the big 3 dont need more bandwidth. if they want 700, they should be forced to give up another band, like 850.
"Studies show that 60% of the time, it works every time."
Wind $29/Month UNLIMITED EVERYTHING BTS plan
Globe and Mail's article last Tuesday had pretty good coverage of the 700MHz set-aside issue, and the OpenMedia.ca petition.
"...analysts say only key blocks of the 700 MHz frequency are considered ideal for LTE purposes – roughly 46 MHz of the total 58 MHz expected to be put on the auction block.
...One proposal that was under consideration by Ottawa is to potentially place a cap at 10 MHz of bandwidth...
Michael Hennessy, senior vice-president for regulatory and government affairs at Telus Corp., said caps would ensure “multiple winners” in the wireless industry, while also enabling telecom incumbents to make LTE network investments in both urban and rural settings.
Set-asides, he added, are problematic because they create a lot of “distortion” in the bidding process, meaning industry players end up overpaying for spectrum..."
It's in Bell and Telus's interests to lobby for a 10 MHz cap, since they're "independent" companies but then they share a network. It would be blatantly unfair to allow Bellus to acquire 20 MHz while everyone else was limited to 10.
That said, I believe there SHOULD be a set-aside. Although I don't think Robellus deserve ANY more spectrum unless they give up 850.
I think I know what they put a cap, then they can also use the discount brand and bid on it. I think that, the first rules is to prevent any discount brand in bidding on the 700mhz. This is just a assumption though.
To be honest, Big 3 does not even need 20mhz in total (for the 3) to roll our LTE in rural area. They have 1700mhz for urban area already and rural area traffic won't be that congested anyways. If I remember correctly, LTE also increase the capacity of data network. They have 850mhz 1700mhz 1900mhz.
If government want competition, they need to set aside quite a bit of 700mhz for the new entrants since it is needed for penetrating buildings and also for them to create a national wide network. If they don't want to do this, at least have the big 3 to cough out the 850mhz so that it could balance out
Let me ask you: What do you think about the "reasonable" defensive measures like traffic shaping at Mobilicity? Does it justify as a "last resort" against the "net neutrality", which is a principle OpenMedia believes in?
Last edited by HC - NO "i"; 01-18-2012 at 11:41 AM. Reason: typo
HC - NO "i"
I am NOT "the" HC, we are TWO different individuals!
"If we amplify everything, we hear nothing!" - Jon Stewart, Comedian
Not sure I'm clear on your question Howard, or why you're asking
I think I've made it clear I don't agree with port or protocol crippling, and that any data management should be restricted to rate/volume management, and only 1) as a stop gap measure to relieve user frustration at network overload or 2) to enforce a reasonable notion of fair usage of a mobile service (eg. preventing 20 or 50 or 100GB per month exploitation).
Last edited by pjw918; 01-18-2012 at 07:19 PM. Reason: changed "congestion" to "overload"
I ask because from the perspective of "net neutrality", one cannot cherry pick i.e. want the government to intervene, set aside the spectrum but on the other hand, implement "excessive" traffic shaping in the name of curbing abusers.
I understand Howard, and I don't think anyone supports Mobilicity's excessive traffic shaping techniques.
But just for fun and to indulge in some cherry picking.. You don't want the government to help the new entrants secure some of the 700MHz spectrum essential to their survival, because we can't watch SPB TV??!!
Last edited by pjw918; 01-19-2012 at 08:23 AM.
I think only the most idealistic of us has much hope for net neutrality in wireless. It's the one aspect of the Internet where the telcos' bulls__t scarcity model actually applies. Even Google threw in the towel on wireless net neutrality when they did their deal with the devil, aka Verizon. Notwithstanding the lost cause (for now) of wireless net neutrality, it's still reasonable in my opinion to hope that the government does set aside spectrum for the new entrants. Robelus is sitting on lots of unused space within the alread-allocated spectrum. Until they deploy all the spectrum they're sitting on, they can't really begrudge some of the 700 MHz spectrum being reserved for the little guys.