Advertisement

A Network Neutral Alternative to Free Basics

  • RamneekEmail author
  • Patrick Hosein
  • Sungin Jung
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 11938)

Abstract

The evolution of mobile communication systems and the availability of affordable smart-phones and advanced applications have led to a rapid increase in the number of connected devices and cellular subscriptions. Although the number of connected mobile devices exceeded the total population of the world in 2014, two-thirds of the world’s population still has no access to the Internet. Internet.org, also known as Free Basics, is a Facebook led initiative aimed at providing Internet access to the two-third of the world’s population who do not have it. Through partnerships with mobile operators in different parts of the world, it aims at providing the benefits of connectivity to the poor population who cannot afford a mobile data plan. However, it has a number of associated issues that can lead to the violation of Network Neutrality principles. In addition, network operators have to rely on the design principles of Free Basics applications to ensure minimum network usage so that paid customers do not suffer significant performance degradation. Due to these drawbacks, there is a need for a network neutral solution that benefits both the operators and the end users, without any third party intervention. In this paper we propose a controlled Low Throughput approach, which we henceforth call LTP, for providing free Internet access to those who need it while providing performance guarantees to users of paid subscriptions. In particular, the proposed approach is also Network Neutral.

Keywords

Network Neutrality Free Basics Digital divide Zero-rating QoS 

Notes

Acknowledgment

This work is supported by an IITP grant funded by the Korean government Ministry of Science and ICT (MSIT) under the project titled Research on High Performance and Scalable Many-core Operating System (Grant No: 2014-3-00035).

References

  1. 1.
    Baker, M.: Zero rating and the open internet, May 2015. https://blog.lizardwrangler.com/2015/05/06/zero-rating-and-the-open-internet/
  2. 2.
    Beckert, B.: Network neutrality from an innovation research perspective. In: 2011 50th FITCE Congress (FITCE), pp. 1–5, August 2011.  https://doi.org/10.1109/FITCE.2011.6133426
  3. 3.
    Cisco: Cisco visual networking index: global mobile data traffic forecast update, 2017–2022 (2017–2022). http://www.cisco.com
  4. 4.
    Delloitte: Value of connectivity: economic and social benefits of expanding internet access (2014). https://www2.deloitte.com/content/dam/Deloitte/uk/Documents/technology-media-telecommunications/deloitte-uk-tmt-value-of-connectivity-tmt.pdf
  5. 5.
  6. 6.
    Facebook: Our mission-internet.org (2015). https://info.internet.org
  7. 7.
    FCC: Open internet — federal communications commission (2015). http://fcc.gov/openinternet
  8. 8.
    Hosein, P.A.: QoS control for WCDMA high speed packet data. In: 4th International Workshop on Mobile and Wireless Communications Network, pp. 169–173 (2002).  https://doi.org/10.1109/MWCN.2002.1045716
  9. 9.
    Telecommunications Regulatory Authority of India: Consultation paper on differential pricing for data services, December 2015. http://trai.gov.in/consultation-paper-differential-pricing-data-services
  10. 10.
    Jain, M., Dovrolis, C.: End-to-end available bandwidth: measurement methodology, dynamics, and relation with TCP throughput, vol. 32. ACM (2002)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Jordan, S.: Some traffic management practices are unreasonable. In: 2009 Proceedings of 18th International Conference on Computer Communications and Networks, pp. 1–6, August 2009.  https://doi.org/10.1109/ICCCN.2009.5235365
  12. 12.
    Jordan, S.: Implications of internet architecture on net neutrality. ACM Trans. Internet Technol. 9(2), 5:1–5:28 (2009).  https://doi.org/10.1145/1516539.1516540CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Jordan, S., Ghosh, A.: A framework for classification of traffic management practices as reasonable or unreasonable. ACM Trans. Internet Technol. 10(3), 12:1–12:23 (2010).  https://doi.org/10.1145/1852096.1852100CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Karr, T.: Global internet activists give thumbs down to facebook’s internet.org — billmoyers.com, May 2015. http://billmoyers.com/2015/05/12/internet-zuckerberg-facebook/
  15. 15.
    Kitsing, M.: Network neutrality in Europe. In: Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Theory and Practice of Electronic Governance, ICEGOV 2011, pp. 313–316. ACM, New York (2011).  https://doi.org/10.1145/2072069.2072126
  16. 16.
    Lee, R.S., Wu, T.: Subsidizing creativity through network design: zero-pricing and net neutrality. J. Econ. Perspect. 23(3), 61–76 (2009).  https://doi.org/10.1257/jep.23.3.61. http://www.aeaweb.org/articles?id=10.1257/jep.23.3.61CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Olson, P.: This app is cashing in on giving the world free data, July 2015. http://www.forbes.com/sites/parmyolson/2015/07/29/jana-mobile-data-facebook-internet-org/#294d28b029a6
  18. 18.
    POst, H.: Gigato tries to make internet access affordable with data rebates, July 2015. https://www.huffingtonpost.in/entry/gigato-app-data-rebates_n_55bbb899e4b0d4f33a02b5ed
  19. 19.
    Ramneek, Hosein, P., Choi, W., Seok, W.: Disruptive network applications and their impact on network neutrality. In: 2015 17th International Conference on Advanced Communication Technology (ICACT), pp. 663–668, July 2015.  https://doi.org/10.1109/ICACT.2015.7224879
  20. 20.
    Ramneek, Hosein, P., Seok, W.: Load metric for QoS-enabled cellular networks and its possible use in pricing strategies. In: 2014 IEEE Symposium on Wireless Technology and Applications (ISWTA), pp. 30–35, September 2014.  https://doi.org/10.1109/ISWTA.2014.6981190
  21. 21.
    van Schewick, B.: Network neutrality and quality of service: what a non-discrimination rule should look like. In: 67 Stanford Law Review, pp. 1–166 (2015)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    van Schewick, B.: Network neutrality and zero-rating, February 2014. http://apps.fcc.gov/ecfs/document/view?id=60001031582
  23. 23.
    Scott, B., Heumann, S., Kleinhans, J., Global Commission on Internet Governance and Centre for International Governance Innovation and Chatham House: Landmark EU and US Net Neutrality Decisions: How Might Pending Decisions Impact Internet Fragmentation? Paper series, Chatham House (2015). https://books.google.co.kr/books?id=KYhtjwEACAAJ
  24. 24.
    Stats, I.L.: Number of internet users (2016) - internet live stats (2016). http://www.internetlivestats.com/internet-users/
  25. 25.
    TImes, H.: Trai to reliance communications: Put free basics on hold for now, December 2015. http://www.hindustantimes.com/tech/trai-puts-free-basics-on-hold-for-now/story-Cnm2juiFb1OQZzRwxmgT7O.html
  26. 26.
    Times, I.: Facebook rebrands internet.org as free basics-adds new features, September 2015. http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/tech/tech-news/Facebook-rebrands-Internet-org-as-Free-Basics-adds-new-features/articleshow/49101242.cms
  27. 27.
    TImes, L.: Mark zuckerberg seeks to ease net neutrality concerns over internet.org, April 2015. http://www.latimes.com/business/technology/la-fi-tn-mark-zuckerberg-net-neutrality-20150417-story.html
  28. 28.
    Trak.In: Aircel launches free basic internet for all which is actually net neutral, free and fair, October 2015. http://trak.in/tags/business/2015/10/16/aircel-free-basic-internet-net-neutral-free-fair-facebook/
  29. 29.
    Tribune, I.: Neither good nor free, January 2016. http://www.tribuneindia.com/news/comment/neither-good-nor-free/182383.html
  30. 30.
    West, D.M.: Digital divide: Improving internet access in the developing world through affordable services and diverse content (2015). http://www.brookings.edu/~/media/research/files/papers/2015/02/13-digital-divide-developing-world-west/west_internet-access.pdf
  31. 31.
    Wikipedia: Net neutrality by country-Wikipedia, May 2019. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Net_neutrality_by_country
  32. 32.
    Wikipedia: Net neutrality in the United States, May 2019. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Net_neutrality_in_the_United_States
  33. 33.
    Wireless, F.: Report: 45% of operators now offer at least one zero-rated app (2015). http://www.fiercewireless.com
  34. 34.
    World, P.: Google rolls out more low-bandwidth versions of its products, September 2016. http://www.pcworld.com/article/3124908/google-rolls-out-more-low-bandwidth-versions-of-its-products.html
  35. 35.
    Yoo, C.S.: Beyond network neutrality. Harv. J. Law Technol. 19(1) (2005). http://jolt.law.harvard.edu/articles/pdf/v19/19HarvJLTech001.pdf

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Electronics and Telecommunications Research InstituteDaejeonSouth Korea
  2. 2.The University of the West IndiesSt. AugustineTrinidad

Personalised recommendations