Acanac Inc
Premium
join:2007-03-05
Mississauga, ON
| reply to grayfox
Re: Acanac
said by grayfox  :Any ETA on the 16meg service. Also for users like me with 2 connections in ml-ppp, can bell accurately track are usage ?. We were given no ETA on the 16Mbps service. As for the two connections. I don't think it will matter. They don't plan on tracking the usage based on the user ID. The will do it on the circuit ID. So if you have two connections they will track it for both. Technically you should have 120GB of monthly bandwidth over the two lines. |
|
theninjasqua
join:2007-09-26
Oakville, ON | reply to Newbies
Did they give any reasoning as to why they wanted to do this?
--
-theninjasquad |
|
Acanac Inc
Premium
join:2007-03-05
Mississauga, ON
| If a recall correctly they want to give more value to the service. It's clear that Bell's strategy is to prevent IPTV like service from ever becoming main stream. They might justify these limitations by stating it's to prevent network congestion, but it's just an excuse. If it's really about the costs increase the AGAS fee's and let us decide what we wish to offer to our own clients. They want to limit our ability to make these decisions. They wants us to be nothing more than Bell clones. |
|
mazhurg
Premium
join:2004-05-02
Portage La Prairie, MB
1 edit | And the only reason for that appears to be able to maximize profits while remaining competitive. |
|
CanerisErik
Caneris
Premium,VIP
join:2007-10-03
Toronto, ON
1 edit | reply to djweis
said by djweis :said by CanerisErik :said by Guspaz :On the other hand, I guess building your own remotes would be easier as a group. *IF* the CRTC forces Bell to allow placing remote xSLAMs just like the Stingers Bell puts on the side of their OPIs. We have something in the US called a field connection point as well as remote collocation. With the field connection point you physically place a cabinet or other DSLAM near the FDI (cross connect) in remote areas and pay the LEC a large amount of money to connect in a cable you provide to the cross connect field in the box. We've done 5 of them with Qwest with pretty good success. Some are fed with multiple T1's and a couple are fed with fiber. I don't see a wholesale/CLEC portion of www.bell.ca so I can't say for sure if that's available but it would be an option if it was. It only made sense for us in business parks that didn't have any ILEC DSL available. AFAIK, we don't have anything like that, despite the fact that an ever increasing number of loops is served from remotes (well over 50% in certain bands now). Bell will always find excuses and nonsense to feed the CRTC to prevent CLECs and DSLSPs from accessing remotes.
Just look at the past five years.
Here's a perfect example of their blatant disregard for their ILEC obligations and CRTC, from three years ago: »www.crtc.gc.ca/PartVII/eng/2005/···0497.htm
BS seems familiar? |
|
MisawaGQ
Divi Filius
Premium
join:2002-12-19
Mississauga
| reply to Newbies
What is it going to say about this country if Bell is allowed to so blatantly use their position as a monopoly to cripple their competition? This is a fairly clear-cut case of anti-competitive behaviour, yet I can't shake the feeling that it's going to be met with a sympathetic response from the CRTC.
--
"Let them hate, so long as they fear" -- Lucius Accius |
|
Candoo3
join:2005-01-24
 ·TekSavvy Solutions..
| said by MisawaGQ : yet I can't shake the feeling that it's going to be met with a sympathetic response from the CRTC. *Sympathetic* my a$$ ..... if the CRTC allows any of this to happen, then we will all know for sure that the left hand is feeding the right and vice-versa. |
|
mazhurg
Premium
join:2004-05-02
Portage La Prairie, MB
·TekSavvy Solutions..
·MTS
| reply to MisawaGQ
said by MisawaGQ :What is it going to say about this country if Bell is allowed to so blatantly use their position as a monopoly to cripple their competition? ---> If you are a monopoly, come on down as we have a large passive population just anxious to be raped? |
|
mazhurg
Premium
join:2004-05-02
Portage La Prairie, MB
·TekSavvy Solutions..
·MTS
1 edit | »www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/s···=SciTech
Prentice does not appear to have an issue with stuff he does not use or understand(as In internet and throttling) ; but try to charge him $0.15 per txt message?
Bah, just as crooked as the other ones. |
|
theninjasqua
join:2007-09-26
Oakville, ON | reply to Newbies
The CBC is reporting on this...
»www.cbc.ca/technology/story/2008···?ref=rss
--
-theninjasquad |
|
grayfox
join:2007-12-10
Whitby, ON
·TekSavvy Solutions..
·Bell Sympatico
| reply to Acanac Inc
said by acanac Inc :
We were given no ETA on the 16Mbps service. As for the two connections. I don't think it will matter. They don't plan on tracking the usage based on the user ID. The will do it on the circuit ID. So if you have two connections they will track it for both. Technically you should have 120GB of monthly bandwidth over the two lines.
Thanks that's exactly what I wanted to hear  . (I push ~90GB a month with a peak of 120GB) |
|
theninjasqua
join:2007-09-26
Oakville, ON | reply to Newbies
Was there any mention of allowing for the option to purchase more quota? Or is it everyone is locked at 60 regardless, and going over means paying overage fees?
--
-theninjasquad |
|
MisawaGQ
Divi Filius
Premium
join:2002-12-19
Mississauga | If they locked everyone at 60, how could they charge users for additional bandwidth at a 2000% markup over cost? |
|
elwoodblues
Elwood Blues
join:2006-08-30
Toronto, ON
| reply to mazhurg
said by mazhurg :And the only reason for that appears to be able to maximize profits while remaining competitive. Somebody has to pay for the LBO of BCE, guess who? |
|
elwoodblues
Elwood Blues
join:2006-08-30
Toronto, ON
| reply to mazhurg
said by mazhurg :» www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/s···=SciTechPrentice does not appear to have an issue with stuff he does not use or understand(as In internet and throttling) ; but try to charge him $0.15 per txt message? Bah, just as crooked as the other ones. The Internet is just a series of tubes to him |
|
funchords
Hello
Premium,MVM
join:2001-03-11
Washington, DC
·Verizon Online DSL
 ·Skype
| reply to Acanac Inc
said by Acanac Inc :512Kbps service will be limited to 2GB per month 5Mbps service will be limited to 60GB per month Might as well return Canada to dial-up.
»56k modems can transfer 32GB a Month!
--
Robb Topolski -= funchords.com =- Hillsboro, Oregon
More fun, more features, Join BroadbandReports.com, it's free...
|
|
riojew04532
@cia.com
| reply to Acanac Inc
I think that offering IPTV over GAS would never work for a multitude of reasons:
1. GAS has no QoS guarantees, and as we all know the uplink bandwidth provided to DSLAM's is low, so consistent IPTV streams of 3-12Mbps aren't really possible.
2. Cost wise, IPTV over GAS is different than the ILEC offering IPTV due to multicast. With the ILEC, every device in the chain between home gateway/modem and the video head end is on replicated once on every link, saving massive amounts of link bandwidth at every point in the network.
3. Oversubscription means that the GAS service has something like 60-150Kbps provisioned per user. How does unicast IPTV cope with this type of connection... I'd bet very poorly.
4. With less money for equipment, wouldn't a GAS ISP use more bandwidth between the client and the DSLAM, due to poorer compression?
5. Consider the ATM/PPPoE overhead, which once again makes non-ilec provided IPTV much more ressource intensive. |
|
Acanac Inc
Premium
join:2007-03-05
Mississauga, ON
1 edit |
"1. GAS has no QoS guarantees, and as we all know the uplink bandwidth provided to DSLAM's is low, so consistent IPTV streams of 3-12Mbps aren't really possible."
Our own internal testing over the last year has shown us that IPTV is possible over GAS. We would need ADSL2+ for HD content. I have not noticed any such slow downs with our test system. If the profile is set at 5Mbps we consistently get 4.2Mbps. More than enough for non HD content compressed with H.264. We believe we have a viable IPTV service over the current GAS system.
"2. Cost wise, IPTV over GAS is different than the ILEC offering IPTV due to multicast. With the ILEC, every device in the chain between home gateway/modem and the video head end is on replicated once on every link, saving massive amounts of link bandwidth at every point in the network."
You are correct. We would consume massive amounts of more bandwidth, but the alternative is not to offer it at all.
3. Oversubscription means that the GAS service has something like 60-150Kbps provisioned per user. How does unicast IPTV cope with this type of connection... I'd bet very poorly.
I still have seen no evidence from Bell that GAS service has been oversubscribed. We pay for our multiple 1Gbps interconnects and it's Bell's responsibility to make sure the DSLAM's have enough capacity. If the 1Gbps interconnects are priced to low to cover the cost increase the rate. We are not asking for freebies.
"4. With less money for equipment, wouldn't a GAS ISP use more bandwidth between the client and the DSLAM, due to poorer compression?"
We plan to use H.264 compression. This is what we have been testing for over a year now. The real time encoder cards and client set top boxes are more expensive, but it does save a massive amount of bandwidth.
"5. Consider the ATM/PPPoE overhead, which once again makes non-ilec provided IPTV much more ressource intensive."
Your correct once again, but in the end what choice do we have. The alternative would be not to offer such a service. It's not perfect, but it is viable. The cost to run such a service might be a bit higher than a ILEC, but the profit margin is still there. |
|
fatness
subtle
Janitor
join:2000-11-17
fishing
·EarthLink
Host:
Earthlink DSL
TekSavvy
Forum Feature Requ..
Need Site Help?
Rants, Raves, and ..
1 edit | reply to Acanac Inc
said by Acanac Inc :The only good news is that it will not affect current clients. So as long as you don't change ISP's you can keep your current unlimited connection. Just thinking out loud, that will serve to keep down criticism at the present time. Later, if the caps go into effect and the hubbub had died down, ending the "grandfathering" of existing accounts would generate less criticism.
--
Female monkeys often utter loud, distinctive calls before, during or after sex.. |
|
Candoo3
join:2005-01-24
·TekSavvy Solutions..
| said by fatness :Just thinking out loud, that will serve to keep down criticism at the present time. Later, if the caps go into effect and the hubbub had died down, ending the "grandfathering" of existing accounts would generate less criticism. And that's why this has to be fought from the onset, whether you *think* that it directly affects you or not. Even if you *think* this won't affect you in the near future, guaranteed it will down the road. And by then, it will be too late, because the precedence will already be made. It's too easy to sit back and take a passive stance, thinking only of self, instead of as a whole. |
|
