dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
28683
share rss forum feed

davidbrown

join:2005-05-31
Toronto, ON
reply to Guspaz

Re: The Bell Disclosure!

said by Guspaz:

If the CRTC was on the take, Bell and other ISPs wouldn't be obligated to provide wholesale access to their networks. Bell constantly fights this and tries to have the CRTC remove the requirements, and Bell has so far lost every time.
The crtc was given no choice when that ruling was made as bell publicly hosed themselves.

Bell has now found its loop hole around this ruling and a likely effective means of killing off the smaller isps and thus removing the problem.

At the same time ripping off the consumers.

The real question here is can bell keep things quiet enough to get away with it or higher more idiots with big mouths.

The later bell does rather well and because of this we could get the same result when they ruled against bell for wholesale isp's.

davidbrown

join:2005-05-31
Toronto, ON

1 edit
reply to sbrook

said by sbrook:

This is definitely under public scrutiny BEFORE the decisions have been made ... that makes a huge difference.

As much as the major cablecos and Bell all throttle, the cablecos can provide technical validity to throttling as a part of the technology. BUT Bell cannot provide evidence that throttling is technically required, but simply at best mismanagement of their own networks.
How do you know that for sure?

They have never had to since no one has ever forced them too.

They like bell have a vested interest in no letting that out and having people maybe find out that they are getting ripped off.

My better half dealt with all the above thanks to the hydrovac business she ran and no one of them isn't run by a bunch of crooks .


chronoss2008
Premium
join:2008-03-29
reply to Guspaz

said by Guspaz:

If the CRTC was on the take, Bell and other ISPs wouldn't be obligated to provide wholesale access to their networks. Bell constantly fights this and tries to have the CRTC remove the requirements, and Bell has so far lost every time.
And you htink shaping wholesalers to 95% of what they paid for isn't proof they are on the so called take?
So bell loses a few minor htings but gets what it wants in the end , will make it LOOK like there was actual regulation, when in fact its just a HAHA look at the poor people attitude, oh jimmy bring around the limo, bell gave us a lot a cash to seal this we can party now....


sbrook
Premium,Mod
join:2001-12-14
Ottawa
kudos:13
Reviews:
·WIND Mobile
·TekSavvy Cable
reply to davidbrown

Well, fortunately a degree and experience in Computers, Broadcast Television Engineering, and Communications give me enough knowledge to know that the upstream is very limited and that P2P from just a handful of users on a cable segment can bring that segment to its knees. Moreover, a review of these forums will reveal that at least for Rogers, implementing first DOCSIS and then throttling, the number of performance related complaints has significantly decreased.



An Onymous

@teksavvy.com
reply to Maynard G Krebs

>I think that you/CAIP should hire some consulting help from one of the big firms with inside telco network consulting experience - maybe Ernst & Young, IBM, HP, or some firm that is recommended to you in the US

Ask google for help. They have lots of PHD and other smart guys that know network there.

The DSLAM is the most congest part, but the numbers before the throttling and after almost show no different. The congestion dropped 2%, but that is also the same amount as short term fluctuations prior to throttling. No enough data to show trend whether or not throttling actually helped.



MB9999

@teksavvy.com
reply to JGROCKY

The cell loss graph is amusing. 4500 cells seems like a huge number, but each cell only carriers 48 bytes of data. So for their highest loss month they lost 216k of data or about 150 EtherNet frames.

I don't know the average data loss stats, but it's something like 99.9% and I gather 216kb of data is going to be a very tiny percentage of the total data transferred.



Kareeser
hm?
Premium
join:2006-07-18
Hamilton, ON

1 edit
reply to davidbrown

You have lots of opinions and guesses as to how Bell and the CRTC have in the way of backroom dealings...

Let me ask you your own question in return:

said by davidbrown :
How do you know that for sure?
?

yabos

join:2003-02-16
London, ON
reply to HiVolt

said by HiVolt:

The numbers... Can I be the first one to say... WTF? Congestion?
Soo, 2-5% congestion, so THROTTLE THE WHOLE NETWORK. That makes lots of sense.


CitiLaptop

@teksavvy.com

Their definitions of congestion are pretty low too.

They deem it "congested" if the following utilizations are exceeded:
DS-3: 61%;
OC-3: 84%; and
OC-12 and OC-48: 90%.

And they measure it at 15 minutes intervals. For a link to be considered congested, the threshold must have been exceeded at least once on 5 or more different days of a 14 consecutive day period.

Presumably this 14 day figure is a rolling window.

So, if its measured to be congested at just a couple hours in a 2 week period, its considered congested for that whole month?

And only a few percent of links actually met this ridiculously low criteria for congestion?

I agree with the first couple of posters, the CRTC has all the info it needs to make a ruling yesterday. What's the freakin' holdup here?



Kareeser
hm?
Premium
join:2006-07-18
Hamilton, ON
reply to yabos

I'm not sure whether 2-5% congestion means "The pipes are at an average load og 2-5%", or whether that means "2-5% of our pipes are fully utilized, and people are oversubscribed in those areas and getting substandard service"

I'm leaning more towards the latter, and 2-5% might encompass several neighbourhoods in Downtown T.O.!



Bellus_atm

@cia.com
reply to JGROCKY

If you look at this data and combine it with some telecom knowledge, you understand BC's major capital projects that impact xDSL services... and there are a lot of them at every level of the network... stingers to VDSL2 & Dual Gige LAG uplinks, upgraded BAS equipment, replacement of multilayer+multivendor-edge aggregation, better core capacity.

Also, for Rocky, there is still mucho ATM between your service provider GigE and the end user, although the normal MTU is great for users:

Stinger/Anymedia/Subtended DSLAM shelves: most of these use OC-3 to link up to their control units at the CO.

Al-Lu 73xx ASAM and Stinger FS+ controllers: The FS has OC-12 atm uplinks in many POP's. Same with the Alcatel equipment that controls DSLAM's/shelves.

Finally there is an ATM-to_GigE device connected to a Nortel 8600 edge device. In same cases, some of the above links are now Gige, but even 4 Gige uplinks for a device that controls dozens of DSLAM's isn't much.
---------------------------------------------------------
Even the VDSL2 upgrades to Stingers puzzle me... 3 48port LIM's on a stinger with 2 Gige uplinks. Even with multicast for the IPTV traffic, that doesn't really seem to make sense. But that is where things are going.

I really think the smart thing would be to replace their POP/CO to DSLAM point-to-point links with some sort of GPON 2.488D/1.24U or 10GEPON feeding 24/48/72port micro dslam's every couple blocks.



TakeTheFifth

join:2004-04-20
Anjou, QC
reply to JGROCKY

said by JGROCKY:

Definitely an interesting table... no doubt!
What I'd like to know is how/where they measure congestion at the dslam. 5.2% of the links are congested. Which ones ?

Phil


Maynard G Krebs

@teksavvy.com
reply to sbrook

said by sbrook:

This is definitely under public scrutiny BEFORE the decisions have been made ... that makes a huge difference.

As much as the major cablecos and Bell all throttle, the cablecos can provide technical validity to throttling as a part of the technology. BUT Bell cannot provide evidence that throttling is technically required, but simply at best mismanagement of their own networks.
Don't put it past Stevie-Boy Harper to abolish the CRTC when Parliament resumes. It's what the telco's and cableco's want.


Maynard G Krebs

@teksavvy.com
reply to JGROCKY

said by JGROCKY:

said by Mantiz:

From Arbor's website
»www.arbornetworks.com/en/ellacoy···ogy.html

Arbor Ellacoya e30:
Support up to 64,000 subscribers at 4 Gbps speed.

Arbor Ellacoya e100:
Support up to 500,000 subscribers at 20 Gbps speed.
Any price tags on these?
E30-64-ac (A/C Power for 64K with 64K subscriber license subscriber) $61,400

E30-64-dc (DC Power for 64K with 64K Subscriber license Subscriber) $61,300

Availabilty 2 weeks

Expect the e100 to be more costly - these figures are in-line with the $1-2 per subscriber previously posted in this thread.

Capharnaum

join:2006-06-19
Montreal, QC
reply to sbrook

said by sbrook:

Well, fortunately a degree and experience in Computers, Broadcast Television Engineering, and Communications give me enough knowledge to know that the upstream is very limited and that P2P from just a handful of users on a cable segment can bring that segment to its knees. Moreover, a review of these forums will reveal that at least for Rogers, implementing first DOCSIS and then throttling, the number of performance related complaints has significantly decreased.
Why not just throttle the upstream then?

Capharnaum

join:2006-06-19
Montreal, QC
reply to TakeTheFifth

said by TakeTheFifth:

What I'd like to know is how/where they measure congestion at the dslam. 5.2% of the links are congested. Which ones ?

Phil
Remember that criteria for a congestion isn't that there's an overload. It's just that their "limit" (which isn't 100%) was passed four times out of 1344 checks within a two week span (if I understand the documents correctly). Then that dslam is labeled as "congestioned". It doesn't mean that the dslam was overloaded at any time during the month.

It's pretty shady.


DJMASACRE

join:2008-05-27
Nepean, ON
reply to JGROCKY

I think i made tables like that in grade 5 math class....

looks sorta like a periodic table..

boxes with percentages... ok .. so what...

can we see actual logs of hardware, congestion, real loss figures...

them taking their own figures ( real or made up ) and just making a nice table for us doesnt give us any real truth.. its still what they want us to see after they gather what they think is relevant...

thats still not any real data to analyze..

nice try ..

in a court room, this evidence should/would just be discarded...

like finding any gun you can and display it for evidence, and say,.. see.. thats the gun ...

i dunno...

that looks like crap to me.. :P


jfmezei
Premium
join:2007-01-03
Pointe-Claire, QC
kudos:23

>In a court room, this evidence should/would just be discarded...

only if the opposing lawyers show that these numbers are worthless. If nobody questions (legitimately and logically) these numbers, the judge will accept those as facts.


heavyduty

join:2008-03-26
Brampton, ON
reply to Bellus_atm

said by Bellus_atm :

I really think the smart thing would be to replace their POP/CO to DSLAM point-to-point links with some sort of GPON 2.488D/1.24U or 10GEPON feeding 24/48/72port micro dslam's every couple blocks.
Yeah, it seems there is strong need to push RDSLAMs if twisted-pair last-mile is to be used, well last 1k-2k feet is more or less the target reach.

GPON is certainly a reasonable solution. Verizon is using it (along with BPON). But somehow I suspect even with GPON, Bell would still be very stingy with bandwidth. I just don't think they have the cahones to put out 10/2, 20/5, 20/20 and 50/20 mbps services (with particular emphasis on those upstream rates).

BTW, I like the 2.488D/1.244U (2:1) ratio i like very much

davidbrown

join:2005-05-31
Toronto, ON

1 edit
reply to Kareeser

said by Kareeser:

You have lots of opinions and guesses as to how Bell and the CRTC have in the way of backroom dealings...

Let me ask you your own question in return:
said by davidbrown :
How do you know that for sure?
?
Simple the crtc passed behavior has been to the point of being totally illegal but they have repeatably done it.

I seriously doubt they are going to change and see the light just on this issue or for us.

Can i know for sure..no..but its a bet any gambler would take in a min.

Add to this bell own dishonesty and backroom dealings and i sure rocky has his own supisions.

I do though have faith in bell ability to mess things up so all hope isn't gone.


Angelo
The Network Guy
Premium
join:2002-06-18

what i gathered from their numbersis that the reason they throttled was because they could have saved abit more throttling instead of upgrading...

the fact that it's only conguested for a few hours (minimal), they saw it as a way to generate more revenue by throttling it and adding more users to the line... this was the same logic cable isps first had when they started offering cable internet. Quickly they discovered customers would switch if they discovered their service was not infact avertised speeds.

The means of which this is created doesn't really matter. When you get down to it. The is only why question that remains. If you knew for months (1 or more months) taht a link was going to get conguested (or is) why didn't you upgrade it.

Also the info supplied by Bell was a joke. They are hoping noone can understand the missing data which still remains... (and which the CRTC should point out).

as Rocky has mention in here in the past Teksavvy is Ethernet not ATM. Are we to assume all resellers and wholesalers are ATM only?

If not didn't Bell just not follow what the CRTC has told them to provide solid evidence there is conguested on your network?

I'm going to end my rank short as i'm tired =p


jfmezei
Premium
join:2007-01-03
Pointe-Claire, QC
kudos:23

>as Rocky has mention in here in the past Teksavvy is Ethernet
>not ATM. Are we to assume all resellers and wholesalers are
>ATM only?

From what I gather, Teksavvy was one of the first ones to move its AHSSPI links from ATM to ethernet. There are still many waiting to be upgraded. Sentex recently made a comment to the effect that they were still waiting to be upgraded. (this was on can.internet.highspeed if I recall correctly).

Bell is clearly not there to educate the CRTC on the real situation. They are spinning numbbers the same way they lied when speaking to the media.

Bell wants those ellacoya boxes to be allowed to stay onder the false premise of congestion, and once they are in, then their real purpose will be activated (charging customers extra to have unfettered access to certain protocols/applications, and capturing HTTP traffic and feeding it to ad agencies for extra monthly revenus (and possibly injecting ads into HTTP traffic.

Bibic's "white label reseller" may in fact be the shape of things to come since Bell,s satanic boxes will in fact dictate service levels, inject ads, collect data and sell it to Netbuad etc, and the independant ISPs won't be able to select their own IP service policies anymore, and will essentially be able to provide a service equal to Sympatico and nothing more.


globus999

join:2008-05-15

1 edit
reply to JGROCKY

This is for Rocky. Yes, I know somebody already suggested it, but I will suggest it again. There is an old saying: "if you are getting into a wits fight, make sure your opponent comes armed".

Meaning:

1 - CAIP MOST DEFINITIVELY NEEDS an "insider". You are fighting blind and against the wall. You NEED the "inside" track of things to know where to punch, low, fast and dirty. This is how to win this fight.

2 - Bell's worst enemy is Bell. They are big, slow and stupid. The ONLY advante they have is the so called "security by obscurity". IF you know where to look and how to look (see point 1) they are no match. HOWEVER, as it stands today, I am not optimistic.

My two c$.


Jabus

join:2002-11-24
Mississauga, ON
reply to JGROCKY

If TSI needs an insider and needs to fight dirty to win....What makes them any better than Bell in the overall scheme of things?



mlerner
Premium
join:2000-11-25
Nepean, ON
kudos:5

said by Jabus:

If TSI needs an insider and needs to fight dirty to win....What makes them any better than Bell in the overall scheme of things?
Sometimes you have to fight fire with fire.. Bell is a overzealous telco that has been given more power than they should.
--
"If bullshit was money this guy would be richer that Bill Gates." - quote by olebiker on Mirko Bibic

mr_hexen

join:2007-08-02
Brampton, ON
reply to Angelo

and on top of this all, regardless of their reasons or their method, they have said NUMEROUS times that if they DID NOT throttle 790,000 customers would be affected in Q1, 2009!!

so, why throttle NOW if it's not an issue for another 1.5years (dating to the Oct 2007 of Sympatico throttling)????????

for video rentals. PERIOD.


mr_hexen

join:2007-08-02
Brampton, ON
reply to Capharnaum

said by Capharnaum:

said by TakeTheFifth:

What I'd like to know is how/where they measure congestion at the dslam. 5.2% of the links are congested. Which ones ?

Phil
Remember that criteria for a congestion isn't that there's an overload. It's just that their "limit" (which isn't 100%) was passed four times out of 1344 checks within a two week span (if I understand the documents correctly). Then that dslam is labeled as "congestioned". It doesn't mean that the dslam was overloaded at any time during the month.

It's pretty shady.
I did the numbers on page 1 or 2. it's 0.37% time.

if the available time over 14 days is congested as little as 0.37% they mark the entire 14 days as congested 24/7.

riiiight.


sbrook
Premium,Mod
join:2001-12-14
Ottawa
kudos:13
Reviews:
·WIND Mobile
·TekSavvy Cable
reply to Capharnaum

said by Capharnaum:

]Why not just throttle the upstream then?
The current technology throttles the downstream as collateral damage to the upstream throttling. The only way to dynamically throttle the upstream is to reset the modem upstream speed which slows EVERYTHING on the upstream down and will create modem resets every time they turn it on. In other words, it's not a seamless change.


Arbalister

join:2007-11-24
St Catharines, ON

If I remember correctly, Bell's original submission stated that they took sample data from 20 of the most congested sites ... because they only had 20 demon boxes.

So...

The single worst point in that table is DSLAM figures for Feb 08, at 8.2% What does that really represent? 8.2% of 20 sample sites is...1.64 DSLAMs.

Rounding upwards, they're telling us that *TWO* DSLAMs wer congested in Feb.



Mr 5percent

@mc.videotron.ca

Correct. Bell's original data was based on one month (april I believe) and included EVERYTHING over the network; dial-up, probably cell data xfers, basic light speeds, and anything using the IP network most likely like digital phone.

This in turn lowered their "average" user B/W usage to about 10-gigs. (I believe they claimed most users use under 10-gigs per month and anyone using over 59-gigs is a 5% bandwidth hog who made the throttle necessary)

5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5%