A recent draft memorandum by the NTC indicates some sort of service level agreement where ISPs are required to provide a minimum guaranteed speed on subscriptions as well as allow for daily bandwidth capping on subscribers.
The circular requires ISPs to deliver a minimum average of 80% of the subscribed plan for regular broadband/dial-up lines and 99% for leased lines.
The NTC defines this accordingly:
… service reliability is measured over a period of one month and is derived by dividing the number of hours used in a day into the difference between hours used in a day and hours used below minimum connection speed in a day.
On the other hand, the NTC also endorsed recommendations by ISPs to put a daily cap on bandwidth usage. This clarifies the bandwidth caps already being imposed by telcos which we reported earlier.
While many would look at the “bandwidth caps” and cry foul, I’d look at the other provision that requires a minimum guaranteed speed based on the subscribed speed. This means if you subscribe to a 1Mbps plan, your average internet speed over a period of 1 month should not be under 800Kbps. If that’s the case, I’d gladly agree to be capped at 25GB per month (see Globe’s Broadband Internet bandwidth caps here).
I recently talked to a network engineer who’s a supplier of one of the telcos mentioned above and he explained how they arrived on the bandwidth caps imposed by the carriers.
What they do is they look at network traffic and determine how much bandwidth is used on a monthly basis. It turns out that over 99% of the users consume less than 1.5GB of bandwidth on their mobile phones.
The less than 1% who exceed are very few and inconsistent — meaning, they don’t consistently exceed 1.5GB on a month to month basis. Btw, this 1.5GB cap of Smart is for mobile 3G internet only.
In order to avoid regular users from being affected by the heavy users, the heavy users (those who exceed the 1.5GB cap) are isolated and transferred to a different network segment or bucket. The allocation for that small group in the segment is then limited. Hence, only the heavy users will be competing for the limited bandwidth in their bucket while all the regular users remain on the regular, uncongested network.
The rationale behind this policy has been studied and compared with other carriers in other countries worldwide. Of course, there are other factors that come into play.
I personally own several servers and re-sell bandwidth so I have a lot of experiences with system abuses. It’s the same reason why Cabalen imposes a double-the-price penalty to diners who put more food on their plate than they can finish. Same goes with Mang Inasal’s unlimited rice — just go try and ask for 100 cups of rice in one go. Or why the MMDA imposes number coding and restricts which car you can drive on a given day.
Apparently, in the Philippines, regular consumers don’t fully understand the “bucket system” so telcos resorted to time-based servicing. Remember that standard mobile internet used to be priced on a per KB basis back in the days? That did not work out well (the bucket system) so they shifted to the time-based billing system.
However, the time-based system is very prone to abuse (a problem which don’t exist if they imposed the bucket system). The throttling and capping of bandwidth to supplement time-based services allows the service providers to regulate the network and separate the heavy users from the regular users.
I don’t like the idea of putting caps but I’m okay with it as long as it’s a reasonable one. Just give me that 1Mbps speed I actually subscribed to. I hope this draft memorandum gets pushed thru so we can all get that 80% minimum guarantee on subscribed internet speeds.
Addendum: I think the issue here is the use of the word “unlimited” in the subscription plans when in fact it’s actually just a modified form of “bucket plans”. What if the NTC orders all the telcos to shift to “bucket plans” and sell internet connection on a pay per use basis? Say if you consume 15GB a month, you only pay Php500 but if you use 50GB in a month, your bill goes up accordingly (say Php1,500). I think that would have been a more straight-forward approach. Never mind if most of the consumers could not quantify what a gigabyte is. At least it’s not false advertising.
We’re not really that alien to caps. Even the MMDA has capped how many days you can drive your car in a week. We seem to be okay with that since everyone is experiencing how congested EDSA is.
isonski is a prime of example of a dumbass douchebag lmao. Since you seem to have no idea what the cap means to people doing proper things online, stfu and gtfo.
@isonski
kung wala kang pakialam sa nangyayari sa bansa natin, mang-rape ka na lang ng aso or mag-masturbate ka na lang sa public toilet! meganon?!
@isonski
ano kaya kung i-cap ng government ang pagkain dito sa ‘pinas? pati yung hangin na hinihinga natin? yung tubig? yung kinikita natin?
ganon lang kas-simple ‘yon…kung may pakialam ka sa nangyayari concerned ka. kung wala, manhid ka!
ano kaya kung i-cap ng mga magulang mo ang oras na pwede kang gumamit ng pc or mag-masturbate, anong pakiramdam?
eh kung i-cap ng pharmaceutical store ang gamot na bibilhin mo para sa malala mong sakit?
cap means limitation…
@isonski
kilabutan ka naman sa sinasabi mo, isipin mo nga ang epekto nito sa mga call center agents, medical transcriptionist at Icafe owners. naghahanap buhay din yun mga yun di ba? di mo ba naisip ang magiging epekto nito sa kanila magkataon?
kaya lalong naghihirap ang pinas kasi may mga tao na katulad mo na walang pakialam sa mga nagyayari sa paligid nya since hindi naman sya gaanung maapektuhan.
at isa pa, wala kang pakialam sa mga tao nagfafacebook, nag-oonline games, nanunuod sa net, or kung ano-ano pa. buhay nila yung at may karapatan silang gawin anumang gustuhin nila. kung yung favorite passtime mo kya eh lilimitihan ng gobyerno, ano feeling? di ka aangal? wag manhid bro
ahaha, kulang na lang ay i-cap ng meralco ang kuryente na pwede nating gamitin!!! ‘yon ang mas nakakatakot!!!
To NTC: BOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!! You’re all a bunch of prats deserving a good drive by shooting. Capping. Instead of screwing around with the paying public, make the service better! Terrestial DSL for instance, the type of broadband internet I use is dedicated bandwidth yet the idiots at the telcos say otherwise. WTF is up with that? I pay on time and now NTC is recommending capping? Unlimited indeed. I pay for a service because of the advertised features. If the telcos follow the recommended caps, a lot of customers like me are going to be pissed. (I already am.) Its like being told to sleep only 5 hours a night for the reason of productivity purposes. Bunch of bollocks!
i guess bucket system or capping is not based on what will be the throughput, the real issue is what the teleco want, to limit max allowable latency per month. like in an instance if you are subscribed to 1mbps, your max will be 30gb/month. i guess that is what they wanted. But the problem on our side most probably is the download rate like for 1mb we are only getting 60-70% of it. how would they implement capping if they dont give the right service to the end-user and not advertising it correctly? they should let end-user know. let see if how many users will they get xD
Why do they cap the consumers? We pay thousands of pesos monthly, Then they don’t even provide their services properly. The reason we signed their contracts because of the advertised service. If they promised that your subscription will be up to 384kbps then it should be up to 384kbps, but in reality that’s not happening. In the first place my maximum download speed is 150 ~ 200 kbps, but they cut me down and fixed me to 45 kbps. It was really annoying.
The danger with the memo actually is the lack of specifics with regard to the bandwidth cap. If telcos wish to maximize their profits, they can even limit it to as low as 100MB per day.
If you give the leeway to the telcos to control their own bandwidth cap, we’re not moving in the right direction here. If we propose a policy, it should be for the benefit of everyone, both companies and subscribers.
“New players came in to compete for market share. Competitors like Sun offered better deals. Consumers switched to the provider that offers the better deal. Existing providers lost customers and started to compete. We now have boat-loads of bucket plans and unlimited offers again.
I believe the same will happen with broadband internet service. It will follow the same market trend.”
The problem with the above is that there was no NTC regulation that capped SMS messages. Bandwidth capping is different. Market forces will not come into play if inherent regulations prevent it from doing so, which is precisely what bandwidth capping will do.
All business models moving forward will need to adhere to the policy unless it is repealed.
sa nakikita ko at nabasa sa mga sinabi nyo, ang may malaking problema lang dito at talagang apektado ay yung mga taong adik sa online games, facebook and video/audio streaming… sa mga katulad namin na tunay na nagta-trabaho gamit ang internet technology walang gaano epekto ito… pero nadadamay lang kami…
sa mga totoong internet working-class heroes, sa mga sysads, network admins, developers/programmers, project leads, MIS/IT/ICT personnel and techs, mabuhay tayong lahat…!!!
sa mga kunyaring nagtatrabaho lang at kunyari busy sa pag-facebook at online games, maghanap kayo ng ibang pagkakaabalahan at mapaglilibangan nyo…!!! mabgbasa kayo ng libro para naman magkalaman ang utak nyo..!!! huwag nyong sayangin ang mga kapakipakinabang na resources sa mga walang kwentang bagay!
Dislike.. I’m pretty sure that there’s something going on under the table here.
mmm……guys, just work harder this 2011 and earn more money so any price increase the Telcos will impose will be peanuts. Or better yet, cut down on Facebook, Youtube and bit torrent nonensene so you can earn more money. :)
mmmm….guys, just work harder this 2011 and earn more money so any increase in your Telco bill will be peanuts. Hindi ninyo mararamdaman. Kayang kaya nyo yan……
We’re missing the point here.
The telcos are not doing this to improve service or update their network. this is just a way to increase their earnings.
With caps in place they can sign up more people without actually needing to upgrade their network.
The main thing that has changed in the past year is the increase of normal communication channels facilitated through the internet: chat, video calling, FB, twitter, etc.
all these items used to run through the telcos in one form or another: voice calls, texting, etc.
Now they find that all their income generating services are being run through their ISP service which they had promoted as “unlimited” resulting in loss of revenue for the company.
instead of using the gains to increase service viability, it will only be used to increase the number of users so that they can generate more income to offset the loss of other channels.
Wow. When this thing gets passed, we’ll end up having the same slow speeds, but now with unreasonable caps. Imagine Globe’s 800MB cap, wherein after the cap, they cut you off completely. Imagine if NTC now justifies the cap, they can now cap you 500MB a day or 250MB a day. :( then when you reach the cap, they cut your line. Does the memo even have a minimum cap? I suppose none.
That speed throttling is BS, because we know they wont do it, is it even in the NTC Memo? I suppose not.
The minimum speeds.. 80%? Another BS. We all know they have an excuse for everything, like network congestion, signal, etc etc.
Sad part is, when they violate the 80% minimum, consumers have no recourse. Lodging an administrative complaint with the NTC is like a big joke. Waste of time and effort. Have we ever seen a telco being fined or penalized? Even with all the hooplah? (like lost load or those text scams?) NONE.
@yuga re free market
On that we can both agree on.
@cocoy – I strongly believe in Free Market Economy. Competition among numerous players wil drive prices down and benefit the consumers.
Let’s take for example a parallel service — SMS. It used to be unlimited. Then, the telcos got greedy and used the “congested network” reason to cap SMS deliveries. That did not stop the Philippines from becoming the SMS Capital of the World.
New players came in to compete for market share. Competitors like Sun offered better deals. Consumers switched to the provider that offers the better deal. Existing providers lost customers and started to compete. We now have boat-loads of bucket plans and unlimited offers again.
I believe the same will happen with broadband internet service. It will follow the same market trend.
I humbly disagree, yugatech.
1. If you’ve seen the caps imposed in Canada, the US, and elsewhere, they don’t help improve the service. At all.
2. the M.O. still insists on best effort speed by the Telcos, /while/ raising caps. So there is no guarantee of speed.
3. there is no mention of minimum speed. They leave it to the telcos to decide what minimum speed is. Likewise the size of the cap.
4. I’m a free market guy, but this is one of those instances where government must lay down the basic law. Lay down the parameters. the proposed M.O. does not do that.
5. There are numerous studies conducted for example by the Korean Communication Commission, the world bank that say, Broadband is important to raise productivity and ergo leads to GDP growth. What the NTC and the government at large is saying there is no overall general plan to encourage our telcos to keep reinvesting.
6. Fundamentally, it is an economic problem, and not a technical problem. Technology exists to make speed and reliability a non-issue. It is the economics of it that we all contend with.
7. Market study by Yahoo-Nielsen determined that 0 to 5 percent increase in mobile internet use happened because telcos gave very good prices on their mobile offerings.
8. Yahoo-Nielsen also determined that 69 percent of Internet users in the philippines is in Internet cafes. So the majority of internet users are there.
9. The broadband cap isn’t fair in that it is only favorable to the telcos. There is nothing in the proposed memorandum order that the consumer can say, ok, we can get a better deal out of it.
10. The World Bank study by Bocchi determined that the philippines is a low capital investment country. Meaning, industries don’t reinvest as much because they are making money off the status quo. the key is to get them to reinvest.
why not pegged 100 mbps internet connection like what japan is doing?