Top 5% being throttled starting 6/1

[tommym65]

This thread is still going? Sheesh....

Amen! This topic has gone w-a-a-y past being absurd.

 

1. Sprint has said they will throttle the "top 5%" of data users at times/locations of network congestion. Sprint has NOT said what this "5%" level of usage is. Sprint knows precisely what this level currently is, because they constantly monitor all data and voice traffic from all devices on the Sprint network, and can also undoubtedly predict what it WILL be in the near- to medium-future. We who read and post to S4GRU do NOT know what this level is now, nor what it will evolve to over time. Any comment beyond these obvious facts is simply idle speculation.

 

2. Sprint has said that they will "throttle" these users. Sprint has NOT said they will cap usage. Sprint has NOT stated the speeds at which they will perform this throttling. Any comments beyond these obvious facts are also simply idle speculation.

 

3. In stating that Sprint will throttle some data users at some unspecified speed, Sprint has NOT compared Sprint network usage to any other cellular network anywhere in the world. Comparing Sprint usage to other networks' usage is also simply idle speculation.

 

4. Contributors to this thread have expressed various levels of consternation and outrage at Sprint for making these statements, even though NO ONE outside of Sprint actually knows what the effects of the throttling will be on a). Subscriber counts or b.). Network speed. Until such time as these effects are known and measurable, these comments are also simply idle speculation.

 

5. Clearly, some forms of Sprint network behavior constitute abuse (bit torrents, constant video streaming, web hosting, etc., etc.), and almost everyone who has posted here has agreed with that statement. In spite of the fact that, as NV2 is implemented, the Sprint network will have absolutely ENORMOUS data capacity nearly everywhere where there is Sprint service, abusers will overload that network and should must be limited or removed, or the network will sink into unusability. Cellular networks are constrained, finite resources and require that certain civilized rules of sharing be enforced to insure that they will work at all.

 

So, let's all take a deep breath, step back from the idle speculation, and carefully watch Sprint's behavior after June 1st, and THEN we can make informed comments on what Sprint is doing.

 

All I am say-ing, is give peace a chance!

[rf40928]

Amen! This topic has gone w-a-a-y past being absurd.

1. Sprint has said they will throttle the "top 5%" of data users at times/locations of network congestion. Sprint has NOT said what this "5%" level of usage is. Sprint knows precisely what this level currently is, because they constantly monitor all data and voice traffic from all devices on the Sprint network, and can also undoubtedly predict what it WILL be in the near- to medium-future. We who read and post to S4GRU do NOT know what this level is now, nor what it will evolve to over time. Any comment beyond these obvious facts is simply idle speculation.

2. Sprint has said that they will "throttle" these users. Sprint has NOT said they will cap usage. Sprint has NOT stated the speeds at which they will perform this throttling. Any comments beyond these obvious facts are also simply idle speculation.

3. In stating that Sprint will throttle some data users at some unspecified speed, Sprint has NOT compared Sprint network usage to any other cellular network anywhere in the world. Comparing Sprint usage to other networks' usage is also simply idle speculation.

4. Contributors to this thread have expressed various levels of consternation and outrage at Sprint for making these statements, even though NO ONE outside of Sprint actually knows what the effects of the throttling will be on a). Subscriber counts or b.). Network speed. Until such time as these effects are known and measurable, these comments are also simply idle speculation.

5. Clearly, some forms of Sprint network behavior constitute abuse (bit torrents, constant video streaming, web hosting, etc., etc.), and almost everyone who has posted here has agreed with that statement. In spite of the fact that, as NV2 is implemented, the Sprint network will have absolutely ENORMOUS data capacity nearly everywhere where there is Sprint service, abusers will overload that network and should must be limited or removed, or the network will sink into unusability. Cellular networks are constrained, finite resources and require that certain civilized rules of sharing be enforced to insure that they will work at all.

So, let's all take a deep breath, step back from the idle speculation, and carefully watch Sprint's behavior after June 1st, and THEN we can make informed comments on what Sprint is doing.

All I am say-ing, is give peace a chance!

Saying what everyone has said is "worthless" speculation is a bit overboard when you in a nutshell said if was all idle. These forums draw in people and obviously the fact they are interested keeps s4gru alive and well.. Keeps them coming and donating. Much posting on any topic has a degree of speculation involved.

 

And its not all speculation - as AJ stated above -we know at what point (5gb) of usage Sprint will throttle and we know the throttling they use wil likely disrupt video at least.

 

Still other things seem fuzzy. Im not sure if it clear if Sprint is throttling by phone - which makes sense, but if they throttle by account - Say 3 phones using a collective 12 GB on one shared unlimited plan- which would be a mistake- alot more people could fit in that category. The idea they might do this is not proposterous as att and verizon have shared plans where peeps share as much data all in one.

[swintec]

And its not all speculation - as AJ stated above -we know at what point (5gb) of usage Sprint will throttle...

 

Sprint did not say they will throttle at 5 GBs.  If they throttle at 5 GBs they they are not throttling the top 5%, they are throttling...anyone over 5 GBs.  Of course, Sprint could be lying through their teeth at us but all we can do is take what they said at face value for now.

 

The article from OP even quotes Sprint:

 

One problem for customers under the Sprint's prioritization scheme is that there is no exact amount of data consumption that will place them within the top 5 percent of users in any given month, and the threshold will change monthly as demand changes...

 

But Sprint said customers who typically use 5 GB or more in a given month will likely be in that uppermost tier.

 

(Emphasis mine)

 

Saying 5 GBs is the cut off is not true and is what is getting everyone on the other discussion boards in a frenzy because they believe there is some sort of hard cut off line.

 

I half joked in a previous post...if we all go on a download free for all starting next month we could easily get the top 5% group raised far beyond the quoted 5 GBs figure.

[Flompholph]

Not sure why this went 16 pages most people won't notice it. If they do get throttled they will just blame it on sprints normal congestion for those areas anyways.

 

I found this neat and it goes with the 5% discussion. I guess at least the top 5 percent is not close to wired top 5% average 328GB per month.

 

http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2014/05/watch-out-for-data-caps-video-hungry-cord-cutters-use-328gb-a-month/

 

I also saw that 33% of mobile traffic is youtube and facebook.

[dkyeager]

...I can see Sprint wanting to push out 15gb+ users but pushing out people using 5+ gb by throttling them into the arms of another carrier seems like a horrible plan for a company that has all this bandwidth. Maybe its not ready now and thats the problem.

yes, the real issue is the portions of the Sprint network that are still legacy are near collapse, especially when sites are taken out of service to be converted to network vision, which further reduces capacity. This almost forces many customers to leave. Then having a threat against the heaviest users should help the new networks (bands) from being overwhelmed. The poetic justice here will be when a heavy user untouched in an advanced market goes to the legacy market, they will be hammered down to below legacy speeds, which often max out at below 53kbps, in my recent experience, with almost all calls going to voice mail in peak hours. So there are valid technical reasons for this. We will have to wait and see if it gets carried further to purge heavy users or they use it to buy time to fix network capacity issues (or both).

 

sent by tapatalk from my LS-980 (G2)

[rf40928]

yes, the real issue is the portions of the Sprint network that are still legacy are near collapse, especially when sites are taken out of service to be converted to network vision, which further reduces capacity. This almost forces many customers to leave. Then having a threat against the heaviest users should help the new networks (bands) from being overwhelmed. The poetic justice here will be when a heavy user untouched in an advanced market goes to the legacy market, they will be hammered down to below legacy speeds, which often max out at below 53kbps, in my recent experience, with almost all calls going to voice mail in peak hours. So there are valid technical reasons for this. We will have to wait and see if it gets carried further to purge heavy users or they use it to buy time to fix network capacity issues (or both).

 

sent by tapatalk from my LS-980 (G2)

 

Yeah .. I'm curious how this will work out.. 5Gb is still considerable data use.. but I don't think they should throttle users this low in markets that have the bandwidth - and supposedly they aren't going to if not needed if the site isn't overloaded..

 

It seems like Sprint has a hardon for the 5Gb+ users..

 

but in some markets this is not as big a deal as others.  I hope in markets where 2500 is working the extra bandwidth keeps throttling to a minimum as Columbus has decent 2500 

[anthony.spina97]

I found this neat and it goes with the 5% discussion. I guess at least the top 5 percent is not close to wired top 5% average 328GB per month.

I guess my family is part of the top 5% of wired...

http://imgur.com/3MVtdFz

 

-Anthony

[halcyoncmdr]

I found this neat and it goes with the 5% discussion. I guess at least the top 5 percent is not close to wired top 5% average 328GB per month.

 

http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2014/05/watch-out-for-data-caps-video-hungry-cord-cutters-use-328gb-a-month/

 

 

I used 648GB last month according to my router logs, 555GB in March, 396GB in February, 480GB in January, 272GB in December, 210GB in November, 410GB in October, 237GB in September, 135GB in August, 188GB in July, 58GB in June, and 77GB in May. The numbers include combined up/down throughput, and I do not torrent files very often, which can dramatically increase usage as we know.

 

My household usage is going up by about 50-100GB per month. Our usage for the most part has been pretty consistent for the last year. Starting March of last year one roommate began working from home, and we had our speeds increased and Comcast Business Class installed. Now that it has been a year, I find it interesting to go back through and look at our usage increase. In January we had one of my friends and his mother move in since they had a falling out with family and needed a place to stay, they are waiting on disability and SSI to be approved, and we have the room. His mother spends most of the day online since she is disabled and can't do much else, so this explains a spike starting then. In March I also was laid off and so I've been home more overall, online and such, which is likely related to our increase since then. We are not cord cutters, but we do use Netflix and HBO GO quite a bit in addition to the TV itself.

 

If my household usage is going up by this much every month without us actually changing the way we are doing things, think of the average person that doesn't care or pay any attention at all. Many people treat their mobile device as just an extension of their home connection, or as a substitute for a bad home connection in some cases.

 

My home usage is going up seemingly on its own even across months that we haven't made any significant changes in what we are using it for. Imagine if you move my usage across to a mobile network at a fraction of the overall usage, let's say if we took 1% of my home data usage and made it mobile instead. We'd be looking at 6.48GB last month, 5.55GB in March, 3.96GB in February, 4.8GB in January, 2.72GB in December, 2.1GB in November, 4.1GB in October, 2.37GB in September, 1.35GB in August, 1.88GB in July, 5.8GB in June, and 7.7GB in May. Now, this is just 1% of my overall household data usage, but it adds up very quickly and is fairly inconsistent month-to-month.

 

I am knowledgeable of what uses data, and recognize issues with congestion, but even with that knowledge I can't even account for my household usage accurately. Now, think of the average person.

[gnoj]

Sprint uses a throughput and latency throttle on prepaid, while it only implements a latency throttle on postpaid. That's very important to keep in mind.

 

Do you happen to know the throttling policy of a wholesale (MVNO) agreement?

[Conan Kudo]

Do you happen to know the throttling policy of a wholesale (MVNO) agreement?

It's generally the same as prepaid, though the limits that trigger the throttling differ wildly based on the agreement. And of course, there are some agreements that don't have them at all, like Ting's (because access is fully metered).

[tampaflusa]

I haven't received anything in the mail yet notifying me of the proposed throttle. How is Sprint going to notify it's customers when June 1st is coming up soon? Not everybody reads tech sites like this.

 

Sent from my SPH-L720T using Tapatalk

[david279]

Mail! You'll be getting a text or email.

 

Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk

[Johnner1999]

Typically it's sneaked into your bill. Yeah they know now one reads them.

 

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

[gnoj]

It's generally the same as prepaid, though the limits that trigger the throttling differ wildly based on the agreement. And of course, there are some agreements that don't have them at all, like Ting's (because access is fully metered).

 

So for the rare Ting user (or anyone on a similarly metered plan) whose usage falls in the top 5%, their usage would be unaffected by this new policy, essentially giving them priority over all other throttled traffic, including Sprint's postpaid retail customers on unlimited plans? Given how much such usage would cost at their current rates ($74+ for 5GB), I suppose that would be fair.

[Destroyallcubes]

So I have been throttled. It didn't make sense because it was midnight, on a never congested tower, and Slacker couldn't even stream music on it very well. Download speed of .5mbps and upload of almost 7mbps. The .5 should of been plenty for streaming though. Pings were normal

[EvanA]

So I have been throttled. It didn't make sense because it was midnight, on a never congested tower, and Slacker couldn't even stream music on it very well. Download speed of .5mbps and upload of almost 7mbps. The .5 should of been plenty for streaming though. Pings were normal

Throttling policies aren't in effect yet.

 

Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk

[Dkoellerwx]

So I have been throttled. It didn't make sense because it was midnight, on a never congested tower, and Slacker couldn't even stream music on it very well. Download speed of .5mbps and upload of almost 7mbps. The .5 should of been plenty for streaming though. Pings were normal

 

That's not throttling. If it was, your pings would have been through the roof.

[Destroyallcubes]

Throttling policies aren't in effect yet.

Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk

well it was on several towers. The policy was in my opinion already in place. By shaping of data. It could of been just that. I just found it weird I had consistent .5 on several sites

[Destroyallcubes]

That's not throttling. If it was, your pings would have been through the roof.

Are we sure pings will be slower during throttled periods. They never were on AT&T. I would think pings would be effected. Just download speeds.

[Dkoellerwx]

Are we sure pings will be slower during throttled periods. They never were on AT&T. I would think pings would be effected. Just download speeds.

 

It's been explained before how the throttling will work.

 

Network prioritization is an effective throttle. T-Mobile uses it, CBW used it, AT&T uses it with Aio and Cricket, Verizon uses it with prepaid, and Sprint is just now going to start using it. It's not a throughput throttle, it's effectively a latency throttle. It's a technique to enforce an effective packet processing order that pushes out the simplest/smallest requests ahead of larger ones.

 

....

 

Sprint uses a throughput and latency throttle on prepaid, while it only implements a latency throttle on postpaid. That's very important to keep in mind.

 

....

[derrph]

You do all that while driving a truck? Impressive.

 

Try using your radio or satellite radio. Spotify/Pandora plays the same songs they do. Just a heads up.

 

I am on my phone all day, I stream music, watch a few netflix a month, do email and all the works. I am told I am glued to my phone.

 

I have never cracked 5 gigs.

 

Sent from my HTC M8

Are you streaming your music on regular quality?

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[halcyoncmdr]

Are we sure pings will be slower during throttled periods. They never were on AT&T. I would think pings would be effected. Just download speeds.

 

It's not throttling the way AT&T or T-Mobile do by artificially limiting your speed.

 

It is a network prioritization, so your packets will be delayed as they are a lower priority than other "standard" users that haven't hit the 5% mark.

 

Also, it isn't in effect yet. If you were getting slow speeds at an off-peak time it was due to some other factor, like a network issue/overnight maintenance or something similar. Possibly just a bunch of users that had their stuff set to update at midnight, or something similar to that. Just because it isn't a classic "peak hour" that doesn't mean that it won't be peak for that particular site.

[Destroyallcubes]

It's not throttling the way AT&T or T-Mobile do by artificially limiting your speed.

 

It is a network prioritization, so your packets will be delayed as they are a lower priority than other "standard" users that haven't hit the 5% mark.

 

Also, it isn't in effect yet. If you were getting slow speeds at an off-peak time it was due to some other factor, like a network issue/overnight maintenance or something similar. Possibly just a bunch of users that had their stuff set to update at midnight, or something similar to that. Just because it isn't a classic "peak hour" that doesn't mean that it won't be peak for that particular site.

Well even at peak hour this site never did so, and it was multiple sites hitting the same speed on the download. It just looked like classic AT&T throttle, I missed a few pages of important details about it being different.

[dstar2002]

Are you streaming your music on regular quality?

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Regular is CD quality which is plenty for on the go streaming for anyone.

 

If people didn't use ultra high quality maybe it would help keep then out of the top 5%

 

Sent from my HTC M8

[The Dave]

I always stream Spotify at extreme quality. I wonder how much more data I use doing that as opposed to normal quality.