CTIA Makes Case for Why Wireless Must Be Treated Differently Under Revised Net Neutrality Rules

The 2010 net neutrality order imposed a weaker standard for prohibitions on blocking on wireless and exempted mobile from the nondiscrimination rule. But most industry observers said that, in a move to strengthen the rules, wireless is an easy target for enhanced regulation (CD July 17 p1). The FCC is taking comment in response to a May 15 net neutrality NPRM and will start a series of roundtables next week. A Sept. 16 roundtable specifically looks at mobile broadband.

"Any extensions of, or additions to, the FCC’s 2010 rules would be unwieldy and over-inclusive when applied to the complex and constantly-evolving management of mobile broadband networks,” the CTIA paper argued (http://bit.ly/YeIU57). “With the introduction of LTE, networks are managed and operated in a far more complicated and complex manner than the networks in place in 2010 when the Open Internet Order was adopted.” The paper, filed in docket 14-28, was by Jeffrey Reed, professor of electrical and computer engineering at Virginia Tech University, and consultant Nishith Tripathi.

Wireless apps can consume “very large quantities of bandwidth, potentially causing problems for the end user or for others nearby,” CTIA said. It said third-party apps and services “can also interfere with and undermine network performance, and wireless network operators must be permitted the flexibility to manage their networks to prevent these negative effects.” Spectrum scarcity means carriers have to put in place controls to manage their networks, CTIA said. “Wireless providers must take steps to contain data-intensive applications from flooding the network with excessive amounts of traffic that would degrade service for many users,” it said. “Wireless network operators require the flexibility to fairly balance network performance and user performance among users, devices, user services, and overall services on the network."

The May NPRM also seeks comment on the feasibility of defining the minimum level of service that broadband networks must provide, CTIA noted. “Such standards cannot be readily quantified for mobile wireless networks given the millisecond-to-millisecond adjustments in the network and would prevent wireless network operators from using techniques critical to ensuring a robust user experience."

The issue came up during a Thursday webinar sponsored by the Georgetown Center for Business and Public Policy. Wireless networks are different, with less capacity, “much more complex management” issues and mobility issues, and subjecting them to the same rules as wireline doesn’t make sense, said panelist Russell Hanser of Wilkinson Barker. “The bottom line is it’s about having spectrum and you have to manage incredibly high growth,” said Patricia Paoletta of Harris Wiltshire.

Fred Campbell, executive director of the Center for Boundless Innovation in Technology, said he agreed with the thrust of the CTIA paper. “Prioritization to manage congestion is the norm for wireless networks, not the exception,” said Campbell. The July 2012 report by the President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology (PCAST) recognized the importance of different service tiers, he noted. “Given that efficient spectrum use routinely requires prioritization, the notion that commercial spectrum users should have the burden of proving that their network management decisions are reasonable is absurd. In the absence of obvious competitive issues, the government should presume that wireless prioritization is reasonable."

But Matt Wood, policy director at Free Press, called the CTIA arguments “ridiculous” on their face. “Wireless networks need to manage congestion? Sure,” Wood said. “That’s why the reasonable network management allowance existed in 2010 and why it would assuredly be part of any new rules too. It’s ludicrous to leap from there to the notion that wireless needs a license for unreasonable discrimination.” Principles may apply differently to different networks, he said. “But we need the same basic openness principles in place for all Internet users and innovators, no matter how they connect.”

"It does not take great technical expertise to tell that deliberately degrading service, blocking some sites, favoring others, and otherwise privileging contents or applications is utterly inconsistent with an open Internet,” said Public Knowledge Senior Vice President Harold Feld. “Whatever technical limitations inherent in wireless make ‘reasonable network management’ more restrictive than on the wireline side, we can certainly apply the general rules needed to protect the open Internet."

The wireless industry needs to decide whether LTE will be “genuine” broadband, or just a “fragile” alternative for those who can’t get wireline service, Feld said. CTIA’s paper “amounts to a rather sad admission that wireless broadband is not real broadband, and it can never be robust or reliable enough to be real broadband,” he said.

The FCC doesn’t need to impose new rules on wireless or wireline networks, said Randolph May, president of the Free State Foundation. “There is really no serious dispute that spectrum constraints, especially exacerbated by exploding usage of video apps, make application of ‘neutrality’ rules to wireless much more problematical from an engineering perspective.” The wireless market is more competitive than wireline, he said. “Application of net neutrality rules to wireless providers would mean that non-neutral plans like those recently offered by T-Mobile and Sprint providing consumers with additional choices would be prohibited. ... The issue of extending net neutrality to wireless ought to be a non-starter."

Ensuring that mobile connections remain “crystal clear is an urgent priority for all wireless providers, and is driving the increasingly intense investment, innovation and competition we see in the industry today,” said Jonathan Spalter, chairman of Mobile Future. “The FCC also has a crucial role to play to help unleash more spectrum to meet skyrocketing consumer demand for mobile broadband. Simply put, more spectrum will mean more mobile innovation, more investment, more economic productivity, and more high-speed broadband competition.”