Mobile Broadband Performance

1
Mobile Broadband Performance

• Measuring Broadband America

2
Measuring Broadband America

• Focused on Wireline ISP performance in 2011
• Established Measurement Infrastructure consisting
  of
• Software to administer testing
• Scheduling, Software updates, measurement
  collection
• Test nodes distributed across nation for
  performance testing

3
Collaboration

• Measuring Broadband America (Wired) demonstrates
  advantages of collaboration
• Increased expertise
• Identification of carrier issues
• Balanced perspective
• Higher integrity in final product
• FCC would prefer collaborative model for MBA
  Wireless

4
SamKnows

• Ofcom funded client software and platform
  enhancements for mobile testing
• Two Variants for testing
• White box capability supporting multiple data
  dongles
• Stationary or fleet placement
• Multiple carriers measured simultaneously
• Android software to support crowd source
  application
• Work has been completed and is available for
  application in 2012
• Work based on SamKnows platform structure
  previously developed for wireline testing

5
Potential Performance Information
Test Duration
Web browsing Est. 3 seconds
Voice over IP Fixed 10 seconds at 64k
Download speed 3MB fixed size
Upload speed 3MB fixed size
UDP latency Continuous
UDP packet loss Continuous
DNS resolution Est. 1 seconds
Video Streaming Fixed 10 seconds at 2Mbit/s
6
Potential Infrastructure Data

• Location of test
• Active cell tower ID and signal strength
• Visible neighboring cell towers (IDs/RSSI)
• Active network operator ID
• SIM network operator/ID
• Bearer Channel (CDMA, GPRS, EDGE, etc)
• Roaming state (True/False)
• Other usage data of potential interest

7
Measurement Controls

• Volunteers required for test
• 90,000 solicitations received for terrestrial
  trials
• Carrier participation provides more efficient
  means for solicitation
• Platform allows control over
• Nature of tests
• Scheduling of tests
• Measurement points included in testing
  infrastructure
• We can control impact of tests
• Carrier participation could
• Lessen impact on consumer (no data billing)
• Allow more use of white boxes (data port
  contribution)

8
Assessment

• Through a combination of work implemented in MBA
  program and interest in other regulatory
  jurisdictions opportunity exists to undertake
  mobile measurement study
• We have opportunity to evaluate this approach
  against more traditional metrics
• Infrastructure data describing tower/service
  coverage is available
• Potential benefit to other efforts
• This type of data is increasingly collected but
  eclectically
• E.g. OOKLA, but tests contain consumer bias
• By Content providers e.g. Google, but kept
  confidential
• In short its out there but we can obtain in a
  more public and statistically valid method
• Two regulatory jurisdictions pursuing similar
  paths
• England/Brazil
• Others likely to follow

9
Benefits

• Short Term
• First statistically valid study of cellular
  performance of major and other service providers
• Independent view of cellular coverage
• Long term
• Move towards common standard for measuring
  performance

10
Preferred Structure

• Potential exists to go forward without active
  cooperation of carriers
• Preference to extend MBA model to wireless
  carriers
• Industry input into approach and greater
  acceptance of results

11
Immediate Steps

• Contract issues force quick start
• Need to announce start of program July/August
• Need determination on how to proceed
• Collaborative/Independent model
• If Collaborative model
• Engage service providers on testing of software
• Establish planning structure