said by mazhurg :

The real issue is about something a lot more basic:

Bell Networks was contracted, and paid to supply transfer data packet(s) from point A to point B. Nothing more. Not to look and delay, not to reroute, not to *inspect* and not to drop them en-route as per the appropriate schedules.

Now Bell can squirm and protest all it wants, but unless that schedule change then is it against regulations for it to do more.

said by DKS :

Bell also has the right to take measures to protect its network when traffic loads overwhelm it. Which is the point of the discussion. Bell says it is and it has the right and the CAIP says it isn't and it doesn't. And the lawyers win.

said by chuckless :

DKS seems to still believe in the 5% bullsh|t which even bell has abandond.

[giggles]

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.

said by DKS :

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.

said by R0CKY :

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.

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.

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.

said by DKS :

My CO isn't oversold and my connection isn't throttled. I have zero complaints with Bell. Your point?

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.

said by Radar73 :

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).

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.

said by DKS :

How so? Individually, it doesn't affect me. But in the bigger picture? yes.

said by DKS :

Who says it is "purposeful" (other than CAIP)? It's a form of network management, nothing more.

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.

said by DKS :

That's my point. Capacity IS being expanded. Sorry, Rocky. You lose on that one.