|
Derived From: 12/23/10 FCC Acts to Preserve Internet Freedom and Openness. R&O: Word | Acrobat
53. Promoting competition throughout the Internet ecosystem is a central purpose of these rules. Effective disclosure of broadband providers' network management practices and the performance and commercial terms of their services promotes competition-as well as innovation, investment, end-user choice, and broadband adoption-in at least five ways. First, disclosure ensures that end users can make informed choices regarding the purchase and use of broadband service, which promotes a more competitive market for broadband services and can thereby reduce broadband providers' incentives and ability to violate open Internet principles. [165] Second, and relatedly, as end users' confidence in broadband providers' practices increases, so too should end users' adoption of broadband services-leading in turn to additional investment in Internet infrastructure as contemplated by Section 706 of the 1996 Act and other provisions of the communications laws. [166] Third, disclosure supports innovation, investment, and competition by ensuring that startups and other edge providers have the technical information necessary to create and maintain online content, applications, services, and devices, and to assess the risks and benefits of embarking on new projects. [167] Fourth, disclosure increases the likelihood that broadband providers will abide by open Internet principles, and that the Internet community will identify problematic conduct and suggest fixes. [168] Transparency thereby increases the chances that harmful practices will not occur in the first place and that, if they do, they will be quickly remedied, whether privately or through Commission oversight. Fifth, disclosure will enable the Commission to collect information necessary to assess, report on, and enforce the other open Internet rules. [169] For all of these reasons, most commenters agree that informing end users, edge providers, and the Commission about the network management practices, performance, and commercial terms of broadband Internet access service is a necessary and appropriate step to help preserve an open Internet. [170]
54. The open Internet NPRM sought comment on what end users and edge providers need to know about broadband service, how this information should be disclosed, when disclosure should occur, and where information should be available. [171] The resulting record supports adoption of the following rule:
A person engaged in the provision of broadband Internet access service shall publicly disclose accurate information regarding the network management practices, performance, and commercial terms of its broadband Internet access services sufficient for consumers to make informed choices regarding use of such services and for content, application, service, and device providers to develop, market, and maintain Internet offerings. [172]
55. The rule does not require public disclosure of competitively sensitive information or information that would compromise network security or undermine the efficacy of reasonable network management practices. [173] For example, a broadband provider need not publicly disclose information regarding measures it employs to prevent spam practices at a level of detail that would enable a spammer to defeat those measures.
56. Despite broad agreement that broadband providers should disclose information sufficient to enable end users and edge providers to understand the capabilities of broadband services, commenters disagree about the appropriate level of detail required to achieve this goal. [174] We believe that at this time the best approach is to allow flexibility in implementation of the transparency rule, while providing guidance regarding effective disclosure models. We expect that effective disclosures will likely include some or all of the following types of information, timely and prominently disclosed in plain language accessible to current and prospective end users and edge providers, the Commission, and third parties who wish to monitor network management practices for potential violations of open Internet principles: [175]
- Congestion Management : If applicable, descriptions of congestion management practices; types of traffic subject to practices; purposes served by practices; practices' effects on end users' experience; criteria used in practices, such as indicators of congestion that trigger a practice, and the typical frequency of congestion; usage limits and the consequences of exceeding them; and references to engineering standards, where appropriate. [177]
- Application-Specific Behavior : If applicable, whether and why the provider blocks or rate-controls specific protocols or protocol ports, modifies protocol fields in ways not prescribed by the protocol standard, or otherwise inhibits or favors certain applications or classes of applications. [178]
- Device Attachment Rules : If applicable, any restrictions on the types of devices and any approval procedures for devices to connect to the network. (For further discussion of required disclosures regarding device and application approval procedures for mobile broadband providers, see paragraph 98 , infra .)
- Security : If applicable, practices used to ensure end-user security or security of the network, including types of triggering conditions that cause a mechanism to be invoked (but excluding information that could reasonably be used to circumvent network security).
Performance Characteristics [179]
- Service Description : A general description of the service, including the service technology, expected and actual access speed and latency, and the suitability of the service for real-time applications.
- Impact of Specialized Services : If applicable, what specialized services, if any, are offered to end users, and whether and how any specialized services may affect the last-mile capacity available for, and the performance of, broadband Internet access service.
Commercial Terms [180]
- Pricing : For example, monthly prices, usage-based fees, and fees for early termination or additional network services.
- Privacy Policies : For example, whether network management practices entail inspection of network traffic, and whether traffic information is stored, provided to third parties, or used by the carrier for non-network management purposes.
- Redress Options : Practices for resolving end-user and edge provider complaints and questions.
We emphasize that this list is not necessarily exhaustive, nor is it a safe harbor-there may be additional information, not included above, that should be disclosed for a particular broadband service to comply with the rule in light of relevant circumstances. Broadband providers should examine their network management practices and current disclosures to determine what additional information, if any, should be disclosed to comply with the rule.
57. In the Open Internet NPRM , we proposed that broadband providers publicly disclose their practices on their websites and in promotional materials. [181] Most commenters agree that a provider's website is a natural place for end users and edge providers to find disclosures, [182] and several contend that a broadband provider's only obligation should be to post its practices on its website. [183] Others assert that disclosures should also be displayed prominently at the point-of-sale, in bill inserts, and in the service contract. [184] We agree that broadband providers must, at a minimum, prominently display or provide links to disclosures on a publicly available, easily accessible website that is available to current and prospective end users and edge providers as well as to the Commission, and must disclose relevant information at the point of sale. Current end users must be able to easily identify which disclosures apply to their service offering. Broadband providers' online disclosures shall be considered disclosed to the Commission for purposes of monitoring and enforcement. We may require additional disclosures directly to the Commission. [185]
58. We anticipate that broadband providers may be able to satisfy the transparency rule through a single disclosure, and therefore do not at this time require multiple disclosures targeted at different audiences. [186] We also decline to adopt a specific format for disclosures, and instead require that disclosure be sufficiently clear and accessible to meet the requirements of the rule. [187] We will, however, continue to monitor compliance with this rule, and may require adherence to a particular set of best practices in the future. [188]
59. Although some commenters assert that a disclosure rule will impose significant burdens on broadband providers, no commenter cites any particular source of increased costs, or attempts to estimate costs of compliance. [189] For a number of reasons, we believe that the costs of the disclosure rule we adopt today are outweighed by the benefits of empowering end users and edge providers to make informed choices and of facilitating the enforcement of the other open Internet rules. First, we require only that providers post disclosures on their websites and provide disclosure at the point of sale, not that they bear the cost of printing and distributing bill inserts or other paper documents to all existing customers. [190] Second, although we may subsequently determine that it is appropriate to require that specific information be disclosed in particular ways, the transparency rule we adopt today gives broadband providers some flexibility to determine what information to disclose and how to disclose it. We also expressly exclude from the rule competitively sensitive information, information that would compromise network security, and information that would undermine the efficacy of reasonable network management practices. Third, as discussed below, by setting the effective date of these rules 60 days after notice in the Federal Register announcing the decision of the Office of Management and Budget regarding its mandatory approval of the information collection requirements contained in the rules, we give broadband providers adequate time to develop cost effective methods of compliance.
|
"For example, the Max Planck Institute analyzed data collected by the Glasnost tool from thousands of end user, and found that broadband providers were discriminating against application-specific traffic. [] Netalyzr is a National Science Foundation-funded project that tests a wide range of network characteristics. [] Similar tools are being developed for mobile broadband services. See, e.g., WindRider, Mobile Network Neutrality Monitoring System.
|
60. A key purpose of the transparency rule is to enable third-party experts such as independent engineers and consumer watchdogs to monitor and evaluate network management practices, in order to surface concerns regarding potential open Internet violations. We also note the existence of free software tools that enable Internet end users and edge providers to monitor and detect blocking and discrimination by broadband providers. [191] Although current tools cannot detect all instances of blocking or discrimination and cannot substitute for disclosure of network management policies, such tools may help supplement the transparency rule we adopt today. [192]
61. Although transparency is essential for preserving Internet openness, we disagree with commenters that suggest it is alone sufficient to prevent open Internet violations. [193] The record does not convince us that a transparency requirement by itself will adequately constrain problematic conduct, [194] and we therefore adopt two additional rules, as discussed below.
. . . . .
Proceedings
| "Need For Speed" Information For Consumers Of Broadband Services |
CG Docket 09-158. Comments Due May 26, 2011; Replies Due June 16, 2011. Comments can be filed at FCC ECFS. Learn about FCC Process. |
Consumers rely on Internet-based applications and services that place a wide range of demands on broadband networks. Some applications, like e-mail, are generally not sensitive to network performance. Other applications, such as videoconferencing and gaming, may be affected significantly by a broadband service's speed, latency, and jitter. Consumers seeking to make informed choices between competing broadband Internet access services require information about the speed and performance required for the range of Internet applications they intend to use. We note that the Open Internet Order requires broadband providers to disclose information regarding network management practices, performance, and commercial terms of broadband services. This Public Notice seeks input on the particular types of "need for speed" information that are most useful to consumers assessing which broadband service to purchase. This Notice is a further step in the Commission's ongoing effort to ensure that consumers have access to the information they need about the communications services they purchase and use.
. . . . . More
4/11/11
FCC Bureau Seeks Comment on "Need for Speed" Information for Consumers of Broadband Services.
News Release: Word | Acrobat
Public Notice: Word | Acrobat
Notes
It was argued that a key solution to NN concerns would be to have networks disclosure what blocking or discriminatory behavior they engage in. [Atkinson ("Congress should require broadband providers to state their broadband access and usage
policies in clear terms.")] [Marsden Sec. 1.2.1 Types of Content Discrimination: Transparency Failures] [Shewick Farber p. 35, 36]
This solution was endorsed by the FCC's NRIC and the IETF. It was also a part of FCC Ch. Powell's Four Freedoms, but was subsequently dropped in FCC Ch. Martin's Broadband Principles.
A few networks already make these disclosures. See Ports for a list of existing Port-Blocking policies.
In additional, it has been recommended that a useful endeavor would be to create a baseline of network discriminatory behavior (both good and bad) which exists for such things as network management, security, and network operations.
[FTC Staff Report 2007 p 58: A related concern expressed by some network neutrality proponents is that last mile
ISPs might not disclose to end users the ISPs' differential treatment of certain data
and that they will be able to get away with such non-disclosure due to a lack of viable
competitive alternatives in the marketplace or the difficulty of tracing problems to ISPs' practices. Proponents also suggest that, to the extent that such disclosures are made by
ISPs, many end users will not be able to readily understand them, making such disclosures ineffective in checking potential ISP misconduct.262 Some network neutrality
proponents also argue that the use of data packet inspection and other traffic analysis
technologies by network operators may give rise to privacy concerns that end users might
not readily recognize.
Providing disclosure of networks acceptable use policies and network management has historical precedent. Both NSFNET and ARPANet had AUP's which indicated what was and was not appropriate activity over the Net. Standards and protocols are disclosed through RFCs of the Internet Engineering Task Force.
Applications are written to those publicly disclosed standards of the IETF. To put it simply, the design of the Internet was to have applications designed to function over TCP/IP instead of having applications function over a particular physical network. There is not one application that works over fiber networks and a different one over cable networks. Applications work over TCP/IP and TCP/IP interacts with the underlying physical networks. See the Internet Hourglass. Assuming the network is implementing TCP/IP, the application that conforms with the protocols should work. When the network alters the public TCP/IP protocols, the applications may no longer work. Only a network that deviates from the public standards will know its deviation and is in a position of informing the public of this deviation (in other words, the application is not in a position of disclosing "may not work of network X" as the application assumes the networks implements IETF TCP/IP).
Some argue that while this is a positive step, it is not sufficient to prevent discrimination. [Shewick Farber p. 36 (Shewick)]
Opponents argue that full disclosure of network management principals would provide bad guys with a road map on how to defeat those security features.
FCC NRIC VI Focus Group 4 (Broadband) Recommendations Service Transparency White Paper, December 5,2003 Broadband - Papers (doc) Published 05-Dec-03
Service Transparency: Broadband Service Providers Should:
- Establish controls to administer network policy associated with blocking and filtering.
- Make meaningful information available to customers about blocking and filtering policies. This information should disclose both static and dynamic traffic filtering policies.
- Static Policies are policies that seldom change. Services and applications may depend on a consistent set of policies.
- Dynamic Policies are policies that are adjusted as part of a dynamic need to maintain the “best” operations of the network. Typically these policies are implemented as a response to an outside stimulus (virus, attack, etc).
- Make meaningful information available about expected performance with respect to upstream and downstream data rates and any limitations of the service (i.e., throughput caps, etc.)
- Best effort, “up to”, or unspecified bit rate services should be identified as such in a clear manner.
- Services having specified committed bit rates or other criteria should be handled by a SLA between the parties.
- IETF
- IETF, Reflections on Internet Transparency, RFC 4924 at 5 (Jul. 2007) ( RFC 4924) ("In practice, filtering intended to block or restrict application usage is difficult to successfully implement without customer consent, since over time developers will tend to re-engineer filtered protocols so as to avoid the filters. Thus over time, filtering is likely to result in interoperability issues or unnecessary complexity. These costs come without the benefit of effective filtering . . . .")
- IETF, Considerations on the Use of a Service Identifier in Packet Headers, RFC 3639 at 3 (Oct. 2003) (RFC 3639) ("Attempts by intermediate systems to impose service-based controls on communications against the perceived interests of the end parties to the communication are often circumvented. Services may be tunneled within other services, proxied by a collaborating external host (e.g., an anonymous redirector), or simply run over an alternate port (e.g., port 8080 vs port 80 for HTTP).").
- J. Klensin, Terminology for Describing Internet Connectivity, IEFT RFC 4084, BCP (May 2005) (stating, for example, "the provider should identify any actions of the service to block, restrict, or alter the destination of, the outbound use (i.e., the use of services not supplied by the provider or on the provider's network) of applications services.")
Disclosures
Papers
News
|
