Slashdot Mirror
Texas Lawmaker Wants To Ban Mobile Throttling In Disaster Areas (arstechnica.com)
Bobby Guerra, a Democratic member of the Republican-controlled Texas House of Representatives, filed a bill last week that would prohibit wireless carriers from throttling mobile internet service in disaster areas. "A mobile Internet service provider may not impair or degrade lawful mobile Internet service access in an area subject to a declared state of disaster," the bill says. If passed, it would take effect on September 1, 2019. Ars Technica reports: The bill, reported by NPR affiliate KUT, appears to be a response to Verizon's throttling of an "unlimited" data plan used by Santa Clara County firefighters during a wildfire response in California last year. But Guerra's bill would prohibit throttling in disaster areas of any customer, not just public safety officials. Wireless carriers often sell plans with a set amount of high-speed data and then throttle speeds after a customer has passed the high-speed data limit. Even with so-called "unlimited" plans, carriers reserve the right to throttle speeds once customers use a certain amount of data each month.
Despite the Verizon/Santa Clara incident, Federal Communications Commission Chairman Ajit Pai has taken no action to prevent further incidents of throttling during emergencies. Pai's repeal of Obama-era net neutrality rules allows throttling as long as the carrier discloses it, and the commission is trying to prevent states from imposing their own net neutrality rules.
Despite the Verizon/Santa Clara incident, Federal Communications Commission Chairman Ajit Pai has taken no action to prevent further incidents of throttling during emergencies. Pai's repeal of Obama-era net neutrality rules allows throttling as long as the carrier discloses it, and the commission is trying to prevent states from imposing their own net neutrality rules.
Good idea. Then all the yahoos live-streaming the disaster can flood the towers with nonsense traffic.
Maybe have government plans that get priority over the general public?
My Other Computer Is A Data General Nova III.
Everyone will use tons of data even though half the towers are offline due to the hurricane (or whatever) and public safety officials will be limited by network congestion.
Better suggestion: leave the network management to the guys who know how to do it.
I would tend to support prohibitions on throttling for any emergency service and recovery personnel but it seems counterproductive to prevent throttling of typical consumers. During an emergency is exactly the best time to triage and prioritize some communications over others. Given that networks, wireless ones in particular, have limited total capacity I would not want to see emergency service and recovery service traffic taking a backseat to someone in the area watching YouTube videos. It seems emergencies are exactly the sort of thing QoS is designed for! It just needs to be applied properly giving the bandwidth resources to the people who will help the most other people.
The technical reality is during a disaster you want the DSCP markings to be honored (exact opposite of neutrality). E911 gets highest priority non control plane markings.
"Tempers are wearing thin. Let's just hope some robot doesn't kill everybody." --Bender
I'm all for net neutrality in the general case, but during an emergency we have the unfortunate mix of likely having higher demand and lower supply for traffic. Throttling nonessential traffic seems commonsense so essential traffic will make it through. The alternative might be an effective telco blackout during emergencies.
For every problem, there is at least one solution that is simple, neat, and wrong.
You mean like instead of Above Unlimited or Beyond Unlimited, they should get the No, Really Unlimited Unlimited package? Did Verizon even give CA first responders an option that prevented throttling in that case?
https://www.usatoday.com/story...
>"Did Verizon even give CA first responders an option that prevented throttling in that case?"
THAT is the real question. It is stupid and silly for the agencies to complain that they bought a plan with X GB then throttling.... and THEN complained about the throttling, done exactly as stated in the contract. THAT WAS THE PLAN THEY BOUGHT. And if the government worker(s) entered into that very, very industry-standard agreement without understanding it, then they are very, very incompetent.
If you can't handle throttling, then:
1) Get a plan with X GB and then it charges per MB.
Or
2) Get a plan that is 100% metered.
Now, if none of the suitable carriers have such a plan AND are unwilling to create such a plan for emergency agencies (which seems unlikely), THEN perhaps the FCC should step in.
Now, if none of the suitable carriers have such a plan AND are unwilling to create such a plan for emergency agencies (which seems unlikely), THEN perhaps the FCC should step in.
The price per MB for overage is outrageous (even at Verizon's old .002 CENTS per KB). If you think that taxpayer dollars shouldn't be spent on outrageous plans, then perhaps the FCC should step in.
I think law makers need to sit down with telcoms and the two need to work out why and when throttling is appropriate.
Especially in an emergency situation when EVERYONE is trying to use it, greedily, and without throttling, you just end in a situation where no one can use it at all.
So basically, understanding why throttling is taking place, before you start making laws about something you potentially have no f'ing clue about.
also forbid traffic congestion
I do not believe in karma. "Funny"=-6. Do good and forbid evil. Yours, Oft-Offtopic Flamebaiting Troll.
Here's the facts: We want emergency services to be able to communicate during an emergency, without restrictions. We want emergency service to pay just like everyone else. We don't want massive infrastructure that the end user pays for, and that is useless 99.9% of the time, except in emergencies.
So what telcos should do: Offer a plan exclusively to emergency services with the following rules: 1. They pay for their data and call allowance just like everyone else. 2. When they exceed their data allowance, for example due to an emergency, the bill for that is sorted out later, but they are NEVER capped and NEVER throttled and NEVER blocked. Also, they should get priority of networks are congested due to high traffic.
Of course that doesn't give a firefighter the right to watch videos all the time with a 500MB plan. They will not be capped, or slowed down, or blocked, but they will pay the bill.
The price per MB for overage is outrageous (even at Verizon's old .002 CENTS per KB). If you think that taxpayer dollars shouldn't be spent on outrageous plans, then perhaps the FCC should step in.
0.002 CENTS per KB is on the expensive side, but not outrageous. It only becomes outrageous when there are numpties involved who can't do maths and turn 0.002 CENTS per KB into $2 per MB, because to them thousand times 0.002 cents is two dollars, not two cents.
Government services shouldn't be adding extra load to commercial networks during major catastrophes. Someone tell the government to stop being cheap. For everyone else - I can understand some situations in an emergency where internet services might be required but for the most part the average citizen should be focused on evacuating safely. Don't check Waze for updates - read road signs and listen to emergency services' directions. You should not be relying on commercial services during emergencies as a general rule...
The ups: great when you got service.
The downs; if the cell towers didn't blow down from the storm or simply got wiped off the map. Several key towers were toppled or ruined by Harvey when it hit, pretty much killing all service in the Rockport/Fulton/Holiday Beach area for at least 2 full months after. There was only one tower that stayed in service and it was way down the road from town by Aransas Pass. The poor thing was so inundated with traffic, that data was a slow dog, and more than a few calls were dropping like flies.
But AT&T was sporting in removing the caps and giving us grace periods on billing. Dunno about Sprint or Verizon tho...
First rule of holes; When in one, stop digging.
So bandwidth can magically be created out of nothing. Because legislation!
A gig in every pot!