Finger-pointing over interconnection

When a consumer’s OTT video stream starts rebuffering, or suffers packet losses resulting in degraded quality, it’s often hard to know where to direct blame. The problem is typically caused by congestion somewhere between the content’s originating server and the consumer’s receiving device. But exactly where in the chain of transit that congestion is occurring, and more importantly who is responsible and why, can be difficult even for engineers — and virtually impossible for consumers — to ascertain.

045448280-maclean-d-deshler-m-baldwinBack when it appeared the FCC was poised to classify interconnection arrangements between last-mile ISPs and third-party transit and content providers as a new, distinct type of Title II service the question of liability for congestion in the chain of transit suddenly became urgent for those involved in wholesale traffic exchanges.

Fearing the new classification would leave them at a disadvantage in negotiating interconnection agreements with content delivery networks (CDNs) and other transit providers and worried they’d be blamed for problems occurring elsewhere in the transit chain, ISPs rushed to the FCC to insist that any new rules regarding traffic exchanges cover both parties to the exchange. Read More »

Net Neutrality: Interconnection Covered, But Not By ‘Bright Line’ Rules

After a flurry of last-minute lobbying and internal debate the FCC ultimately backed off its plan to define interconnection arrangements between ISPs and third-party content and applications providers as distinct service separate from last-mile internet access service in its Open Internet order, which it approved today by a 3-2 party line vote. But the commission asserted its authority under Title II of the Communications Act to hear complaints and take appropriate enforcement action if it determines that specific interconnection practices by ISPs are not “just and reasonable.”

ppcommissioners-nov-2013-webThe decision to drop the separate classification of the service that ISPs make available to edge providers marks an apparent shift from the proposal outlined in the Feb. 4 fact sheet released by FCC chairman Tom Wheeler, which referred to interconnection and last-mile service separately. But it eliminates the potential legal problem for the commission’s authority to review interconnection arrangements that separate classification could have created. Read More »

For OTT providers, ‘strong’ Net Neutrality may be losing its strength

Don’t look now OTT fans but the net neutrality rules expected to be enacted Thursday by the FCC may turn out to be not as OTT-friendly as it originally appeared they would be.

FCC Commissioner Mignon Clyburn

FCC Commissioner Mignon Clyburn

When FCC chairman Tom Wheeler unveiled his “fact sheet” on the upcoming rules on Feb. 4, it looked as if the commission was poised to adopt the “strong” version of net neutrality pushed by Netflix and others. According to the fact sheet, the rules would treat interconnection arrangements between ISPs and third-party edge providers as a Title II service subject to the same “just and reasonable” standard that will apply to ISPs’ management of their last-mile networks. Read More »

The next OTT battleground: Zero-rating

The FCC this week is expected to approve on a party-line vote chairman Tom Wheeler’s long-gestating plan to impose new net neutrality rules by reclassifying internet access as a telecommunications service under Title II of the Communications Act, setting in motion a process by which the world will finally get to see the full text of the 308-page Memorandum and Order and begin fighting — almost certainly in court — over its particulars.

TMO1-1149_Baracuda_ALL_R13_03-03One thing that apparently will not be in the order, however, is any bright-line rule banning so-called “zero-rated” data plans offered by wireless operators and ISPs under which particular applications are not counted toward a user’s monthly data cap. Read More »

Peter Chernin: The Future of Live Sports is Online

Former News Corp. president Peter Chernin, who now runs The Chernin Group, thinks live sports will eventually be a bigger business on the web than on broadcast channels.

044924465-st-patricks-day-sports-showgro“I’m not sure what the timeline is, but there’s clearly more money to be made online than there is out of those broadcast deals,” he said Wednesday at the Re/Code Media conference. “There’s more money to be made on a subscription basis, through targeting, they’re global, there’s almost zero distribution friction. I think what the leagues are wrestling with, especially the big leagues, is what is the breadth of their audience on each of those three big national platforms.” Read More »