Internet congestion

I read the article by George Cini (February 12) about internet congestion with interest and cannot help but feel frustrated by Aldo Calleja's explanation of why users are experiencing congestion in Malta. It seems as though he is blaming congestion on his customers, whereas the problem is likely to be shortcomings in his own company's infrastructure and blatant overselling.

I am not sure how internet service providers in Malta are set up, but in general an ISP leases data lines from a telecommunications carrier and use those data lines to move its customers' traffic to and from the internet. These data lines have a limit as to how fast traffic can go through them, which creates a limit on how many customers can use the internet at the speeds the ISP advertises. The following example is an oversimplification but it should clarify my point.

Assume the ISP's data lines to the internet have a maximum transfer rate of 250 megabits per second, which means that the combined internet traffic coming to their customers or generated by their customers cannot exceed 250Mbps. If the ISP advertises that a customer can get 500Kbps transfer speeds, then the number of customers that can be online at any given time downloading at maximum speed is 250Mbps/500Kbps or 500 customers.

Of course, the ISP will sell service to a lot more than 500 customers because it assumes that not all of its customers will be downloading at maximum speed at once.

It is a valid assumption but the result is a tricky balancing act. The ISP wants to have as many customers as possible to make a profit. The more customers, the worse the performance of each internet connection.

The question is whether or not the ISP is acting responsibly. Is the ISP selling service to more and more customers, knowing their internet connection performance will not meet advertised transfer rates, but simply does not care because it is making more money?

The answer lies in the acceptable use policy that must be agreed upon when signing up for internet service. The AUP for Waldonet (<http://www.waldonet.net.mt/terms/useragreement.asp>) clearly states that service is on a shared and best effort basis, that is, it implies no guarantee that a customer will get the advertised transfer rates. All well and good, this is common practice. On the other hand, why are they advertising transfer speeds they cannot offer to all of their customers? Where does "not guaranteed" end and misleading advertising begin?

Mr Calleja's comments place emphasis on the "not guaranteed" side, and blame congestion on his users. The following would have been my replies to Mr Calleja had I heard those comments in person.

"Internet users who make use of the system 24 hours a day, downloading films and CDs while they are out of the house, are causing this congestion."

No, the congestion is caused because the traffic your customers are generating cannot be supported by your infrastructure. Whether they are downloading films or CDs or reading web pages, whether they are in the house or out of the house, it does not matter. The amount of bandwidth you can provide to them as a whole is insufficient to meet their joint demands. And nowhere in your AUP does it say how much they can download or when. They are not breaching their contracts. It is not "abuse", it is "use".

"Internet abuse could be compared to the owners of fast cars who expect to drive at high speed all day."

Providing broadband service is not giving your customers fast cars, it is giving your customers a fast road. Cars go fast on a fast road, unless you let too many cars on the road. Your road is not fast enough for the amount of cars you are letting on it, and it is causing a traffic jam.

"If everyone uses the internet on a shared basis, as it was meant to be used, things would run smoothly," Mr Calleja said.

This internet is a network, and a shared medium by definition. Your customers are sharing the internet with approximately 600 million other internet users (<http://www.nua.ie>) and the internet is not running any less smoothly because of it.

The slowdown your customers are experiencing is due to the oversaturated data line from your ISP to the rest of the internet, because there are more paying customers sharing that line than there should be for the transfer rates you advertise.

"Customers who abuse the system are complaining that the system has now slowed down. Customers who have raised their modems tenfold need to understand that global telecommunications have not grown by that amount," he said.

Again, it is not abuse if they follow the acceptable use policy, which says nothing about how much data customers can send or receive, and when they can send or receive it. As for global telecommunications not growing, the number of internet users in Europe alone has grown from 70 million to 108 million over the last two years, over a 50 per cent increase(<http://www.altevie.net/mediagraphix/europeaninternetstats/>).

This would not have been possible without heavy investment and growth in telecommunications. Of course, the infrastructure has not grown at quite the same rate as internet usage, but we are talking about a Maltese market of around 50,000 internet users, maybe a quarter of which are with Waldonet. Whose infrastructure has not grown; the global one, or Waldonet's? And whose fault is that, the customers'?

Taking the driving metaphor further, Mr Calleja said traffic was regulated by traffic lights and at certain times by traffic policemen to allow drivers to exert their right of way. "Yet, there are drivers who expect to hog the road at will," Mr Calleja argued.

People are paying money expecting the lights to be green, because that is what you advertise. People are paying money to have the right of way, because that is what you advertise. If your network functions the way it should, there would be no red lights and nobody would need to give way. Nobody would be hogging the road. The customers are not causing other customers to drive slow, your infrastructure is.

One more indication that the blame is being unfairly placed on the customers is the ISP code of practice (<http://www.waldonet.net.mt/news/show.asp?id=102>), published a year ago by the Malta Communications Authority. Section 3 states that the "ISPs shall present themselves and their services honestly and shall not make false, misleading or exaggerated claims," and Section 4 states that "ISPs shall publish and make available to customers a clear description of each service type offered together with the standards expected".

In my opinion, these statements concretely draw the line between "a best effort level of service" and false advertising. If legal use of a service causes such depletion in its quality that advertised rates cannot be achieved, then the advertised rates are misleading and exaggerated and an ISP is not presenting itself honestly.

Mr Calleja fails to realise that his customers are simply trying to use the service that his company is supposed to be providing. If his company is unfit to do so, then he should re-evaluate his business practices instead of offending his customers. I doubt the problem will persist much longer, however. Customers who do not get what they pay for and are accused of "abuse" on top of it have a habit of turning to the competition. Mr Calleja's roads may soon be empty.