'Best Effort' Still Raises Consumer Hackles

By

Consumer best effort Internet access can be challenging for a service provider.

For starters, some service providers offering a shared Internet access service on a “best effort” basis will have extreme difficulty providing as much capacity as some users will want, at peak hours, and earning enough return to keep investing, over time.

In other words, there is a business model issue.

That doesn’t mean some service providers sometimes “do dumb things” and under-invest when market conditions call for adding more capacity, or that some service providers arguably might have failed to move aggressively enough to match revenues and operating costs. That’s a business management issue.

And by definition, “best effort” means it is not possible to guarantee bandwidth. On the other hand, this is a business issue, more than a technology issue. Any Internet service provider, given enough resources, can “over-provision” an access network for some customers.

The issue is: “given enough resources.”

In some cases, spectrum availability, financial strength, scale, prevailing market conditions, legacy cost structures or other issues limit the amount of latitude an ISP has to add bandwidth fast enough to avoid major consumer irritation issues.

There is, of course, another way. Business customers can buy service that guarantees a specified level of service – for a price. In fact, U.S. consumers generally have the option of buying a business-grade service.

Such business grade services sometimes will support packet prioritization, though U.S. regulatory policy now forbids anything but “best effort” service for consumer services and accounts.

If regulations are not changed, consumers who want assured levels of service will have to buy business-grade services or ISPs simply will have to make capital investment a priority.

The other issue is “progress.” Some will say an ISP, that meets the advertised “speeds up to” claims more than 80 to 95 percent of the time, is doing pretty well. Others might say that level of performance is unacceptable.

Still, one fundamental problem is that “best effort,” by definition, means it really is impossible to specify the actual level of performance, at all times. Over-provisioning helps. Lower contention ratios help. But “best effort” still means just that.

Perhaps consumers ought to be able to buy access services that offer quality assurance mechanisms that improve experience, even in a “best effort” environment. But that would mean packet prioritization, which the Federal Communications Commission says cannot be offered to a consumer ISP customer.




Edited by Braden Becker

Contributing Editor

SHARE THIS ARTICLE
Related Articles

Coding and Invention Made Fun

By: Special Guest    10/12/2018

SAM is a series of kits that integrates hardware and software with the Internet. Combining wireless building blocks composed of sensors and actors con…

Read More

Facebook Marketplace Now Leverages AI

By: Paula Bernier    10/3/2018

Artificial intelligence is changing the way businesses interact with customers. Facebook's announcement this week is just another example of how this …

Read More

Oct. 17 Webinar to Address Apache Spark Benefits, Tools

By: Paula Bernier    10/2/2018

In the upcoming webinar "Apache Spark: The New Enterprise Backbone for ETL, Batch and Real-time Streaming," industry experts will offer details on clo…

Read More

It's Black and White: Cybercriminals Are Spending 10x More Than Enterprises to Control, Disrupt and Steal

By: Cynthia S. Artin    9/26/2018

In a stunning new report by Carbon Black, "Hacking, Escalating Attacks and The Role of Threat Hunting" the company revealed that 92% of UK companies s…

Read More

6 Challenges of 5G, and the 9 Pillars of Assurance Strategy

By: Special Guest    9/17/2018

To make 5G possible, everything will change. The 5G network will involve new antennas and chipsets, new architectures, new KPIs, new vendors, cloud di…

Read More