Re: Official Response... in TekSavvy

said by Name96

"Bell is slowing down your online banking because they can't tell the difference between you downloading a movie and you managing your money."[/BQUOTE :

Downlaoding a movie IS managing your money :)]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20247071 Sat, 29 Mar 2008 11:40:13 EDT Re: Official Response... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20247063 jfmezei : >When Bell is inspecting packets, it only inspects the header
>information and then applies it's traffic shaping based on
>what it finds in the header.

I posted the links to the Ellacoya PDF files. The above is wrong.

DPI means going into the packet DATA to look for application signatures.

Inspecting headers: determining a file is C source code by looking at the file's extension (.c)

DPI: Searching the file's content for tell tale strings such as #include or #define or main(

Bell is doing DPI. And the Trafic shaping vendors's document clearly state that they go beyond the header and will work even for applications that use random port numbers or try to shield themselves as HTTP transactions.

Bell and that other devils are paying big money for those machines, and you can bet that as they collect traffic information, they will adjust their filters as they want. So when hjackers find a way around their expensive ellacoya boxes, Bell simply needs to add new filters to block the new technique.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20247063 Sat, 29 Mar 2008 11:37:42 EDT Re: Official Response... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20246982 BronsCon : I think they're referring to TekSavvy customers with only TS and Bell as ISP choices having an increased level of satisfaction with Bell service when they stop throttling THEIR lines.

I'm glad this doesn't affect me, but I've been following it since it started and let me tell you, if I thought I could get some large incendiary devices across the border, I'd consider helping you guys out. LOL (NSA, I'm freakin' kidding, ok?! Don't come arrest me, I'm not a turra-rist!)

I suggest talking amongst yourselves, finding out who among you works for the gas and electric companies and organizing as much infrastructure maintenance as possible, with emphasis on accidentally cutting as many Bell cables as possible; preferably their backbone links as well as last-mile cabling. ;)]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20246982 Sat, 29 Mar 2008 11:18:05 EDT Re: Official Response... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20246939 LiQuiD : And here I thought public services meant over the internet... oops. :uhh: :uhh

Teksavvy's smtp is a "private service" i suppose, in that only teksavvy clients can use it. Did they change the port? Yeah, exactly. Do what they (and many others) do and restrict access.

If you're really that concerned, have global access to only ssh, and use something like authpf through pf so that once you ssh to your firewall machine, you have complete access to everything. If someone doesn't login via ssh, no dice.

Anyway, just realize that YOU might think it's good practice to change a port. Doesn't make it a globally accepted good practice.

Hmm, my dns server is private, I think i'm gonna go change the port number on that... :p
--
Windows is the virus. Linux is the vaccine, FreeBSD is the CURE]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20246939 Sat, 29 Mar 2008 11:07:56 EDT Re: Official Response... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20246924 Name96 : Rocky, are you planning to seek an emergency injunction against Bell anytime soon?
--
Coridon Henshaw -=- »www.talisiorder.ca]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20246924 Sat, 29 Mar 2008 11:05:24 EDT Re: Official Response... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20246906 Stiffarm :

said by LiQuiD

:

Unless you have a _good_ reason to change a port number, don't.

Actually, you should be saying: Unless you have a _good_ reason to *not* to change a port number, do it.

A good reason not to change ports would include those public services you mentioned and wish to expose. For private services... move it.

Sorry for getting off topic on this.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20246906 Sat, 29 Mar 2008 11:01:58 EDT Re: Official Response... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20246791 LiQuiD :

said by Stiffarm

:

In order to use an encrypted protocol I will have to use it on a standard port. Otherwise this will get throttled. One of the first things I always do is move a service away from its standard port unless it is absolutely necessary to keep it there. This is common security "best practice."

Now I'm being forced to decide between opening myself up for attack, or having a service that will be ostensibly broken due to throttling.

Uhm, do tell me where you see that this is common best practice. If it was best practice, I doubt we'd have something like a listing of standard ports, and how exactly would email, http, ftp (ftp-data, ftp through proxy/firewall) et. al. work if the ports were all over the place?

If someone wanted to exploit a service on your system, changing the port wouldn't do much to avert it. Changing the port only prevents those "script kiddies" from gaining access, but in reality, keeping your system up to date and patching it when the patches are out will prevent that on it's own.

Unless you have a _good_ reason to change a port number, don't.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20246791 Sat, 29 Mar 2008 10:40:23 EDT Re: Official Response... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20246759 Name96 : Phone harassment is illegal and rarely effective.

But if you you only have a SIP phone number (e.g. Vonage) and your service doesn't work between 4pm and 2am, it might well be that 2:10am is the only time you can call to voice your displeasure.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20246759 Sat, 29 Mar 2008 10:33:50 EDT Re: Official Response... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20246741 anon : Shoot the messenger.

We are NOT talking about taking out anger on a nameless nobody Bell technician.

No, we are talking about people that sign things. Sign their name to documents officially.

I don't care what cockamamy letters are behind Jason's name, he's a somebody, even if he isn't the ultimately most ideal somebody.
Yeah, I'd rather be ringing the home phone of someone called a CEO or a President. Because we all know "VP" also stands for "target" when it's important for them to be one.

I've got no problem putting VPs in my sights though.

Let them realize the company spin isn't good enough out here at the sharp end. The natives aren't buying it.

And the best part, a lot of us tend to be up late a lot (downloading you understand). Piece of cake to phone someone at 3:15 in the bloody AM and ask if their fridge is running?]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20246741 Sat, 29 Mar 2008 10:30:23 EDT Re: Official Response... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20246705 UT_CK :

said by Name96

said by UT_CK

:

It is legal for the sake of managing a network to inspect the header information, but it is illegal to inspect the contents (the area between the packet header and trailer).

You are correct ! It is not illegal to inspect packet contents. There is however a Privacy Law in Canada, which prohibits divulging such information, other than by court order or through ATIP or through lawful disclosure. Also the inspection of those packets should not be used to compromise the integrity or privacy of the content.

CK
{:(B)]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20246705 Sat, 29 Mar 2008 10:19:35 EDT Re: Official Response... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20246671 Stiffarm :

said by Name96

:

Bell's traffic filters are currently configured to disrupt any protocol not explicitly recognized as normal. If Bell has not loaded a specific rule allowing--for example--some esoteric online game you might want to play, traffic for that game will be limited to 30KB/s and ping times will be forced into the one second range.

What we have now is nothing more than a 530KB/s web browsing service.

Yes, that is how I understand what is going on here. Here is the big problem for me. In order to use an encrypted protocol I will have to use it on a standard port. Otherwise this will get throttled. One of the first things I always do is move a service away from its standard port unless it is absolutely necessary to keep it there. This is common security "best practice."

Now I'm being forced to decide between opening myself up for attack, or having a service that will be ostensibly broken due to throttling.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20246671 Sat, 29 Mar 2008 10:09:44 EDT Re: Official Response... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20246588 mazhurg : This "letter" as you call it is totally worhtless, both legally and contractually.

Legally as:
1) It does not address your business but is a generic form letter.
2) This letter (written as a letter of intent) is not something you send business clients but employees.
3) There is no listings, other than a generic header as to which companies are affected.

Contractually as:
1) It has no metric specifying equipment that is affected, which clauses the changes are actionned under, what contract is affected.

All in all, this is a form letter that an employer would send staff to advise them of a company policy change.

Are you sure you actually have a contract with BCE? Because if you do, then Bell is quite obviously ignoring that little fact and should be quite a cornerstone in any court battle.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20246588 Sat, 29 Mar 2008 09:47:04 EDT Re: Official Response... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20246530 Name96 :

said by UT_CK

:

It is legal for the sake of managing a network to inspect the header information, but it is illegal to inspect the contents (the area between the packet header and trailer).

The whole point behind deep packet inspection is to look at the contents area to identify what application is in use. It has definitely not been established that inspecting packet contents is illegal as this is the exact method Bell, and the cable ISPs use to eliminate every protocol that they either can't identify or consider a threat to their business model.

Bell's traffic filters are currently configured to disrupt any protocol not explicitly recognized as normal. If Bell has not loaded a specific rule allowing--for example--some esoteric online game you might want to play, traffic for that game will be limited to 30KB/s and ping times will be forced into the one second range.

What we have now is nothing more than a 530KB/s web browsing service.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20246530 Sat, 29 Mar 2008 09:26:29 EDT Re: Official Response... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20246403 UT_CK : Just a little clarification on Packet Inspection.

All packets contain information which is constructed using the OSI model.

The last layer is the Applicatiuon Layer. There are seven layers .. ranging from the Physical layer right up to the Application layer. In between are layers which identify the type of protocols used to achieve the delivery of the packet.

Each packet contains a packet header, the packet header can be inspected to determine the nature of the packet and which protocols are being used to deliver it.

It is legal for the sake of managing a network to inspect the header information, but it is illegal to inspect the contents (the area between the packet header and trailer).

When Bell is inspecting packets, it only inspects the header information and then applies it's traffic shaping based on what it finds in the header. The trailer is used to delimit the packet and differentiate from the next packet.... where a new header packet is inspected.

All of this inspection "slows" down the traffic... since it has to be analysed and acted upon.

Regards,
CK]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20246403 Sat, 29 Mar 2008 08:28:25 EDT Re: Official Response... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20246374 UT_CK :

said by dbsanfte

:

I loathe Bell. They're worse than hemorrhoids. This just proves it.

Hemroids/Hemorrhoids are good, they serve a purpose. It's the inflammed ones that are not too pleasant (ie... When they turn into a ring of fire). haha

CK
{:(B)]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20246374 Sat, 29 Mar 2008 08:11:38 EDT Re: Official Response... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20246343 anon : if bell has to identify it for you to be unshaped , then encrypt your stuff to LOOK like its somehting thats ok
think about a html page as it looks, encrypt your rars,traffic and make it look exactly like a website.

there problem solved, now go do it.
in the end bell et all would have to traffic shape EVERYTHING
and when they do that it would 100% be fraud for them to advert 7 megabit or anything as it would not be.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20246343 Sat, 29 Mar 2008 07:55:44 EDT Re: Official Response... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20246215 matradley :

said by hidea

:

Why did it affect my Star Craft gaming? :(
Playing it around 4AM and I caused a lag in the game.

I don't even have anything P2P turned on.

That's hard to say then - it could have been anything. If you started anything that was encrypted like a VPN tunnel, NNTP, Encrypted SMTP, perhaps you triggered the deep packet inspection. Otherwise, perhaps there are some router problems?]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20246215 Sat, 29 Mar 2008 06:08:30 EDT Re: Official Response... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20246141 hidea : Why did it affect my Star Craft gaming? :(
Playing it around 4AM and I caused a lag in the game.

I don't even have anything P2P turned on. ]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20246141 Sat, 29 Mar 2008 05:00:24 EDT Re: Official Response... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20246126 liamoforange : Let me see if I am understanding the situation:

1. Bell owns a 20 lane highway

2. Bell leases TSI 6 lanes of said highway

3. TSI pays Bell for 6 lanes at 100km/h

4. Bell then states TSI's customers must only drive 4 cylinder car, in 4 lanes of said highway, at 90km/h during rush hour, even though they have bought access to 6 lanes.

5. TSI customers stay in their 6 paid for lanes but Bell says they are slowing down all the rush hour traffic

6. Bell is blaming this rush hour situation on "criminal behaviour"

7. The CBC is engaged in said "criminal behaviour"

8. TSI's contract lawyers didn't see this coming

9. TSI's contract lawyers still are TSI's contract lawyers

10. TSI's contract lawyers are the ones we are counting on to get us out of this situation

Cheers!]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20246126 Sat, 29 Mar 2008 04:40:13 EDT Re: Official Response... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20246119 nyt :

said by Taylortbb

:

Unfortunately encryption doesn't work, Bell throttles anything they can't identify..

Has anyone tried BT over ssh? That should work unless they throttle ssh as well, but it requires you to have a shell.
or http-tunnel.com, it looks nice.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20246119 Sat, 29 Mar 2008 04:29:14 EDT Re: Official Response... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20246075 Taylortbb :

said by nyt

:

»www.azureuswiki.com/index.php/Av···_shaping
maybe it has been mentionned already, but there is way too many messages on the issue to read them all!

Unfortunately encryption doesn't work, Bell throttles anything they can't identify.

funchords: No one knows the hardware for sure, but about 95% it's Ellacoya hardware. Bell has an investment in the company.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20246075 Sat, 29 Mar 2008 03:45:42 EDT Re: Official Response... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20246061 nyt : »www.azureuswiki.com/index.php/Av···_shaping
maybe it has been mentionned already, but there is way too many messages on the issue to read them all!]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20246061 Sat, 29 Mar 2008 03:32:35 EDT Re: Official Response... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20246018 funchords :

said by megahuts

:

And: How do you look at a packet's mapping?

I think you have to look at the packet itself.
Therefore Bell looks at the packet and checks (a portion of) the content.

If they're using Packet Mapping, then no, they don't need to inspect anything except for the IP portion of the header (the outside of the envelopes) -- which is appropriate for them to see.

But clearly they're using DPI to determine protocols like Remote Desktop Protocol, PPTP, SSH, etc.. So I'd just ignore the words "Packet Mapping." They've already provided you with better ammunition.
--
Robb Topolski -= funchords.com =- Hillsboro, Oregon
FCC Public Hearing on the Future of the Internet - Thursday, April 17th - Stanford Univ., Calif.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20246018 Sat, 29 Mar 2008 03:07:04 EDT Re: Official Response... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20246015 nyt : A few questions:
how much bandwidth TSI is saving now that throttling is in place? The saving is likely to be higher than what Bell is seeing on the retail size given that they stopped unlimited a while ago.
are't Bell business GAS users not throttled? Wholesalers should have the ability to sell non throttled GAS if it is the case (or force Bell to apply the same to all GAS as they pretend to be doing).]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20246015 Sat, 29 Mar 2008 03:05:08 EDT Re: Official Response... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20245975 funchords : "...identifies the packet mapping..." sounds like Arbor equipment. Does anyone know for sure what equipment or technology they are using ...

1. For the DPI part
2. For the throttling part

Also "...identifies the packet mapping..." does not explain any VPN slow-down. Packet mapping is a re-application of DDOS detection technology. VPN should look like a single unicast pipe.
--
Robb Topolski -= funchords.com =- Hillsboro, Oregon
FCC Public Hearing on the Future of the Internet - Thursday, April 17th - Stanford Univ., Calif.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20245975 Sat, 29 Mar 2008 02:50:51 EDT Re: Official Response... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20245945 Guspaz : Short-term, sure. But what about lost business?]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20245945 Sat, 29 Mar 2008 02:31:26 EDT Re: Official Response... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20245938 jpabboud :

said by Name96

:

Is it known where Bell has installed their traffic filters?

Are they installed between the ISP aggregation point and the ISP or somewhere closer to the customer?

Probably right after the BAS, before getting to the aggregation point.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20245938 Sat, 29 Mar 2008 02:29:01 EDT Re: Official Response... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20245920 Name96 :

said by jfmezei

:

HSA is also aggregated and fed to the ISP on the GigE lines.

Is it known where Bell has installed their traffic filters?

Are they installed between the ISP aggregation point and the ISP or somewhere closer to the customer?]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20245920 Sat, 29 Mar 2008 02:18:39 EDT Re: Official Response... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20245906 jpabboud :

said by R0CKY

:

Don't missenterpret the financial benefits. Both TSI and Bell will gain financially on the bottom line... that doesn't however make it right, and as you are pointing out, this isn't bandwidth/transit.

Why not negotiate for a broader deployment of HSA ? Is there any room to lower pricing... I know the setup fees are set in stone but what about the monthly fee?

I've got a few people including myself looking seriously at HSA.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20245906 Sat, 29 Mar 2008 02:10:48 EDT Re: Official Response... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20245898 Taylortbb :

said by derekm

said by TSI Marc

:

derekm,

It doesn't work that way. We would have to build a vpn network inside of the tunnel that Bell feeds to us since their equipment is in the middle.

The MTU on each packet would be way down, it causes many problems, it would be a massive pain to manage.

It's not at all a simple thing to setup on a large scale.

Hi Marc,

Thank you for your response.

I don't understand what your are saying. Mppe is *part of ppp framing*, and not an external protocol.

I think the fact that it is at the PPP level is what's causing the problem. The Bell BAS has to be able to read the information to see which ISP to route it to, and I don't think they're about to support encrypted PPP.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20245898 Sat, 29 Mar 2008 02:08:20 EDT Re: Official Response... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20245892 anon :

but does not monitor, track or access the data of your customers...

somehow when i read this part i saw an image of two parents promising a pony for their daughter when they forgot his/her birthday.

how they **** do we trust these ********* when they just decided to up and away w/ our P2P speeds? i need to move to Europe or something.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20245892 Sat, 29 Mar 2008 02:05:41 EDT Re: Official Response... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20245881 Turbinator : We wouldn't have to much angst with the throttling issue, if they would throttle our prices respectively.
You can not expect anyone to pay for 1st rate service, but receive 2nd rate quality.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20245881 Sat, 29 Mar 2008 01:58:50 EDT Re: Official Response... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20245867 R0CKY :

said by nydwarf1 :

Has this guy lost his mind? I love how companies use doublespeak to make it seem like they are doing something to benefit everyone when it's just to benefit them alone. Bell get your hands off our bandwidth!

Don't missenterpret the financial benefits. Both TSI and Bell will gain financially on the bottom line... that doesn't however make it right, and as you are pointing out, this isn't bandwidth/transit.
--
TSI Rocky - TekSavvy Solutions Inc.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20245867 Sat, 29 Mar 2008 01:54:07 EDT Re: Official Response... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20245866 jpabboud :

said by jfmezei

:

"dedicated" is perhaps not accurate. It is a permanent virtual circuit. It doesn't mean that the path is dedicated. HSA is also aggregated and fed to the ISP on the GigE lines.

Same as a T1/Ethernet connections, they're all aggregated and yes you're right it isn't dedicated as in the ISP has his own link going to the DSLAM but you get the idea. It sure is more dedicated than a PPPoE connection. Each HSA user is on a PVC of its own (correct me if I'm wrong) where PPPoE users share the same.

said by jfmezei

:

In terms of pricing, this is artificial price set by Bell to push people to that pesky PPPoE thing. Telus functions primarily in HSA mode for its customers and it doesn't cost it so much since it got software to make reassigning customers from one ISP to another mush easier. Bell requires a half dozen civil servants to push 632 paper forms in triplicate before it can be done.

It isn't the same when it comes to the provider though, big huge difference provisioning a PPPoE dsl and HSA. Bell sends a tech to install HSA and the service levels are different. You get what you pay for...

said by jfmezei

:

With 3 year contract (yes, ISPs have contracts with Bell), HSA is roughly $40 a month instead of $20. But there are circuit setup costs of about $200 of I remember. ( Tarif 5420)

I know when I met with Bell (long story was going to jump in the DSL biz) pricing was way higher than that for HSA. Even at $40 on a 3 yr contract, it's still twice as much.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20245866 Sat, 29 Mar 2008 01:54:01 EDT Re: Official Response... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20245848 anon : I realize that vpn and other encrypted traffic are known to be throttled right now (at least for some customers), but what about setting up a good ole fashioned proxy server?

I could be wrong, but I don't think that is encrypted and you could set it up to only acknowledge ip's from your network or usernames and passwords from your network.
Some programs still support proxy and there is a program out there that is free that works transparently on the clients machine. I forget the name but you load the program and then tell that program to load the desired program. All winsock communications are captured and sent via the proxy server.

Only thing is, you would need a few machines to satisfy your client size (21000 clients, 64xxx available ports per ip, etc...)

I know this shaping thing will take some time, and although I have somehow been temporary released from the clutch of throttling, but I believe this might be a non-shaped traffic solution in the meantime (April 7th is coming close pretty fast).]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20245848 Sat, 29 Mar 2008 01:46:04 EDT Re: Official Response... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20245842 anon : Has this guy lost his mind? I love how companies use doublespeak to make it seem like they are doing something to benefit everyone when it's just to benefit them alone. Bell get your hands off our bandwidth!]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20245842 Sat, 29 Mar 2008 01:42:49 EDT Re: Official Response... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20245835 jfmezei : >HSA is dedicated between dslam and provider, I don't see it
>getting filtered. The price tag actually gives you an idea on
>how much a fully dedicated port with dedicated bandwidth >would cost.

"dedicated" is perhaps not accurate. It is a permanent virtual circuit. It doesn't mean that the path is dedicated. HSA is also aggregated and fed to the ISP on the GigE lines.

In terms of pricing, this is artificial price set by Bell to push people to that pesky PPPoE thing. Telus functions primarily in HSA mode for its customers and it doesn't cost it so much since it got software to make reassigning customers from one ISP to another mush easier. Bell requires a half dozen civil servants to push 632 paper forms in triplicate before it can be done.

With 3 year contract (yes, ISPs have contracts with Bell), HSA is roughly $40 a month instead of $20. But there are circuit setup costs of about $200 of I remember. ( Tarif 5420)]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20245835 Sat, 29 Mar 2008 01:40:09 EDT Re: Official Response... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20245824 jfmezei : >There are rumors that Bell has architecture their traffic
>filter such that it can't be disabled for individual users or
>billing rate classes.

I have not checked the Sandvine specs. But the Ellacoya boxes pride themselves in being able to do passive requests to DHCP or RADIUS servers to get information on each subscriber and apply different thrittling profile depending on the radius information.

They can also collect personal information, quantity of data on a per application/per user. There are serious pruvacy implications on this.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20245824 Sat, 29 Mar 2008 01:36:04 EDT Re: Official Response... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20245742 jpabboud :

said by Name96

:

@TSI Marc:

What's the network path between a HSA customer and your systems? Does the traffic get unwrapped into something that Bell could feed to a traffic filter or do you send/receive raw ATM frames?

(this could provide some leads as to if HSA is filtered)

HSA is dedicated between dslam and provider, I don't see it getting filtered. The price tag actually gives you an idea on how much a fully dedicated port with dedicated bandwidth would cost. I know it has to do with service level agreements also but Bell probably will not throttle a $75-90 per mo DSL port (in a Residential HSA's case).]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20245742 Sat, 29 Mar 2008 01:09:29 EDT Re: Official Response... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20245736 mazhurg :

said by Name96

said by jpabboud

:

I think Bell's opening the door to a higher priced, unfiltered DSL port that would be more expansive and closer to reality in terms of todays bandwidth usage.

Is this like when MS was arguing that they could not uncouple IE from windows because they are too "intertwined"?

AH! :uhh:]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20245736 Sat, 29 Mar 2008 01:07:04 EDT Re: Official Response... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20245723 Name96 :

said by jpabboud

:

I think Bell's opening the door to a higher priced, unfiltered DSL port that would be more expansive and closer to reality in terms of todays bandwidth usage.

There are rumors that Bell has architecture their traffic filter such that it can't be disabled for individual users or billing rate classes. If this is true, then Bell couldn't offer unfiltered service at a higher price even if they wanted to.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20245723 Sat, 29 Mar 2008 01:03:41 EDT Re: Official Response... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20245710 Name96 : @TSI Marc:

What's the network path between a HSA customer and your systems? Does the traffic get unwrapped into something that Bell could feed to a traffic filter or do you send/receive raw ATM frames?

(this could provide some leads as to if HSA is filtered)]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20245710 Sat, 29 Mar 2008 01:00:29 EDT Re: Official Response... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20245648 HiVolt :

said by jfmezei

:

2- Remember that GAS HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE INTERNET.
It a a raw data service that transports packets from a end user at whatever speed his DSL sync is at to the ISP.

The CRTC does not regulate the internet. But it regulates GAS. So GAS *cannot* be the internet.

Excellent point JF...
--
GOLF LEAFS GOLF!]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20245648 Sat, 29 Mar 2008 00:47:16 EDT Re: Official Response... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20245631 jpabboud :

said by Arbalister

:

What they are affecting is the 'last mile' bandwidth - the route through the Bell ATM cloud that links the end user to their ISP. Really, honestly, they're not filtering the internet at all. They are filtering what people bring in from the internet, onto Bells private network. This is what's so wrong about it - companies like TSI have leased specific amounts of bandwidth in that cloud.

I don't think so, I think the 20 some dollars per user charge barely covers the DSLAM port and some of the transport for that user. Problem is Bell probably failed to predict the average bandwidth per user, or terribly underestimated the per user bandwidth growth in this short timespan.

I think Bell's opening the door to a higher priced, unfiltered DSL port that would be more expansive and closer to reality in terms of todays bandwidth usage.

The question is now, are ISP's willing to pay more than the CRTC regulated 20 some dollars per DSL port to provide a different "unfiltered" service? ]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20245631 Sat, 29 Mar 2008 00:42:52 EDT Re: Official Response... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20245626 Arbalister :

said by jfmezei

This is a very valid point and one that the assorted news agencies haven't really picked up on yet.

Our beef isn't with Bell Sympatico at all. It's with Bell Nexxia. Nexxia is *not* an ISP. ISP's are *NOT* (well...sympatico is...or was, perhaps they don't have to now) throttling. Nexxia is a wholesaler of infrastructure that is subject to tariff and CRTC regulation. Nexxia is the monopoly holder of last mile highspeed connectivity on the phone lines. Any claims that they are doing this for 'fair use' are bogus because the affected companies have leased the use of the affected bandwidth. It's not up to Nexxia to police it, just to deliver the service level that they are paid to deliver.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20245626 Sat, 29 Mar 2008 00:40:59 EDT Re: Official Response... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20245624 derekm :

said by TSI Marc

Hi Marc,

Thank you for your response.

I don't understand what your are saying. Mppe is *part of ppp framing*, and not an external protocol.

It is not a VPN tunnel, which I understand is difficult to implement.

The encryption/decryption is done at the PPP access concentrator as part of the PPP framing process.

I could be mistaken, but it is my understanding that your equipment terminates the PPP connection.

»www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc3078.txt

Check out section 3, pp3:
"The maximum length of the MPPE datagram transmitted over a PPP link is the same as the maximum length of the information field of a PPP encapsulated packet."

An then section 3.1, Packet Format:
I see 4 bytes of overhead, on that packet. Assuming that we need to keep the other bytes of overhead we will have a reduced MTU of 1488, vs 1492. I don't think the effects are as exaggerated as you think.

I would be glad to help test the setup... I may be able to give you pointers on how to set up your RADIUS server (if you are using freeradius), but I'm a little rusty on my JunOS. ;)

Anyways, I've already beat the horse dead. I will stop now.

I just hope someone will actually look into what it would take to enable this on your access concentrator (I suspect two config commands on it, and a few lines in your radius server config), instead of flat-out rejecting this approach.

radius.conf:
mschap {
use_mppe = yes
}]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20245624 Sat, 29 Mar 2008 00:40:29 EDT Re: Official Response... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20245586 LiQuiD :

said by Arbalister

:

...an equally valid point. Don't get me wrong, I'm not a pessimist or anything, I sincerely think/hope that this cannot be accepted as "the way it's going to be."

I just hate assumptions like that, like a pet peave or something. Just tonight, my gf said "Awe, the habs are gonna lose, there's 35 seconds left, they'll probably get scored on in the empty net." I was fuming, telling her you can never count them out, and that 35 seconds is an eternity. Habs scored. Check anything but TSN (bell operated) for the rest of that story.

Early in the year, the habs were playing TO, and it was tied late in the third when my dad said, with like 2-3 min left, oh good, it's gonna go to overtime, I'm gonna go get my coffee. I was boiling up inside. Next thing you know, I think Steen scored a really dumb goal, and the laffs won.

said by jfmezei

:

The CRTC does not regulate the internet. But it regulates GAS. So GAS *cannot* be the internet.

AWESOME point, and truly trial lawyer-like way of breaking it down. I love it!]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20245586 Sat, 29 Mar 2008 00:27:43 EDT Re: Official Response... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20245581 jfmezei : 1- If this is the only official communicatiosn Bell will make to its customers (the ISPs), then the vagueness of the announcement is worthy to bring up to the CRTC.

Bell is essentially telling ISPs that they are to play with traffic with undefined speeds, undefined protocols, undefined application signatures they are looking for. ISPs were not even told what speeds the throttled traffic would be, whether it would be slowed down, or whether fake packets would be inserted into the data stream.

2- Remember that GAS HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE INTERNET.
It a a raw data service that transports packets from a end user at whatever speed his DSL sync is at to the ISP.

The CRTC does not regulate the internet. But it regulates GAS. So GAS *cannot* be the internet.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20245581 Sat, 29 Mar 2008 00:27:03 EDT Re: Official Response... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20245576 Arbalister :

said by jpabboud

:

Can someone ask Bell why they would limit wholesalers when these guys are using their own bandwidth to begin with ? Or are they talking about the bandwidth on their internal net between the DSLAMS and Bell's internal network.

What they are affecting is the 'last mile' bandwidth - the route through the Bell ATM cloud that links the end user to their ISP. Really, honestly, they're not filtering the internet at all. They are filtering what people bring in from the internet, onto Bells private network. This is what's so wrong about it - companies like TSI have leased specific amounts of bandwidth in that cloud. For all intents, they own it. Its just like when you rent a house - for all intents, you own it. Even the landlord needs to provide you written notice when he's going to set foot in it. The landlord is expect to maintain it, but if he ever told you that you can't have pizza delivered anymore, you'd laugh at him.

Bell just told us we can't have Pizza delivered.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20245576 Sat, 29 Mar 2008 00:25:53 EDT Re: Official Response... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20245564 Name96 :

said by Scrappy2

:

So am I led to believe that Bell is looking at private material(packets) ?

That depends on what your definition of 'look' is. They can't figure out your banking transactions because that traffic is encrypted. The most they can do is figure out which bank you use and when you login to your bank's online portal.

They're certainly able to figure out how much you download, and by what protocol (i.e. by HTTP, FTP, BitTorrent, NNTP/Usenet, IRC DCC, etc). They're also able to figure out what websites you visit and what pages you read. Note, however, that *every* ISP can do this and it is highly unlikely Bell will be logging this information unless they're keeping records for the RCMP, CSIS or the CSE.

(There is in my view a high probability that some website accesses are logged for the benefit of the CSE but this is tangential to Bell traffic shaping)]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20245564 Sat, 29 Mar 2008 00:23:20 EDT Re: Official Response... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20245546 jpabboud :
Can someone ask Bell why they would limit wholesalers when these guys are using their own bandwidth to begin with ? Or are they talking about the bandwidth on their internal net between the DSLAMS and Bell's internal network.

In that case it looks like Bell is in worse shape than we thought, if they can't keep upgrading their internal network. We're not talking IP bandwidth, what kind of BW do they have between the remotes and CO's ? If the links are limited it's the only way I can see a justification for what they're doing to wholesalers. But then it should only affect subscribers on specific remote DSLAMS.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20245546 Sat, 29 Mar 2008 00:19:24 EDT Re: Official Response... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20245545 Arbalister :

said by LiQuiD

said by Arbalister

:

[snip]...Independant ISP's have been waiting years for one of Bell's anticompetitive maneuvers to blow up in their faces in a massively public way. I don't think that the CRTC and the Competition Bureau are going to have any choices in this case...[snip]

Too true - but as I've said before, the only thing the CRTC fears more then losing their Bell handouts is having to justify their existance to Ottawa. :-P When the public is dumping on their MPs, and big trade unions are getting on the bandwagon, there's going to be some really sweaty palms in the CRTC.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20245545 Sat, 29 Mar 2008 00:19:16 EDT Re: Official Response... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20245520 Scrappy2 : So am I led to believe that Bell is looking at private material(packets) ? bank calls etc?
If this is the case can we not as customers open cases against bell for spying ?infringing on our personal information?
Someone should check into this to really see if they are doing this as I don't see that would be justified in keeping up quality of service.
I do see it as a privacy issue and would feel pissed off beyond belief.
I'd like to know how they would justify this as I've not signed up with Bell have no contract with Bell and don't see how they can do this to customers that don't even have a contract with them.
If anything shouldn't our isp if at all be the ones to check in on packets ?
seems they are infringing on privates citizens rights with no reason to do so since the set up is not even owned by them.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20245520 Sat, 29 Mar 2008 00:14:13 EDT Re: Official Response... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20245507 LiQuiD :

said by Arbalister

Assumption is the mother of all F-ups. I don't trust for a second that it will be that simple with bell involved. It is bell, more than capital one, that should be singing "hands in your pockets" to various forms of gov't.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20245507 Sat, 29 Mar 2008 00:10:58 EDT Re: Official Response... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20245499 megahuts :

said by LiQuiD

:

If Bell can see your interactions with your bank, you should be kicking your bank's ass, before bell. That stuff ought to be encrypted.

my $0,02

Agreed, the bank better encrypt the data. However, the crux of the issue isnt if the traffic is encrypted or not. Most users dont know the difference between HTTP & HTTPS.

The key to this is relying on the publics inability to understand technical jargon.

I say: "Bell is looking at your online banking activities"

Bell replies: "We do not monitor your online banking activities. We use our Data Packet Inspection to identify the packet mapping of P2P/BT traffic" Bell cannot refute 'my' statement.

What is Joe Public going to remember/understand?

Basically, this is a FUD approach (fear, uncertainty, doom). (See the American electoral process for many great examples of FUD in action!)]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20245499 Sat, 29 Mar 2008 00:09:22 EDT Re: Official Response... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20245497 Arbalister :

said by ultracat

:

Is the CBC a Canadian enough company for ya? : ) Haven't you heard that only about a week ago the CBC began to provide publically funded tv shows via bittorrent (first show was Greatest Prime Minister or something like that). So, now Bell is screwing Canadian taxpayers directly by making it unbearable/impossible to access cultural, public domain material distributed by our public broadcaster.

Yeah, that's the beauty of the corner Bell has painted itself into. See...it chose to do this the same time the CBC chose to legitmize bittorrent, immediately after the Heritage Ministry called for net neutrality so that companies like CBC can use p2p networks to further their reach...Michael Giest's "perfect storm." Just as people are getting the message "use Bittorrent for legitimate business, Bell jumps up and down and paints a target on themselves, screaming "look at me, I'm your biggest threat!"

It's about time. Independant ISP's have been waiting years for one of Bell's anticompetitive maneuvers to blow up in their faces in a massively public way. I don't think that the CRTC and the Competition Bureau are going to have any choices in this case.

Of course, they react at about half the speed of continental drift....]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20245497 Sat, 29 Mar 2008 00:08:10 EDT Re: Official Response... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20245481 TSI Marc : derekm,

It doesn't work that way. We would have to build a vpn network inside of the tunnel that Bell feeds to us since their equipment is in the middle.

The MTU on each packet would be way down, it causes many problems, it would be a massive pain to manage.

It's not at all a simple thing to setup on a large scale.
--
TSI Marc - TekSavvy Solutions Inc.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20245481 Sat, 29 Mar 2008 00:06:26 EDT Re: Official Response... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20245468 Name96 :

said by LiQuiD

:

If Bell can see your interactions with your bank, you should be kicking your bank's ass, before bell. That stuff ought to be encrypted.

Yeah, that's a blind ally that should be ignored.

The tack to take on interference with banking is that some people can only connect over HTTPS at 30kbytes. "Bell is slowing down your online banking because they can't tell the difference between you downloading a movie and you managing your money."

This has the potential to cost serious money for people who trade on the markets from home. If you're trading derivatives, having your trades hung up for minutes due to traffic slowing could cost you your day's revenues. "Bell's latest move in their war on file sharing could cost you a day's wages..."

Teksavvy needs to hire the best PR firm they can afford. Unless Teksavvy can seize the upper hand in the propaganda war, Bell will win the whole war outright. It doesn't matter if Bell loses this round of the legal war if they can get the public on side to have the laws changed to be more favorable to Bell's interests.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20245468 Sat, 29 Mar 2008 00:03:10 EDT Re: Official Response... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20245461 TSI Marc :

said by TakeTheFifth

:

(c) An ADSL AHSSPI provides a DS-3, OC-3 or
10/100/400/1000 Mbps service demarcation interface,
subject to a contract period of 1, 2, or 3 years.

Rocky, how do you interface with Bell ?

I'm asking because 10/100/400/1000 Mbps are burstable (read: up to). DS-3 and OC-3 are NOT. So they are true 45 and 155 Mbps. Or am I reading this wrong ?

Phil

We have 5x 1000Mbps + 1x 100Mbps links at present with a 6th gig being lit up in the next few weeks.

The thing is that we are right in the core of the network at 151 Front St. in Toronto. In this building there is no shortage of capacity. That it be burstable or not has really very little significance in this location. It's virtually dedicated.
--
TSI Marc - TekSavvy Solutions Inc.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20245461 Sat, 29 Mar 2008 00:02:20 EDT Re: Official Response... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20245455 ultracat :

said by megahuts

:

Ok, it seems to me Bell has explicitly specified they are shaping "P2P file sharing and bit torrent applications".

Does anyone know of a company that directly profits using "P2P / BT"?
(I know World of Warcraft updates are sent out on BT)

What we need is a company whose business model is destroyed by Bell's actions, who was already in direct competition with Bell. (It shouldnt be too hard to find one in competition with Bell, they have their dirty fingers in everything!)

Ideally, it is a Canadian company.

(TekSavvy doesnt count, as their business model is treat their customers with respect, and Bell can never harm that!)

Is the CBC a Canadian enough company for ya? : ) Haven't you heard that only about a week ago the CBC began to provide publically funded tv shows via bittorrent (first show was Greatest Prime Minister or something like that). So, now Bell is screwing Canadian taxpayers directly by making it unbearable/impossible to access cultural, public domain material distributed by our public broadcaster.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20245455 Sat, 29 Mar 2008 00:01:01 EDT Re: Official Response... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20245451 derekm :

said by R0CKY

:

the more you people can suggest to work with the better (ie: any new angles for making them stop).

Well, I'm beating a dead horse now it seems, and I should be the one Moving On..., but seriously, no one for TekSavvy has said, "we technically cannot allow encryption on your PPPoE connection via mppe because our [insert random equipment here] does not support it"

It's a matter of the RADIUS server allowing MSCHAPv2, and your access concentrator supporting mppe, that is all. Two lines in my ppp.conf file. The CPU on the access concentrator might go through the roof, but hey you won't know until you try it out.

*Take P2P out of the argument all together.*

It will be a lot easier to argue that your customers should be allow unfettered secure access to your network, and it is a lot easier to explain to non-technical people.

In fact, Bell may not even be shaping this type of traffic right now.

Whaddya say R0CKY?]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20245451 Sat, 29 Mar 2008 00:00:06 EDT Re: Official Response... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20245444 Arbalister :

said by TobiasFunke

:

What might prove helpful is to to paint a picture of the infrastructure involved. Something like a Visio diagram outlining how TekSavvy connects into Bell's equipment, what exactly is regulated by the CRTC and even showing the Sympatico infrastructure as a separate entity.

Found this, it'll be close though some of the terms might change. What we're seeing is throttling in the area labelled "ATM Network" at the very least, possible even so far down as "your local CO." The Bell segments would be the two CO's and the ATM Network. Replace "ACME" with TSI and "Upstream Internet Provider with, oh, Cogent, Peer1, etc...

Diagram

]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20245444 Fri, 28 Mar 2008 23:58:43 EDT Re: Official Response... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20245421 Inssomniak :

said by mazhurg

:

Rocky,

How do you like your new status as a Sympatico reseller, since it appears that this is what this letter appears to be saying even as it says wholesale...

The thought of this makes me puke, Rocky and TSI have built an ISP, with all their own equipment and money, and earned respect through good customer relations, to just become basically as mazhurg says here..

A Bell Sympatico Reseller.

Now THAT would piss me off.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20245421 Fri, 28 Mar 2008 23:52:41 EDT Re: Official Response... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20245401 anon : »www.cbc.ca/technology/story/2008···?ref=rss

here is an article]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20245401 Fri, 28 Mar 2008 23:48:16 EDT Re: Official Response... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20245378 LiQuiD :

said by R0CKY

said by megahuts

:

Other interesting angles to attack this from a PR perspective.

"Bell is monitoring your online transactions with your bank!"

"Bell is monitoring your VOIP phone calls!"

Now, the use of the word monitor is dependent on a couple of definitions.
Monitor: electronic equipment that is used to check the quality or content of electronic transmissions

And: How do you look at a packet's mapping?

I think you have to look at the packet itself.
Therefore Bell looks at the packet and checks (a portion of) the content.

Furthermore, Bell has to look at each packet coming out of your computer.
Therefore Bell monitors your internet traffic, including banking/voip.

Put that on the news... and see Bell squirm!

Interesting thoughts.... tx!

If Bell can see your interactions with your bank, you should be kicking your bank's ass, before bell. That stuff ought to be encrypted.

my $0,02]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20245378 Fri, 28 Mar 2008 23:43:07 EDT Re: Official Response... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20245368 TakeTheFifth : (c) An ADSL AHSSPI provides a DS-3, OC-3 or
10/100/400/1000 Mbps service demarcation interface,
subject to a contract period of 1, 2, or 3 years.

Rocky, how do you interface with Bell ?

I'm asking because 10/100/400/1000 Mbps are burstable (read: up to). DS-3 and OC-3 are NOT. So they are true 45 and 155 Mbps. Or am I reading this wrong ?

Phil]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20245368 Fri, 28 Mar 2008 23:40:36 EDT Re: Official Response... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20245341 Candoo3 :

said by megahuts

:

Ideally, it is a Canadian company.
(TekSavvy doesnt count, as their business model is treat their customers with respect, and Bell can never harm that!)

TSI does count, as does any company that has to pass their data thru the Bell network, and this would include the companies that TSI resells to. At present, the REPUTATION of any of these ISP's is at risk (maybe this is part of the Bell game?). Many Sympatico users made an exodus to these other ISP's, for greener un-throttled pastures. How long will it be before the client base of these ISP's begin to drop, and their profits. The idea of competition, is to offer a unique service for a unique pricing, to out-do the competition. TSI can no longer do this bc of Bell's tactics. If that isn't legally considered anti-competitive, then somethings wrong, especially since the ISP's have to depend on Bell's copper. In a sense, even a conflict of interest on Bell's part.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20245341 Fri, 28 Mar 2008 23:37:07 EDT Re: Official Response... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20245323 Doci : Is this a joke?]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20245323 Fri, 28 Mar 2008 23:33:21 EDT Re: Official Response... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20245321 R0CKY :

said by megahuts

Interesting thoughts.... tx!
--
TSI Rocky - TekSavvy Solutions Inc.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20245321 Fri, 28 Mar 2008 23:33:07 EDT Re: Official Response... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20245302 qweloo :

said by dbsanfte

:

I loathe Bell. They're worse than hemorrhoids. This just proves it.

I want that monopoly split up. Turn nexxia into its own firm, not just severed but DISMEMBERED from Bell corporate. Make Sympatico buy service from nexxia in the same manner that wholesalers do.

And finally, send each and every person who made this throttling decision to the gulag.

Maybe the goulag is a little too lenient.

Seeing the outrage out there ... Just a century ago ... There would be talks of lynching.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20245302 Fri, 28 Mar 2008 23:28:58 EDT Re: Official Response... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20245265 megahuts : Other interesting angles to attack this from a PR perspective.

"Bell is monitoring your online transactions with your bank!"

"Bell is monitoring your VOIP phone calls!"

Now, the use of the word monitor is dependent on a couple of definitions.
Monitor: electronic equipment that is used to check the quality or content of electronic transmissions

And: How do you look at a packet's mapping?

I think you have to look at the packet itself.
Therefore Bell looks at the packet and checks (a portion of) the content.

Furthermore, Bell has to look at each packet coming out of your computer.
Therefore Bell monitors your internet traffic, including banking/voip.

Put that on the news... and see Bell squirm!]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20245265 Fri, 28 Mar 2008 23:21:14 EDT Re: Official Response... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20245241 anon : PPPoE Access Concentrator: bas6-ottawa23
is what i'm connected to and i'm yet to be throttled tonight, i have been for the past 5 or so nights.. It's kind of odd isn't it? I thought this was an every day deal from the times indicated in that response?

]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20245241 Fri, 28 Mar 2008 23:16:10 EDT Re: Official Response... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20245173 Jean_22 : Linux distros are affected.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20245173 Fri, 28 Mar 2008 23:03:12 EDT Re: Official Response... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20245168 megahuts : Ok, it seems to me Bell has explicitly specified they are shaping "P2P file sharing and bit torrent applications".

Does anyone know of a company that directly profits using "P2P / BT"?
(I know World of Warcraft updates are sent out on BT)

What we need is a company whose business model is destroyed by Bell's actions, who was already in direct competition with Bell. (It shouldnt be too hard to find one in competition with Bell, they have their dirty fingers in everything!)

Ideally, it is a Canadian company.

(TekSavvy doesnt count, as their business model is treat their customers with respect, and Bell can never harm that!)]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20245168 Fri, 28 Mar 2008 23:02:18 EDT Re: Official Response... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20245154 dbsanfte : I loathe Bell. They're worse than hemorrhoids. This just proves it.

I want that monopoly split up. Turn nexxia into its own firm, not just severed but DISMEMBERED from Bell corporate. Make Sympatico buy service from nexxia in the same manner that wholesalers do.

And finally, send each and every person who made this throttling decision to the gulag.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20245154 Fri, 28 Mar 2008 22:59:38 EDT Re: Official Response... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20245077 NiGHTS : That is a nice diagram. But I would somehow even simplify it further. Compared to everything else, the Bell piece should be the smallest. You wouldn't want the naive thinking that Bell is doing more than they actually are.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20245077 Fri, 28 Mar 2008 22:46:12 EDT Re: Official Response... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20244994 anon : Something like this?

]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20244994 Fri, 28 Mar 2008 22:31:45 EDT Re: Official Response... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20244983 Mersault : Skype doesn't do 911. You're certainly not going to get 911 service from any VoIP service that doesn't give you a phone number, and then it's usually 'Basic 911' meaning you get sent to a national call center where they take you info down first, then send you to your local 911 center.

Some VoIP providers do provide 'Enhanced 911,' where all this info is preloaded. Primus is one such company (full disclosure: I work for Primus). If a VoIP customer with E911 were to experience problems placing a call, that would be more significant.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20244983 Fri, 28 Mar 2008 22:30:24 EDT Re: Official Response... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20244962 Dr_Ellis : What you need to do is target issues the public can understand. They can't understand the issues behind P2P. They will understand if they're told that Bell is preventing employees from working from home and that Bell's disruption of VOIP traffic could have potentially lethal consequences by preventing VOIP calls to 911. They will understand that interfering with the ability of people to work from home is dangerous to the economy.

And this is a serious issue.. much more important than the p2p issue by far.I know a couple people on a dry loop connection and this would seriously affect thier liveleyhood and/or personal safety if there were an emergency requiring a potentially dropped 911 skype(I meant voip.. sorry i had skype on the brain) call during peak hours. Im suprised they didnt take that into consideration to begin with...]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20244962 Fri, 28 Mar 2008 22:26:29 EDT Re: Official Response... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20244931 Name96 : @R0cky: Can you get a confirmed word from Bell on if HSA non-PPPoE links are also crippled?

As for strategies, you'll get a lot of traction real quick with the relevant government bodies and the media if you scream loudly about how Bell's blunt instrument is blocking VPN access and VOIP/Vonage and Skype. Don't concentrate on the ethics of P2P or network neutrality--it'll just go over everyone's heads.

If you make a case to the public on the grounds that P2P shouldn't be blocked you'll get caught up in arguments over if P2P is legitimate or not. This is an irrelevant distraction that few people in the media or public can really understand.

What you need to do is target issues the public can understand. They can't understand the issues behind P2P. They will understand if they're told that Bell is preventing employees from working from home and that Bell's disruption of VOIP traffic could have potentially lethal consequences by preventing VOIP calls to 911. They will understand that interfering with the ability of people to work from home is dangerous to the economy.

People care about their jobs and being able to get an ambulance if they need one. Make the point that Bell is getting in the way of this and you'll put them on the defensive very quickly.

Get the VOIP telcos and companies who have a lot of work-from-home telecommuters on side if you can. This is their battle too.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20244931 Fri, 28 Mar 2008 22:21:03 EDT Re: Official Response... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20244884 avernar : No end user can beat Mersault and his triple exhaust.. er.. pipe rig! :)]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20244884 Fri, 28 Mar 2008 22:11:59 EDT Re: Official Response... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20244868 Mersault :

said by the cerberus

:

"on another note, check it out
»/archive/teksavvy.com
im the fasted unthrottled user on teksavvy :)

Sorry buddy...]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20244868 Fri, 28 Mar 2008 22:08:53 EDT Re: Official Response... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20244849 anon : Would a mass amount of complaints to the CRTC make a difference? Does the CRTC have any say over internet? I know they take things seriously, I sent a complaint about rogers cable TV to them and within 2 days I had someone in management calling me to fix everything. Maybe if everyone complained to the right people something might happen.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20244849 Fri, 28 Mar 2008 22:03:41 EDT Re: Official Response... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20244842 NiGHTS : I like the idea of a creating a diagram. Consider creating a nice simple diagram of the network. Show that Teksavvy in fact uses Peer1, not Bell, except for the "last mile problem". Show that Teksavvy is not a reseller. Give the press a simple example. 99% of the people don't know how this works. Send this diagram to the press and to the governing body.

And before you send it out make sure your lawyers okay it, just so you burned in a trial.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20244842 Fri, 28 Mar 2008 22:02:36 EDT Re: Official Response... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20244829 avernar :

said by R0CKY

:

Bell Carrier is a sub of Bell Canada.... This was a Bell Canada decision.

I don't know the corporate structure of Bell but Senior VP implies that the President, CTO and CEO are the only ones above him in regards to this decision. If they told him what to do, he didn't do his job by telling them what an extremely bad idea this was going to be.

And if he wasn't part of the decision making process, what the hell are they paying him to do? Golf?

All I'm saying is that in my opinion he's not blameless for this. I could be wrong. He could have been extremely opposed to this and fought tooth and nail to prevent it. But I doubt it, too many stock options/bonuses to risk.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20244829 Fri, 28 Mar 2008 22:00:00 EDT Re: Official Response... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20244795 anon : They do not mention in their letter that they are currently launching an online video store for digital downloads and already have an online music store. Do they find it necessary to throttle their own legitimate downloads or just every one else's? When they say "to ensure we deliver bandwidth fairly to all customers" what do they mean by "fairly?" and what is their system of bandwith delivery? ]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20244795 Fri, 28 Mar 2008 21:55:48 EDT Re: Official Response... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20244767 Dr_Ellis : And furthermore, If my foot were to represent a full Gigabyte I'd like to demonstrate my bandwith speeds through a little upload of my own design... Just to show him what us paying suscribers feel like looking at our "hope it hits 500k" download speeds....]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20244767 Fri, 28 Mar 2008 21:48:46 EDT Re: Official Response... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20244722 Antonin : You don't run a successful business by neglecting to plan. Bell has clearly demonstrated (hell, they've admitted it) that they fell down when it comes to planning. Also, by not informing their "resellers" in advance (even under non-disclosure, if necessary) they've clearly demonstrated that they don't trust anyone. ]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20244722 Fri, 28 Mar 2008 21:42:21 EDT Re: Official Response... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20244687 R0CKY :

said by avernar

said by R0CKY

:

This is a Bell issue... John is only the messenger in this.

Bell Carrier is a sub of Bell Canada.... This was a Bell Canada decision.
--
TSI Rocky - TekSavvy Solutions Inc.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20244687 Fri, 28 Mar 2008 21:37:24 EDT Re: Official Response... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20244685 anon : Gentlemen.
I've been leaving in canada for the last 2 years.
I can't deny that even if canadian people are vrey nice, I do miss my country ; for the food first, and the internet connection :!
i used to pay $45 (including tax) for a 23Mo download 800ko upload connection, with a dsl/routeur/wifi + 100 tv channels, free phone (Voip) to somethiong like 28 countries included !
wanna check ? just go to www.free.fr.
that to say, that internet is slow and expensive, even if DSL montreal is the cheapest one, and don't have to complain about it.
BUT Bell will never open bandwidth !
Too bad.
can't wait to be back to my root.
Regards.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20244685 Fri, 28 Mar 2008 21:37:19 EDT Re: Official Response... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20244681 mazhurg : Another interesting point.

In your contract with BCE, is there a mention as to who will manage IP network services? If it is, and BCE has agreed that you are responsible to manage your traffic, then they are now saying here that you are not an independant entity but "all your bases belong to us" as they are now assuming control of managing your traffic.

...."last week, we initiated similar traffic management for uor wholesale users as well" - Notice that they say USERS, not partners, nor customers. In effect that are saying that you are no different than a sympatico user.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20244681 Fri, 28 Mar 2008 21:36:56 EDT Re: Official Response... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20244671 Gwai Lo Dan : I sent a letter to Mr. Sweeney. He can delete if he wants.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20244671 Fri, 28 Mar 2008 21:35:44 EDT Re: Official Response... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20244641 Dr_Ellis : the guy's a moron.. "uhh.. I lied to you and ripped you off... sorry.. SOME people will get what they pay for tho.. so get bent.. Thanks for the cash suckers." is what read off that.. Discracefull...]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20244641 Fri, 28 Mar 2008 21:30:10 EDT Re: Official Response... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20244635 TobiasFunke : What might prove helpful is to to paint a picture of the infrastructure involved. Something like a Visio diagram outlining how TekSavvy connects into Bell's equipment, what exactly is regulated by the CRTC and even showing the Sympatico infrastructure as a separate entity.

It's difficult for the average person - myself included - to accurately see the whole picture. When someone says TSI is a wholesaler, that gives the immediate impression that they are resellers of the "Sympatico" package, which we know is seriously incorrect. A nice Visio diagram to illustrate the exact arrangement visually would be valuable. I'm happy to put one together, but I'd need some specifics on what connects where exactly - I'm not entirely sure how things are setup.

I think it's also important to launch a website with as much truthful information to counteract the Bell spin on this matter. Facebook is great, but a legitimate website with 3rd party ISP backing would be even better. This way if you want to introduce someone to the issue, you can give them a brief primer and point them to the website for more authoritative, accurate information.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20244635 Fri, 28 Mar 2008 21:29:09 EDT Re: Official Response... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20244617 Black Moon : What made me laugh is this: "We understand the difficulty this action has caused for you and your customers who are P2P
users, but the majority of your end users will experience an increased level of satisfaction. We
regret the fact that we did not advise you in advance of taking this action, but the action was
necessary to allow for a more fair allocation of bandwidth for all Canadian internet users."

What does he mean 'regret the fact that we did not advise you in advance'? Was it really that difficult to do? No, they wanted to do it behind our backs and hope nobody would find out. They failed.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20244617 Fri, 28 Mar 2008 21:25:57 EDT Re: Official Response... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20244616 iconfat :

said by mr_hexen

:

this "back haul", is it shared with Sympatico? if it is NOT and is just for WHOLESELLERS, maybe a signed letter from all 3rd party ISP's stating we have no complaints that suggest congestion and do not wish to have our traffic shaped...

just a thought.

It is the same physical infrastructure, but it is in no way shared. Teksavvy has paid for the allocated bandwith and they have no right to tamper with it.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20244616 Fri, 28 Mar 2008 21:25:55 EDT Re: Official Response... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20244608 mr_hexen : this "back haul", is it shared with Sympatico? if it is NOT and is just for WHOLESELLERS, maybe a signed letter from all 3rd party ISP's stating we have no complaints that suggest congestion and do not wish to have our traffic shaped...

just a thought.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20244608 Fri, 28 Mar 2008 21:23:53 EDT Re: Official Response... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20244606 avernar :

said by R0CKY

:

This is a Bell issue... John is only the messenger in this.

John Sweeney is a Senior VP. I seriously doubt he wasn't a part of the decision making or entirely blameless. While I don't endorse violence or any other form or physical retaliation, he deserves as much of the complaints as all the other suits in Bell.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20244606 Fri, 28 Mar 2008 21:23:37 EDT Re: Official Response... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20244605 iconfat : Laszlo was the messenger.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20244605 Fri, 28 Mar 2008 21:23:33 EDT Re: Official Response... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20244593 iconfat :

said by R0CKY

said by regret :

I am pondering the word "regret".
Sweener is gonna regret many things...

This is a Bell issue... John is only the messenger in this.

'

Rocky, he is a seniior VP. He is responsible for this. I've worked in large corperations in the past as a project manager and let me tell you, they make the decisions. Don't fool yourself.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20244593 Fri, 28 Mar 2008 21:21:37 EDT Re: Official Response... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20244589 ftp1020 :

said by Scoop

:

That statement is ridiculous.

I take it you've never worked for a large corporation? Their spokespeople will tell you that the sky is red with green polka dots if it serves corporate interests to do so. And they can do it without so much as cracking a smile. It's just an extension of what has worked so well in Sales for so long...]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20244589 Fri, 28 Mar 2008 21:20:56 EDT Re: Official Response... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20244578 mazhurg :

said by R0CKY

said by mudman2479

:

Well Rock...then provide us with the right numbers to call!!

Out of curiosity, what exactly do you purchase from BCE, ETHERNET/ATM transit? or DSL PPPoE transport?]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20244578 Fri, 28 Mar 2008 21:18:51 EDT Re: Official Response... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20244568 Scoop : That statement is ridiculous.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20244568 Fri, 28 Mar 2008 21:17:20 EDT Re: Official Response... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20244561 eots :

said by CanadianIron

:

"the majority of your end users will experience an increased level of satisfaction."

---------------

Third party Internet providers are up in arms because of a new Bell high-speed Internet policy that slows service to some of their customers. Do you think ISPs that sell bandwidth to third parties have the right to "shape" that bandwidth?

The only satisfaction I'll get out of this is if the CRTC and Competition Bureau slap Bell into submission.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20244561 Fri, 28 Mar 2008 21:15:47 EDT Re: Official Response... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20244557 R0CKY :

said by mudman2479

:

Well Rock...then provide us with the right numbers to call!!

I'm not 100% sure where to send you at this point, but while the ISPs try and figure out how to properly get this situation rectified, the more you people can suggest to work with the better (ie: any new angles for making them stop).
--
TSI Rocky - TekSavvy Solutions Inc.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20244557 Fri, 28 Mar 2008 21:15:14 EDT Re: Official Response... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20244551 avernar : "...but the majority of your end users will experience an increased level of satisfaction."

Can someone inform this bozo that most of Teksavvy's end users are P2P users...]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20244551 Fri, 28 Mar 2008 21:14:31 EDT Re: Official Response... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20244542 qweloo : we can also each send an email to john.sweeney@bell.ca ?

" Just say I am outraged by your throttling of 3rd party ISP and this is a backlash if you didnt notice yet. "

a couple of thousands email all from a different source.
that should fill the mailbox]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20244542 Fri, 28 Mar 2008 21:12:56 EDT Re: Official Response... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20244536 mazhurg : I really find this interesting tho in that they do not identify any mechanism to justify the legality of this action, other than a unspecified "deliver bandwith fairly to all customers during peak internet usage".

There is no metering justifications and no schedules referenced as to the legality of taking this action on a wholesale level.

It appears that they are saying that the purchased transit is in effect degrading the backbone performance of BCE, which can only happen in this case if BCE overextended and oversold it's capacity, which in my opinion would be a breach of contract on their part, no?

Another item in this letter. How can the DPI identify a packet mapping without monitoring it?

Personally, I think presenting this as a legal justification or document would be laughed right out of court.

Can't beleive that the future of a good part of Canadian Telecommunication is in the hands for such morons...]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20244536 Fri, 28 Mar 2008 21:11:59 EDT Re: Official Response... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20244534 mudman2479 : Well Rock...then provide us with the right numbers to call!!]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20244534 Fri, 28 Mar 2008 21:11:50 EDT Re: Official Response... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20244527 R0CKY :

said by regret :

I am pondering the word "regret".
Sweener is gonna regret many things...

This is a Bell issue... John is only the messenger in this.
--
TSI Rocky - TekSavvy Solutions Inc.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20244527 Fri, 28 Mar 2008 21:10:42 EDT Re: Official Response... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20244511 anon : I am pondering the word "regret".
Sweener is gonna regret many things...]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20244511 Fri, 28 Mar 2008 21:07:39 EDT Re: Official Response... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20244503 qweloo : you just need someone working at bell to go into the company directory to get his cell phone and office number .... just one disgruntled employee that can do it anonymously.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20244503 Fri, 28 Mar 2008 21:06:43 EDT Re: Official Response... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20244491 anon : Somehow I don't expect my email to john.sweeney@bell.ca is really going to cut it.

I'd rather I was given his home phone to more fully demonstrate my level of satisfaction.

At dinner hour, and all night long, and into the evening.
Just to be sure he actually didn't fail to perceive my level of satisfaction.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20244491 Fri, 28 Mar 2008 21:04:22 EDT Re: Official Response... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20244478 The Flash : those 69 votes were probably Bell management.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20244478 Fri, 28 Mar 2008 21:02:27 EDT Re: Official Response... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20244462 CanadianIron : "the majority of your end users will experience an increased level of satisfaction."

---------------

Third party Internet providers are up in arms because of a new Bell high-speed Internet policy that slows service to some of their customers. Do you think ISPs that sell bandwidth to third parties have the right to "shape" that bandwidth?

Yes, it's their pipe, they can do what they want
6% - 69 votes

No, ISPs shouldn't restrict the flow of any data
94% - 1002 votes

»www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/···teResult]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20244462 Fri, 28 Mar 2008 21:00:42 EDT Re: Official Response... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20244446 STUNNA :

said by mlerner

said by sMURF

:

Step 1: Print letter
Step 2: Wipe ass with letter (watch out for paper cuts)
Step 3: Mail letter to:

Bell Canada
c/o John Sweeney
Floor 6N
483 Bay Street
Toronto, Ontario M5G 2C9

Step 4: ?
Step 5: Profit

Hmm that's a good idea but I was going to fax them an image of my butt on Monday. I've been meaning to break in the photocopier at work anyway.

LOLLL =P careful though..they might just turn you in the next porn star and make money from your picture]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20244446 Fri, 28 Mar 2008 20:58:29 EDT Re: Official Response... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20244431 mlerner :

said by sMURF

Hmm that's a good idea but I was going to fax them an image of my butt on Monday. I've been meaning to break in the photocopier at work anyway.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20244431 Fri, 28 Mar 2008 20:56:37 EDT Re: Official Response... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20244420 sMURF : Step 1: Print letter
Step 2: Wipe ass with letter (watch out for paper cuts)
Step 3: Mail letter to:

Bell Canada
c/o John Sweeney
Floor 6N
483 Bay Street
Toronto, Ontario M5G 2C9

Step 4: ?
Step 5: Profit]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20244420 Fri, 28 Mar 2008 20:54:59 EDT Re: Official Response... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20244418 STUNNA : "We understand the difficulty this action has caused for you and your customers who are P2P users, but the majority of your end users will experience an increased level of satisfaction."

Can you say Bull Sh*t :mad:]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20244418 Fri, 28 Mar 2008 20:54:33 EDT Re: Official Response... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20244416 mazhurg :

said by forgotmypassword :

"We regret the fact that we did not advise you in advance of taking this action, but the action was necessary to allow for a more fair allocation of bandwidth for all Canadian internet users."

- !!!@

Semantically, this sentence does not compute... Why was it neccessary to take this action whitout advising? How would not advising taking action allow for a fairer allocation of bandwith?]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20244416 Fri, 28 Mar 2008 20:54:05 EDT Re: Official Response... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20244411 mudman2479 : Hey Rocky

Why dont you provide us with some key phone numbers for Bell so we can tell them just how satisfied we are]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20244411 Fri, 28 Mar 2008 20:53:43 EDT Re: Official Response... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20244406 loginname : This letter reeks of "it's easier to do it and apologize than to ask permission (or even just give a heads up) prior to doing it."]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20244406 Fri, 28 Mar 2008 20:52:34 EDT Re: Official Response... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20244396 mlerner : I got two words for them and they're a lot more helpful than that letter.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20244396 Fri, 28 Mar 2008 20:51:25 EDT Re: Official Response... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20244395 qweloo : "we are going to protect you and all your customers will be better off because of it"

What arrogance .... and what lies .... John sweeney ... he'll burn in hell for these lies once his time has come. Sooner rather than later.

It feels like the tone of a corporate parent talking to its affiliates not of a competitor.

Remember competition ? I guess they forgot all about it because they cant compete thus the only solution is to resort to throttling and playing god with other people's information. I guess the CRTC forgot the meaning of the word as well.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20244395 Fri, 28 Mar 2008 20:51:19 EDT Re: Official Response... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20244390 anon : "We regret the fact that we did not advise you in advance of taking this action, but the action was necessary to allow for a more fair allocation of bandwidth for all Canadian internet users."

- !!!@]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20244390 Fri, 28 Mar 2008 20:50:01 EDT Re: Official Response... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20244380 iconfat : LOL!

They say it as if third party ISPS really congest Bells network infrastructure to the point of a slowdown yet they show no proof. (Its not really true, in fact technically imposible considering the size of bells customer base to that of thrid party isps)

What they are doing is taking away third party isps competetive edge to make their own customers feel better. That is illegal. They can't handle the fact that third party isps actually make a profit based on their efficient and effective dsl package products.

Combined with the press and public outcry I can't see bell continuing this much longer.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20244380 Fri, 28 Mar 2008 20:48:13 EDT Re: Official Response... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20244331 anon : I all ready had an increased level of satisfaction....PRIOR to your THROTTLING! Thanks Bell....]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20244331 Fri, 28 Mar 2008 20:40:22 EDT Re: Official Response... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20244329 JayMan : *spits* thats what I think about that.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20244329 Fri, 28 Mar 2008 20:40:08 EDT Re: Official Response... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20244321 aver : Sounds like a bunch of smoke to me.. Kind of odd that they don't try and defend or justify their actions. It also doesn't sound like they have any real reason to do this other than to "make it fair" (i.e., if we have to do it so do you).

I love how they don't even tell mention the technology they are using. What is TekSavvy to do if this packet filtering starts affecting other services such as Gaming, Legit BT Traffic, VOIP, VPN, SSH, NNTP, etc.

Maybe they should take some of that $5 Million dollar raise they gave to Sabia and invest it in their infrastructure where it belongs. ]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20244321 Fri, 28 Mar 2008 20:39:51 EDT Re: Official Response... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20244300 mazhurg : Rocky,

How do you like your new status as a Sympatico reseller, since it appears that this is what this letter appears to be saying even as it says wholesale...]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20244300 Fri, 28 Mar 2008 20:36:47 EDT Re: Official Response... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20244285 the cerberus : "...but the majority of your end users will experience an increased level of satisfaction."

then why may i ask have i never felt the effects of p2p packets slowing down my dsl? o wait thats because teksavvy can properly manage a network! i dont see increased satifaction i see pissed off customers getting there internet slowed down for reasons that comcast just admitted were wrong. screw bell and their lies.

on another note, check it out
»/archive/teksavvy.com
im the fasted unthrottled user on teksavvy :)]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20244285 Fri, 28 Mar 2008 20:34:36 EDT Re: Official Response... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20244276 NeoStylez : Thats smaller then i thought it would be..

what bullcrap.. ]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20244276 Fri, 28 Mar 2008 20:33:22 EDT Re: Official Response... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20244274 matradley : Wow... look at that:

1. Time of throttling 4:30 pm to 2:00 am;
2. Both retail and residential throttled;
3. Only admitted to throttling P2P and BT but not encrypted traffic (bad move); and
4. Finally, they are showing no remorse for the situation. They did not even bother quoting legal documents to prove that they have the right to do this. At any rate, it seems that Bell is in the line for a good old fashioned backlashing!

This letter, really, answers nothing and proves that Bell is full of themselves.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20244274 Fri, 28 Mar 2008 20:33:12 EDT Re: Official Response... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20244269 canadabound : What a load of garbage. I hope with this letter they have just tied their own noose since it gives the smaller isps clear evidence of breach of contract among other things.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20244269 Fri, 28 Mar 2008 20:32:24 EDT Re: Official Response... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20244264 The Flash :

quote:
We understand the difficulty this action has caused for you and your customers who are P2P users, but the majority of your end users will experience an increased level of satisfaction.

My ass, nobody has been happy about these changes...

I wonder if you can opt out of them?]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20244264 Fri, 28 Mar 2008 20:31:46 EDT Re: Official Response... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20244265 adisor19 : Suddenincreasedlevelofsatisfaction is making me wanna punch something :mad:

Adi]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20244265 Fri, 28 Mar 2008 20:31:46 EDT Re: Official Response... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20244247 renton : "...but the majority of your end users will experience an increased level of satisfaction."
The nerve.. unbelivable!]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20244247 Fri, 28 Mar 2008 20:28:10 EDT Official Response... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20244238 R0CKY : Ok Gang,

Here it is!

The next step is digesting this document and reviewing our options.

Rocky
--
TSI Rocky - TekSavvy Solutions Inc.

Customer let···ar28.pdf
Response letter...

]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20244238 Fri, 28 Mar 2008 20:26:58 EDT