1 / 11

Mobile Broadband Performance

Mobile Broadband Performance. Measuring Broadband America. Measuring Broadband America. Focused on Wireline ISP performance in 2011 Established Measurement Infrastructure consisting of Software to administer testing Scheduling, Software updates, measurement collection

spencer
Télécharger la présentation

Mobile Broadband Performance

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  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

  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 “it’s 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

More Related