Guspaz
Guspaz
Premium,MVM
join:2001-11-05
Montreal, QC
 ·Colbanet
·TekSavvy Solutions..
1 edit | reply to Acanac Inc
Re: Acanac
And is control over the profile tied to the usage-based billing? I hear that they've been promising wholesalers control over profiles for several years now and have yet to actually do anything.
This would really suck for me. I'm not exactly a "heavy" user. I have a 200GB cap and tend to use 100-150GB per month. But I'd still go way over a piddly little 60GB cap...
EDIT: Wholesalers forming an alliance to share colocated DSLAMs is an interesting idea, and it'd be great for me, being directly connected to the Atwater CO (one of the main downtown Montreal COs). But it'll suck for everybody on remotes... On the other hand, I guess building your own remotes would be easier as a group. |
|
CanerisErik
Caneris
Premium,VIP
join:2007-10-03
Toronto, ON
| 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. |
|
Acanac Inc
Premium
join:2007-03-05
Mississauga, ON | Forming an alliance in my opinion is the only real longer term solution. We need to make Bell think twice before they come up with these ridiculous ideas. The only way to do this is to offer real compationtion. |
|
beamer69
join:2007-05-10
Burnaby, BC
·TekSavvy Solutions..
| said by Acanac Inc :Forming an alliance in my opinion is the only real longer term solution. While still fighting Bell against these actions in the hope at some point the last mile is broken off from the rest of Bell so everyone is treated equally. 
Right now all they are doing is moving the restrictions they have on Sympatico to wholesalers 
Keep fighting Paul this is really a joke what they are doing. Well wish it was a joke but it is not  |
|
djweis
join:2006-04-02
West Des Moines, IA
| reply to CanerisErik
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. |
|
CanerisErik
Caneris
Premium,VIP
join:2007-10-03
Toronto, ON
1 edit | 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? |
|
