Toronto User
@alocet.com
| reply to CanerisErik
Re: Nexxia throttling?
said by CanerisErik  :According to one poster on the TekSavvy thread, the throttling is done selectively by realm...  How about all the wholesalers come together and form a new organization providing ISP-independent co-location of aggregation equipment in Bell COs? No need for Bell SLAMs/BASs, just pay for the unbundled loop and have shared DSLAMs, etc. provided by wholesalers for wholesalers. Primus is doing it all on their own for themselves. One issue would be all the various business models might not be compatible with this... So my question is this... since Primus is using their new hardware....are they the best next option for P2P users? Can Primus customers respond whether they too are experiencing throttling? |
|
LazMan
join:2003-03-26
Angus, ON
 ·TekSavvy Solutions..
| reply to CanerisErik
said by CanerisErik :According to one poster on the TekSavvy thread, the throttling is done selectively by realm... How about all the wholesalers come together and form a new organization providing ISP-independent co-location of aggregation equipment in Bell COs? No need for Bell SLAMs/BASs, just pay for the unbundled loop and have shared DSLAMs, etc. provided by wholesalers for wholesalers. Primus is doing it all on their own for themselves. One issue would be all the various business models might not be compatible with this... The cost is exceptional to establish and maintain a CoLo within Bell's space. It's routine for us to spend $60k to establish a colo with transport and DSLAM equipment, and annual fees can be that much, or more.
Laz |
|
CanerisErik
Caneris
Premium,VIP
join:2007-10-03
Toronto, ON
| said by LazMan :said by CanerisErik :According to one poster on the TekSavvy thread, the throttling is done selectively by realm... How about all the wholesalers come together and form a new organization providing ISP-independent co-location of aggregation equipment in Bell COs? No need for Bell SLAMs/BASs, just pay for the unbundled loop and have shared DSLAMs, etc. provided by wholesalers for wholesalers. Primus is doing it all on their own for themselves. One issue would be all the various business models might not be compatible with this... The cost is exceptional to establish and maintain a CoLo within Bell's space. It's routine for us to spend $60k to establish a colo with transport and DSLAM equipment, and annual fees can be that much, or more. Laz Yup, hence the "One issue would be all the various business models might not be compatible with this..." |
|
Guspaz
Guspaz
Premium,MVM
join:2001-11-05
Montreal, QC
·Colbanet
| The upside is, if an alliance of independent ISPs are sharing the DSLAMs, the cost is reduced. You don't need multiple ISPs all coloing in the same COs. Should be able to cover, at least, the major cities.
If an ISP like TekSavvy had to drop their $30/mth pricepoint (and only offer the Premium package at $40/mth) due to higher costs, I'd go for that. Most of us would, I think, because we're willing to pay more (up to a point) for unthrottled service. |
|
CanerisErik
Caneris
Premium,VIP
join:2007-10-03
Toronto, ON | reply to ISP_Worker
Another issue is remotes... |
|
HeadSpinning
join:2005-05-29
Windsor, ON
| reply to LazMan
said by LazMan : The cost is exceptional to establish and maintain a CoLo within Bell's space. It's routine for us to spend $60k to establish a colo with transport and DSLAM equipment, and annual fees can be that much, or more. Laz Not sure how you get away with only spending $60k. To build out a co-lo with enough DS0/DS1/DS3 links, power delivery, racks, grounding, fuse panels, remote test head and DSLAM, we're always over $100k, and typically more. |
|
Guspaz
Guspaz
Premium,MVM
join:2001-11-05
Montreal, QC | reply to CanerisErik
You can never cover every CO anyhow, so the lack of remotes doesn't matter so much. The downtown core COs of the major cities cover a fair number of customers... |
|
mazhurg
Premium
join:2004-05-02
Portage La Prairie, MB
·TekSavvy Solutions..
·MTS
1 edit | said by Guspaz :You can never cover every CO anyhow, so the lack of remotes doesn't matter so much. The downtown core COs of the major cities cover a fair number of customers... And how about the rest of us, in small cities or hooked to remotes. Did you know how long it took the current generation to reach us? And now we essentially turn back the clock?
No, I say we get BCE (or Nexxia or whomever the corp is at this point) legistlated so that they lose all ISP status, and spin off any related companies from them.
The only way to get a level playing field might be to have a telecom company that is allowed to do only that and make it impossible for such to spin-off, control, invest in or relate to any type of ISP in the country. Their only job should be to provide neutral connectivity.
Darn I am mad... 
Edited for a few words mistake - Really should triple proofread...  |
|
Guspaz
Guspaz
Premium,MVM
join:2001-11-05
Montreal, QC | There is no ideal solution. If they can cover the major cities, they can help the most people for the least amount of cash, compared to spending all the money on lawyers or building out equipment in small towns. |
|
LazMan
join:2003-03-26
Angus, ON
·TekSavvy Solutions..
| reply to HeadSpinning
said by HeadSpinning :Not sure how you get away with only spending $60k. To build out a co-lo with enough DS0/DS1/DS3 links, power delivery, racks, grounding, fuse panels, remote test head and DSLAM, we're always over $100k, and typically more. Depends on the type of CoLo - going to a type 2 (no cage) has brought our make-ready costs down. We also bring in sub-links as needed, rather then a whack up front... For a type 1, you're right - $100k and up is easy to do. |
|
HeadSpinning
join:2005-05-29
Windsor, ON | We've been doing type 2 lately, but we still load up on DS0's, which does get expensive. If we see the potential up front to go to more than 1 DSLAM shelf, we typically deploy the aggregation switch initially as well, so that adds to it. |
|
ISP IT
@execulink.com
| reply to ISP_Worker
I work for a wholesale ISP and this is old news. We've been talking about this for months and as far as I'm aware our executives are currently taking Bell to task for it. Of course, the latter is speculation but I do believe I recall this being brought up in our last company meeting.
This sort of thing is embroiled in history. The CRTC let Ma Bell be the only show in town for so long that they've got such a firm grip on the telephone networks (with the exception of pockets of independent companies such as my own)in Ontario and Quebec that it's very difficult to stop it. |
|
jfmezei
Premium
join:2007-01-03
Beaconsfield, QC
·ELECTRONICBOX
| reply to ISP_Worker
An update.
To get to the Bell tariffs:
»www.bce.ca/en/aboutbce/regulator···tent.asp
This page contains the following text:
The Bell Canada Tariffs listed below contain the most recent
rates, charges, terms and conditions applicable to the
various services, offered by the Company. These services are
regulated and approved by the Canadian Radio-television and
Telecommunications Commission (CRTC). The Tariffs are
divided into parts which contain the services, listed by
Item Number.
Note the use of REGULATED AND APPROVED BY THE CRTC.
From there, you choose GT (General tarifs), then Part 5 for the Digital Network Services, and then the 5410 for the GAS (the PPPoE service) and 5420 for HSA (non PPPoE access)
The actual 5410 document itself is at:
»www.bce.ca/en/aboutbce/regulator···20%20%20 |
|
popper2
@ntl.com
|  reply to ISP IT
OT was Re: Nexxia throttling?
said by ISP IT :
I work for a wholesale ISP and this is old news. We've been talking about this for months and as far as I'm aware our executives are currently taking Bell to task for it. given that im unlikely to see so many ISP (OK youre in the US and im in the UK but no matter)vendors in one thread again, iv got an OT but related few question if you wouldnt mind taking a few minutes to answer?.
if i accept that this throttling, all comes down to a massive uptake in world wide bandwidth use, from both the unicast P2p,torrent and vido streaming userbase.....
how is it that the ISPs both large and small, dont put in their pockets an spend a miniscule amount of money in comparison to your other outlays.
and pay some inhouse and external coders to look at and contribute to the free Java Azureus/vuze codebase and improve its efficiancy? and save vast amounts of external bandwidth in the process.
the best long term options im looking for are to everyones advantage, not least yours as conduits of the content.
1:retofit multicasting DHT and related code into the AZ codebase, taking from the old Mbone, Bomboo and Mtunnel codebases for instance plus control protocols code as you see fit for todays P2p growth.
2A:turn on multicasting in all your router and related kit all the way to your end users so they can use this new Multicast capability.
2B:or failing everyone turning on Multicasting capability , also have your payed coders contribute an intigrated AZ Multicast tunnel your other new code can use in such cases as the users dont have access to a direct multicast IPv4 (or later the IPv6 multicast), it makes sense that you would want to use something you already have available simply by turning it ON for free.
why do you turn off Multcasting in all your roters and related kit anyway, its there, its powered, its free and most of all it will save masses of bandwudth once the user apps know they can use it and retofit Muticasting into their future codebase....
3:only after 2A nnd 2B...
look at re-coding the current unicast DHT code to better fit the local internal network Swarm in a 'best effort' kind of way.
first LAN, then WAN, then UBR/Dslam segment,ISP segment,
ISP core,fastest peered,slower peered,fastest Co-Lo ISP,slower Co-Lo ISP,national, internation.
sweak the last bits as required and remember to allow for the less popular content and feeding back a reasonable % etc to be fair....
4:regarding streaming Video thats even easyer, as theres several existing Multicast client/server apps, VLC being your best option by far, to help take advantage of your activation of Multicast and that tunnel if required.
we want ipv4 near realtime multicast video, we cant use it yet, as you havent re-activated multicast to us, and noones seen fit to incluse an internal Multicast tunnel in the VLC video app to bypass your lack of it to date.
you just need to improve the USER interface, add the same multicast tunnel code and multlcast DHT as the AZ code you wrote above, and include a good 'NEAR REALTIME' Multicast request/announce and resend local buffering code.... all in the old MBone codebase if you cant or dont write your own.
thats the outline, you could help drag the old MBone cando coders attitude into the P2p age, and save vast amounts of bandwidth and cash for a very little outlay and a reconfigure of your routers and related kit.
OC the worlds now full of cant-do post MBone coders today, so you might have to look that bit harder for some CANDO coders but Multicasting is the best long term answer, let the end users and coders use it for everyones benefit
dont wait for the ipv6 kit to be put in place do it for ipv4 NOW and in 3 months time or less it could be world widespead... it only takes a little cash, effort and time, and you save so much more by doing it NOW. |
|
