I can only echo the sole comment under that answer: > Do you have a reference/proof for the first paragraph about agreements? --- IMHO, I find this hard to b

I can only echo the sole comment under that answer: > Do you have a reference/proof for the first paragraph about agreements? --- IMHO, I find this hard to believe myself. The team(s) in charge of implementing this functionality likely don't have the requisite high level of lateral coordination necessary to facilitate agreements with all the major streaming services. Practically speaking, I see this sort of thing as balancing 1) total network saturation/hard capacity limits 2) encouraging user base to use more data up to thresholds in (1) 3) customer experience (wrt data overages) likely in that order. This functionality isn't a first-class user-facing "generate piles of money"-center; it describes limitations and conservatism and risk balance. It isn't a "pedal to the floor" sort of subject, but more of a continuous optimization concern. I don't really see telcos going to all the streaming services and working out agreements given this sort of status quo/sentiment. It's more the sort of thing that is kept internal. And then of course there's the fact that this would be playing out for every telco relative to every streaming service. At that point everyone would just throw their hands up in the air and make a global standard for cooperative ratelimiting, and we'd all know about it. For the first few years it would be obscure and you'd have to google the terms a few times to correctly identify it, and then someone would put a 43% quality JPEG screenshot of the documentation on facebook and it would go viral and get linked to 5G causing cancer or whatnot. It's just IP ratelimiting.