Topic 'Re: Nexxia throttling?' in forum 'Canadian Broadband' - dslreports.com

OT was Re: Nexxia throttling?

Sat, 29 Mar 2008 20:01:55 EDT

anon posted :

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.

Re: Nexxia throttling?

Wed, 26 Mar 2008 15:26:49 EDT

jfmezei posted : 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

Re: Nexxia throttling?

Wed, 26 Mar 2008 00:33:12 EDT

anon posted : 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.

Re: Nexxia throttling?

Tue, 25 Mar 2008 18:26:26 EDT

HeadSpinning posted : 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.

Re: Nexxia throttling?

Tue, 25 Mar 2008 17:58:10 EDT

LazMan posted :

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.

Re: Nexxia throttling?

Tue, 25 Mar 2008 17:04:22 EDT

Guspaz posted : 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.

Re: Nexxia throttling?

Tue, 25 Mar 2008 16:57:18 EDT

mazhurg posted :

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... :mad:

Edited for a few words mistake - Really should triple proofread... ;)

Re: Nexxia throttling?

Tue, 25 Mar 2008 16:36:45 EDT

Guspaz posted : 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...

Re: Nexxia throttling?

Tue, 25 Mar 2008 16:25:06 EDT

HeadSpinning posted :

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.

Re: Nexxia throttling?

Tue, 25 Mar 2008 16:13:34 EDT

CanerisErik posted : Another issue is remotes...

Re: Nexxia throttling?

Tue, 25 Mar 2008 15:59:56 EDT

Guspaz posted : 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.

Re: Nexxia throttling?

Tue, 25 Mar 2008 14:01:35 EDT

CanerisErik posted :

said by LazMan:

said by CanerisErik:

According to one poster on the TekSavvy thread, the throttling is done selectively by realm... :huh:

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..."

Re: Nexxia throttling?

Tue, 25 Mar 2008 13:58:39 EDT

LazMan posted :

Re: Nexxia throttling?

Tue, 25 Mar 2008 13:32:29 EDT

anon posted :

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?

Re: Nexxia throttling?

Tue, 25 Mar 2008 08:39:33 EDT

Bell_Abused posted : For those interested,

Dr. Geist's site picked up this news item...

»www.michaelgeist.ca/content/view/2782/125/
"Bell Secretly Throttling Wholesale Internet Services?"

Re: Nexxia throttling?

Mon, 24 Mar 2008 22:19:40 EDT

anon posted : Accoring to Bell, "Traffic Management" is not a material change in service.

So they may play this card with the wholesalers and tell them nothing has changed.

Ref: »dsl reports blog material change.

hahaha I will laugh if they play this card and tell the wholsaler, there is no problem, we throttled so what. There is no material change in what Bell provides ans sells you.

LOL

Re: Nexxia throttling?

Mon, 24 Mar 2008 21:14:42 EDT

Black Moon posted :

said by DKS:

If the warranty section of the Service Agreement is any indication of what they warrant to resellers, then that's not true. Nothing, including bandwidth, is warranted or guaranteed.

In other words, just like when you rent a flat, they'll make sure their arses are covered twenty times over.

What I don't understand is why local loop unbundling is so rare here. In the UK and other places in Europe, local loop unbundling is commonplace and allows ISPs to bypass the incumbent telco. Why is it not done here? Is it cost? Is it something else?

Re: Nexxia throttling?

Mon, 24 Mar 2008 20:04:24 EDT

dcorreia posted : This has happen to me a few times, 5meg fast path profiles down to 3meg and sometimes even interleave.

said by Acanac Inc:

Although we have not yet had any complaints on our end about throttling, Acanac has noticed profiles being lowered when they could support higher speeds. This is happening more and more. This in it's self is a type of throttling.

Best Regards,
Paul
www.acanac.ca

Re: Nexxia throttling?

Mon, 24 Mar 2008 12:57:43 EDT

sbrook posted : The competition bureau is under the dept of industry.

Re: Nexxia throttling?

Mon, 24 Mar 2008 12:31:01 EDT

anon posted : not only the industry minister but with the competition bureau. This is (could be) an attempt to control and stifle the competition.

Re: Nexxia throttling?

Mon, 24 Mar 2008 12:24:37 EDT

mlerner posted : Sad but probably true, when they are supposed to be handing it themselves. Always makes me wonder why we still have them around.

Re: Nexxia throttling?

Mon, 24 Mar 2008 12:16:59 EDT

sbrook posted : Better to file with the Industry Minister. I'll lay odds that the CRTC will pass it off if left to their own resouces.

Re: Nexxia throttling?

Mon, 24 Mar 2008 11:58:41 EDT

mlerner posted : So, if this turns out to be intentional, who's going to be the first to file a complaint with the CRTC?

Re: Nexxia throttling?

Mon, 24 Mar 2008 05:15:40 EDT

jfmezei posted : PPPoE service is provided under the name "Gateway Access Service" otherwise known as "GAS".

It is tariff approved by the CRTC, numbered 5410
(the non PPPoE (HSA) is 5420).

Bell Canada has a section on its web site which does list all applicable tariffs.

www.bell.ca/tariffs (search for 5410 or Gateway Access Service)

5410 seems to be available at:
»www.bce.ca/en/aboutbce/regulator···20%20%20

This is a .PDF document. Not sure if this is the most current, but this version has seen updates since 5410 was first introduced (for instance addition of dry loop support, and upping of basic speed to 5mbps)

##
2. General | 2. Généralités |
| |
(a) Gateway Access Service (GAS) is a broadband
access service based on Asymmetric Digital Subscriber
Line (ADSL) technology. This service will enable a
service provider to establish a high speed data access
path between its end-user's premises and a Company
serving wire centre. End-user login and password
authentication are established via a “network selection
gateway” which can enable access to multiple destination
networks.
##

I am no lawyer, but the document mentions only PPPoE (PPP over ethernet) frame transport between end user and Bell,s customer (aka: ISP). Nowewhere is it mentioned that inside the PPPoE frame, it is expected to be TCPIP packet. In fact, it mentions internet access, LAN extensions

##
(e) GAS supports Point to Point Protocol over Ethernet
(PPPoE) across the Company's backbone network.
##

This implies that Bell is to carry PPPoE frames between end use and ISP. Again, no mention of TCPIP.

(PPPoE could be used to transport any network such as DECNET, Appletalk, SNA etc, PPP itself is not tied specifically to TCPIP although TCPIp is the most widely used protocol over PPP or PPPoE lines).

Nowhere is it mentioned that Bell reserves the right to "manage" traffic. In fact, in a separate filing from MTS requiring Bell to provide a mean time to repair of 4 hours, Bell argues that GAS is an unmanaged service (Bell offers managed network services with quick repair garantees).

##
(e) GAS supports Point to Point Protocol over Ethernet
(PPPoE) across the Company's backbone network.
##

It is thus Bell's responsability to ensure its backbone network can handle the load to provide the 5mbps down and 800kbps up rates that are stipulated in the tariff.

Re: Nexxia throttling?

Sat, 22 Mar 2008 10:26:05 EDT

Bicephale posted : Hi,

Isn't it possible that cross-talk taking place in the wiring
which spreads over our streets reached a saturation point,
that this saturation is the consequence of having so many
customers on 5+ Kbps profiles doing transfers all day long?

Re: Nexxia throttling?

Sat, 22 Mar 2008 10:05:27 EDT

xmz posted : I have experienced the exact same thing. This is definitely Bell's method of throttling. I am getting the full speed on a Fedora torrent that was previously only getting up to 30kb/s.

Cross posted in »Teksavvy's throttling now? Just a vent, nothing is needed. as well

Re: Nexxia throttling?

Sat, 22 Mar 2008 09:52:59 EDT

CanerisErik posted : According to one poster on the TekSavvy thread, the throttling is done selectively by realm... :huh:

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...

Re: Nexxia throttling?

Sat, 22 Mar 2008 08:41:49 EDT

anon posted :

said by DKS:

The CRTC will not touch this. Broadband is not regulated by the CRTC.

It is from the wholesalers side.

Re: Nexxia throttling?

Sat, 22 Mar 2008 08:24:20 EDT

andrewhaji posted : I posted this in the TekSavvy thread as well...

At least Bell is consistent. Right at 2 AM my speeds went back to normal, but during the whole afternoon I was bouncing between 30 KB/s and about 100 KB/s. This has to stop.

Re: Nexxia throttling?

Sat, 22 Mar 2008 08:20:35 EDT

DKS posted :

said by jfmezei:

If the ISPs won't do it, how many customers would it take to get the ear of the CRTC to take action ?

In such a case, can we also tell the CRTC the reason they are not seeing ISP complaints is that ISPs are scared of Bell and do not wish to jeoperdise their relationshp with Bell by complaining to the CRTC ?

The CRTC will not touch this. Broadband is not regulated by the CRTC.
--
Need-based health care not greed-based health care.

Re: Nexxia throttling?

Sat, 22 Mar 2008 04:06:11 EDT

jfmezei posted : Question to the various ISP people who participate here:

Is there any chance that ISPs will get together ASAP and pressure the CRTC to force Bell to stop implementing Sympatico policies on the wholesale data transfers ?

If the ISPs won't do it, how many customers would it take to get the ear of the CRTC to take action ?

In such a case, can we also tell the CRTC the reason they are not seeing ISP complaints is that ISPs are scared of Bell and do not wish to jeoperdise their relationshp with Bell by complaining to the CRTC ?

Re: Nexxia throttling?

Sat, 22 Mar 2008 00:59:56 EDT

anon posted : Maybe hamilton isn't considered a major city and you better hope that never changes.

Re: Nexxia throttling?

Fri, 21 Mar 2008 23:27:39 EDT

Last Parade posted : I'm downloading torrents at 508.1 KB/sec and uploading at my forced cap, 40 KB/sec.

Re: Nexxia throttling?

Fri, 21 Mar 2008 23:06:28 EDT

sbrook posted : Throttling is clearly being done by deep packet inspection of the TCP packets within the PPPoE envelope.

The connectivity of the 3rd party ISPs is in their service agreement with Bell which most of us here are not privvy to. so you can't say that it can't throttle.

But it is a good point if that's what Bell agreed to carry.

Re: Nexxia throttling?

Fri, 21 Mar 2008 23:02:41 EDT

jfmezei posted : Throtling is done at the TCP level.

Sympatico can throttle all it wants. It provides TCP connectivity and can affect how it carries TCP traffic all it wants.

Bell provices packet forwarding at the PPPoE level between residences and ISPs. It does not provide TCP connectivity.

As such, it has no business dealing with packets that transit between ISPs and their customers. It is private data and Bell can't inspect their contents.

Re: Nexxia throttling?

Fri, 21 Mar 2008 23:02:18 EDT

sbrook posted : I haven't seen a 3rd party ISPs service agreement. But I really do question whether they claimed the right to willfully interfere with traffic.

But that aside, the second question is far more likely to hang Bell in terms of the regulators (the fist might hang them in a civil court action) and begs questions of Bell's motives and whether this is an anticompetitive move. If it looks like a duck, swims like a duck, and quacks like a duck, it's PROBABLY a duck. That's my reaction given the timing of this action on Bell's part to throttle 3rd party ISPs using their facilities.

Re: Nexxia throttling?

Fri, 21 Mar 2008 22:53:45 EDT

DKS posted :

said by sbrook:

But the questions, DKS, are a) whether they have the RIGHT to interfere with that traffic, and b) whether the interference with that traffic is being anticompetitive in the light of loss of customers to competitors having throttled and capped their own and this time not losing them to Rogers ... since Rogers has implemented their own throttling and caps.

It sure reeks like limburger cheese of the latter.

For Sympatico clients, yes they do. It's laid out in the service agreement. And yes, they have the right to throttle, pass to a 3rd party and all kinds of things.
--
Need-based health care not greed-based health care.

Re: Nexxia throttling?

Fri, 21 Mar 2008 22:50:47 EDT

sbrook posted : But the questions, DKS, are a) whether they have the RIGHT to interfere with that traffic, and b) whether the interference with that traffic is being anticompetitive in the light of loss of customers to competitors having throttled and capped their own and this time not losing them to Rogers ... since Rogers has implemented their own throttling and caps.

It sure reeks like limburger cheese of the latter.

Re: Nexxia throttling?

Fri, 21 Mar 2008 22:42:38 EDT

DKS posted :

said by jfmezei:

Bell is in the business of providing bandwidth. If it can't provide sufficient bandwith to support all the lines ISPs pay for, there is something definitely wrong.

If the warranty section of the Service Agreement is any indication of what they warrant to resellers, then that's not true. Nothing, including bandwidth, is warranted or guaranteed.
--
Need-based health care not greed-based health care.

Re: Nexxia throttling?

Fri, 21 Mar 2008 21:53:31 EDT

jfmezei posted : What I transmit between myself and my ISP is none of Bell's business.

Bell provides bulk transport of PPPoE packets. It has no business looking at the contents of those packets.

Bell is in the business of providing bandwidth. If it can't provide sufficient bandwith to support all the lines ISPs pay for, there is something definitely wrong.

What is really happening here is that Bell is scrambling to raise its DSL speeds to not look so pathetic against the cable companies. The only way its infrastructure can support this is by lowering throughput by the same amount that it increases the DSL sync rates.

It is ironic that Bell is using a terrible kludge called DSL (PPPoE over ATM over old copper) and that in the end, the weakest link in the chain isn't that ugly DSL kludge but Bell's own network which can't cope with all the new customers.

Essentially, Bell wants to be able market higher speeds without actually providing higher speeds except when you do HTTP.

Re: Nexxia throttling?

Fri, 21 Mar 2008 21:42:04 EDT

sbrook posted : When you've got multimillion customers, a few who actually take the step of complaining and quitting isn't even a blip in the ocean. This is why it's well beyond that. This really requires either true competition (of which there is none) or regulation.

Re: Nexxia throttling?

Fri, 21 Mar 2008 21:26:16 EDT

anon posted : What would probably, maybe, perhaps, be a good thing to include is canned letters (something the community can put together through ideas and compose) for the:

said by sbrook:

Your MPP / MLA
The Ontario Ministry of Government Services (Consumer Protection) if you're in Ontario or the equivalent in other provinces
Your MP
The Federal Industry Minister
{competition bureau}
The CCTS (Commissioner for Complaints for Telecom Services
{CRTC to make them aware the people are fed up of them doing nothing at all}

*If* enough "spam" goes out to be a nuisance, then maybe someone will raise an eyebrow.

I can't see bell caring what their users (especially non-users) have to say about a throttle that Bell has invested in.

They should mail/Email a Director in bell threaten to cancel any bell service they have and actually follow through with it. I can't see something as passive as a forum petition doing anything to raise their eyebrows personally.

Re: Nexxia throttling?

Fri, 21 Mar 2008 20:56:26 EDT

sbrook posted : There is an online petition for those interested in the Sympatico forum objecting to Bell throttling.

That said, online petitions aren't very effective and this probably won't be either ... but hey give it a shot.

The best way to make complaints about this and other issues is to write to

Your MPP / MLA
The Ontario Ministry of Government Services (Consumer Protection) if you're in Ontario or the equivalent in other provinces
Your MP
The Federal Industry Minister
The CCTS (Commissioner for Complaints for Telecom Services

Express you concern about the anti-competitive nature of throttling 3rd party ISPs and the lack of protection for the consumer in Bell's dealings with its customers.

Re: Nexxia throttling?

Fri, 21 Mar 2008 20:17:14 EDT

xmz posted : For what it's worth, I'm with Distributel and I am noticing a steady 30kb/s limit on any torrent that I try. As far as I know Distributel is a Bell reseller, not unlike TekSavvy. This is pretty recent as I remember that as soon as last week I was getting full speeds. I am located in KW.

Just to add on: If I attempt to grab something via FTP while I have a torrent client open, speeds are at a dismal 30kb/s as well. This is bullshit. :huh:

Re: Nexxia throttling?

Fri, 21 Mar 2008 17:03:13 EDT

bbwarrior posted :
I think ElectronicBox's cable service here in Quebec looks more and more tempting... I hope Videotron is not planning on following Nexxia in their foot steps.

Re: Nexxia throttling?

Fri, 21 Mar 2008 12:57:58 EDT

anon posted : Now, with the news that Rogers is applying the same 60-gig throttled limits as Sympatico, and with dissemination of a leaked Sympatico document announcing further changes to its bandwidth policies, she’s wondering if there’s more to the situation than meets the eye, with the phrase ‘price fixing’ front and center.

Full rumor story at:

»www.p2pnet.net/story/15361

Let the rumours fly.

This should also probably be front page news on dslr.

Should follow this up with as many wholesalers as possible to get their side of whats happening. hmmmmm

Anyone game for an interview?

Re: Nexxia throttling?

Fri, 21 Mar 2008 12:33:14 EDT

anon posted :

said by Acanac Inc:

Acanac has noticed profiles being lowered when they could support higher speeds.

Something needs to be done and this is probably one of the times where all you wholesellers need to pool your resources and fight back before you really get stepped on more.

Re: Nexxia throttling?

Fri, 21 Mar 2008 12:25:29 EDT

Acanac Inc posted : Although we have not yet had any complaints on our end about throttling, Acanac has noticed profiles being lowered when they could support higher speeds. This is happening more and more. This in it's self is a type of throttling.

Best Regards,
Paul
www.acanac.ca

Re: Nexxia throttling?

Fri, 21 Mar 2008 12:23:24 EDT

DKS posted : Here is what Rocky of TSI is saying in the thread referenced by him above.

quote:
After some discussions with Bell, while doing upgrades to zones that are under capacity, it looks like they've now started to implement at type of load balance system of sorts... I don't think it's a throttle, but it does seem they're spreading the pain from the looks of it right now.

We're hoping to get more details after the holiday weekend to see what the official plans are from them.

As a side note, we have no plans to throttle anything, so if anyone is experiencing anything remotely related to this, it would be before it hits our side... This looks like a load to upgrade planning issue right now with the Bell side of things....

We would have loved to have given a faster response on this one, but it's still not clear exactly what's going on or where to ask questions as of yet.

More to come shortly on this matter.

Rocky

--
Need-based health care not greed-based health care.

Re: Nexxia throttling?

Fri, 21 Mar 2008 12:20:28 EDT

DKS posted :

said by ISP_Worker :

I work for an ISP, and I deal with Sympatico/Bell everyday, dealing with tickets and troubles...

Just got off the phone, started with a Nexxia rep telling me that bandwidth is being shapped/slowed down for Sympatico AND DSL Resellers in regards to P2P traffic... I asked for confirmation, she placed me on hold, and came back saying that yes, this is true. Then I asked for a manager... she said she couldn't transfer me, but gave me a name and number to call, talked to that person, and she wouldn't come right out to say yes this is all true, but is not denying it, and tried to explain the impact P2P traffic has on all customers, whether they are on resellers or not...

I can't confirm that any of this is true... 1 person said it is, the 2nd higher up didn't denie it and tried hard to explain why something like this would be done if it were...

I looked around a few forums here to see if anything close to this had been reported... but I see nothing...

I have also heard this is true, from back channel conversation.
--
Need-based health care not greed-based health care.