Statistics 12345

Response statistics for Public consultation on specific aspects of transparency, traffic management and switching in an Open Internet
Status : Active
Start date : 2012-07-23
End date : 2012-10-15
There are 412 responses matching your criteria of a total of 412 records in the current set of data.
Search criteria
All data requested
Questionnaire
1. Traffic management
1.1. Traffic management and differentiation
Question 2: Please provide your views on the following ways/situations where traffic management may be
applied by ISPs. Are traffic management measures: a) applied to deliver managed services (e.g. to ensure a
guaranteed quality of service for a specific content/applications)
Number of % % of % of
requested records Requested total number total number
records(412) records(412) records(401)
necessary 37 9,0% 9,0% 9,2%

appropriate 102 24,8% 24,8% 25,4%
problematic 262 63,6% 63,6% 65,3%
N/A - - 2,7% -
401
b) taking into account the sensitivity of the service to delay or packet loss
necessary 49 11,9% 11,9% 13,4%

appropriate 120 29,1% 29,1% 32,8%
problematic 197 47,8% 47,8% 53,8%
N/A - - 11,2% -
366
c) used to implement or manage compliance with the explicit contractual restrictions (e.g. on P2P or VoIP) of
the Internet access product accepted by the user
necessary 11 2,7% 2,7% 2,9%

appropriate 42 10,2% 10,2% 11,2%
problematic 322 78,2% 78,2% 85,9%
N/A - - 9,0% -
375
d) targeting types/classes of traffic contributing most to congestion

necessary 12 2,9% 2,9% 3,3%

appropriate 50 12,1% 12,1% 13,9%
problematic 299 72,6% 72,6% 82,8%
N/A - - 12,4% -
e) targeting heavy users whose use is excessive to the extent that it impacts on other users
necessary 20 4,9% 4,9% 5,2%

appropriate 75 18,2% 18,2% 19,5%
problematic 289 70,1% 70,1% 75,3%
N/A - - 6,8% -
384
f) applied during busy times and places, when and where congestion occurs
necessary 20 4,9% 4,9% 5,6%

appropriate 95 23,1% 23,1% 26,7%
problematic 241 58,5% 58,5% 67,7%
N/A - - 13,6% -
356
g) affecting all applications/content providers in the same way (application-agnostic)
necessary 85 20,6% 20,6% 25,1%

appropriate 129 31,3% 31,3% 38,2%
problematic 124 30,1% 30,1% 36,7%
N/A - - 18,0% -
338
h) affecting (similar) applications/content providers of the same category in the same way
necessary 40 9,7% 9,7% 13,5%

appropriate 58 14,1% 14,1% 19,5%
problematic 199 48,3% 48,3% 67,0%
N/A - - 27,9% -
297
i) used, without other grounds, against services competing with the ISP's own services
necessary 7 1,70% 1,70% 2,05%

appropriate 6 1,46% 1,46% 1,76%
problematic 328 79,61% 79,61% 96,19%
N/A - - 17,23% -
341
j) implemented at the full discretion of the ISP
necessary 11 2,67% 2,67% 3,15%

appropriate 16 3,88% 3,88% 4,58%
problematic 322 78,16% 78,16% 92,26%
N/A - - 15,29% -
2. Transparency and switching (consumer choice)
2.1 Transparency and general characteristics of the Internet access offer
Question 4: In order to allow consumers to make informed choices, on the basis of clear, meaningful, and
comparable information, which elements should be communicated to consumers? - Elements related to traffic
management practices: a) Contractual restrictions (blocking, throttling, other restrictions on application use)
important 384 93,20% 93,20% 98,46%

less important 6 1,46% 1,46% 1,54%
N/A - - 5,34% -
390
b) Traffic management policy applied to prioritise certain traffic in specific circumstances
important 342 83,01% 83,01% 89,53%

less important 40 9,71% 9,71% 10,47%
N/A - - 7,28% -
382
c) Whether and to what extent managed services may affect the quality of the best effort Internet (e.g. the
possibility of the Internet connection being affected when watching IP-TV or when using other managed
services)
Number of % % of
requested records Requested total number
records(412) records(412)
important 257 62,38% 62,38%
less important 46 11,17% 11,17%
measuring technically feasible (fixed) 122 29,61% 29,61%
measuring technically feasible (mobile) 105 25,49% 25,49%
currently measured (fixed) 102 24,76% 24,76%
currently measured (mobile) 96 23,30% 23,30%
728
e) Data allowances (caps), download limits
important 335 81,31% 81,31% 91,03%

less important 33 8,01% 8,01% 8,97%
N/A - - 10,68% -
f) What these data allowances enable customers to do in practice (download x hours of video; upload y photos
etc.)
important 200 48,54% 48,54% 54,95%

less important 164 39,81% 39,81% 45,05%
N/A - - 11,65% -
Elements related to speed and quality: a) Average speed, typical speed ranges and speed at peak times
(upload and download)
Number of % % of
important 306 74,27% 74,27%
772
b) Respect of guaranteed minimum speed (if applicable)
Number of % % of
important 330 80,10% 80,10%
685
c) What these speeds allow customers to do in practice (video-streaming, audio-download, video-conferences
etc.)
important 202 49,03% 49,03% 55,80%

less important 160 38,83% 38,83% 44,20%
N/A - - 12,14% -
362
d) Latency/network responsiveness (a measure of traffic delay) and which services would be affected thereby
(e.g. certain applications such as IP-TV or videoconferencing would be more seriously impacted by higher
traffic delays in the network of the provider)
Number of % % of
important 252 61,17% 61,17%
657
e) Jitter (a measure of the variability over time of latency) and which services would be affected thereby
(e.g. echoing in VoIP calls)
Number of % % of
important 197 47,82% 47,82%
f) Packet loss rate (share of packets lost in the network) and which services would be affected thereby (e.g.
VoIP)
Number of % % of
important 227 55,10% 55,10%
629
g) Reliability of the service (network accessibility and retainability), i.e. measure for successful start and
completion of data sessions
Number of % % of
important 274 66,50% 66,50%
603
h) Quality parameters for (mobile) voice telephony (call setup success rate, dropped calls, speech quality,
other)
Number of % % of
important 231 56,07% 56,07%
568
Question 5: Some ISPs currently apply 'fair use policies', which give them wide discretion to apply restrictions
on traffic generated by users whose usage they consider excessive. Do you consider that, in case of
contractual restrictions of data consumption, quantified data allowances (e.g. monthly caps of x MB or GB)
are more transparent for consumers than discretionary fair use clauses?
Yes 304 73,79% 73,79% 81,07%

No 71 17,23% 17,23% 18,93%
N/A - - 8,98% -
Question 6: a) When should the elements of information referred to in question 4 be provided to the
consumer by the ISP?
Number of % % of
before signing the contract 367 89,08% 89,08%
regularly updated during the contract 172 41,75% 41,75%
period
during the contract period if changes 286 69,42% 69,42%
occur
other 23 5,58% 5,58%
Question 7: a) In order to promote transparency and consumer choice, do you consider it necessary that
comparable data on the Internet access provided by ISPs is collected and published by NRAs or another
independent organisation?
Yes 300 72,82% 72,82% 82,19%

No 65 15,78% 15,78% 17,81%
N/A - - 11,41% -
Question 8: a) Do you consider it necessary to regulate the labelling as "Internet access" of subscriptions that
restrict access to some Internet services, content or applications?
Yes 313 75,97% 75,97% 87,92%

No 43 10,44% 10,44% 12,08%
N/A - - 13,59% -
2.2 Switching
d) Should customers be able to easily opt out from certain contractual restrictions (up to a completely
unrestricted offer) by the same operator?
Yes 263 63,83% 63,83% 89,46%

No 31 7,52% 7,52% 10,54%
N/A - - 28,64% -
e) Do you think that a customer should be allowed to switch to another operator within a reduced contract
termination period in case his/her current operator does not at all offer an unrestricted Internet access
product or does not allow switching to such unrestricted offer?
Yes 293 71,12% 71,12% 91,56%

No 27 6,55% 6,55% 8,44%
N/A - - 22,33% -
Question 10: While there may be valid (technical) reasons why consumers do not always get the advertised
service speed or quality, should there be a limit on the discrepancy between advertised and actual service
parameters (e.g. speed)?
Yes 285 69,17% 69,17% 87,69%

No 40 9,71% 9,71% 12,31%
N/A - - 21,12% -
Question 13: a) How important would be the benefits for end-users of improved transparency and facilitated
switching?
very important 255 61,89% 61,89% 76,12%

important 68 16,50% 16,50% 20,30%
slightly important 12 2,91% 2,91% 3,58%
not important 0 0,00% 0,00% 0,00%
N/A - - 18,69% -
3. Process
Question 14: a) Do you consider that intervention by public authorities is necessary at this stage?
Yes 305 74,03% 74,03% 86,40%

No 48 11,65% 11,65% 13,60%
N/A - - 14,32% -
Question 15: Under article 22(3) USD NRAs have the power to set minimum quality of service requirements on
undertakings providing public communications networks. In a scenario where in a given MemberStateno
unrestricted offer is available (for instance because all operators actually block VoIP), do you consider that
the "minimum quality of service tool" should be applied by the NRA to require operators to provide certain
unrestricted offers?
Yes 269 65,3% 65,3% 94,7%

No 15 3,6% 3,6% 5,3%
N/A - - 31,1% -

Statistics 12345

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Statistics 12345

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Response statistics for Public consultation on specific aspects of transparency, traffic management and switching in an Open Internet

1.1. Traffic management and differentiation

necessary 37 9,0% 9,0% 9,2%

necessary 49 11,9% 11,9% 13,4%

necessary 11 2,7% 2,7% 2,9%

d) targeting types/classes of traffic contributing most to congestion

necessary 12 2,9% 2,9% 3,3%

necessary 20 4,9% 4,9% 5,2%

necessary 20 4,9% 4,9% 5,6%

necessary 85 20,6% 20,6% 25,1%

necessary 40 9,7% 9,7% 13,5%

necessary 7 1,70% 1,70% 2,05%

necessary 11 2,67% 2,67% 3,15%

2. Transparency and switching (consumer choice)

2.1 Transparency and general characteristics of the Internet access offer

important 384 93,20% 93,20% 98,46%

important 342 83,01% 83,01% 89,53%

important 335 81,31% 81,31% 91,03%

important 200 48,54% 48,54% 54,95%

important 202 49,03% 49,03% 55,80%

Yes 304 73,79% 73,79% 81,07%

Yes 300 72,82% 72,82% 82,19%

Yes 313 75,97% 75,97% 87,92%

Yes 263 63,83% 63,83% 89,46%

Yes 293 71,12% 71,12% 91,56%

Yes 285 69,17% 69,17% 87,69%

very important 255 61,89% 61,89% 76,12%

Yes 305 74,03% 74,03% 86,40%

Yes 269 65,3% 65,3% 94,7%

You might also like