It’s official. DSL Reports has confirmed that Comcast will officially implement a 250 GB cap on bandwidth for broadband subscribers beginning October 1.

This has been a long time coming, after the spotlight was shone on Comcast for their unorthadox network practices, and the FCC ruled against their policy of throttling P2P applications on their network, Comcast has finally taken steps toward challenging those who use their network to transfer massive levels of data.

This is a smart policy, in the vein of what was previously advocated by Google’s Vint Cerf, that will allow Comcast to manage the traffic on their network more efficiently.

UPDATE: Thanks to Vint for the clarification, this policy isn’t as smart as his idea:

“I advocated limiting RATES not limiting total bytes transferred. The aggregate transfer cap deals with averages while, as Tony Lauck has pointed out, the issue is instantaneous data rate congestion - too much being transferred at the same time. Different metrics and methods are needed to limit the maximum rate at which a user can accept or emit data.”

No word on the penalty when users go above the 250 GB threshold, though this type of tiered pricing seems preferable to the metered pricing proposed by companies like Time Warner.

On Friday, the Federal Communications Commission released a three page ruling finding that Comcast’s network management practices “unduly interfered with Internet users’ right to access the lawful Internet content and to use the applications of their choice.”

While the order is a win for net-neutrality advocates, Google’s Public Policy Blog points out that it leaves unanswered a critical question: What’s a reasonable approach for managing broadband networks?

The order states that Comcast “has an anti-competitive motive to interfere with customers’ use of peer-to-peer applications” but Comcast also has an obligation to provide a certain standard of service to their users who can be effected during times of network congestion, and compounded by a small percentage of those who are using disproportionate amounts of bandwidth.

So, argues Vint Cerf, Google’s Chief Internet Evangelist (because as you know, Google now owns the internet and if they don’t evangelize it who will?) “the real question for today’s broadband networks is not whether they need to be managed, but rather how.”

Metered pricing as we’ve argued here before is not a solution so much as another way for those that own network infrastructure to increase revenue. Cerf argues for transmission rate caps, “which would allow users to purchase access to the Internet at a given minimum data rate and be free to transfer data at at least up to that rate in any way they wish.”

Comcast was the first to be busted for their network practices but their problem is a larger issue facing all network operators. The FCC’s decision doesn’t make the question of how any easier to answer. In my mind, while potentially unpopular with the hands-off crowd the best long-term solution is independent oversight by an unbiased government agency of all U.S. networks.