Source: https://www.ocalasatellite.com/hughesnet-receives-top-review-from-fcc
Timestamp: 2017-11-20 23:03:27
Document Index: 671074809

Matched Legal Cases: ['art 1', 'art 2', 'art 2', 'art 2', 'art 4', 'arts 12', 'arts 15', 'art 15', 'art 15', 'art 19', 'arts 21', 'art 21', 'art 25']

HughesNet Receives Top Review From FCC
2015Measuring Broadband AmericaFixed Broadband Report
CC's Office of Engineering and Technology and Consumer and Governmental Affairs Bureau
The initial Measuring Broadband America Fixed Broadband Report was published in August 2011, and presented the first broad-scale study of directly measured consumer broadband performance throughout the United States. Including the 2015 Report, five reports have now been issued. [1] These annual reports provide a performance benchmark for fixed broadband Internet access services in the United States, and track progress towards the Commission’s continuing goal of improving the speeds and quality of broadband access commonly available to the American public.
We continue to see significant growth in broadband speeds and in the uptake of these higher speeds by consumers, though results are not uniform across technologies. Spurred by the deployment of enabling technologies such as DOCSIS 3, the maximum advertised download speeds among the most popular service tiers offered by ISPs using cable technologies has increased from 12-30 Mbps in March 2011 to 50-105 Mbps in September 2014. In contrast, the maximum advertised download speeds that SamKnows tested among the most popular service tiers offered by ISPs using DSL technology has remained generally unchanged since 2011. There is a growing disparity in most download speeds tested between many DSL-based broadband services and most cable-based broadband services. [2]
Consistency of speed may be more important to customers who are heavy users of applications that are both high bandwidth and sensitive to variations in actual speed, such as streaming video. [3] In this Report, we continue to present statistics on the minimum actual speed that was experienced by at least 80% of panelists during at least 80% of the peak usage period.
As explained in more detail in the section on Methodology below, these reports focus on the most popular service tiers offered by each participating ISP, as shown in Table 1, which together constitute the majority of the broadband plans subscribed to by their consumers. Some participating ISPs also offer faster service tiers than shown here, but if their number of subscribers is small, they are not analyzed herein. [4]
Chart 1 shows that when DSL is used to provide broadband service, the maximum advertised download speeds among the most popular service tiers has remained generally unchanged since 2011. [5] In contrast, when cable is used to provide broadband service, the maximum advertised download speeds among the most popular service tiers has increased from 12-30 Mbps in March 2011 to 50 - 105 Mbps in September 2014. [6] In particular, most cable broadband ISPs now offer a 50 Mbps or 100 Mbps download speed tier, taking advantage of the increase in download speeds made possible by the transition from DOCSIS 2 to DOCSIS 3 technology. [7]
Chart 2 charts the migration of panelists to a higher tier based on their access technology [8] . Specifically, the horizontal axis of Chart 2 partitions the September 2013 panelists by the advertised download speed of the service tier to which they are subscribed. For each such set of panelists who also participated in the September 2014 collection of data [9] , the vertical axis of Chart 2 displays the percentage of panelists that migrated by September 2014 to a service tier with a higher advertised download speed. There are two ways that such a migration can occur: (1) if a panelist changed their broadband plan during the intervening year to a service tier with a higher advertised download speed, or (2) if a panelist did not change their broadband plan but the panelist’s ISP increased the advertised download speed of the panelist’s subscribed plan. [10]
However, as we observed above when examining advertised download speeds, the increase in actual download speeds is not uniform across access technologies. For subscribers to DSL-based broadband service, the increase in actual download speeds has varied among ISPs. For subscribers to each of the participating cable broadband services, there have been fairly steady and substantial increases in actual download speeds. [11] We find that, over the course of our reports, the average annual increase in actual download speeds by technology has been 28.2% for DSL [12] , 61.2% for cable, and 19.2% for fiber [13] .
Chart 4 shows the ratio in September 2014 of the actual speeds experienced by an ISP’s subscribers (averaged across both geography and time) to that ISP’s advertised speeds. [14] The ratios for downloads and uploads are both illustrated. The ratio in September 2014 of the actual download speeds to advertised download speeds, averaged across all panelists, was 105.6%, an increase from the 101.6% reported last year for September 2013. [15] For uploads, the similar ratio increased to 113.2% compared to the previous year’s 109.1%.
In addition to variation based on a subscriber’s location, speeds experienced by a particular consumer will vary during the day based on variations in aggregate usage by all subscribers to that consumer’s ISP. For purposes of discussion, we use the term “80/80 consistent speed” to refer to the minimum actual speed that was experienced by at least 80% of panelists during at least 80% of the peak usage period. Consistency of speed may be more important to customers who are heavy users of applications that are both high bandwidth and sensitive to variations in actual speed. [16]
Thirteen ISPs participated in the Fixed Measuring Broadband America program in September 2014. [17] They are:
The measurements that provide the underlying data in this Report rely both on measurement clients and measurement servers. The measurement clients reside in the homes of 5,583 panelists who receive service by the 13 participating ISPs. The participating ISPs collectively account for over 80% of U.S. residential broadband Internet connections. The panelists closely match the overall state and region statistics of Internet access connections in the United States as reflected in the Commission’s Form 477 data. [18]
The measurement servers are hosted by M-Lab and Level 3 Communications, and are located in 9 cities across the United States near a point of interconnection between the ISP’s network and the network on which the measurement server resides. [19]
The measurement clients collect data throughout the year, and this data is available as described below. However, only data collected from September 1, 2014 to September 16, 2014 and from September 27, 2014 to October 11, 2014 (referred to throughout this report as the “September 2014” reporting period) are used to generate the charts in this Report. [20]
Although the Report generally focuses on each participating ISP’s entire service territory, in this Report we also briefly analyze network performance in each of the four census regions of the United States. [21]
This Report focuses on three performance metrics that are of particular relevance to consumers of broadband Internet access service: speed, latency, and packet loss. Download and upload speeds are the primary network performance characteristic advertised by ISPs. Actual download speed is the average rate at which information can be downloaded by the consumer. Higher speeds indicate a higher delivery rate. However, as discussed above, the performance observed by a user in any given circumstance depends not only on the actual speed of the ISP’s network, but also on the speed of other parts of the Internet and on the speed of the application itself. [22]
Latency is the time it takes for a data packet to travel from one point to another in a network. It increases with distance of the route or path between the source and destination and with any congestion on the route. The Measuring Broadband America program measures the round-trip time between the consumer’s home and the closest measurement server. Latency may directly affect the perceived quality of highly interactive applications, such as real-time two-way voice applications, [23] video chat, or interactive games. Latency may also indirectly affect actual speed. Some applications consist of a sequence of network tasks, so the effect of network latencies may accumulate.
The Validated Data Set [24] on which this Report was based, as well as the full results of all tests, are available at http://www.fcc.gov/measuring-broadband-america .
Both the Commission and SamKnows, the Commission’s contractor for this program, recognize that, while the methodology descriptions included in this document provide an overview of the project as a whole, there will be a number of interested parties – ranging from recognized experts to members of the general public – who would be willing to contribute to the project by reviewing the actual software used in the testing. SamKnows welcomes review of its software and technical platform, consistent with the Commission’s goals of openness and transparency for this program. [25]
However, the increases in actual download and upload speeds are not uniform across access technologies. Charts 12.1 and 12.2 show the actual download and upload speeds by technology, from 2011 to 2014. For subscribers to DSL broadband service, the increase in actual speeds has depended on the ISP. For subscribers to any participating cable broadband service, there have been fairly steady and substantial increases in actual upload speeds . We find that over the course of our reports, the annual average increase in upload speeds by technology has been 77.4% for cable, 27.7% for fiber and 12.5% for DSL.
Charts 15.1 and 15.2 show the complementary cumulative distribution of the ratio of actual download speed (averaged over the peak usage period) to advertised download speed for each participating ISP. For each ratio of actual to advertised download speed on the horizontal axis, the curves show the percentage of panelists subscribing to each ISP that experienced at least this ratio [26] . For example, the Cox curve in Chart 15.1 shows that 90% of Cox subscribers experienced an actual download speed exceeding 80% of the advertised download speed, while 70% experienced an actual download speed exceeding 96% of the advertised download speed and 50% experienced an actual download speed exceeding 101% of the advertised download speed. Curves that fall steeply around near 100% of the advertised download speed, like that of Cox, indicate that a high percentage of subscribers experience a ratio near 100%. In contrast, curves that fall slowly, like that of Frontier DSL’s download ratio, indicate that there is a wider range of performance within the service territory.
The curves for cable-based broadband and fiber-based broadband are steeper than those for DSL-based broadband and satellite-based broadband. This can be more clearly seen in Chart 15.3, which plots aggregate curves for each technology. Approximately 70% of subscribers to fiber- and cable-based technologies experience actual download speeds exceeding the advertised download speed. In contrast, only approximately 35% of subscribers to DSL-based broadband experience actual download speeds exceeding the advertised download speed. [27] Over 80% of subscribers to satellite-based broadband experience actual download speeds exceeding the advertised download speed.
Chart 19 shows the variations among the four U.S. census regions (Northeast, South, Midwest, and West) in the advertised download speed and actual download speed, averaged across all panelists in each region. [28] While no single technology was the fastest in all regions, for cable- and fiber- based broadband, both the average advertised download speed and the average actual download speed among the most popular service tiers exceeded 25 Mbps in each region.
As shown in Charts 21.1-21.6, peak usage period performance varied by service tier among ISPs included in this study during the September 2014 test period. On average, during peak periods, the ratio of actual download speed to advertised download speed for all ISPs are 74% or better, and 90% or better for the majority of ISPs. However, theratio of actual download speed to advertised download speed varies among service tiers.
Chart 21. 3: The ratio of actual download speed to advertised download speed, by ISP (12-15 Mbps)
As discussed in prior Reports, some cable ISPs offer “burst speed” techniques which temporarily allocate more bandwidth to a consumer’s service. The effect is temporary—typically lasting less than 15 to 20 seconds—and may be reduced by other broadband activities occurring within the consumer household. [29] Burst speed is not equivalent to actual speed, and may be more useful with certain applications than with others. For example, large file transfers, video streaming, and video chat require the transfer of large amounts of information over sustained periods of time. However, other activities require the transfer of moderate amounts of information in a short interval of time, and may benefit from burst speed techniques.
We have tracked this metric from the inception of these reports. As broadband speeds have increased, the measurable impact of using this burst technique has diminished. Correspondingly, only two ISPs (Cox and Mediacom) use this technique now. This year, therefore, we have restricted the results to only those two participating ISPs that have affirmed that they are using burst technology. Chart 25 shows burst download speed results. [30] Mediacom’s 15 Mbps advertised download speed tier showed a 28% increase from actual download speed to burst download speed, and Cox’s 25 Mbps and 50 Mbps advertised download speed tiers showed 11%-13% increases from actual download speed to burst download speed. Other tiers offered by these broadband providers showed less than a 10% increase.
In order to provide statistical background for the availability of technologies by state, Table 7 reproduces Form 477 statistics on the availability of particular broadband speeds for states, regions and technologies published in Table 16 of the October 2014 Internet Access Services Report. [31]
Re: Measuring Broadband America Program ; GN Docket 12-264
[2] It is important to note some limitations on the results contained in this Report. Generally, only the most popular service tiers among an ISP's offerings were tested, even though some service providers may offer other tiers not represented by volunteers contributing data to the program. We note that a particular ISP may offer faster speed tiers either throughout their territory or in specific portions of their territory that are not as popular as the speed tiers we tested.
[3] Video traffic currently comprises over 60% of Internet traffic, and some expect it to grow to 80% by 2019. See “Cisco Visual Networking Index: Forecast and Methodology, 2014-2019 White Paper”, May 27th, 2015 at http://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/solutions/collateral/service-provider/ip-ngn-ip-next-generation-network/white_paper_c11-481360.html , last accessed on 10/6/2015
[16] . Some video streaming and some cloud-based applications fit into this category, see e.g. Cisco Global Cloud Index: Forecast and Methodology 2013–2018 White Paper , available at http://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/solutions/collateral/service-provider/global-cloud-index-gci/Cloud_Index_White_Paper.html .
[18] The Form 477 results can be obtained from: http://www.fcc.gov/encyclopedia/form-477-filers-state-0 .
[20] The period from September 17, 2014 to September 26, 2014 was omitted due to unusually high Internet traffic created by what we believe to be downloads of Apple’s iOS 8 operating system, per the FCC policy concerning the collection period for fixed-line MBA data (See the August 19, 2013 ex-parte letter for the meeting held August 7, 2013, http://apps.fcc.gov/ecfs/document/view?id=7520939594 , and http://www.fcc.gov/encyclopedia/measuring-broadband-america-measuring-fixed-broadband .)
[25] The software that was used for the testing will be made available for academic and other researchers for non-commercial purposes. To apply for non-commercial review of the code, interested parties may contact SamKnows directly at team@samknows.com , with the subject heading “Academic Code Review.”
[31] . Industry Analysis and Technology Division Wireline Competition Bureau, Internet Access Services: Status as of December 31, 2013, Report (rel. Oct. 2014), https://www.fcc.gov/document/fcc-releases-new-data-internet-access-services-2 (Internet Access Report). Table 8 reproduces only the information for States and technologies included in Table 6 from Internet Access Report for connections by technology by state as of December 31, 2013 for connections over 200 kbps in at least one direction, in thousands. Data for satellite connections was withheld in the Internet Access Report to maintain firm confidentiality.