Broadband

 Average Monthly Internet Usage

  I will share some information with you based on my research of five ISPs including two rather large cable corporations.  This data includes WISPs or fixed wireless providers, DSL providers and cable providers that most informed users would agree are at opposite ends of the technology used to deliver our high speed broadband service.  Median monthly Internet data usage is approximately 2 - 5 GB and average monthly Internet data usage is approximately 6 - 20 GB.  

  More detailed research includes a study of an ISP, a Missouri provider, with about 1000 customers of which ~70% are on DSL and ~30% are on wireless.  Average data usage per customer is 8.9 GB and median data usage per customer is 2.9 GB.  There are about 260 customers (26%) that use less than 1 GB per month.  About 790 customers (79%) use less than the 8.9 GB average.  Most notable is that less than 3% of the customers use more than 30% of the bandwidth.

  It is a very common and a quite well known fact among ISPs and WISPs that 10% of their Internet users consume 60% of the monthly bandwidth and 20% of the customers consume 75% of the monthly bandwidth.  Another common factor is that less than 4% of the users consume more than what most ISPs would consider reasonable.  For our network I would define 60 GB per month as reasonable.  As streaming content increases I expect we will have to start enacting soft caps that range from 10 GB per month on the Economy plan to 60 GB per month on the Premium plan.  Most Internet users will not be negatively affected by soft caps and will experience higher quality service as a result.  This level of usage met the needs of 97.5 % of the users on the broadband network that I analyzed.

  Here is a link to from an independent source that supports my information about what average Internet usage is: http://www.cisco.com/en/US/solutions/collateral/ns341/ns525/ns537/ns705/Cisco_VNI_Usage_WP.html

  Here is some information about the latest trends in Internet use.  For years now most WISP operators have repeatedly noted that less than 20% of their customers use 70% - 90% of their bandwidth.  They have developed and deployed technologies to insure that the “power users” did not penalize the majority of their users.  This trend is quickly changing with all the streaming video options available through the Internet.  Many people seem to think they will be able to get rid of their $80.00 satellite or cable bill and their $50.00 phone bill and use their high speed broadband Internet connection for everything.  This mentality is bringing about changes that most of us will find distasteful.  The reason why cable or satellite TV costs so much is not content it is transportation.  See this article: http://gigaom.com/2010/12/01/fcc-opens-the-door- for-metered-web-access/

  In addition look at the caps on satellite and cellular wireless Internet.  These caps reflect the fact that high speed broadband Internet delivered through wireless technology is a much more limited resource.

  I believe the cost of transporting streaming content has not yet caught up with the content providers who will have to pass it on to their subscribers.  When it does catch up, the cost of streaming content will be much closer to the other forms of delivering entertainment.

Capacity Limits on Wireless Broadband

  A WISP faces limitations on their infrastructure that most other ISPs do not.  The biggest hurdle that a wireless provider has to overcome is network capacity.  This can only be overcome with technology.  Technology like most things in life is a trade-off.  We can have somewhat better technology for much more money and much less range.  What this means is we can have the capacity to stream video to many but it will raise the price of the Internet service for all on the network.  It would easily double the cost of the wireless network in hardware costs alone.

  Now factor in the bandwidth.  If one-third of the customers on the network stream video, the demand for bandwidth will increase by a factor of 3.6.  This does not account for the fact that with 33% of us watching streaming TV during prime time we will exceed the capacity of the Access point by 3.6 times.  Another drawback to technology that supports more bandwidth is that range will be greatly decreased and coverage to as much as half the customers in our area will most likely be lost.

  An access point (the radio on the tower that your Subscriber Module connects to) can support from 50 to 150 wireless users depending on the technology.  But just 10 customers streaming TV on a 1.5 Mbps connection during prime time can use all the capacity of that access point.  This means that your WISP could need as much as ten times the wireless equipment to keep up with demand.  Tower capacity is not available to handle a load increase like that.  In addition, there is not enough spectrum to increase capacity by that much either.

  So now I hope you are starting to see the value of your present TV service.  I can't see a way to design a wireless network that will support 30% - 50% of it's customers watching streaming HDTV, even one channel per household during three hours of prime time viewing, and be affordable enough to remain in business.  I know in our household, various family members watch two or three different channels at once.  

  One last fact worth mentioning is that 900 MHz will be the most useful wireless frequency for delivering broadband Internet to most rural customers at any distance.  This frequency will operate much better in the hills and trees that we have to contend with to deliver high speed broadband Internet throughout southern Missouri.  Unfortunately the 900 MHz equipment has the least spectrum and therefore delivers speeds lower than wireless equipment operating at 2.4 GHz or 5.8 GHz.

The WISP and ISP Dilemma

  I want to share something to help you understand the operation of an WISP.  Every ISP operates their network on a contention basis.  Not every customer is uploading or downloading data at the same time.  Not every customer is on the Internet at the same time.  This is why during peak usage time your connection slows down because the number of customers using the Internet often exceeds the contention ratio.  This can occur on your network, the transport network, the level one provider or anywhere the upstream travels to get to its destination.  In small networks such as a WISP, this rate may be from 8:1 to 20:1.  A large ISP such as a telephone or cable company may have a rate from 20:1 to 100:1 or more.  When an ISP combines data bursts and reasonable contention rates their network operates very smoothly most all of the time.

  Contention rates are what make your Internet connection affordable.  Streaming content and excessive use threaten this business model that has served us so well for so many years.  Most of us, if not all, cannot afford a dedicated connection for our home.  Yet Internet users continue to move toward saturating their broadband connection, which they should only expect to be allowed to do with a dedicated connection.

  You don't see many homes, or even a lot of businesses, with a T1 connection because they are too expensive.  They are readily available these days to most anyone with phone lines and offer dedicated bandwidth.  Dedicated bandwidth like a T1 is well suited for and quite capable of serving as an entertainment connection.  It might require a couple of bonded T1s to deliver the multiple channels a family generally watches at the same time in the same household these days.  All Internet service providers are concerned about the direction that content and usage habits are taking.  See this link: http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/10_50/b4207043617708.htm 

  Many of the WISP operators that I know have increased their bandwidth by 50% - 100% at least once in the last year.  Several have made this kind of increase more than once over the past couple of years while only increasing customers and revenue by 10% - 20% or less.  A small WISP cannot deal with costs increasing at five or ten times the rate that revenue is increasing.  It appears to me that it is only a matter of time before streaming content will start to bear a transportation cost that better reflects it's load on the Internet service provider.