Connecting Canadians is one of the five
pillars of the federal government's Digital Canada 150 plan announced on 22 Jul
2014.
A main objective within the Connecting Canadian pillar is to ensure 98%
of all Canadians will have access to high-speed Internet at 5 Mbps. As
presented in the government paper the blog
entry the day of the announcement, this is a rather meaningless statement
as no measurement standard for the 5 Mbps is used
In the blog entry of 29 Jan 2012 entitled What
Mobile Speeds Really Mean I discussed the three different ways mobile data
speed can be measured: - Theoretical
Maximum, Vendors Advertised Speed,
and Actual Speeds Available to the User. If I were writing the article today, I might be
inclined to add a fourth category, namely, Speed
Identified in a Government Funding Program.
While the original item was directed at
Mobile (Cellular) systems, the same three classifications can be applied to
terrestrial (cable and DSL), fixed wireless and satellite.
The problem with public Internet
connectivity networks is that most of them operate as a shared networks as some
point.[1] Based on
a net neutrality model, this means that all the active users are sharing all
the available bandwidth simultaneously.[2] Assuming
a fixed bandwidth model, say 5 Mbps, this means that as the number of active
users increase, the amount of bandwidth available to service each active user
decreases. Eventually the network reaches the point where it collapses under its
own weight.
This phenomenon is most likely to occur
during the peak usage period, some
times referred to as the rush hour. While the busy period can vary from
location to location, the industry generally accepts the period of weeknights
between 7:00 pm to 11:00 pm local time.[3]
Should we allow an ISP to
state a 5 Mbps speed if it cannot deliver anywhere near that speed during the peak
usage period? I say no.
The US Federal
Communication Commission (FCC) has been tracking the real speed provided by US Internet
Service Providers (ISP). They have come up with the terms "Advertised
Speeds' as used by the ISPs to market their product and "Sustained
Speed" which is designed to describe a long term average for broadband
(high-speed Internet). The FCC study concludes that speeds can only be stated as
speeds obtained during the peak usage period.
Researchers at North
Carolina State University (NCSU) developed a method of measurement that allows
for a base metric. The NCSU system is based on a metric designed to convey how
likely any given consumer is to experience broadband speeds of a particular
level. The key to the system is the percentage of users receiving a percentage
of the advertised speed. This results in numerical score.
The first step is to
identify a target level based on the formula: percentage
of users for percentage of the time during peak hours. Targets levels are expressed as 80/80 [4]
where 80 percent of the users get 80 percent of the advertised speed in a fixed
period. FCC has been using the 80/80 target level.
This information is monitored
by special routers install at the user location and reported to the FCC. An
example of final calculation might be 78% of user met the threshold target of 90/90.
This ISP would be rated as 78%. The ISP could
raise the score by increasing the bandwidth available during peak hours. However,
it would still only be able to advertise a speed of 78% of 5 Mbps until they
met or exceeded 100%.
As part o the FCC
study, there were ISPs delivering service in excess of 100%, i.e. they consistently
delivered speeds in excess of those contracted. The highest rated was the satellite
service Exede while the most of the others were fibre optic based.
The Digital 150 plan needs
to adopt an approach similar to the FCC. Allowing an ISP to say they are delivering
5 Mbps while actually providing about 20% of that speed to the majority of
users is not good enough.
A good start would be
the use of the term "sustained speed" as the 5 Mbps target speed.
[1] While most people have experienced cellular site congestion at the local level, recent studied have indicated that major congestion also occurs at Tier 1 peering points which would affect all type of networks.
[2] There are network controls available that can adjust access and assign priority to selected users. Some, such as Quality of Service (QoS) that assign priority to real-time applications like VoIP are acceptable. Others, such as "throttling" violate net neutrality concepts or are frowned upon.
[3] There is also anecdotal evidence in the Algoma District that the peak usage period closely follows the hours students are out of school including weekends.
[4] Any threshold ratio can be used such as 70/70 or 90/90. The lower the ratio, the more likely a higher score will be achieved.
