For ARCEP, Free does not limit the flow YouTube - ZDNet

Regulation: After investigation, the regulator believes that the delays observed by the subscribers are not caused by Free but a “congestion” of the network and under-sizing of the interconnection links between Free and YouTube.

ARCEP finally whitens Free on delays observed by ISP subscribers when they want to use YouTube at peak times. These delays were created in late 2012, a lively debate involving consumer association, government and regulatory authority.

The question was whether knowingly bridled Free YouTube stream to put pressure on Google. The attitude of the p-dg Iliad (parent company of Free), Xavier Niel, fueled this belief: it simply encouraged users prefer Dailymotion YouTube …

In case the compensation of excess traffic generated:. “We decided not to let it go (…) In the meantime, we flange access to anyone, but stop climbing: there is a pipe of a certain size for the traffic from Google and do not push it, “he said in April

.

can lock had pushed the UFC-Que Choisir seize ARCEP and DGCCRF on the issue. The regulator had also himself open administrative investigation last November to try to determine where the problem was.

After six months of investigation, the verdict is clear. “The investigation did not reveal any discriminatory practices in terms of interconnection and routing of data traffic between the two companies.”

The reason: the natural network congestion and capacity of intercompany too low

Precisely, “Free traffic between Google and flows both directly, through a link to” peering “, and indirectly, through several operators pay interconnection involving international transit data” .

“The investigation did not reveal any management practices traffic on its network Free differentiating content delivery conditions according to their nature, origin, destination or the type of protocol used. A fortiori, any practice that is contrary to the principles of net neutrality were found.
terms routing of Internet traffic (peering or transit) and the respective weights of the use of these terms by Free and Google does not call for any particular comment from ARCEP “
But she says the Authority adds.” interconnection capacity and routing traffic Free data are congested during rush hour, in a context of steadily rising most consumers use capacity data transmission, faced all ISPs. ”

translation, delays are not caused by Free but by a global network congestion that affects all ISPs. Why then the problems of delays seem most pregnant at Free?

ARCEP tries technical explanation. “The quality of access to the user perceived internet service depends, first, its technical installation and final connection (optical fiber, cable, copper wire, mobile network), second, to the nature of the choices made by the ISP and content provider, after including bilateral negotiations in respect of the freedom of trade and, finally, the regular technical network management is the responsibility of each actor, ISP or content provider. “

For consumers to compare offers

continued: “therefore covers these particular choices, and the technical management, sizing heart and network interconnections and, to some extent, traffic routing policies implemented by the ISP or the content provider. “

Conclusion

if Free does not knowingly flange flow, these delays are certainly the result of inherent design of the network and / or too weak interconnection capacities. ARCEP then called consumers to shop around.

“In a competitive market such as retail markets high and very high speed in France, the user is then able to exercise his choice between different offers available, depending on the price and quality of services provided, to ultimately select what best suits their needs and fits their needs, “she says.

Free

may also invest again and increase the price of its subscriptions to finance a better interconnection. Xavier Niel then explained that rates should rise by 5 to 15 euros per month. An amount that had been vigorously contested by the regulator.