Name96
join:2008-03-28
| reply to TobiasFunke
Re: Illustrating the network and throttling for non-tech people
I suggest a few more tweaks to work the anti-competitive aspects in:
For the first illustration, change description (4) to read "Internet access for Sympatico customers is throttled because Bell claims the Sympatico network is overloaded. Sympatico charges XX dollars a month for throttled access."
Change description (5) to read "Teksavvy provides unthrottled Internet service through Cogent and Peer1. Teksavvy charges XX dollars a month for unthrottled access."
For the second illustration, change (4) to read "Teksavvy is no longer able to provide unthrottled access."
Because Bell has provided no objective evidence that they're experiencing a bandwidth crunch, their claim of 'limited bandwidth' should not be repeated uncritically. It's b**ls**t and should be treated as such.
--
Coridon Henshaw -=- »www.talisiorder.ca |
|
DJ R
Premium
join:2005-06-12
Brossard, QC | reply to TobiasFunke
Bell is going to lose their Bronze hahaha very fast.
»User reviews - Bell Sympatico
»Site FAQ »About BBR Awards |
|
InvalidError
join:2008-02-03
 ·TekSavvy Solutions..
 ·Videotron
| Sadly, BBR does not offer a 0/5 rating and this is skewing all scores up by 1. Otherwise, it would have been a done deal several weeks ago. |
|
DabberDan
join:2004-11-15
Gatineau, ON | reply to TobiasFunke
What exactly is a BRAS? How does it relate to the 5Mbps I'm supposed to get? |
|
emoci
join:2007-05-29
York, ON
| said by DabberDan  :What exactly is a BRAS? How does it relate to the 5Mbps I'm supposed to get? BRAS: Broadband Remote Access Server
Others can correct me if I am wrong, but this equipment is found at every CO.....the closer to the CO you are (this is not neccessarily physical closeness, but close in phone line length) the better your speeds should be...
By the way, I edited one of the previously posted illustrations a bit (although the original author could may want tomake it look better)
It may also be worth pointing that the part in blue background here, is the Network operated by Bell, which has been put together via the contributions of both Bell Phone and Sympatico users and third party users as well as government subsidies |
|
Grounded
join:2007-12-13
canada
| As you can clearly see from this illustration, Bell Canada / Sympatico provides the greatest portion of the entire network and is responsible for providing and maintaining the service of all our resellers, on top of the million + Sympatico customers. Teksavvy, (and all of our other resellers) provide only a small portion of the vital network, and therefore do not have the same great responsibilities & concerns that we at Bell Canada have. This is why we are working pro-actively to protect the integrity of Internet services, not just for those subscribing directly to Bell Sympatico, but for all Canadians.
If I was working for Bell, that is how I would use these illustrations. I think there is danger in laying out any of this in a way that can be perverted to bolster Bell's claims. We've all seen the comments at the Globe & far too many of those believe that Bell is the protector of the public good.
If you want to use an illustration like this for PR purposes you need to target it directly at your audience & focus the message. So far, this seems to be targeted for us - for people who are already pro-TSI, but lack the network knowledge to be able to picture the breakdown properly. |
|
TobiasFunke
Premium
join:2007-02-27
Toronto, ON
| reply to TobiasFunke
Ok guys, I've tried to incorporate feedback as much as possible. I agree with the pie chart idea, but at this point it would be total conjecture, so I've tried to use that philosophy in sizing the shaded areas instead.
I also need to get some real-life work done in the next little while, so if anyone would like to take this up and make additional changes, please PM me and I can send the OmniGraffle source files (or Visio if you prefer). That said, I'll still check in and I can make minor changes if need be. |
|
mbind
join:2008-03-30
| reply to TobiasFunke
Hello Tobias,
*wow* are you creating graphs for a living? Perfect style 
But one question: is Bell throttling traffic _to_ TekSavvy/Peer1 or _from_ ?
Taking into account that the upload speed is physically only around 800kbit/s anyway I assume they throttle the download direction?
In this case Bell could easily dismiss this diagram as wrong because of the description in point "4".
Regards, Marc |
|
TobiasFunke
Premium
join:2007-02-27
Toronto, ON
| Thanks Marc - I used to do a little bit of graphic design a few years back, still like to do it once in a while.
As for the to/from stuff, my understanding is that it's a little bit of both that Bell does. In the case of Bittorrent, throttling user uploads actually has the effect of decreasing download speeds. That said, it appears that Bell's system just applies a blanket cap once it detects P2P (it may not even be that sophisticated!), but I'm not sure how to explain that in the limited space that's available. |
|
Guspaz
Guspaz
Premium,MVM
join:2001-11-05
Montreal, QC | reply to TobiasFunke
Might want to consider branding Bell differently to further reinforce the difference between Bell and Bell Sympatico.
"Bell Nexxia" perhaps? Although I understand Nexxia doesn't exist anymore. |
|
TobiasFunke
Premium
join:2007-02-27
Toronto, ON
| reply to TobiasFunke
I spotted some small layout mistakes and typos, then decided to try to rework the phrasing to avoid the "to/from" problem. Here's the result. |
|
RobertR
join:2002-07-30
London, ON
·TekSavvy Solutions..
| How do we know that Bell is throttling its wholesale customers' connections the same way as it's own? For what we know, Bell is using different methods to throttle it's own network or running it wide open and just throttling its wholesale customers (which would be anti-competitive.) The diagram above suggests that Bell is treating itself and wholesale customers the same, which may not be the case. I think the diagram should be changed to reflect this by placing item 3 on TekSavvy's pipe only. Customers are also being denied service on an individual basis so they should each get pink boxes as well.
There are several issues here. Traffic shaping, retail customer service denial and wholesale customer service denial.(IMHO, throttling is too technical and has no legal connotation.) Bell is not practicing traffic shaping (as they like to imply) but service denial. Furthermore, the service denial implementation is based on their perceived, and probably inaccurate, analysis of customer data. |
|
theninjasqua
join:2007-09-26
Oakville, ON | I can tell you as a Bell customer that I am being throttled during the same time frame as you guys. I wont be a customer with them for much longer however.
--
-theninjasquad |
|
cutoff
@teksavvy.com
| reply to DJ R
LOL it's gone now. And it's not over yet, the HMCS Sympatico is taking on water fast |
|
shikotee
join:2007-01-11
Toronto, ON | reply to TobiasFunke
Awesome work Tobias! Kudos!
LoL!
I can't help but wonder - while you are doing this in front of your computer, if you are wearing your blue paint, just in case! |
|
TobiasFunke
Premium
join:2007-02-27
Toronto, ON
| reply to TobiasFunke
Hey guys,
I have done a little bit of research and realized that my diagrams are unfortunately more than a little inaccurate. It appears that I was working from the false impression that Bell's traffic-shaping is taking place at 151 Front - whereas in reality it is much more distributed... basically at every CO, which makes a lot of sense if you think about how it is being rolled out. Don't know why it didn't occur to me sooner.
As much as I want a positive outcome for TSI and us users, I don't like the idea of misrepresenting the situation, so I'd ask that you refrain from spreading my diagrams around until I get the chance to update them.
Also, I've discovered Bell's problem seems to be much more fundamental than I'd originally thought. Specifically, Bell does not have just a Sympatico problem, they believe they have a core network problem and they are or will be facing chronic core network congestion unless they can do something about it. Keep in mind that it's not just our Internet that runs over the core, but also a very large chunk of the national voice network and other services. |
|
SmithCanada
join:2003-06-22
Canada
|  reply to TobiasFunke
One point that I have seen referenced indirectly in some posts regarding Bells infrastructure is the idea that the BRAS are not always co-located with the DSL infrastructure -- or, as a question, is there a BRAS in *every* CO?
As I understand it, Teksavvy (and other ISPs) pay for carriage from the BRAS to their connection. However, if the BRAS is not at the same location as the DSL infrastructure in every CO, then there may be places where Bell has to carry the DSL-to-BRAS traffic - possible over a considerable distance - but can't bill it back to anyone.
It is *also* possible that although the above network architecture is correct, Teksavvy is actually paying for carriage from the DSL infrastructure to their connection point. In such a case, all the bandwidth between the DSL and the BRAS should be covered by the tarrifs, with the BRAS appearing as a complex router to separate the traffic according to the ISP that the DSL is signed on to.
Can anyone clarify any of this so that the diagrams can be as accurate as possible? |
|
TobiasFunke
Premium
join:2007-02-27
Toronto, ON
| What I've recently been told is that there is indeed a BRAS, sometimes more than one, in every CO. From the BRAS, traffic is routed over the Bell core network in an L2TP tunnel to 151 Front, where it is connected to TekSavvy's bank of routers.
One thing I'm still not entirely clear on is whether TekSavvy pays Bell for transit over their core network. I wish someone from TSI could shed some light on this. I realize they pay for the DSL connect, and they pay for the 1 Gbps links at 151 Front, but AFAICT, TSI doesn't pay anything specifically for the tunnelled traffic on Bell's core network. |
|
mbind
join:2008-03-30
| Hello Tobias,
I don't know the Bell network in detail but some generic thoughts:
the problem shouldn't be the 800kbit/s upstream, likely the large number of ADSL lines with a multi-Mbit/s _downstream_ speed is overwhelming the network. Saying this I doubt that the focus of the throttling is upstream but think it is downstream. Upstream throttling would be done as close to the copper wire as possible. Throttling downstream though would happen as close as possible to the entry point of the IP or L2TP traffic, i.e. the exchange in Toronto (and isn't there one in Montreal?).In this case your diagram would be fine regarding the position of the throttle box, IMHO.
Regards, Marc |
|
An Onymous
@teksavvy.com
| said by mbind :Hello Tobias, I don't know the Bell network in detail but some generic thoughts: the problem shouldn't be the 800kbit/s upstream, likely the large number of ADSL lines with a multi-Mbit/s _downstream_ speed is overwhelming the network. Regards, Marc The downstream speed is *limited* by how many pipes ISP/TSI has to connect to Bell's network. Furthermore, the ISP can do traffic shaping before it reaches Bell's network. If Bell cannot handle the traffic, they should tell the ISP when they are ordering the pipes.
The 800kbps upstream traffic is unbounded as there are no QoS/routers going upstream. The only way traffic control is when TCP packets get tossed out after when they hit the exit pipe to ISP. |
|
