Comcast uses a standardized protocol called IPDR for their accounting and if they're still using the same software collector that they were a few years ago it was independently verified for accuracy. IPDR had been part of the DOCSIS protocol for nearly a decade and is publicly documented.
Now, what (if anything) they choose to zero rate or otherwise manipulate I can't speak on, but the collection of the usage is well understood, independent of the CPE, and extremely accurate. On Jan 9, 2016 12:05 PM, "Robert Webb" <rw...@ropeguru.com> wrote: > Unfortunately when it comes to "competition" in the wireless world, even > though there are multiple providers, the consumer will always be gouged > given the attitude of today's providers to just follow what the other does. > In my opinion, kind of a in the public eye form of collusion. So there will > never be a true competition based market in the wireless given the current > players. > > There should be certifications for measurement is that is what my bill is > going to be based on as a consumer. My power meter, gas meter, water meter, > etc. get replaced every so often for calibration and the particular utility > will come out and swap or test on site if I think there is an issue. > > Unfortunately, providers like Comcast, yes, I know they aren't wireless, > but their usage meter is a joke and a proprietary based joke at that. I do > not think I have ever seen anyone from Comcast willing to describe exactly > how their meter works and what is and is not counted towards usage. I am > not a wireless expert, but my guess is that it would be even more difficult > to accurately track usage on wireless given the portable nature. > > (In my area, luckily, my landline ISP doesn't charge or have caps either. > But my wireless carrier has caps. And given the data hungry phones these > days in which a lot of the data cannot be controlled by the user, then I > certainly want the technical details of the usage calculation open to me > for review.) > > Robert Webb > > On Sat, 9 Jan 2016 10:46:29 -0600 (CST) > Mike Hammett <na...@ics-il.net> wrote: > >> The cost to the provider is irrelevant to the consumer. Cost to the >> consumer is all the consumer should be concerned with. Competition, >> industry and media would serve as the barometer to sensible or ridiculous >> pricing. >> There are a myriad of ways to measure usage. I'm not sure there are any >> certifications for any other billing relating to the Internet, so why start >> now? >> >> (My ISP doesn't charge for usage and I don't intend to until the industry >> makes that shift. I'm just debating this side.) >> >> ----- Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com >> >> Midwest Internet Exchange http://www.midwest-ix.com >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >> >> From: "Robert Webb" <rw...@ropeguru.com> To: "Mike Hammett" < >> na...@ics-il.net> Cc: "North American Network Operators' Group" < >> nanog@nanog.org> Sent: Saturday, January 9, 2016 10:37:23 AM Subject: >> Re: Binge On! - get your umbrellas out, stuff's hitting the fan. >> The normal consumer has no way to correlate what the "real" cost is as >> the providers keep their "costs" for bandwidth, transit, etc. proprietary >> secrets and always lie to the consumer and muddy the picture of what the >> ISP actually pays for regarding bits! >> Additionally, until there can be proper tools that are "certified" for >> measuring usage, then usage based billing will never be viable. >> Robert Webb >> On Sat, 9 Jan 2016 10:11:29 -0600 (CST) Mike Hammett <na...@ics-il.net> >> wrote: >> >>> My point on usage based billing isn't meant to stifle anything, but to >>> provide equitable service to everyone at a fair price. $10/gig certainly >>> isn't a fair price for almost any network. People pay variable rates for >>> water, electricity, gas, food, etc., etc. >>> Is it necessarily a bad thing if people stop to think about what their >>> usage costs? >>> >>> ----- Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com >>> >> >> >> > >
