dslreports logo
site
spacer

spacer
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


view:
topics flat nest 
Comments on news posted 2008-06-30 10:18:39: As demanded by Canadian regulators, last week Bell Canada finally offered "proof" that their decision to throttle the bandwidth they provide wholesalers (without telling them) was necessary because their network was just so congested. ..

page: 1 · 2 · next


adisor19

join:2004-10-11

CRTC has to take out the whip now

Bell messed up really bad on this one and now that the rabbit is out of the Bag, the CRTC needs to force the other black sheep to show their "congestion proof". I'm talking here about none other then Robers.

Adi


EXPOSE THEM

@dsl.bell.ca

Exposed

Look like Belly was caught red handed.

Man i can't wait that my contract with sympatico is over at the end of the month. I feel absolutely dirty giving them any money right now. What a bunch of crooks


Matt3
All noise, no signal.
Premium
join:2003-07-20
Jamestown, NC
kudos:12

A lot I bet

said by Karl Bode:
It makes you wonder how many other claims of congestion armageddon could be laughed off in North America were we to see actual data.
A lot I bet.

While I am all for the ability of a company to protect their profit margins, I don't support doing it in an underhanded manner. Bell Canada is lying to everyone, including the government.

If the Canadians will lie, cheat and steal like this, imagine what is going on in country that produced the S&L Loan scandal, the Enron fiasco, the MCI Worldcom debacle, and the Rigas Family's greed.


Dogfather
Premium
join:2007-12-26
Laguna Hills, CA

1 edit

And certainly BC isn't alone

There is nothing special about Bell Canada that wouldn't apply to other ISPs so when someone like AT&T starts boo-hooing about how their seeing a 60% increase in traffic (of course that is what happens when you have a major merger), and need to cap, you know it's bullshit.

Corydon
Cultivant son jardin
Premium
join:2008-02-18
Denver, CO
reply to Matt3

Re: A lot I bet

So the next question is are Comcast, Cox and the other MSOs doing the same thing in order to kill video services delivered over the internet while they're in the cradle? They've got a lot more to lose if the internet becomes a mainstream vehicle for delivering video content after all.
--
"Every man thinks meanly of himself for not having been a soldier, or not having been at sea."

hottboiinnc
ME

join:2003-10-15
Cleveland, OH
reply to adisor19

Re: CRTC has to take out the whip now

Why Rogers? Roger's for the most part does NOT wholesale their network to a 3rd party like Bell does.

So why would it make a difference to them?

hottboiinnc
ME

join:2003-10-15
Cleveland, OH
reply to Corydon

Re: A lot I bet

no its called excessive use of bandwidth


pfak
Premium
join:2002-12-29
Vancouver, BC
reply to hottboiinnc

Re: CRTC has to take out the whip now

Rogers is required to wholesale their network to 3rd parties just like Bell or TELUS.

How else do we get scum like 3Web (or whatever it's called now?).
--
Xenophase - British Columbia's premier online gaming community.


nekkidtruth
YISMM
Premium
join:2002-05-20
London, ON
kudos:2
Reviews:
·WIND Mobile
·Rogers Hi-Speed

The funny part is....

There must be a lot of people around here who feel really stupid for sticking up for Bell.

Here is my favourite part...

I told you so! (Read: We told you so!)

The fact that anyone actually believed Bell (or any other ISP for that matter) would actually show congestion, boggles me. I get a really good laugh at how this has played out. Someone at Bell should be fired (or step down) as they just made the company look like idiotic (not hard to do anyway).
--
Weeeeeee


Mike
Premium,Mod
join:2000-09-17
Pittsburgh, PA
kudos:1
Yeah they should step down for making the company look bad.

Since you know, there are a lot of alternative ways to go. Right. Yeah.


espaeth
Digital Plumber
Premium,MVM
join:2001-04-21
Minneapolis, MN
kudos:2

Assume those were packet loss numbers

Would anyone still be saying that 2-3% packet loss is acceptable?

By contrast, your average Internet backbone provider runs their network at less than 0.001% contention. Our acceptable level of packet loss on IP networks is exactly 0.0% -- anything more than that and interactive applications start becoming practically unusable.

Don't get me wrong, I'm less than enthused as the quality of the data that Bell has published, but there's a lot of bullshit coming from all sides. I especially like the crap being spewed about upgrading the DSLAMs to GigE access as being the cure-all. The numbers published by Bell indicate congestion is a path issue, not a point issue. If you upgrade all of your DSLAMs that data still needs to go somewhere.. that means upgrading the aggregation network, which in turn pushes upgrades to the core. This isn't a problem that you fix by taking dad's credit card to Radio Shack to buy a few parts.


XNemesis

join:2002-11-16
Kitchener, ON
But the question is, "With this proof now in the clear, will anything actually be done about this?" I wonder


peter_m
Premium
join:2005-07-13
Canada, QC

1 edit

Throtteling to KEEP enough bandwidth, not reduce congestion

They are throttling not only to leave room for their own Video Store but they might eventually offer true TVoIP in HD. That is why they installed Fiber to the curb (to my area at least). This was mentioned to me by a Bell tech.


TI POIL

join:2006-03-05
Toronto, ON
reply to XNemesis

Re: Assume those were packet loss numbers

LOL nothing, it's Canada... we bend over and take it.


Guspaz
Guspaz
Premium,MVM
join:2001-11-05
Montreal, QC
kudos:23
reply to peter_m

Re: Throtteling to KEEP enough bandwidth, not reduce congestion

Thing is, P2P's relative usage is shrinking. Right now, it makes up about 50% of all traffic (down from 60% a while back). As streaming video grows far faster, P2P's share of the bandwidth pie is shrinking rapidly. By 2012, streaming video such as YouTube will make up 50% of net traffic (I believe that was in the Ars article), making P2P less important.

bgw

join:2008-06-28
North York, ON

The Truth Comes Out!

I hope the CRTC acts responsibly in this case.

Next time it wont be a protest on Parliament Hill but a Government out on its ass!

Between the new Copyright act, Bell's Throttling this Government is out and out encouraging me to assist the opposition during the next election!

dynodb
Premium,VIP
join:2004-04-21
Minneapolis, MN

The real laugh

If Bell's upstream DSLAM links are too slow, the whole problem could be fixed quite cheaply by upgrading the networking board in the back of DSLAM to gigabit Ethernet. For a company already publicly pledging to spend $500 million in capital upgrades this year, such a fix would be pocket change.
This is the truely funny part, because whoever wrote it is completely clueless. He honestly thinks it's just a matter of slapping a GigE card in a DSLAM and all problems are solved? Such ignorance can only come from someone who hasn't the slightest idea what they're talking about.

That's like suggesting that by putting high speed tires on your car, you'll go faster.

patcat88

join:2002-04-05
Jamaica, NY
kudos:1
said by dynodb:

If Bell's upstream DSLAM links are too slow, the whole problem could be fixed quite cheaply by upgrading the networking board in the back of DSLAM to gigabit Ethernet. For a company already publicly pledging to spend $500 million in capital upgrades this year, such a fix would be pocket change.
This is the truely funny part, because whoever wrote it is completely clueless. He honestly thinks it's just a matter of slapping a GigE card in a DSLAM and all problems are solved? Such ignorance can only come from someone who hasn't the slightest idea what they're talking about.

That's like suggesting that by putting high speed tires on your car, you'll go faster.
No, it is that simple. If your not following a capital upgrade plan, then your to blame.

qworster

join:2001-11-25
Bryn Mawr, PA
Reviews:
·Comcast
·Verizon FiOS

1 edit

We all know why they did this...

Bell did it because they offer a DSL product that's inferior to their competition, and people knew it.

So, they tried to force lower the competition's product to match THEIR crappy one.....

Unfortunately for them, they got caught-and their excuse has so many holes in it that if it was a water bucket, it wouldn't hold a drop of water.

I hope the lawsuit that their competition will now file against them costs Bell MANY MILLION$ of dollars!


Froggy

@teksavvy.com

Most of the packet loss is caused by their throttle boxes

For all the people who aren't up-to-date of this one. Most of the packet loss is caused by their throttle boxes. There was virtually none before they used the throttle boxes. On another note the BCE deal is dead and buried. Market action would portend the end of the Bell deal by the end of this year.

dynodb
Premium,VIP
join:2004-04-21
Minneapolis, MN
reply to patcat88

Re: The real laugh

said by patcat88:

said by dynodb:

If Bell's upstream DSLAM links are too slow, the whole problem could be fixed quite cheaply by upgrading the networking board in the back of DSLAM to gigabit Ethernet. For a company already publicly pledging to spend $500 million in capital upgrades this year, such a fix would be pocket change.
This is the truely funny part, because whoever wrote it is completely clueless. He honestly thinks it's just a matter of slapping a GigE card in a DSLAM and all problems are solved? Such ignorance can only come from someone who hasn't the slightest idea what they're talking about.

That's like suggesting that by putting high speed tires on your car, you'll go faster.
No, it is that simple. If your not following a capital upgrade plan, then your to blame.
No, as someone who's been involved in precisely this type of upgrade- it's nowhere near that simple.

Assuming the DSLAM is even capable of being upgraded to GigE (not all are), it still requires fiber to be run to it, the DSLAM completely reconfigured, GigE switches/routers to actually connect to, provisioning and troubleshooting systems to be upgraded... and even then you're still not solving the congestion problem, since the ISP gateway trunk is more likely to be prone to congestion than the DSLAM trunk.

That means new gateway routers, even more GigE backbone switches/routers, more systems upgrades, etc.

Again- anyone who thinks that merely swapping out a card solves the problem or converting to GigE is cheap and easy has no experience or knowledge of what they're talking about. It's an expensive, time consuming process.

rahvin112

join:2002-05-24
Sandy, UT
He thinks you just push a big red button that says upgrade. Either he's young on a PHB.

Nothing is ever as simple in real life as some people think it is. Adding capacity to a communication network is very similar to adding capacity to your local freeway or any other infrastructure job. It's not cheap, it's not easy and it takes a long time. The only time it's "easy" is if the pavement is already there and all you are doing is putting down paint, the equivalent in communication would be if all the network capacity is there because the upgrade already happened. In the real world you don't overbuild your capacity because the costs of new installations are tremendous and demand has to be there before you build it.

daveberstein

join:2002-07-15
New York, NY

1 recommendation

DSLAMs are in fact the problem in Bell data

Folks

If you look at the data released, you'll see that congestion problems have dropped to totally minimal except at the DSLAMs. Their definition of "congested" is that one out of 200 15 minute tests of that link come within 10 and 30% of the capacity.

So if they eliminated a problem happening less than 0.5% of the time, that would add only a trivial load to the rest of the network. Especially because most of the "problems" do not affect any packets at all (there's still 10-30% of capacity to carry packets past the "congestion" threshold, which means most of them are getting through.)

So upgrading the DSLAM backhaul (where Bell identifies the problems) would easily alleviate the problem on that link while adding only an insignificant load to the rest of the network. Go look at the data.

It makes sense they don't have problems in the other parts of the network - carriers around the world are proving the network upgrades are practical and inexpensive - dimes a month on a service that sells for $30-$50 adds enough capacity to almost never have problems. (Katrina, 9/11 style events still likely problems.)

Bandwidth isn't free, but it's pretty darn cheap: 2-4% of what you pay for broadband. Switches and routers keep getting cheaper at a Moore's Law pace of 25-40% per year So you'd have to have bandwidth demand grow faster than 25-40% per user for the costs of (generally reliable) bandwidth to go up. The definitive data (Odlyzko, University of Minnesota) shows total growth of 40-55% from 2002 through 2008, or 28-35% growth per user.

There absolutely are congestion problems possible - cable upstream until DOCSIS 3.0 can get jammed - but if you look at the costs of providing bandwidth congestion are wired networks is inexpensively avoided 99+% of the time.

Dave Burstein
Editor, DSL Prime


Good for Bell

@dsl.bell.ca

I Support Bell

I support Bell and their throttling especially against 3rd party ISP's renting off the Network. These companies are offering Unlimmited bandwidth to their customers. Bell doesn't offer that to their own customers unless your grandfathered. Funny thing happened last week. I went out on a DSL repair. Tek Savvy customer complaining of no sync at the modem. I went out to investigate and he's getting 5meg/800 excellent sync on the line. He then calls his ISP support line and hands the phone to me. I said how long has he been your DSL customer. The guy on the phone says 5 years. I ask have you ever sent him a new modem because it's the modem. No its not theres a problem with the line the guy tells me. I said look my friend Its your companys modem. Send him a new one. Well he'll have to pay 80 dollars for a new modem. I say to the tek savvy guy. Buddy, Bell is providing your customer with 5 megs. Right on the modem it says One meg modem. technology from like 7 years ago. At least if he were Bells customers they'd send him a new modem with the upgrade. The guy asks what company I work for and my ID number. Take a hike I tell the guy. The customer was not impressed and said he'll call Sympatico right away to become a subscriber. The 3rd party ISP's are cheating there customers with yesterdays technology for todays capabilities. All these companys have been ISP's for a few years. Its time they spent some money and got their own Networks and stop renting off of Bells Network. These companys are not ISP's. They are Pirates. So why shouldn't Bell Give the better technology and service to Sympatico subscribers. You get what you pay for going 3rd party. Why buy from the middle man when you can buy from the source.

Riplin

join:2002-05-13
canada
hahaha I needed a good laugh before I went to bed

Oh and a little correction to your rant buddy, its not bell's network its the people's network. Where do you think bell got the money to build it? duh


HiVolt
Premium
join:2000-12-28
Toronto, ON
kudos:21
Reviews:
·TekSavvy DSL
reply to Good for Bell
said by Good for Bell :

I went out to investigate and he's getting 5meg/800 excellent sync on the line. He then calls his ISP support line and hands the phone to me. I said how long has he been your DSL customer. The guy on the phone says 5 years. I ask have you ever sent him a new modem because it's the modem. No its not theres a problem with the line the guy tells me. I said look my friend Its your companys modem. Send him a new one. Well he'll have to pay 80 dollars for a new modem. I say to the tek savvy guy. Buddy, Bell is providing your customer with 5 megs. Right on the modem it says One meg modem. technology from like 7 years ago. At least if he were Bells customers they'd send him a new modem with the upgrade.
Alright Mr. Repair Tech, lets start poking some holes in your story.

First, the 3rd party ISP's don't use the obsolete Nortel 1 meg modems.

Second, how were you getting a solid 5056/800 sync on a line supposedly provisioned for the old Nortel 1meg modem platform? G.DMT and Nortel line cards can't be used simulatenously.

Third, It's Bell Sympatico who still has people on the old Nortel 1Meg Modem platform, and has not informed them of the technolgy change that happened 5 years ago.

Now, go fly a kite, sir.
--
,,!,,('-'),,!,,


BellSmell

@rogers.com
ROFL!! HiVolt You Are tha Man! Way to tell that Bell Shill to stick it where the sun don't shine! - LOL!!


Angelo
The Network Guy
Premium
join:2002-06-18
reply to HiVolt
lol @ hivolt... i found his story amusing for bed time =p

backness

join:2005-07-08
K2P OW2
reply to BellSmell
they probably charged him 4$ a month x5 Years for the rental of that Piece of shit too

80$ sounds like a steal. If my grade 4 arithmetic serves me correctly that would be over 3x as much for inferior hardware

hottboiinnc
ME

join:2003-10-15
Cleveland, OH
reply to pfak

Re: CRTC has to take out the whip now

Something that Roger's seems to keep under wraps then cause there is nothing on their website about wholesaing like on Bell and Telus