Contention Ratios varying from 1:50 and 1:20 (Can be relaxed a bit in residential as the links are not shared) is what LIRNEasia and TeNet jointly proposed, but Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI) thought it best to adopt 1:50 and 1:30. According to ‘Guidelines for service providers providing Internet/broadband services for ensuring better quality of service’TRAI issued on March 2, 2009, ISPs are expected not only to maintain contention ratios above these values but also be open to subscribers on what they will deliver – instead of promises they cannot make.
In addition we received some publicity from Indian online media. Good to know people start taking notes.
More on LIRNEasia’s Rapid Response program here.
Read all comments TRAI received from stakeholders on Consultation Paper on “Bandwidth Required for ISPs for better Connectivity and Improved Quality of Service” here.
2 Comments
Mahinda Herath
I have two comments.
1.Your link to ‘Guidelines for service providers providing Internet/broadband services for ensuring better quality of service’ is not working! This link leads to “ERROR ! ERROR ! ERROR ! Sorry ! Please try another link.”
2.I always wonder why you never take into account the “Implied Contention Ratio” in analyzing the customer experience. “Implied Contention Ratio” is an important parameter in reporting broadband quality. (If you need more information on this, I suggest that you refer OECD reports for definition. I am sure that you will be surprised to find out how important this parameter is and how OECD countries are scoring on this parameter!). After all, what is the use of going at rocket speed for just 2 minutes of the whole month and then pay through your nose for the rest of the month, even for very a moderate speeds? What one has to understand is that the monthly subscription paid by a customer is to receive reasonable service for the whole month and therefore the cost per bit over a month is also a very important QoS factor; as far as a customer is concerned.
Chanuka Wattegama
Hi Mahinda and all,
Sorry about the link. It worked when I visited but looks down for some reason now.
I have uploaded the document instead.
Missed opportunities in Philippine data governance
Even though the Constitution of the Philippines protects citizens’ right to access official records and research data used in policymaking, the absence of a comprehensive right-to-information law has left implementation subject to executive discretion. In a recent article published in InsiderPH on April 6, 2026, J.
Rethinking Sri Lanka’s Data Centre Hub Ambition
The idea of turning Sri Lanka into a regional data centre hub is an attractive one, particularly in the context of growing global demand for digital infrastructure and AI-driven services. However, it raises important economic questions, especially whether this is a viable and high-return investment strategy for a small, fiscally constrained economy like Sri Lanka.
Nepal’s digital crossroads: building a transparent data governance framework
Nepal’s evolving digital landscape highlights a growing tension between constitutional guarantees of privacy and access to information, and a fragmented, outdated data governance framework. In a recent article published in Republica on March 17, 2026, Avash Mainali, Country Researcher for Nepal for LIRNEasia’s D4D Asia project, argues that while the introduction of the Personal Data Protection Policy, 2082 (2025), marks a positive step, its impact will depend on whether it can move beyond aspirational language to enforceable rights.
Links
User Login
Themes
Social
Twitter
Facebook
RSS Feed
Contact
9A 1/1, Balcombe Place
Colombo 08
Sri Lanka
+94 (0)11 267 1160
+94 (0)11 267 5212
info [at] lirneasia [dot] net
Copyright © 2026 LIRNEasia
a regional ICT policy and regulation think tank active across the Asia Pacific