cacruden
join:2008-03-18
Toronto, ON
 ·TekSavvy Solutions..
|  Internet service providers cry foul
»telegraphjournal.canadaeast.com/···e/266983
"Internet service providers cry foul
Nathan White
Telegraph-Journal
Published Monday April 14th, 2008
Appeared on page B1
Internet service providers are slowing down users with virtual speed bumps some observers say create unfair competitive advantages and could even hamper economic development.
Major ISPs such as Bell Canada and Rogers Communications Inc. have made national news recently for policies that cap or slow down usage.
Rogers will implement hard monthly limits in June, penalizing those who exceed them by up to $5 a gigabyte. Meanwhile, 50 ISPs that buy wholesale from Bell have complained Bell is slowing down their customers' traffic, putting them at a disadvantage against the telecom giant.
The Canadian Association of Internet Providers has asked the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission to direct Bell to cease the practice with customers that aren't its own. Known as shaping, throttling or choking, Bell, Rogers and others use it with their retail customers, slowing down certain types of use. In the U.S., Comcast Corp. has promised to cease the controversial practice after incurring the wrath of regulators.
...continued on website" |
|
mazhurg
Premium
join:2004-05-02
Portage La Prairie, MB | Again, Another article that calls Bell an ISP (they are not) and is vague as to what constitue "normal" usage....
Are these journalists really lemminglike?
Bah. |
|
Angelo_
The Network Guy
Premium
join:2002-06-18 | at least the tsory will be read by the masses  |
|
brad
join:2007-09-06
Etobicoke, ON
| reply to mazhurg
said by mazhurg  :Again, Another article that calls Bell an ISP (they are not) and is vague as to what constitue "normal" usage.... Are these journalists really lemminglike? Bah. Because Sympatico which is Bell Canada's retail ISP is not an ISP, right? Uh huh.
You should look in the mirror. |
|
mazhurg
Premium
join:2004-05-02
Portage La Prairie, MB
·TekSavvy Solutions..
·MTS
| Bell Canada is a telecommunication company. Sympatico Canada is an ISP. Just 'cause bell owns Sympatico does not make Bell, the company, an ISP.
It is the crux of the matter and what most people do not, or don do not want to, understand.
Are all the treads written here, and elswere falling on deaf ears??? |
|
Doci
Toothless Fairy
join:2003-02-01
·Bell Sympatico
| reply to brad
said by brad :said by mazhurg :Again, Another article that calls Bell an ISP (they are not) and is vague as to what constitue "normal" usage.... Are these journalists really lemminglike? Bah. Because Sympatico which is Bell Canada's retail ISP is not an ISP, right? Uh huh. You should look in the mirror. Let me make it clear for you. The issue is with BCE Nexxia/Bell Carrier Services(not an ISP) who is a vendor for ISPs like TekSavvy and Bell Sympatico. Bell Sympatico and TekSavvy are the same. What these news releases make it sound like likes of TekSavvy are wholesaling Bell's ISP services(hence reselling Bell Sympatico) but they're not. They're not reselling, they're wholesaling because BCE Nexxia/Bell Carrier services is not an ISP. |
|
UT_CK
Premium
join:2008-01-28
·TekSavvy Solutions..
·Bell Sympatico
1 edit | reply to cacruden
Reply to Brad ...
You seem to have a habit of posting without providing a justification for your statements. It might help to provide some reasoning to your arguments !
(last posts)
»Ellacoya - Typical corporate leech
Regards,
CK
{:(B) |
|
dav_ID
Happiness Is What You Make It
join:2001-11-22
Toronto
·TekSavvy Solutions..
| reply to Doci
said by Doci :said by brad :said by mazhurg :Again, Another article that calls Bell an ISP (they are not) and is vague as to what constitue "normal" usage.... Are these journalists really lemminglike? Bah. Because Sympatico which is Bell Canada's retail ISP is not an ISP, right? Uh huh. You should look in the mirror. Let me make it clear for you. The issue is with BCE Nexxia/Bell Carrier Services(not an ISP) who is a vendor for ISPs like TekSavvy and Bell Sympatico. Bell Sympatico and TekSavvy are the same. What these news releases make it sound like likes of TekSavvy are wholesaling Bell's ISP services(hence reselling Bell Sympatico) but they're not. They're not reselling, they're wholesaling because BCE Nexxia/Bell Carrier services is not an ISP. Well, aside from the Corporate structure of Bell, Sympatico, and Nexxia, lets pause for a moment and look at the humour in this!
Based upon my years of horror stories with Sympatico, even the slightest hint that they are an ISP would imply that they have a CLUE. They Don't (read my review of them). Therefore they are NOT an ISP.
My 2¢ 
--
In theory, a bumble bee cannot fly! |
|
backness
join:2005-07-08
K2P OW2 | the problem is scummy managment accountants have gotten their mits on our data |
|
brad
join:2007-09-06
Etobicoke, ON
| reply to UT_CK
said by UT_CK :Reply to Brad ... You seem to have a habit of posting without providing a justification for your statements. It might help to provide some reasoning to your arguments ! Regards, CK {:(B) I could say the same to half the nut jobs that have come out of the wood work on these forums since this started. |
|
sbrook
Premium,Mod
join:2001-12-14
H0H 0H0
 ·Rogers Hi-Speed
Host:
Rogers
Bell Canada
1 edit | reply to backness
IF you take the argument that Bell is not in business, amongst other things, as an ISP, then you throw out the baby with the bathwater.
If you segregate it and say that Bell is simply a holding company for Sympatico (the ISP), Nexxia (the company's internal transit provider), Bell Canada (the telco), then you're implying these operate totally independently.
So, Nexxia decides to throttle to keep down transit costs and it applies it to Sympatico and wholesalers. That then is not an anti-competitive act. It was applied to everyone and doesn't put Sympatico in a position of preferential treatment.
The argument that needs to be made is not that Bell is a group of independently run operating units, but that this is a corporate decision which gave Sympatico a way of levelling the playing field by making it appear that there was no advantage to be had by going with the wholesalers.
Moreover, Bell is creating the argument that the wholesalers are simply rebranding Bell's entire end to end service, when in fact, they are only using only a portion of Bell's services and only "end to middle". This is the current argument of significant import! |
|
bjlockie
join:2007-12-16
Ottawa
| reply to cacruden
Is there any point in lodging a personal complaint to:
Commissioner for Complaints for Telecommunications Services Inc. (CCTS)
»www.ccts-cprst.ca/en/page/ComplaintsProcess
The problem is with Bell, not Sympatico, right? |
|
Doci
Toothless Fairy
join:2003-02-01
·Bell Sympatico
| reply to sbrook
said by sbrook :So, Nexxia decides to throttle to keep down transit costs and it applies it to Sympatico and wholesalers. That then is not an anti-competitive act. It was applied to everyone and doesn't put Sympatico in a position of preferential treatment. If it was Nexxia's decision and it had nothing to do with their Retail side then why did the molesting start w/ Sympatico 4 months ago? Simply put, Sympatico wanted it there so they put the gear in but only to discover they were losing customers hand over fist and decided to level the playing field. If it weren't at Sympatico's request then techs like Deadpool (who works for Sympatico) should have no access to these devices either directly or indirectly. |
|
sbrook
Premium,Mod
join:2001-12-14
H0H 0H0
·Rogers Hi-Speed
Host:
Rogers
Bell Canada
1 edit | That's part of my point. You can't say that Bell isn't an ISP because that assumes separate operating companies, or at the very least fully independent operating units. Clearly that's not the case. It was at one time.
Bell is an ISP ... they are also a provider of network services and a high proportion of those services don't begin with the customer and end at an internet transit provider.
If you say that it isn't an ISP, then it throws out the anti-competitive argument. If Sympatico went to Nexxia and said "Level the playing field, throttle everyone", then they aren't independent units.
Nexxia and Sympatico are now profit/loss centres and brands of Bell's business. |
|
Doci
Toothless Fairy
join:2003-02-01
·Bell Sympatico
| They're supposed to be operate separately but they're not.
What I don't understand is why isn't anybody making it a point to tell that Bell's business customers are not throttled yet everybody else's business clients are? Once again, Bellnet business PPPoE customers are not throttled.
I've used my work business login at home to test them simultaneously on two computers, my own Sympatico one hovering around 30 while the work one pulling in 450+. Same torrent. Before somebody claims routing, its the same whether I use my login or work bellnet login. For some reason there is no difference between the logins. Everything else on my line is throttled(TekSavvy, Sympatico, Primus etc) except Bellnet. |
|
Angelo_
The Network Guy
Premium
join:2002-06-18
·TekSavvy Solutions..
| said by Doci :They're supposed to be operate separately but they're not. What I don't understand is why isn't anybody making it a point to tell that Bell's business customers are not throttled yet everybody else's business clients are? Once again, Bellnet business PPPoE customers are not throttled.I've used my work business login at home to test them simultaneously on two computers, my own Sympatico one hovering around 30 while the work one pulling in 450+. Same torrent. Before somebody claims routing, its the same whether I use my login or work bellnet login. For some reason there is no difference between the logins. Everything else on my line is throttled(TekSavvy, Sympatico, Primus etc) except Bellnet. you would be the perfect person to complain to the crtc... and i would prove it to them this is happening...
they can't do this |
|
UT_CK
Premium
join:2008-01-28 | This point should be brought to Rocky's attention. It is going to be a field day for his lawyers.
Regards,
CK
{:(B) |
|
Angelo_
The Network Guy
Premium
join:2002-06-18
·TekSavvy Solutions..
| said by UT_CK :This point should be brought to Rocky's attention. It is going to be a field day for his lawyers. Regards, CK {:(B) Rocky has most likely seen this post as he posts in various forums on dslreports, this being one of them |
|
vintagewino
join:2003-07-22
Grimsby, ON
·TekSavvy Solutions..
 ·magicjack.com
·Look Communications
| reply to bjlockie
said by bjlockie :Is there any point in lodging a personal complaint to: Commissioner for Complaints for Telecommunications Services Inc. (CCTS) » www.ccts-cprst.ca/en/page/ComplaintsProcessThe problem is with Bell, not Sympatico, right? »www.ccts-cprst.ca/en/attach/Comp···post.pdf
is the complaint form indicated. Sadly, the basis of it tends to say: "We'll look at it, and that's all because it's currently in the hands of other jurisdictions".
Don't you just love the runaround?
Guess all one can do is be a pest to your MP's. |
|
GKC
join:2008-03-07
Toronto, ON
| And sadly enough, even the Competition Bureau doesn't believe that Bell is engaging in any form of anti-competitive acts, in reply to an email I sent to the Competition Bureau...and that email reads in part....
...At this point, Bell’s network management practices appear to be non-discriminatory, in that they are being applied at a network-wide level to both Bell’s own retail service and the service of all its wholesale customers, as opposed to the targeting of specific competitors. In this regard, it does not appear to the Bureau that Bell is currently engaging in a practice of anti-competitive acts in order to harm a competitor contrary to the Act. The extent that such network management practices may violate any contractual terms between Bell and its ISP customers is a private contractual issue between those parties. In addition, wholesale ADSL access services remain regulated by the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission (“CRTC”) subject to Telecom Decision CRTC 2008-17, Revised regulatory framework for wholesale services and definition of essential service, 3 March 2008. |
|
