Emily Hong
Policy Program Associate, Open Technology Institute
Today, an internet service plan is among the most important purchases that an American household can make, so when your internet isn鈥檛 working correctly, it鈥檚 frustrating. And even if you run a speed test on your home broadband connection, it鈥檚 often hard to figure out what鈥檚 wrong. Perhaps you鈥檙e a consumer wondering how Measurement Lab (M-Lab) differs from speedtest.net; perhaps you鈥檙e an internet service provider that wants to implement good practices and help your customers understand their internet connectivity. Or maybe you鈥檙e a researcher, and just want more information about how broadband measurement works.
In any case, you鈥檝e come to the right place.
To help resolve some of this confusion and help you understand what exactly goes into good broadband measurement, OTI has released Getting Up to Speed, a policy paper that examines different ways of measuring broadband internet performance. Our research comes at a time when the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) has taken important steps to improve the availability of broadband performance information to consumers through the and the new Across the Atlantic, European regulators are also transparency guidelines in their implementation of the EU鈥檚 new network neutrality rules.
In this paper, we review efforts to empirically measure and quantify internet performance, and discuss best practices for using internet performance tests and performance data for consumer education on broadband issues. We also consider these best practices in a brief case study of the FCC鈥檚 Measuring Broadband America program. 聽Broadband performance is affected by complicated factors that are not always apparent to consumers, and there are a number of different approaches for measuring broadband performance. Not all tests work in the same way, nor do they reflect the same aspects of network performance. As such, internet performance data drawn from different methodologies are like apples and pears鈥揷omplimentary perhaps, but not interchangeable.
We find that useful performance data requires a consistent, reproducible methodology that provides full transparency to the data鈥檚 underlying assumptions, strengths, and limitations. That means that even if methodologies between two given 聽tests differ, a researcher or consumer could easily understand what those differences mean. 聽For example, you鈥檇 want to know if the speed test application you鈥檝e been using is potentially throwing out some data points, painting a rosier picture than the speeds you are actually getting. 聽Sometimes the problem with your connection is the result of traffic bottlenecks at the point where the networks that carry content throughout the internet connect to your home internet provider. 聽To help you distinguish between different types of congestion, internet performance measurement should therefore be able to replicate the end user experience with regard to those interconnection points.
We hope this paper functions to encourage regulators and internet providers to better integrate performance measurement considerations into their consumer-facing communications, and to inform consumers about what constitutes rigorous and transparent broadband measurement.
Our methodology best practices, at a glance:
Data should be collected using a consistent and reproducible methodology.
Measurement methodology should accurately reflect the experience of the end user, and uphold standards of transparency and openness by providing precise specifications for measurement and analysis.
Measurement should capture performance over interconnection points and at peak hours,
Methodology should allow for third-party oversight and verification,
All methodological and analytic choices should be available in full transparency,
Open software measurement clients and back end (the measurement application) should be open source, and
Methodology in analysis and processing of the data should be open.
Read the full paper here.