FCC now seeking comment from those affected by T-Mobile network outage

fcc-seal-small

FCC Chairman Ajit Pai said that he planned to investigate T-Mobile’s recent network outage, which he called “unacceptable”, and now the FCC wants to hear from you about what happened.

The FCC is now seeking comments from the public on the T-Mobile outage that happened on June 15. Specifically, the agency wants to know things like how T-Mo customers learned about the outage, if T-Mobile’s communication was timely and effective, if customers were able to send and receive calls and texts, and what effect the outage had on consumers’ personal activities.

Because there were some reports that the outage also affected 911 calling for some T-Mobile customers, the Public Safety and Homeland Security Bureau is also looking into the outage. It’s seeking input from affected public safety entities as well as state and local governments on how the outage affected 911 calls and services.

If you’re interested in leaving a comment with the FCC about the outage, you have until July 8th to do so. You can go to the docket to file a comment or you can file by paper, which you can find instructions for in the public notice.

The outage happened on June 15 and lasted for around 12 hours. T-Mobile blames a fiber circuit failure that was compounded by other issues and eventually resulted in “significant capacity issues” on the IMS network core that supports VoLTE calls. This knocked out VoLTE calling as well as texting for many T-Mo customers across the country for most of the day.

Did last week’s outage affect you?

Source: FCC

Tags: , ,

  • Joss Edbrards

    Ajit Pai is “outraged” at T-Mobile’s outage and Verizon makes it harder for customers to switch to other carriers. Things that make you go “Ajit Pai *is* a Verizon tool”, but by all means, complain to the FCC if you were affected. I just know where Pai is coming from.

    • Sayahh

      If I have a problem, Chairman “No to Net Neutrality” would be the last person who I’d tell.

      • marque2

        That was his one good decision. Internet stagnated under NN and immediately went back on the old growth line when it ended

        I don’t understand millenials and their obsession with subsidizing google.

        • JG

          Care to provide specific examples of when the internet stagnated under Net Neutrality and immediately sprang back after?

          Verizon and Comcast both reassured their investors during their 2015, 2016 and 2017 earnings calls that Title II had not in any way negatively impacted their abilities to invest and improve their network. Dozens of smaller regional ISPs co-authored a letter to the FCC asking them to keep Title II in place, stating Title II had not harmed them in any way.

          If you look at mobile internet specifically, you will see an increase of spending on network improvements from 2012-2015, then a sudden drop 2015-2018 and now another spike. And while these do correlate to the time Title II was in place, remember “Correlation does not imply causation”.

          In this particular case, the 2012-2015 spike was the buildout of LTE networks. 2015-2018 saw carriers complete their build out and enter a maintenance period. And now, they’re investing large amounts of money into their networks to build out 5G [which according to Pai’s logic shouldn’t exist as it was developed during Title II when ISPs couldn’t spend money making new technology to improve their networks].

          AT&T CEO Randall Stephenson specifically said it was going to happen that way in 2012. They would have a couple years of enhanced spending (’12-’15) followed by lowered spending. It has NOTHING to do with Title II that wasn’t implemented until years later!

        • marque2

          I would have to look up news reports I read awhile ago. Not worth the time to prove a point.

          You could try to become more informed yourself on your own with your own search of you are truly interested.

          Most supporters base your view base it on feels and emotions. It just sounds right – yeah neutral and not the reality of google spending millions to force ISPs to give them free service. ISPs were never going to stop our home web pages as you all think. They were after Google and Netflix who were taking 70% of the bandwidth and demanding free use of ISP facilities for support servers.

          Anyway, yeah you might try to research it a bit yourself.

        • disqus_3BrONUAJno

          Starlink and their competitors will make terrestrial broadband obsolete.

        • disqus_3BrONUAJno

          You appear to be the one that is reticent to do research to prove a point.

        • marque2

          That does not follow logically. But OK go for it. Tell me why forcing ISPs not to charge google and Netflix for bombarding their networks, is such a good idea. And explain why google was so magnanimous that they decided to spend money to lobby and put ads on TV merely for the good of the common “man” and not google?

          I’ll listen, but I find most of the answers boil down to “it sounded good, ya know it,s neutral not biased”

        • disqus_3BrONUAJno

          What does “forcing ISPs not to charge google and Netflix for bombarding their networks” have to do with your tacit refusal to do your own research?
          ISPs have contractual agreements with content providers to insert commercials for which the providers are compensated. If you have a problem “bombarding” their networks, you are free to refuse to patronize them. Google is an advertising platform and they need to publicize themselves to those who do not use them. How else would they do that except outside their own platform?
          Have you never heard of barter advertising, which constitutes much of today’s radio advertising?
          Logic has little to do with anything outside of the operation of computer chips. Human beings are not logical animals.

        • marque2

          I don’t see you doing research either. Just babbling. I at least read a bit about the situation.

        • disqus_3BrONUAJno

          Tell me about the research you’ve done in the fiction and children’s sections of the library.

        • Shaun Michalak

          One thing that you said is a little off.. It is not just about 5G right now.. It is also about taking down anything pre 4G too.. You have to remember, places like AT&T and Sprint both still have a lot of towers that are not 4G LTE compatible, and since they want to take them down within, say the next year (maybe less), they have been spending a lot of time and money upgrading all those pre 4G towers to 4G and better..

        • disqus_3BrONUAJno

          Verizon is doing something sensible for a change.
          They have postponed their shutdown of pre 4G to prevent their cash-strapped customers that can’t afford their overpriced 4G phones from bolting, as a result of the COVID depression.

        • Shaun Michalak

          Where exactly are you getting this information from?? Because as of 2 months ago, Verizon was saying that they were shutting down their 3G and older networks in December of this year.. That was “after” a 1 year extension, because they talked last year, of having it shut down last December, but decided to leave it up for one more year.. So please show me this link that they changed their minds in the past 2 months about not shutting it down in December of this year, and extending it for a 2nd time..

          As for the phones, it all depends on where you get them.. Straight from Verizon, then I would agree.. But the same could be said from any of the main companies.. But the fact is, if they are still using a 10 year old phone, they obviously are not high data or performance users, and knowing that, a basic smart phone with 16gb storage space can be bought from walmart starting at $35.. So it is not like they are as expensive as you make them sound to be.

        • disqus_3BrONUAJno

          The information came from a saleswoman in a Verizon reseller’s store, who is in the best possible position to know what is happening vis a vis service options, because Verizon can’t benefit from lying to its partners.
          I have had a 3G flip phone for many years and it still works fine. If you know about Verizon’s service plan, you’ll know how old a $15 a month 300 minute plan is. That is more than I need since I only need it for a handful of friends to reach me. Every time they try to upsell me into a more expensive plan, I tell them I’d rather have a $5 a month plan with 100 minutes. That pretty much cuts off the sales talk. I won’t get smartphone until that is the only option and with Verizon backpedaling on cutting off the 3G, I don’t see it going away any time soon.

        • Shaun Michalak

          I can.. For the main reason that with T-Mobile getting all that new spectrum, going to 5G on their towers, and with the improvements that is going to bring.. Well, verizon is going to need to step up their game to keep up.. and they need to do it before they get outdone, not before.. and to do that, unless they get a lot of new spectrum, they will have to take their 3G network down to use that spectrum for newer stuff..

          While I am not going to say that it is not possible what you said.. At the same time, I have met a lot of representatives for companies that think that they know more then they do, or mishear what is actually going on.. I guess it is a “time will tell” as to if it is still up next year or not..

        • disqus_3BrONUAJno

          It is academic to me. When my 3G flip phone stops working, I’ll go buy a Verizon 4G LTE flip phone at the lowest price (currently $19.99) I can find and take it to a Verizon store to have my number transferred to it, assuming I still need it. If Dr Fauci isn’t lying (for a change), we may all be dead before 3G is.

        • Shaun Michalak

          Companies change their minds, plans, etc every time you turn around, so I am more the type of.. Well, they said.. But at the same time, I will believe it when I see it, type of person.. I personally upgraded to a 4G phone years ago from my 3G phone.. Not because of the faster speeds and stuff, but because any new towers that T-Mobile put up in something like the past 6 years, has no coverage for anything but 4G service.. and since that amounts to probably about 80% of their coverage (if not more) across the country.. Well, I kind of wanted the coverage.. I then made one more upgrade after that to get a phone that had band 71 support for that extra coverage too.. Beyond that, I have no plans on upgrading for at least 1 year..

          I will wait until they have 5G on the phones, if they win the auction for the bandwidth later this year for the 3.6ghz range?? I think that is what it is.. It will give them time to get that support on the phones, etc..

          The thing about Verizon is the fact that they really are not doing anything for extra coverage though, so there really is no incentive to upgrade to a 4G phone if you do not need it abilities and speed on the network. Outside of mmWave, Verizon and AT&T both have done nothing to build new towers to expand coverage in the past 10 years (which also means no new towers that will have 4G only on them for more coverage). So coverage on 3G really was not any different then on the 4G network. So why bother until you have to, when you have a phone that you like.

        • disqus_3BrONUAJno

          5G frequencies span 24.250 GHz to 52.600 GHz.

        • Shaun Michalak

          No, 5G can be installed on pretty much any frequency.. I am not sure why people insinuate that 5G can only be installed on mmWave like that. With that being said, just because it is 5G does not necessarily mean you will get great speeds.. It just means that the protocol is fast enough to support those faster speeds..

        • disqus_3BrONUAJno

          Why would 5G be installed on a frequency that can’t provide it with optimal bandwidth or data rate?
          LTE doesn’t support the speeds, it provides them.
          You really need to gather and understand all of the relevant information before you try to express it. You need to learn to find the relevant information so you can gather and understand it. The frequencies being licensed by the FCC for 5G are a matter of public record, that being where I got them.

        • Shaun Michalak

          It is a technology, or a specification.. The limit is not due to the design of the technology, but the available resources.. How about quote something..

          “AT&T 5G Spectrum

          The average 630 MHz of millimeter wave spectrum that AT&T now holds in key markets would appear to position the company well to support high speeds, as the company previously achieved speeds of 1.2 Gbps in trials using a 400 MHz channel over a distance of 150 meters”

          So, if AT&T was getting 1.2ghz using 400mhz of spectrum, say they only had 10mhz of spectrum to use.. Do you think that they could still reach those speeds with just 10mhz used?? Of course not.. But by your standards, you could no longer say that mmWave is 5G due to not being able to reach 1ghz speeds using just 10mhz of spectrum.. That is no different then saying 2.5ghz spectrum is not 5G because they only have 40mhz of spectrum in use..

          So why is it any different?? Say T-Mobile had 500 mhz of 2.5ghz spectrum, and reached speeds of 20ghz down.. Are you still going to say that it is not 5G just because it is below 6ghz in frequency?? That makes no sense. Just to back it up, 4G maxes out at 1ghz in the standard.. “Speed tests have shown that T-Mobile’s 5G network in NYC is breaking the 1 gigabit barrier using 2.5GHz.”.. So those, over 4G speeds are not 5G because they are not MMwave?? Explain that to me..

        • disqus_3BrONUAJno

          I’ll be happy to explain that to you as soon as you cite the quoted text so I can see all of it so it will make sense. I suspect that you are quoting a publication distributed to non-engineering sales professionals, something I never was. I was the guy keeping broadcast radio stations on the air when I wasn’t keeping users of the manually interconnected mobile phone systems that preceded cellular in touch.

        • Shaun Michalak

          Me showing that link would prove nothing.. Your comment relies on the fact that since there is not enough / do not own enough “bandwidth” or “Frequency” to get those speeds, that it can not be considered 5G.. So I asked, mmWave, which you claim is 5G, if they only have 20mhz of it, clearly does not have enough to support true 5G speeds, just as you stated lower bands for the same exact reason. You can not say that something, that does not have enough bandwidth is not 5G, because it does not have enough bandwidth, but the same exact program, software, etc with the same exact limitations, is 5G.. Both succumb to the same exact problem.. Not enough bandwidth to get those speeds.. Even if you are using the same protocols, same technology, etc..

          In essence, if you had only 20mhz of mmWave to use, and 400 mhz of mid band to use, the mid band would have faster speeds.. But even though they have faster speeds, your comment clearly implies that the slower connection is 5G, and the faster one is not. Then to add that you said that the reason the faster speeds were not 5G were because of a lack of frequency to use.. But the results are the same in this situation with both frequencies.. Mid band and mmWave.. That is why it makes no sense.. You clearly based your comment on the “lack” of available frequency to use, and not based on the technology.

        • disqus_3BrONUAJno

          The only thing it would prove is that I can recognize the blather of non-technical people talking about things they can only imagine to understand and you share their fantasies.

        • Shaun Michalak

          and yet, you still have yet to prove my comment incorrect, or your comment correct.. so does that make your comment fantasies too??

        • disqus_3BrONUAJno

          I gave up trying to show you how wrong you were.
          It doesn’t matter since you obviously don’t work in the industry.

        • Shaun Michalak

          You disagree with what I say, I ask for proof from more then, “I work in the industry” as proof, yet I am the one wrong because I do not just believe someone at their word that they are telling the full truth, or are correct, with not one word of proof to back it up.. and even when someone questions your comment that is supposed to be the truth, you just come back with, “but I am in the industry so I am right” type of comment.. But I am the one wrong huh??

          Just a thought, but if you are soo right, and I am soo wrong (even when I give actual quotes to back up what I say), then why have you not been able to “disprove” my statement with an actual fact that can be backed up even once?? I think that about says it all right there.. Have a nice day.

        • disqus_3BrONUAJno

          I never thought being able to construct senseless compound sentences disproves technical knowledge, but now I have proof that is true. You didn’t have to say anything more.

        • Shaun Michalak

          You disprove yourself all by yourself.. and can not even admit to it.

          If you only have 20mhz of 2.5ghz spectrum, that is not enough to have 5G speeds, so that can not be 5G technology..

          If you only have 20mhz of 10ghz spectrum, that is not enough to have 5G speeds, but that “is” 5G technology..

          That is your exact ideology and what you have said and stated. It does not make any sense to me, or anyone else, but hey.. If you want to call those same exact results, 2 completely different things, and make it sound good by saying it is senseless because it comes from me.. Then go right ahead.. But no matter how you look at it, comparing a car to a car does not make it a truck.. and comparing 2 different spectrum’s that do not reach 5G speeds, but saying that one is 5G and the other is not, using the same exact technology.. Well, go right ahead. I think we all can see who is the true troll here, or who is the ignorant one that can not back up their on comments.. have a nice day mr troll.

        • disqus_3BrONUAJno

          Calling a vehicle a truck doesn’t make it one, especially if it doesn’t have at least 10 wheels.

        • Shaun Michalak

          Exactly.. and calling one frequency not 5G, and another one 5G, when both meet the same criteria, and have the same technology, does not make one 5G and the other one not.. If both get 5G speeds, both use the same technology, then both are 5G.. and you said that something that meets 5G speeds, faster then 1000mb down is not 5G, even though 4G maxes out at 1000mb down.. So if it is not 5G, and obviously not 4G since it is faster then 4G, then what is it?

        • disqus_3BrONUAJno

          In the United States, 5G is whatever the FCC says it is, and that is where I got 5G frequencies span 24.250 GHz to 52.600 GHz. Take it up with them.

        • disqus_3BrONUAJno

          Is patronizing a business the same thing as subsidizing it?

  • Shaun Michalak

    So this got me thinking.. Hmm.. Verizon here went out for weeks to whole areas, and it took Verizon weeks to fix it.. Nothing said.. The power company failed to make sure that their system worked properly, and the power for the North East of the country, through Ohio, PA, NY, and up into Canada, all went out, for up to weeks before they got it fixed.. and all because of a lack of maintenance.. Look at how many outages they have every year in California for the same reason. The cable company, which provides phone service, has outages every month or two here, and all of this nothing is said.. T-Mobile goes out for 12 hours and they act like it is the end of the world..

    When Verizon lost service in the Carolina’s in January, I did not see them saying anything about it.. Or the Verizon outage that went through multiple states (including OH and PA) back in February.. The nationwide Verizon outage that effected people making calls in December 2019.. Verizon’s 4G LTE service outage from the midwest to the north east of the US that had problems in October 2019..

    Ironic how Nothing was said about the problem that occurred, or what fixed it on a lot of these from Verizon.. Just, we fixed it and it should be back up.. Then T-mobile goes down for a half a day, and people are all going crazy like it never happens.. Now lets put this all into perspective.. T-Mobile is not the only one that has had problems or outages.. It happens quit frequently across the country..

    • Mike Thaler

      First major outage for us w.Voicestream/T-M in 15+ years. Should have done an apology AND sent texts (SMS was working). Wasted some time thinking it might simply have been an acct. problem. Out from about noon til after midnite in Miami.

    • mikeZo6

      Verizon Never had Complete Outage ! their backhaul always works

      • Acdc1a

        Well the 4G LTE failed entirely and the EVDO backup got so overloaded that it failed to work…for weeks…but I guess calls and text messages went through so everything was peachy!

      • Mike Thaler

        TM’s outage was mostly in SE. Our lines in Boston and Seattle worked fine.

      • Shaun Michalak

        Complete outage?? Do you mean across the full US, or regional?? I never said I found an article with a complete, across the full US outage, just regional ones.. But the same could be said for “any” cell carrier..

        FYI.. Verizon admitted that their “backhaul” as you put it, or their backup or redundancy system “FAILED” too, and that was their words, not mine.. So you expect me to believe your “always works” vs their admittance to it stating otherwise? Yea.. If Verizon put it in writing that their redundancy failed, I think I am apt to believe them.. That is unless you have some kind of proof that they were lying to all of us when they said that it failed??

  • steveb944

    Better go on there to let them know. Bunch of haters on there.

  • mikeZo6

    People are missing the point COMPLETE OUTAGE for Tmo not even their back up worked 911 also OUT.
    that NEVER happened to Verizon

    • marque2

      Yes, but what will the FCC do about it that T-mobile isnt already doing? T-mobile doesn’t want to irritate customers and is already hot on a solution. FCC would just slow that doen asking for documents and demanding fines (which could slow down the fix)

      Seems like this is yet another political look at me I am in government and i am doing something – when really i am doing nothing moment.

      • disqus_3BrONUAJno

        The FCC never gets in the way of those who pay it fees to regulate them.
        They are moving to the same system that the FAA uses to regulate Boeing.

    • Royes

      Actually on DEc 18, 2019 Verizon had a nationwide outage and I don’t recall the FCC taking any action after that outage.

      • mikeZo6

        Verizon Never had complete outage only 4G LTE went down, still could use phone to make calls and 911 on 3G back up

        • Notpoliticalyet

          It’s funny the underdog T-Mobile and it’s customers and how they defend them. T-Mobile’s reputation has always been 4th place. John L. did do lots of things to bring them up and offered incentives to customers. He also helped their brand identity some. However at the end of the day the image of T-Mobile is still at the backend. Verizon is #1 for a reason. The coverage detail’s tell all and the overall reliability. They’ve won awards and not the #1 for no reason. T-Mobile will be a bigger network and hopefully for the customers that have hung in there over the years with spotty coverage, they will see the benefits for the merger soon.

        • Shaun Michalak

          It all depends on where you live as to how good Verizon is and works.. My sister lives in a rural area, and she has had tons of problems with her Verizon phone working over the years.. The thing is, back then, in her area, there was only Verizon, or AT&T, so not much competition.. Her, in that rural town, with all the problems of dropped calls, noise on the line, calls not going through, etc.. She has had 100 times more problems then I have had with T-Mobile’s talk and text service in main cities.. and yes, she was not far from a tower, so it was not a signal strength issue..

          The thing about those ratings is the fact that they emphasize more on the masses, then anything.. So 200 people in the country are having problems.. But the 100,000 people in the city they make sure keeps good service, so 200 mean nothing in the grand scheme of their ratings..

          I will agree that Verizons coverage is overall better.. I think it is because right now, outside of main cities and highways, T-Mobile is working on mass coverage right now, and not on constant coverage.. The edge of one tower barely hits the next tower, if at all, in a lot of places, which gives poor coverage in a lot of places.. I personally believe that they are working at getting coverage over most of the country first, and are going to come back and install more towers to fill in those gaps once they get the mass coverage done..

  • Jay Holm

    Sure would be nice to see some headlines on this website about 2.5ghz Band 41 integration into T-Mobiles 5G network, it’s been nearly THREE FULL MONTHS since the merger closed, and still. . . only 2 cities have 2.5ghz Band 41 5G, NYC and Philly.

  • Mike Thaler

    Did you ask or was it offered voluntarily?

    • Sharti24

      I Asked and It’s a $5 credit per line. Since my 3rd line is free i didnt qualify for the extra $5

      • Mike Thaler

        Thanks. I’m almost feeling guilty to go ahead and ask. We are on a plan where all lines that stay under 2Gig of data/mo. get $10 credit/line. 7 of the 8 lines usual stay under. Monthly total – under $190. Then, about 10 weeks ago took advantage of unadvertised offer that if we agreed to a 2 Gig hard data cap for 3 months – would cut bill in half. Bills are about $120/mo for 8 lines!
        Only 5 of 8 lines were affected.

  • Mike

    What more information needs to be said? Think all the details are already known that an outage occurred for a long time and the so called back up didn’t work. Break a fiber line and alot of stuff can go out. Slap there hands and be done with it already. So much for technology.

    • Shaun Michalak

      I have yet to find a company that did not have a backup fail at some point in time.. be it spectrum, Comcast, T-Mobile, Verizon, etc.. So I am not sure why they are making soo much of a big deal about it here..

      • Mike

        One thing I know here locally is that there is no 3g/2g backup..The only mode my phone ever gets is 4g/LTE. I even proved it when customer care was on the phone, they had me try 3g, but the phone wouldn’t connect to anything. So when they say there back up didn’t work, to me that meant that primary went down because it effected VOLTE calls and messages. Unless they were connecting lines through NSA? And something failed ?

        • Shaun Michalak

          They said backup fiber line, not backup bands or frequencies.. Since fiber lines are usually a bunch of fiber lines all put together.. For example, the lost number of fiber filaments that they run is 6 outside of building runs, one fiber run goes down, and that can be 6, or 12, or 24 lines that all go down at once.. If the relay that switches it over to the backup run fails, then all goes down.. Say they run a 6 line run to a tower.. They could run 4 to LTE use, and 2 fibers for 2 and 3G use..

          As for 2 and 3G.. Well, any new towers that they installed in the past 6 years, they did not install any 2 or 3G service on.. I found that out because I was going through rural areas.. I got a 4G phone to see the difference between my older 3G phone, and the newer 4G phone, and watched to see how much coverage that T-Mobile had.. I found that all the towers that were 10 years old, still had 3G coverage on them.. But every newer tower past those old ones.. Not one could I connect to with my 3G phone.. I either connected to AT&T or it said no service.. My 4G phone kept coverage on T-Mobile about 70% of the time on T-Mobile towers though.. But that was about 5 or 6 years ago, but if they did not install any 3G coverage on any of those newer towers, I doubt they did anywhere else either..

        • Mike

          Not sure how they can do a backup for VOLTE, once a fiber line goes down it will cause problems. But for the whole nation to have had a problem means that outage had to be close to there main hub.

        • Shaun Michalak

          and the fact that it was an IP overload, means that the switch, or system that directs the traffic, was way too much overloaded with requests.. and since phone calls are all digital now, that means every call has an IP address to use on that network. I am guessing that what happened was that when the fiber lines went down, then it routed them in another direction.. Say that system could only handle 500 requests at a time, and suddenly it was getting 1000 requests.. that really is not too much different then a denial of service attack that they use in hacking.. Overload, compromise, and the only way to get it working again is to pretty much shut down all service and reset.. kind of thing.. That would be my guess at least.

        • disqus_3BrONUAJno

          Cellular traffic doesn’t go over publicly packet switched circuits.
          Cellular carriers provide them, not use them.

        • Shaun Michalak

          They have to go over a network some how.. The data is not magically going to go from point A to point B with nothing in the middle.. What is in the middle is static, stationary private lines run by secondary companies.. and at every junction, you have to have a switch to route traffic or otherwise, it would bog down the system with requests.. A switch says, hey, this goes to NY, and NY is port 5.. So it sends the information to just port 5, and not to ports 1, 2, 3, 4, or 6.. the problem is, when port 5 went down, the system may not know where to send the information since it was never routed through ports 1 though 4 or 6 before that.. It now sends out requests on all ports, which then bogs down the system as it tries to find another route to send the data..

          The best way I can explain it is to think of it like this.. You shut the highway down, and all the traffic from the highway has to go somewhere.. Well, since everyone is used to the highway, hen they get off the highway, no one knows what route to take, and everyone goes crazy trying to figure it out (without google maps or something similar to tell you the way that is). Not really much different..

          Fact is, T-mobile does not own all the lines for all of the transmission of data.. They lease it from carriers and then just run the lines from that carrier, to their towers. So the lines may be secluded from public use, it still is not the cell carrier that is running them or the data from tower to tower..

        • disqus_3BrONUAJno

          T-Mobile owns their entire network. They lease the physical infrastructure where their towers are sited. They lease excess capacity on their network to others, but no telecom carrier with their own customers are going to trust that carriage to others. Tracfone owns no infrastructure and operates via interoperability agreements with all of the cellular networks to provide coverage, and that is fully reflected in their service agreement.
          This is similar to the fact that the government owns the land that their highways are built on. That doesn’t mean that they have anything to do with the routing of the vehicles that use those highways, aside from operating detours as necessary.
          If your argument is that they don’t own their networks, it is clear that legal ownership is only important on paper. It is control that they require, not legal ownership.
          LTE is a prioritizing system, not a cellular generation.
          Broadcasters who use MaxxKonnectWireless get priority secondary only to first responders, and MaxxKonnectWireless is like Tracfone, they own none of the infrastructure. They use two of the major cellular carriers to ensure the higher availability, which wouldn’t be available on a high-latency publicly packet-switched network.

        • Shaun Michalak

          I think you misunderstood my comment.. What I was trying to say is.. T-Mobile leases space on a cell tower, they then run the lines from the antenna’s down to their computers, and then they own the fiber lines back to the main network run.. But from that network run, they lease the lines from there to another place down the road.. Verizon is the only real exception.. Verizon does have and own a lot of their on towers, on leased land..Verizon even admitted in one of their comments about their network having problems.. They stated, Our fiber run on the “comcast” network went down.. Comcast is not Verizon, and vise versa..

          I am not saying that they do not own any of the lines, but mainly the lines to the backbone of the fiber network, where they then lease lines going from point a to point b.. After all, you do not think that T-mobile has fiber lines run, that they own, constantly from NY to California.. Those lines are what I was saying is leased, but on a private network, that is separated from the public network for that run.

        • Mike

          Good explanation…. I’m guessing they learned a big lesson from all this. But one thing during the call outage time frame the internet still worked on the phone, so that IP worked. The VOLTE side sure had the issue, back at the switch. Had to be something with bringing the two networks into one.

      • Notpoliticalyet

        Probably because T-Mobile’s reputation has always been a lower end company. Also this merger probably the FCC was not to thrilled about it but they had no choice.