R0CKY
TSI Rocky
Premium,VIP
join:2005-05-19
Chatham, ON
| reply to DKS
Re: CAIP debunks Bell Canada throttling claim
said by DKS  :said by mazhurg :Oh please  . Yes they can, in a transient and effective manner while they fix the cause of the problem. The transient solution appears pretty permanent; there does not seem to be any move toward fixing the alleged load (usually by ahem... upgrading???) other than to deny sold services. Anyway, I said my piece. I note several new remotes in my community. DSL coverage areas have been expanded out of this CO in the last year. Upgrading is happening. It's just not happening fast enough for the bandwidth hogs and thieves. Remotes have nothing to do with Bandwidth hogs/thieves.... It's an expansion to service more people/clients that aren't currently serviceable at all or at the advertised speed rates.
--
TSI Rocky - TekSavvy Solutions Inc. |
|
Radar73
join:2008-01-20
Ajax, ON
| reply to DKS
Re: CAIP debunks Bell Canada throttling claim
There's no such thing as bandwidth hog. It's made up just like most of Bell's data on congestion is. People pay for a service offering that includes unlimited bandwidth at a fixed speed. No service is unlimited. There's a speed limit on your transfers, so even downloading at full capacity 24/7 for the entire month will only get you so many gigs. Your personal bandwidth is never tred upon by pirates or otherwise, and if you think differently, then you should take you concerns up with Bell for oversubscribing your CO/DSLAM.
As for CAIP vs Bell, Bell is the common carrier whose obligation under GAS is to transport a PPPoE packet from a residence/business to the connection point of the third party ISP at the speed alloted for under GAS. That doesn't require Bell to look any further past the PPPoE packet header to get the job done. The payload of the packet is private communications between the subscriber and the ISP. The mail analogy CAIP used is more accurate the the BS Bell tried to get away with. |
|
root9
join:2005-04-08
Kitchener, ON
| reply to DKS
Hey DKS
You have been Busted!
And now who's wearing the tin hat? hahaha rofl hahaha
You bring such good laughable satire to dslreports 
Thanx for the gut wrenching laugh of the day ROFL
--
Please engage eyeballs and retain functional brain before operating fingers. |
|
DKS
Damn Kidney Stones
Premium,ExMod 2002
join:2001-03-22
Owen Sound, ON
clubs:
 ·Bell Sympatico
| reply to TI POIL
said by TI POIL :DKS have you ever notice a change in your connection before and after all that throttling happen????? Does your google page load faster now? I know your answer NO you are just being brainwashed. It's all lies and bullshit. My connection has never been throttled. No throttling has been reported from my area. Please don't move here.
--
Need-based health care not greed-based health care. |
|
DKS
Damn Kidney Stones
Premium,ExMod 2002
join:2001-03-22
Owen Sound, ON
clubs:
·Bell Sympatico
| reply to j3richo
said by j3richo :said by DKS :said by j3richo :as usual, DKS is first in line to shill for the telcos and spout complete nonsense. Newsflash! your idiotic ramblings have been thoroughly debunked, nobody is hogging your bandwidth, I'm using *MY* own bandwidth that *I* payed for. As am I. 5 megs down and no cap. And no one has refuted anything I have said. They just change the frame of reference, which is an old, old way of avoiding the facts. lol, you didn't make any claims that need to be refuted, you just called us "spoiled GenX'ers...and downloading pirates hogging the bandwidth you pay for". This isn't an argument, it's just resorting to name calling since repeating Bell's claims will just get you laughed at. You deny, then that you are not? I am certainly not a GenX'er and I do not do any downloading or piracy. Not even a "linux distro". And what I am saying is no different from the bending of the truth to suit their facts that CAIP is using.
--
Need-based health care not greed-based health care. |
|
DKS
Damn Kidney Stones
Premium,ExMod 2002
join:2001-03-22
Owen Sound, ON
clubs:
·Bell Sympatico
1 edit | reply to R0CKY
said by R0CKY :said by DKS :said by mazhurg :Oh please . Yes they can, in a transient and effective manner while they fix the cause of the problem. The transient solution appears pretty permanent; there does not seem to be any move toward fixing the alleged load (usually by ahem... upgrading???) other than to deny sold services. Anyway, I said my piece. I note several new remotes in my community. DSL coverage areas have been expanded out of this CO in the last year. Upgrading is happening. It's just not happening fast enough for the bandwidth hogs and thieves. Remotes have nothing to do with Bandwidth hogs/thieves.... It's an expansion to service more people/clients that aren't currently serviceable at all or at the advertised speed rates. That's my point. Capacity IS being expanded. Sorry, Rocky. You lose on that one.
--
Need-based health care not greed-based health care. |
|
DKS
Damn Kidney Stones
Premium,ExMod 2002
join:2001-03-22
Owen Sound, ON
clubs:
·Bell Sympatico
| reply to root9
said by root9 :Hey DKS You have been Busted! And now who's wearing the tin hat? hahaha rofl hahaha You bring such good laughable satire to dslreports Thanx for the gut wrenching laugh of the day ROFL How so? I simply refuse to accept your version of the truth and substitute my own. I disagree with both CAIP and Bell. It needs to be left to the courts as a contractual dispute.
--
Need-based health care not greed-based health care. |
|
DKS
Damn Kidney Stones
Premium,ExMod 2002
join:2001-03-22
Owen Sound, ON
clubs:
·Bell Sympatico
| reply to Radar73
said by Radar73 :There's no such thing as bandwidth hog. It's made up just like most of Bell's data on congestion is. People pay for a service offering that includes unlimited bandwidth at a fixed speed. No service is unlimited. There's a speed limit on your transfers, so even downloading at full capacity 24/7 for the entire month will only get you so many gigs. Your personal bandwidth is never tred upon by pirates or otherwise, and if you think differently, then you should take you concerns up with Bell for oversubscribing your CO/DSLAM. My CO isn't oversold and my connection isn't throttled. I have zero complaints with Bell. Your point?
As for CAIP vs Bell, Bell is the common carrier whose obligation under GAS is to transport a PPPoE packet from a residence/business to the connection point of the third party ISP at the speed alloted for under GAS. That doesn't require Bell to look any further past the PPPoE packet header to get the job done. The payload of the packet is private communications between the subscriber and the ISP. The mail analogy CAIP used is more accurate the the BS Bell tried to get away with.
Your forget that Bell has the contractual ability to manage their network. You don't like the way they are managing it. Tough. The contract is between Bell and their clients. Let them and their lawyers fight it out.
One thing I will give CAIP credit for is good public relations and mobilizing the public. Mind you, it is manipulative in their favour, but it's a good, effective strategy. Now how about mobilizing people around an issue that REALLY matters? Like war, illiteracy, bad water on First Nations reserves or something significant? This ain't.
--
Need-based health care not greed-based health care. |
|
drjp81
join:2006-01-09
canada
·TELUS
·TekSavvy Solutions..
| reply to oh LOOK
Wow nothing like a good dose of pontificating, eh? DKS?
However I do believe DKS is right, that in the immediate it is a contractual dispute. However, the terms of the contract are principally mandated by a public regulatory body, the CRTC.
Hence the public interest (and rightly so) from the internet users especially, to see if the CRTC is going to bend over and take it, or show some teeth.
The breech of contract is allegedly done by Bell, so of course they are getting more flack. But you just have to wonder, what in the heck has a company, with Bell's clout going on in the unrealistic spheres of high management, so that normally courteous and helpful tech reps start lying through their teeth unscrupulously.
It certainly doesn't resound of "it's my network and will manage it as I'll want to".
And finally, as it has been explained more than once, with thankfully no help from any lawyers, CAIP's bandwidth is paid for in full and theirs to use as they see fit. NO "up to's" and anything in excess is surcharged.
So no one is taking "your precious" bandwidth DKS.
Nice try though.
--
Cheers!--
I reserve the right to use any private message
in these boards if you behave like a horse a$$ in it. |
|
Radar73
join:2008-01-20
Ajax, ON
| reply to DKS
said by DKS :My CO isn't oversold and my connection isn't throttled. I have zero complaints with Bell. Your point? I'm glad you have no complaints. I was just pointing out how your complaint about bandwidth hogs stealing your bandwidth doesn't make much sense (and sort of is a complaint).
said by DKS :Your forget that Bell has the contractual ability to manage their network. You don't like the way they are managing it. Tough. The contract is between Bell and their clients. Let them and their lawyers fight it out. We will find out in September if Bell's form of network management of GAS is part of their contractual abilty. I'm pretty sure I didn't read anything about purposeful degredation of regulated speeds of GAS as part of the Tarriff, but we shall see what the CRTC thinks. |
|
j3richo
join:2007-12-08
Gatineau, QC
·Acanac
 ·Videotron
| reply to DKS
said by DKS :You deny, then that you are not? I am certainly not a GenX'er and I do not do any downloading or piracy. Not even a "linux distro". And what I am saying is no different from the bending of the truth to suit their facts that CAIP is using. wow ok, so what part of CAIP's claim are false? please explain how they are bending the truth. I'm curious why CAIP and Bell have even bothered to go to the CRTC since you apparently already know what's true and what's not |
|
DKS
Damn Kidney Stones
Premium,ExMod 2002
join:2001-03-22
Owen Sound, ON
clubs:
·Bell Sympatico
| reply to Radar73
said by Radar73 :said by DKS :My CO isn't oversold and my connection isn't throttled. I have zero complaints with Bell. Your point? I'm glad you have no complaints. I was just pointing out how your complaint about bandwidth hogs stealing your bandwidth doesn't make much sense (and sort of is a complaint). How so? Individually, it doesn't affect me. But in the bigger picture? yes.
said by DKS :Your forget that Bell has the contractual ability to manage their network. You don't like the way they are managing it. Tough. The contract is between Bell and their clients. Let them and their lawyers fight it out. We will find out in September if Bell's form of network management of GAS is part of their contractual abilty. I'm pretty sure I didn't read anything about purposeful degredation of regulated speeds of GAS as part of the Tarriff, but we shall see what the CRTC thinks.
--
Need-based health care not greed-based health care. |
|
DKS
Damn Kidney Stones
Premium,ExMod 2002
join:2001-03-22
Owen Sound, ON
clubs:
·Bell Sympatico
| reply to j3richo
said by j3richo :said by DKS :You deny, then that you are not? I am certainly not a GenX'er and I do not do any downloading or piracy. Not even a "linux distro". And what I am saying is no different from the bending of the truth to suit their facts that CAIP is using. wow ok, so what part of CAIP's claim are false? please explain how they are bending the truth. I'm curious why CAIP and Bell have even bothered to go to the CRTC since you apparently already know what's true and what's not You assume I know something. The decision to go to the CRTC was CAIP's. That's on the public record. And both parties present the facts to support their position. That's why they both have good lawyers.
--
Need-based health care not greed-based health care. |
|
Radar73
join:2008-01-20
Ajax, ON
| reply to DKS
said by DKS :How so? Individually, it doesn't affect me. But in the bigger picture? yes. Since Bell's congestion data is kind of loose and Bell's network capacity data shows it has enormous unused capacity on it's network, the so called bandwidth hogs aren't really a problem for anyone. In the bigger picture I'm more concerned with Bell telling me what content I can access from what application at what time of day. It should be none of Bell's business what I lawfully use my paid DSL connection for.
said by DKS :Who says it is "purposeful" (other than CAIP)? It's a form of network management, nothing more. Purposeful meaning intentional. CAIP has nothing to do with it. Bell decided unilaterally to slow P2P by 90% for 10 hours a day. That is a hefty speed reduction to the regulated speeds of GAS. Some people acutally use P2P for legit uses you know, some don't, but that's not in Bell's jurisdiction.
As for "network management" that Bell likes to hide it's unscrupulous behaviour under, I can't say it any better than this:
said by jfmezei :DPI is not a network management solution, it is a service management solution which defines what types of uses of internet are to be allowed and what parts are not allowed. This is not an "engineering" decision, it is a management decision. If congestion were a problem, Bell Canada would have delayed Sympatico 40% speed increases from 5 to 7mbps until the backbone was able to support it. That would have been an engineering solution to manage the network. The ADSL speed is the only variable that Bell can control under GAS tariffs. ISPs control how much AHSSPI capacity they purchase to support the type of uses their customers make at the speeds Bell as decided to supply on the ADSL loops. Management at the application level is not network management, it is service management. |
|
j3richo
join:2007-12-08
Gatineau, QC
·Acanac
·Videotron
| reply to DKS
said by DKS :said by j3richo :said by DKS :You deny, then that you are not? I am certainly not a GenX'er and I do not do any downloading or piracy. Not even a "linux distro". And what I am saying is no different from the bending of the truth to suit their facts that CAIP is using. wow ok, so what part of CAIP's claim are false? please explain how they are bending the truth. I'm curious why CAIP and Bell have even bothered to go to the CRTC since you apparently already know what's true and what's not You assume I know something. The decision to go to the CRTC was CAIP's. That's on the public record. And both parties present the facts to support their position. That's why they both have good lawyers. I'm not assuming anything, you said CAIP is bending the truth and misleading the public, what exactly are you talking about? |
|
DKS
Damn Kidney Stones
Premium,ExMod 2002
join:2001-03-22
Owen Sound, ON
clubs:
·Bell Sympatico
| said by j3richo :I'm not assuming anything, you said CAIP is bending the truth and misleading the public, what exactly are you talking about? Not acknowledging that the matter is a contractual issue and turning it (apparently successfully) into a "net neutrality" issue.
--
Need-based health care not greed-based health care. |
|
morons galore
@videotron.ca | Blocking and interfering with competitive technology IS a neutrality issue.
and no this competitive technology IS NOT used only by theives like you claim.
Take a hike with your bull dks. |
|
DKS
Damn Kidney Stones
Premium,ExMod 2002
join:2001-03-22
Owen Sound, ON
clubs:
·Bell Sympatico
| said by morons galore :
Blocking and interfering with competitive technology IS a neutrality issue.
and no this competitive technology IS NOT used only by theives like you claim.
Take a hike with your bull dks.
I beg your pardon? How is it a net neutrality issue? It is because CAIP has said it is so, and I don't agree with them. It is a successful public relations maneuver by CAIP that has gained huge public sympathy, but nothing more. Bell has a contractual right to manage their network. Folks just get all pissy because it interferes what they think is their God-given right. Guess what? It ain't.
--
Need-based health care not greed-based health care. |
|
pier walk_it
@videotron.ca
1 edit | oh ok, Bell being the gate-keepers and deciding whats allowed and what isn't allowed is not a neutrality issue, riiiiiiight
Bell slowing down comeptition is not a neutrality issue, riiiiiiight
Bell deciding what you download via HOW you download is not a neutrality issue, riiiiiiight |
|
