Re: Acanac in Canadian Broadband http://www.dslreports.com/forum/r20873283 en Tue, 01 Dec 2009 11:52:21 EDT Tue, 01 Dec 2009 11:52:21 EDT Re: Acanac http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21181024 Gwai Lo Dan :
said by nice4 See Profile :

BTW, should a Bell's DSL modem 4200/5200 type works well with ACANAC service becasue I can get one of those from a friend so that I don't need their modem.
It will work. I use have a 5200 that works fine with Teksavvy.
EDIT: It is a little picky in that I have to set the TCP/IP addresses in Windows (i.e., automatic does not work), but the modem works fine after that.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21181024 Sun, 28 Sep 2008 07:59:55 EDT Re: Acanac http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21175018 Quake110 :
said by nice4 See Profile :

Thanks pacman99....As I have no time read all the post regarding ACANAC services in term of speed/availability and such. Anyone has any advise/tips for this ISP ?

BTW, should a Bell's DSL modem 4200/5200 type works well with ACANAC service becasue I can get one of those from a friend so that I don't need their modem.
BTW, Acanac has their own forums on their website. »community.acanac.com/acanac/]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21175018 Fri, 26 Sep 2008 19:25:53 EDT Re: Acanac http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21174906 Quake110 :
said by Acanac Inc See Profile :

The renewal prices includes tax. It's looks like allot of people miss the fact that our prices include tax. Do you think it would more appropriate to advertise the prices before tax?

Best Regards,
Paul
www.acanac.ca
I think you should add "Tax included" if you want to leave it as it is because we're not used to see prices includes the tax.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21174906 Fri, 26 Sep 2008 19:00:01 EDT Re: Acanac http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21174799 levi47 : Any ETA on the MLPPP support? this ssh tunnel is flaking out all the time, leaving me with a pitiful 30kb/s bandwidth.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21174799 Fri, 26 Sep 2008 18:42:36 EDT Re: Acanac http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21144023 nice4 : Thanks pacman99....As I have no time read all the post regarding ACANAC services in term of speed/availability and such. Anyone has any advise/tips for this ISP ?

BTW, should a Bell's DSL modem 4200/5200 type works well with ACANAC service becasue I can get one of those from a friend so that I don't need their modem.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21144023 Sun, 21 Sep 2008 01:11:19 EDT Re: Acanac http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21143076 pacman99 : I'm not from acanac but I'll try answering your questions from what I know:
1) Yes there is a 30 day money back guarantee from the time your service becomes activated. I also think you can request a trial account before paying but I'm not sure if that's still available.
2) Yes modem's free but you have to put down a $49.95 deposit which is apparently refunded once you return the modem.
3) Supposedly 5-10 business days but in my case, even a month wasn't enough. I don't know who kept on screwing things up but I still don't have my business DSL activated (been a month I think) so i'll be asking for my refund when I get around to it.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21143076 Sat, 20 Sep 2008 20:07:32 EDT Re: Acanac http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21142239 nice4 : Can ACANAC offers quick answers for these..
1) Does ACANAC offer some trail period before I commit for a full year sign-up. ie a month or so ?
2) Does ACANAC offer free modem with their service too ? if not what kind of modem is required ie Bell's 4200/5200 ?
3) How long it takes for activation ?
Cheers]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21142239 Sat, 20 Sep 2008 15:59:55 EDT Re: Acanac http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21122835 anon : I'm talking about this page here:

»acanac.ca/DSL-Terms.htm

When I see the 33.95 struck out and the 18.95 put in, it gives me the assumption that the 18.95 is the special price, which it is, and that that specific special includes tax. Just saying making it clearer would be better.. And yeah, I dunno what's going on with networks these days. Perfectly good service until Bell screwed it up for me..]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21122835 Tue, 16 Sep 2008 23:51:39 EDT Re: Acanac http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21115158 anon : ACANAC rocks DSL - VPN and VOIP, but you need to send them hate mail to get action.

Haha. ]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21115158 Mon, 15 Sep 2008 18:55:53 EDT Re: Acanac http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21113154 Last Parade :
said by intelceleron11 :

If prices indicated that they included tax, I think some would think twice before going to teksavvy.
Um, they do. »acanac.ca/DSL.html]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21113154 Mon, 15 Sep 2008 13:12:50 EDT Re: Acanac http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21112426 invincible00 : Thanks for your explanations.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21112426 Mon, 15 Sep 2008 11:00:30 EDT Re: Acanac http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21106526 anon : If prices indicated that they included tax, I think some would think twice before going to teksavvy. I know I was thinking of switching to teksavvy - after the second year of using Acanac of course - I don't feel right taking advantage of a company with a special. ...

Honestly the service is crap no matter where you go - Bell sucks, Teksavvy sucks, and acanac sucks. DSL just plain sucks. Bell has made DSL the garbage connection, a joke. No offense but if you're throttled, you're throttled. Acanac at least has native english speaking people to talk to, something Bell can't say. I've heard good things about teksavvy but everyone has both good times and bad times with ISP's... At least I get what I pay for with Acanac. I was paying 50 bucks a month.. more actually, with Bell. I had enough when it took them 2 weeks to replace a damned modem. Every time I called they said they'd do a line test - which was supposed to have been done the second day. I took my free months from them and left. First they sucked with billing (back in the day)- that made my mother not want to deal with them. Then they throttled me (and their service sucked - wasn't a problem until my hardware had a problem)... Went to Acanac then BAM fast speeds again.. then throttled again - thanks Bell! ... Even when I leave them, I still can't LEAVE THEM!!

I've been thinking about asking about that server option acanac is providing for free that can torrent - HTTP downloading seems to be the only way around this at the moment.

All I"m doing is waiting for October... I hope the CRTC nails Bell. 5% bandwidth congestion isn't a problem. What's considered congestion? 25%? Yes in fact most networks consider 25-50% as a congested network. Don't tell me that bell's networks are 100% congested in certain hops. I don't believe it. Regardless Bell is backpedalling with (cisco?) implementing new fiber networks. It's all just a ploy to try to make the CRTC feel sorry for Bell. Hope they nail them so badly.

... So to answer your question Paul, just mention it on the term discount page that the price includes tax - that'll help a lot. Lol... all that just to say yes, include it on your main page cause I know I for one was confused.

Also another weird thing... I log into Acanac with my computer - fast downloads with torrents. Acanac doesn't officially support MLPPP... I use my router to log in, I get throttled like everyone else. It's so weird.. If any information can be given as to why this is, that would be appreciated - the only reason I"m not using my computer as a router is it's too unstable. It's an unstable connection - at least my router stays online consistently for a day. My computer drops the connection like 20 times a day. Anyway enough from me.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21106526 Sat, 13 Sep 2008 23:26:06 EDT Re: Acanac http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21105580 anon : If Acanac price not include tax, then Quebec subscribers only have to pay GST tax.

As of right now, Acanac is collecting QST tax money from Quebec subscribers... Sound like not correct isn't it?]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21105580 Sat, 13 Sep 2008 19:07:52 EDT Re: Acanac http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21105277 anon :
said by Acanac Inc See Profile :

The renewal prices includes tax. It's looks like allot of people miss the fact that our prices include tax. Do you think it would more appropriate to advertise the prices before tax?

Best Regards,
Paul
www.acanac.ca
I think so.
When people ask in the forum people quote your prices as higher than others, so people assume yours is higher.

I, for one, never knew your price included tax.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21105277 Sat, 13 Sep 2008 18:00:10 EDT Re: Acanac http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21104283 Acanac Inc : The renewal prices includes tax. It's looks like allot of people miss the fact that our prices include tax. Do you think it would more appropriate to advertise the prices before tax?

Best Regards,
Paul
www.acanac.ca]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21104283 Sat, 13 Sep 2008 13:53:05 EDT Re: Acanac http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21101814 anon : Which reminds me. Paul. Is the 33.95 after the first year, is that with or without tax? Cause if it's tax included, Acanac is actually cheaper than Teksavvy after taxes.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21101814 Fri, 12 Sep 2008 22:35:28 EDT Re: Acanac http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21100710 Quake110 :
said by invincible00 See Profile :

Thanks. I am perhaps not a so heavy user. Who wants unlimited capacity? To me, 60G at Bell is more than enough. I don't know how some people manage to use up 100-200G/month, downloading what? I need to work full time, so only use internet at home after work
I usually use uTorrent's RSS so that it downloads the things I need automatically when I'm at school/work. But each person is different ;)]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21100710 Fri, 12 Sep 2008 16:49:03 EDT Re: Acanac http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21100594 levi47 : MLPPP is multi link point to point protocol, it obfuscates traffic enough to bypass the throttle bell implements on it's lines. PM stands for Private message, possibly other things. ACANAC is the cheapest you'll find any dsl for the first year and pretty close after that. You may not need that large a CAP but for the extra 3$/month over a 30$ limited plan they provide a free online pc, free personal ftp server with 100gb storage and an SSL tunnel for encrypting traffic. While i did not really expect to use these features much they come in very handy at work and on vacation.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21100594 Fri, 12 Sep 2008 16:25:09 EDT Re: Acanac http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21100527 invincible00 : Thanks. I am perhaps not a so heavy user. Who wants unlimited capacity? To me, 60G at Bell is more than enough. I don't know how some people manage to use up 100-200G/month, downloading what? I need to work full time, so only use internet at home after work. Price is more an issue. If Acanac can fine divide the price, say 60G or 100G at a lower price, unlimited downloading at a higher price, it will be better, will it not?

By the way, what do PM and MLPPP mean? Sorry to ask.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21100527 Fri, 12 Sep 2008 16:16:00 EDT Re: Acanac http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21100420 levi47 : Where have you seen prices below 30$ for unlimited internet? I was with Teksavvy last year for 40$/month. I was very happy with their service and thought 40$ /month was reasonable. I switched to ACANAC because of the lower price and have been very happy. I do like teksavvy's visibility on the throttling issues and the mlppp workaround, but ACANAC provides great service for 33$/month, let alone the 20$/month the first year. Now i just have to wait for MLPPP support to come in, and possibly free internal traffic for their pay VPS service.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21100420 Fri, 12 Sep 2008 15:58:09 EDT Re: Acanac http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21100308 invincible00 : Thanks for both your replies. So prompt.

But how can you run a business if it's real that you lose money for the first year's price? Unbelievable, sorry to say. The second year's price isn't very attractive compared with others' less than $30 price, is it?

Appreciate your fast reply, Sir!]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21100308 Fri, 12 Sep 2008 15:41:20 EDT Re: Acanac http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21099999 Last Parade :
said by invincible00 See Profile :

I am thinking of buying the Acanac's internet service. The first year is attractive, but why a sudden price jump in the 2nd year? That will certainly make many subscribers turn off.

Won't it be better for both parties if later years' price can only moderately increase? Thanks.
The second year of service is on par with TekSavvy...]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21099999 Fri, 12 Sep 2008 14:50:06 EDT Re: Acanac http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21099791 Acanac Inc : Thank you for your interest in our service. Please understand that during the first year of service we loose about $96. You pay us $18.95, but our true cost of running your account is around $26. It takes us a few years just to recoup the first years losses. $32 dollars before tax is a very competitive service for an unlimited account.

It's just that the first year is just so dam good:)

Best Regards,
Paul
www.acanac.ca]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21099791 Fri, 12 Sep 2008 14:11:48 EDT Re: Acanac http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21099252 invincible00 : I am thinking of buying the Acanac's internet service. The first year is attractive, but why a sudden price jump in the 2nd year? That will certainly make many subscribers turn off.

Won't it be better for both parties if later years' price can only moderately increase? Thanks.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21099252 Fri, 12 Sep 2008 12:45:31 EDT Re: Acanac http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21095017 HF1 : Hi Paul,

I forgot how to PM you, is it just press the button 'Reply OP' or any other way? can you please advise as well?

Thanks.

HF1]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21095017 Thu, 11 Sep 2008 16:26:21 EDT Re: Acanac http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21095002 HF1 : Hi Paul,

I forgot how to PM you, is it just press the button or , can you please advise as well?

Thanks.

HF1]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21095002 Thu, 11 Sep 2008 16:23:50 EDT Re: Acanac http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21094956 HF1 : Hi Paul,

I'm current acanac customer since March 08, but I have a DSL signal loss more often this month, which I occasionally lost any internet access for either 20 minutes or a few hours a day... And it forced me have to drive back to my office to continue my work for a few evening. I have called the support (Ticket PDH-58435 and XIU-86203) opened, but it still keeps happening... My slow speed can 214 kbps to 1115 kbps max. last night. If you can provide your email, I can send the screenshot to you or you can check my ticket as I always sent screenshots to dslsupport@acanac.com.

Can you please help to follow up?

BTW, I have never see the promised 5Mbps, the max I saw was 2.8M bps so far since I joined Acanac.

Thanks a lot in advance if you can help.

HF1]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21094956 Thu, 11 Sep 2008 16:15:27 EDT Re: Acanac http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21063291 Ikarasu : Are you in works of setting that up, or plan to anytime soon? Any ETA? :D I like the VPS thats included, would be nice to have you guys as a second connection :D ]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21063291 Fri, 05 Sep 2008 15:00:37 EDT Re: Acanac http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21062631 Acanac Inc : We do offer Voip, but at this moment DSL is not offered. In the first few years we might have offered DSL in the Western Provenience through Bell, but the prices and setup times did not make any sense. Until the day we setup a similar contract with Telus it's not worth the costs.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21062631 Fri, 05 Sep 2008 13:18:17 EDT Re: Acanac http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21062173 Ikarasu : A little offtopic.

But I was wondering...was browsing Forums and saw you used to offer DSL in BC not too long ago, but now you don't...any reason for this?]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21062173 Fri, 05 Sep 2008 12:01:35 EDT Re: Acanac http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21058493 wonder man : after 15 days of without internet , acanac staff writes" We informed Bell about the issue and they will investigate as soon as possible"....i wrote for cancelation of order and will complain to CRTC.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21058493 Thu, 04 Sep 2008 18:42:12 EDT Re: Acanac http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21057512 levi47 : Do you know when the equipment will be in place to use MLPPP? ]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21057512 Thu, 04 Sep 2008 15:43:05 EDT Re: Acanac http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21056961 Acanac Inc : DSL Phone Support :
Mon-Fri 9am-12am
1-866-281-3538

I don't no the reason why your connection has not yet been actevated, but please understand this this part is Bell responsibility. Did you have a Dry loop with your previous provider? ]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21056961 Thu, 04 Sep 2008 14:01:04 EDT Re: Acanac http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21056813 Acanac Inc : We do apologize for the delays in the MLPPP. We had it working on one of our LNS servers, but it ended up crashing it after a few days. Until we are confident these bugs have been corrected we prefer to be on the safe side. We have ordered in some Juniper equipment as an alternative for MLPPP. The only problem with this method is that you will need to change the realm.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21056813 Thu, 04 Sep 2008 13:33:37 EDT Re: Acanac http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21056506 levi47 : I have been with ACANAC for the past few months and have few complaints. My main complaint is that they claimed to unofficially support MLPPP and planned to officially support it on all servers in the near future. It has been months and so far i have been unsuccessful in connecting using MLPPP on all servers they operate. They offer an SSH tunnel which can be used to bypass the throttle for some applications but i want a solution for ALL applications, as MLPPP is. If they were to support MLPPP i would say they offer the best product for your dollar out there, as is it is pretty close. They offer a free online PC and SSH tunnel as well as a personal ftp/webserver.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21056506 Thu, 04 Sep 2008 12:30:07 EDT Re: Acanac http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21053244 wonder man : i have a very bad experience with acanac. the staff is non technical. i had teksavvy which is the best interent provider, but since last 15 days ago i had to cancell my net from them temptation of saving money and sign with acanac(one of the looser company) ,still not conected. simply acanac peoples are incomptant to deal customers.they dont have any working phone number...just imagine. i am still hanging for connection after 15 days of waiting. before going to sign up with acanac think twice.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21053244 Wed, 03 Sep 2008 20:15:04 EDT Re: Acanac http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21049008 Quake110 :
said by jack9999 See Profile :

From what i know, they dont throttle, but Bell does.
But Acanac figured a way to bypass the trottle, maybe thats how the "No throttling" come by?
You can bypass Bell's throttling by a SSH tunnel provided by Acanac if you're with them.
»acanac.ca/SSH-Tunnel-U.htm]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21049008 Wed, 03 Sep 2008 01:40:17 EDT Re: Acanac http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21048632 Acanac Inc : Please PM me the times your called with the phone number you called from. Today was a busy day because of the long weekend and some calls may have been missed. In fact today was one of our busiest days ever. Both in terms of tech support and sales. Nearly 3000 calls. Once again I would be more than happy to look into it.

If you have any other questions please don't hesitate to ask.

Best Regards,
Paul
www.acanac.ca]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21048632 Tue, 02 Sep 2008 23:47:05 EDT Re: Acanac http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21047994 Cubytus : Seems that Acanac, as of september 2008, is not a serious company to deal with. Its sales representative are impolite with prospective customers, and their DSL department (ext. 4) never answers.

Maybe the least expensive... for ghosts.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21047994 Tue, 02 Sep 2008 21:37:49 EDT Re: Acanac http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20943297 alex6999 : bell provide link from local box with dsl modems to acanac, they can do it only of harm.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20943297 Wed, 13 Aug 2008 08:47:14 EDT Re: Acanac http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20943264 jack9999 : From what i know, they dont throttle, but Bell does.
But Acanac figured a way to bypass the trottle, maybe thats how the "No throttling" come by?]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20943264 Wed, 13 Aug 2008 08:39:21 EDT Re: Acanac http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20942827 alex6999 : is it true? about thorttling
]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20942827 Wed, 13 Aug 2008 04:36:00 EDT Re: Acanac http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20898454 Guspaz : One might argue that the whole "internet" part of the equation is rather important.

Nevertheless, it looks like the indy ISPs are considering changing this. As soon as they have their own equipment in COs, it's them for everything but the dumb copper to the DSL modem. Effectively, they own every aspect of the chain except for the dumb copper cable. And since they'd be controlling the equipment on either end, you could argue that the indy ISPs would "control" 100% of the chain.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20898454 Mon, 04 Aug 2008 16:11:43 EDT Re: Acanac http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20897159 mazhurg : I wonder how Bell & co can come up with such a scheme? While currently most traffic is pretty well defined it will come a time, in the not too far future where the web will be the computer.

You can already start to see some trace of this: with off-line storage, group computations (E.g SETI), distributed applications (Google tools) and many others. Heck, Microsoft is working on a distributed OS, where the web is the OS.

In face of all that; we can pretty well conclude that data transit will have nowhere to go but up.

Do we as a country, as this capping and throttling will spread to most other Canadian telecommunications companies and cable if successful, really want to miss this opportunity and be relegated to the third world of communications?]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20897159 Mon, 04 Aug 2008 11:56:28 EDT Re: Acanac http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20896475 Last Parade :
said by bell usual :

The reason why companies such as Acanac and Teksavvy exist is to attenuate the Bell Monopoly. If Bell was to get the green light on this, it would undo the entire intent.
You're more of a Bell customer than an Acanac customer. Acanac just uses spare bandwidth to route you to the Internet, the rest is all Bell.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20896475 Mon, 04 Aug 2008 09:22:44 EDT Re: Acanac http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20895697 anon : Ok here's the deal. What if Bell just wants to do away with all DSL customers, offloading all high volume customers (and some disgruntled others) to the cable companies' arms, effectively putting a strain on their networks (potentially). Just a thought. Surely, it's shady, and surely it's despicable, but they have the right to dictate the terms. They don't have the right to arbitrarily dictate what can and cannot be done on a leased line, when the terms at the beginning were agreed upon. This DPI technology is definately completely anticompetitive when used with their entire network. It stops becoming an issue of bandwidth control for their own networks, but goes into the realm of net neutrality, which is essentially what everyone's been talking about. IPTV is completely possible, in fact tvu player does fairly decent standard definition tv for around half a meg, using conventional p2p technology and windows media video container.

Maybe it's under the conventional bandwidth amount that bell caps me. Truth be told I'm an acanac customer but I'm affected by bell. I'm seriously considering dual logins to hopefully bypass this issue. It's frustrating and irritating and really, bell just is like the crazy girlfriend that after breaking up with her goes off the deep end. Bitcapping isn't going to work, and I can't see how Bell would even be thinking that a 60 GB cap would actually be appropriate - for anyone. It's definately useful as aforementioned, for utilitarian internet uses, but a 5mbit connection should not be considered utilitarian. The internet for me is an entertainment machine - I use it for gaming, for TV, for other downloads, for telephony, but interestingly enough, telephony isn't viable any longer ever since Bell throttled me and didn't tell me. When I cancelled my service I'm sure my voip provider wasn't too happy and I honestly think that I blamed my voip provider for problems that Bell actually caused. I considered removing my landline in favor of voip but since bell was being anticompetitive in that way also.... there is nothing I can do - I don't have cable, that's what my internet is for, and in order to have cable internet I've been told I need to subscribe to basic cable - which I think is BS but no matter what I'm being screwed for not wanting to be party to someone else's capitalist dream, being forcefed things I don't want and don't need.

That's all this comes down to with bell - they're just being more stuck up and hardnosed, thinking that because others "rent" the lines they as a landlord have total and complete rights as to what happens after that point. But there's tenant's rights, and likewise there should be wholesale broadband subscriber's rights as well. It's just another area of the internet that isn't defined but should be. I think Bell is just betting on the fact that the internet is so taboo and "mystical" that their actions "on this new frontier" wouldn't be seen the same way as other types of anticompetitive behavior. I'm not one to sue, but I really hope Bell gets what's coming to them with that class action suit wanting to be started in quebec. If alexander graham bell was alive today, he'd spit on Bell Telecom and forsake it as his brainchild for being so very cutthroat when it has no reason to be. As The Acanac poster says - up the price of the lines, do whatever, but be reasonable about it, but it's something that Bell just doesn't want to play Ball about. So I say it's already 3 strikes, and they're out.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20895697 Mon, 04 Aug 2008 00:06:36 EDT Re: Acanac http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20895495 anon : The reason why companies such as Acanac and Teksavvy exist is to attenuate the Bell Monopoly. If Bell was to get the green light on this, it would undo the entire intent.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20895495 Sun, 03 Aug 2008 23:09:40 EDT Re: Acanac http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20885832 Candoo3 :
said by ancodia See Profile :

they seem to be going out of their way to make sure every Internet user doesnt choose Bell. How can you secure your future when you alienate all your current/potential customers?
Because their target is mainstream Joe/Jane Average Canuck, who aren't informed and don't have a clue. Ppl will go with BS just because they have phone service with them. Case in point, my ex. She asked for a good ISP for her internet needs, and I recommended TSI, and wrote out info for her to get the connection. A few weeks later I hear thru the kids she got Inet, but went with Bell for simplicity, as her landline and mobile is with them. Many folks have this frame of mind, and Bell relies on it.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20885832 Fri, 01 Aug 2008 19:20:39 EDT Re: Acanac http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20885579 ancodia : overcharge will drive people away from DSL. From my local cable provider I can get 120g/month for $65. With the new Bell rates, .50 @ 60g = $30 + my dry loop dsl, so its cheaper to go cable (and cable is faster). For an extra $25 I can upgrade to the 200g package. If Bell charges $2 per gig, well forget about it.

Like I said before, I've honestly think there must be a high level disgrunted Bell manager who is hell bent on destroying Bell. There is no way management would make these kind of decisions believing its good for business. (god help them if they do believe that!) The future is Internet based and they seem to be going out of their way to make sure every Internet user doesnt choose Bell. How can you secure your future when you alienate all your current/potential customers? Nickel & diming is the road to bankruptcy.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20885579 Fri, 01 Aug 2008 18:27:00 EDT Re: Acanac http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20885360 anon : Thank you Paul for your replies. I really appreciate hearing the ISP's take on how they would like costs to change if they need to (CRTC finds that proposed costs & billing models are ok and needed).

I would also like to clarify that when talking about GAS or wholesale xDSL in general, I use transit to mean the carriage cost of whatever system I describe, although I guess internal transit is more accurate. And it is a big number; if there really was 5Mbps for each user, the total internal transit would be 10Tbits downstream. I don't think all the wavelengths combined Bell has between Toronto and Montreal (ie. TO-Ottawa-Mtl + TO-NYC-MTL X 36 wavelengths X 10Gbit) could carry that much, nor could 40Gbps upgrades furnish that. I know that's not realistic use today, but in future it could be... 3Mbps iptv unicast, 10Mbps for HD. I also think that capacity has an exponential cost; 40Gbps is more expensive to buy than 4 X 10Gbps in some cases. And every element in the chain needs to be upgraded to support an upgrade at any one point.

Disclaimer: I'm formerly from the business side of IT consulting for telecoms and am pretty familiar with the ILEC infrastructure in north america in broad terms. Lots of experience in OSS, FTTN and legacy to IP network transformation (DS/OC/ATM/Sonet/T1/ISDN/DMS to IP/Ethernet/DWDM/ROADM/xDSL/metro ethernet/VoIP). I guess I sympathize with big carriers to an extent, and KNOW that their labour/integration/maintenance/support costs are absurdly high. But I'm also a consumer, and an advocate of open networks, avid P2P user and youtube fan. And I use the only non-throttled providers in both areas I live in, which means FiOS and 3web.

My dream infrastructure is that everyhome has a decent last mile link to enable a triple play, provided by VDSL2 or GPON (rural clients might suffer with bonded ADSL2+ and more limited options), where each element of the triple play has a wholesale and retail component. For example, providers can buy a 5Mbps ip/internet pipe, a 128K ultra-high QoS VoIP pipe, a business could have a 10Mbps IP/MPLS VPN and so on as discrete elements within the last mile. It reduces cost and port usage because all providers can share a single port/line/etc for the last mile, instead of say having Bell IPTV over one pair, and the ISP (Acanac/TSI/Sympatico/XYZ) over another: 2 ports, 2 modems, 2 copper pairs all mean more $ spent by everyone. This is very much like utopia in Utah: every service is provided over a single fiber regardless of provider, with each provider paying a portion of the cost of providing the link and internal transit.

Lastly, regarding FTTH: I think the big driver for FTTH for ILEC's is that they can guarantee retail-price levels of return on investment and avoid wholesale integration costs by being exempt from open access requirements. In many countries, FTTH infrastructure is exempt from resale requirements & regulation. Perhaps Bell et al are holding out for that. Or perhaps its still that the costs in the short term for FTTH are much higher than xDSL.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20885360 Fri, 01 Aug 2008 17:43:00 EDT Re: Acanac http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20884999 theninjasqua :
said by HeadSpinning See Profile :

said by theninjasqua See Profile :

It would drive a lot of people to cable I think. I know I would consider it, that is of course until cable starts being just as limiting as Bell is.
Cable already caps and throttles.
I know, but the throttling is no where near as invasive as Bell is. Plus the price/speed ratio is much better, and they do have some options for more bandwidth tiers.
--

-theninjasquad]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20884999 Fri, 01 Aug 2008 16:42:30 EDT Re: Acanac http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20884875 HeadSpinning :
said by theninjasqua See Profile :

It would drive a lot of people to cable I think. I know I would consider it, that is of course until cable starts being just as limiting as Bell is.
Cable already caps and throttles.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20884875 Fri, 01 Aug 2008 16:19:00 EDT Re: Acanac http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20883445 Acanac Inc :
said by TFArchive See Profile :

Isn't a gig-e capable of 640TB a month? A 10Mbit can do 3.2TB each direction, 100mbit 32TB each direction, 1000mbit should be 320TB each direction.

Of course you can only expect max 80% usage before issues could start occurring but that is still a lot of bandwidth.
Thank you for the correction. I have now updated the above post. The per GB prices do remain the same.

Once again thank you for caching that mistake. ]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20883445 Fri, 01 Aug 2008 12:17:35 EDT Re: Acanac http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20882803 theninjasqua : It is really mind boggling seeing the way Bell is digging themselves a hole this past year. This company has really taken a dive bomb.

If in a terrifying world and the CRTC denies the CAIP injunction, and allows Bell to get away with these new shenanigans, they are effectively shooting themselves in the foot. It would drive a lot of people to cable I think. I know I would consider it, that is of course until cable starts being just as limiting as Bell is.

Our country is seriously in distress when it comes to internet.
--

-theninjasquad]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20882803 Fri, 01 Aug 2008 10:10:03 EDT Re: Acanac http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20882491 TFArchive : Isn't a gig-e capable of 640TB a month? A 10Mbit can do 3.2TB each direction, 100mbit 32TB each direction, 1000mbit should be 320TB each direction.

Of course you can only expect max 80% usage before issues could start occurring but that is still a lot of bandwidth.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20882491 Fri, 01 Aug 2008 09:14:46 EDT Re: Acanac http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20881892 Candoo3 : With the figures that you have given here, and that Rocky has previously stated TSI shells out to Bell each month, how is Bell rationalizing to you, the Indies, the caps and the overage charges that they want to apply? It would seem that they are already making their fair share of the game. Besides their more than obvious reasons, how do they justify this?]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20881892 Fri, 01 Aug 2008 03:41:50 EDT Re: Acanac http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20880869 Acanac Inc : I would have no issues paying per port if the following conditions were met. The per GB rate is as cost effect as the 1Gbps interconnects. Lets also be clear that Bell does not provided us with any transit. They are simply a local loop back to our POP. The wholesalers are then responsible to provide transit to the rest of the world.

We are currently paying about $20.50 per GAS user each and every month. (every 5Mbps DSL client)
We also pay about $1, 800.00 per month for each 1Gbps interconnect. This portion of the bill is suppose to cover the cost of the internal Bell bandwidth. I want to be clear once again that this is not transit. It's is simply internal traffic and allot cheaper to provide than external transit.

Lets say worst case scenario Bell were to charge us wholesalers based on external transit costs. At this moment in time one is able to get a full 1Gbps connection for less than $10 per Mbps. In some cases for allot less.

Each 1Mbps can do roughly 320GB per month.
1Gbps connection can do approximately 320TB each direction every month.
Based on $10 per Mbps each GB of usage would costs 0.03 cents. This is just for one direction. In reality you can cut the price by a further half by using the other direction. Bell wants to charge us for both directions. This is unheard of in the industry.

Once again lets not forget that this is for real transit. Bell does not even have peer with anybody else in the entire planet. It's all internal traffic.

From the bit of information I got at the Bell conference they will be charging us wholesalers anywhere from 50 cents up to $2 per GB for internal traffic. Not even the most expensive transit providers in Canada come close to these ridicules rates. Even if they tried they would be out of business. On second thought not even Bell charges this much for real transit, but some how they can justify it for internal traffic. This is like rolling back the clock to the 1990's. They want us to be Sympatico clones and nothing more.

If Bell wants to charge per port based on usage I have no issues. Get rid of the $1,800 interconnect fees and charge us about 0.01 cent per GB. This is only fair since it's not real transit.

Best Regards,
Paul
»www.acanac.ca]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20880869 Thu, 31 Jul 2008 22:19:36 EDT Re: Acanac http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20880396 Walter Dnes :
said by Acanac Inc See Profile :

Just got back from the conference and here is what Bell is proposing.

512Kbps service will be limited to 2GB per month
5Mbps service will be limited to 60GB per month
Let me get this straight. Bell sells X bandwidth to a re-seller. Why is it any of Bell's f***ing business whether those 3rd-party ADSL re-sellers doled out the 10 or 20 gigs at 512 kbits or 5 megabits to their customers??? If Bell's network can stand the hit at 5 megabits, why can't it stand the hit of half-a-megabit.

Full disclosure... I recently switched down from 5 megabits to 512 kbits on Teksavvy, saving $5/month in the process. I don't do P2P. Here's a dirty little secret. I find the half-meg speeds perfectly sufficient *FOR MY NEEDS*. YMMV. With the exception of a few really graphics-heavy sites, webpages load just as fast as at 5 megs. The usual roadblock is an overloaded ad-server on the other side of the planet. Even 128-kbit radio streams on Live365 come in fine, thank you.

Here's what I think happened. Bell is like a Detoit auto company, which lures in customers with basic cars, but generates its biggest profit margins by bait-n-switching buyers to more expensive models. With the recent upgrade of the "Lite" profile to 512 kbits SDSL, I believe that many people have come to the same conclusion as me, i.e. 512 kbits is perfectly sufficient. The result is that many new signups are going for 512K, rather than 5 or 6 megabits, and quite a few people are downgrading their 5 or 6 megabit connections to 512 kbits. This will result in reduced profits, and more importantly, reduced bonuses for the Board of Directors.

The usual reaction would be to cripple Sympatico's "Lite" service to the point of uselessness, to drive subscribers to Sympatico's more expensive options. Sympatico was probably telling the truth that the average user uses 10 gigs/month or less. Therefore, the bandwidth had to be reduced to something utterly ridiculous, like 2 gigs. However, the marketeers remembered that last time they tried such a stunt, people left in droves for Sympatico's competitors, which hadn't made followed Sympatico's footsteps. Sympatico realized that they would have make their competitors' Lite offering just as unattractive as Sympatico's. Hence the limits on reseller users' bandwidth.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20880396 Thu, 31 Jul 2008 20:45:18 EDT Re: Acanac http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20880377 anon : Thank you for your reply. Few people seem to acknowledge that the economics aren't quite what some suggest they are... on both sides of the equation. Or that there may actually be a contention issue at some point in the network.

To follow up, if the cost is the issue, you prefer they increase the overall rates, correct rather than constrain service? Should they break down GAS charges further into a port/loop charge, a transit charge, and an interconnect charge? Do you believe that different ISP's are impacted to a different degree if the cost of transit is not billed as an individual component (example: local ISP who just does internet subsidises the providers offering VOD/IPTV & internet over the same tariff because he would likely use less bandwidth)?

What do you think of this model: the physical links are a fixed cost and actual consumptive use (transit) billed at wholesale, regulated prices that are costed out by CRTC & Bell (instead of the absurd prices they charge their retail clients)? Isn't that the fairest way? No caps, maybe they could say that a 512K GAS includes xGB, 5Mbps xGB, etc and then have it PPU thereafter, at the same rate as before, also reserving the right to disconnect crazy abusers, who use 90%+ of their xMbps link 24/7 (servers).

--------

And my response to a few things: billing per physical port is the only real way of doing it. As the sale of PPPoE logins has shown, this would make any type of per-GAS port (which should equal subscribers) included bandwidth impossible to bill. Want to circumvent usage billing; just create another login, which Bell gets no more revenue for! Furthermore, if there was to be a congestion management solution implemented that is enabled only during contention, even if it wasn't P2P specific, applying the constraint to the whole port is more effective (ie. "fair"). That is, creating N sessions won't increase your share of the pie by N times.

Lastly, in future the transfer rate won't be set by sync if you look around at other providers. BT, Telus, ATT, and others limit the PPPoE session throughput on a per-circuit basis at the BRAS in part because the internet PPPoE is only one of the services delivered over the last mile in next-gen-networks because other services (multicast IPTV pipeline, VoIP pipeline, femtocell pipeline, etc.) over the last mile are also sold... 60Mbps VDSL2 to the home isn't going to mean 60Mbps GAS. And furthermore, in the next-gen network, the network owner has to be much more demanding/restrictive in terms of what is connected to the network... thinks like dynamic spectrum management, power spectral desnity, loop testing, throughput testing and require compliance and a compatible software extension in the end user hardware. A line that has to increase TX/RX power because of bad splitters, inside wiring, poor quality equipment has a negative effect on stability and attainable sync for others that share the same distribution copper.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20880377 Thu, 31 Jul 2008 20:41:35 EDT Re: Acanac http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20880232 Candoo3 :
said by fatness See Profile :

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.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20880232 Thu, 31 Jul 2008 20:09:46 EDT Re: Acanac http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20880080 fatness :
said by Acanac Inc See Profile :

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..]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20880080 Thu, 31 Jul 2008 19:37:53 EDT Re: Acanac http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20879753 Acanac Inc :
"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. ]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20879753 Thu, 31 Jul 2008 18:31:00 EDT Re: Acanac http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20879477 anon : 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.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20879477 Thu, 31 Jul 2008 17:39:07 EDT Re: Acanac http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20879058 funchords :
said by Acanac Inc See Profile :

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...
]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20879058 Thu, 31 Jul 2008 16:20:43 EDT Re: Acanac http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20878774 elwoodblues :
said by mazhurg See Profile :

»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.
The Internet is just a series of tubes to him]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20878774 Thu, 31 Jul 2008 15:25:55 EDT Re: Acanac http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20878767 elwoodblues :
said by mazhurg See Profile :

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?]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20878767 Thu, 31 Jul 2008 15:24:54 EDT Re: Acanac http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20878736 MisawaGQ : If they locked everyone at 60, how could they charge users for additional bandwidth at a 2000% markup over cost?]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20878736 Thu, 31 Jul 2008 15:18:54 EDT Re: Acanac http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20878674 theninjasqua : 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]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20878674 Thu, 31 Jul 2008 15:06:07 EDT Re: Acanac http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20878341 grayfox :
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)]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20878341 Thu, 31 Jul 2008 14:15:25 EDT Re: Acanac http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20877888 theninjasqua : The CBC is reporting on this...

»www.cbc.ca/technology/story/2008···?ref=rss
--

-theninjasquad]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20877888 Thu, 31 Jul 2008 13:00:42 EDT Re: Acanac http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20877577 mazhurg : »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.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20877577 Thu, 31 Jul 2008 11:55:41 EDT Re: Acanac http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20877556 mazhurg :
said by MisawaGQ See Profile :

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?]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20877556 Thu, 31 Jul 2008 11:50:29 EDT Re: Acanac http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20877541 Candoo3 :
said by MisawaGQ See Profile :

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.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20877541 Thu, 31 Jul 2008 11:48:02 EDT Re: Acanac http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20877485 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? 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]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20877485 Thu, 31 Jul 2008 11:36:34 EDT Re: Acanac http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20877424 CanerisErik :
said by djweis See Profile :

said by CanerisErik See Profile :

said by Guspaz See Profile :

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?]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20877424 Thu, 31 Jul 2008 11:22:55 EDT Re: Acanac http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20877420 mazhurg : And the only reason for that appears to be able to maximize profits while remaining competitive.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20877420 Thu, 31 Jul 2008 11:22:07 EDT Re: Acanac http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20877220 Acanac Inc : 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. ]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20877220 Thu, 31 Jul 2008 10:42:56 EDT Re: Acanac http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20877170 theninjasqua : Did they give any reasoning as to why they wanted to do this?
--

-theninjasquad]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20877170 Thu, 31 Jul 2008 10:32:26 EDT Re: Acanac http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20877125 Acanac Inc :
said by grayfox See Profile :

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.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20877125 Thu, 31 Jul 2008 10:24:28 EDT Re: Acanac http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20876796 djweis :
said by CanerisErik See Profile :

said by Guspaz See Profile :

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.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20876796 Thu, 31 Jul 2008 09:20:15 EDT Re: Acanac http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20876623 Gnaraktol : I think the next fight should go to court and not CRTC... this last move HAS to be illegal... Too bad Bell has lots of lawyer money...

The amount of data that passes through a pipe in a month is irrelevant to them, they may have an argument about the speeds because pipes can only handle so much at a time (not that I agree with throttling) - and that's what their fight at the CRTC is about, but total bandwidth passing in a month is ridiculous... it becomes another subject.
it's not like after 1 million gigs the DSLAM craps and they need to buy a new one or the wires wear out due to "bandwidth", sigh!

this last one is not about congestion, it's about control/monopolizing... The current tarrif contracts must say something about them being able to make changes to the traffic going through, if it's allowed only as a result of "network management to prevent blah blah blah" they can't use congestion on this last one... ]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20876623 Thu, 31 Jul 2008 08:34:10 EDT Re: Acanac http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20876395 beamer69 :
said by Acanac Inc See Profile :

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 :huh:

Keep fighting Paul this is really a joke what they are doing. Well wish it was a joke but it is not :(]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20876395 Thu, 31 Jul 2008 07:10:25 EDT Re: Acanac http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20875516 grayfox : Any ETA on the 16meg service.

Also for users like me with 2 connections in ml-ppp, can bell accurately track are usage ?.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20875516 Wed, 30 Jul 2008 23:31:25 EDT Re: Acanac http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20875030 anon :
quote:
doesnt it strike anyone as odd that ALL the big providers are pushing a 60 gig cap? You can't tell me that with all the different infrastructures in place from various providers they all can only support 60 gig per customer. There is something going on behind the scene that is driving all this.


EXACTLY what I was thinking as well. And the more I ponder this, the more I suspect that what a few posters above have said will eventually come to fruition: they want to eliminate P2P, Usenet binary groups, free youtube, and the like since it competes with their "movie download" service. Just look at the whole Utopia thing..charging dsl prices with a 50 gig cap! W..T..F!

TekSavvy/Acanac absolutely have to band up and fight Goliath (bell) otherwise we'll be at their mercy forever. This whole fiasco reminds me of the opening scene from Saving Private Ryan. You can guess who the Nazis are.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20875030 Wed, 30 Jul 2008 22:02:02 EDT Re: Acanac http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20874549 Acanac Inc : 7Mbps service was briefly brought up, but I don't recall any ETA. I believe a questions was asked if user based billing would be implemented with this upcoming service. If I recall correctly the answer was yes.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20874549 Wed, 30 Jul 2008 20:34:27 EDT Re: Acanac http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20874496 tiger9 : Goddammit, at this rate, Rogers will be competitive compared to Bell. That's sure not a good thing.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20874496 Wed, 30 Jul 2008 20:23:56 EDT Re: Acanac http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20874490 anon :
said by ancodia See Profile :

doesnt it strike anyone as odd that ALL the big providers are pushing a 60 gig cap?
maybe 'typical' (read 'low usage') bandwidth statistically peaks at 60gb/month (and some higher value for people that use p2p and stream things often). so they figure that browsing/email/etc is the 60gb peak and that's what they want their currently priced service to be used for. the new stuff: streaming/p2p/etc they want people to pay a premium for.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20874490 Wed, 30 Jul 2008 20:22:43 EDT Re: Acanac http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20874468 j3richo : paul, did they say anything about ADSL2+?

also maybe each ISP can "change" the current agreements to "lifetime contracts with no cancellation penalties" with their customers, I wonder if that would work lol]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20874468 Wed, 30 Jul 2008 20:17:29 EDT Re: Acanac http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20874406 ancodia : doesnt it strike anyone as odd that ALL the big providers are pushing a 60 gig cap? You can't tell me that with all the different infrastructures in place from various providers they all can only support 60 gig per customer. There is something going on behind the scene that is driving all this.

That said, the DSL providers need to join together, look at where all your customers are and get serious about installing your own equipment. I'd be more than willing to sign a 1 or 2 year deal with whatever provider can deliver using there own equipment. It's time to start driving in the final nails into the Bell coffin.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20874406 Wed, 30 Jul 2008 20:04:33 EDT Re: Acanac http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20874371 mazhurg : They put down anything on paper yet for the unwashed masses to sift through?]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20874371 Wed, 30 Jul 2008 19:59:05 EDT Re: Acanac http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20874338 Acanac Inc : As for the legality that's for the commission to decide. I hope they will refuse it, but from the legal opinion's I have gotten it does not look good.
They will track the usage based on the circuit ID. We pointed out some potential problems with this method. One for example would be if a user where to get a second user name and password from a second provider. The primary provider would have no way to tell how much bandwidth this client would be using through out that specific month. The primary provider would only get a bill at the end of the period. Then the provider would have to pass on the bill to the client or absorb the cost.

In the end this entire scheme if approved will be a logistical nightmare. Bell's billing system is from stone ages and I don't expect it to get any better.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20874338 Wed, 30 Jul 2008 19:52:35 EDT Re: Acanac http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20874279 mazhurg :
said by Acanac Inc See Profile :

From my understanding it will only affect new clients as of Jan 1 2009.
Again, is it legal within the tariff framework, for them to impose caps on raw data?

If so, how would that work? they bill the ISPs for total bandwidth? You have to tell them how many users you have? They get to record all your users communications?

This is outrageous!

Essentially what you are saying is that there will no longer be independents as of Jan 1st. It's will all be white label...]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20874279 Wed, 30 Jul 2008 19:39:50 EDT Re: Acanac http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20874259 mr_hexen :
said by Acanac Inc See Profile :

From my understanding it will only affect new clients as of Jan 1 2009.
lets not forget how Bell likes to accidently change your account and then claim the "old deals" are no longer available.

you can bet THERE ;) will be some of those cases.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20874259 Wed, 30 Jul 2008 19:35:23 EDT Re: Acanac http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20874243 Acanac Inc : From my understanding it will only affect new clients as of Jan 1 2009. ]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20874243 Wed, 30 Jul 2008 19:32:00 EDT Re: Acanac http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20874194 jam_bongo : you're saying it doesn't affect current customers, does that include people who signed up for service this month?]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20874194 Wed, 30 Jul 2008 19:21:38 EDT Re: Acanac http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20874048 dataiv : Jaggie, hate to nitpick, but you have a few posts in this thread already and you keep using "there" in every single post ...

said by Jaggie See Profile :

Telling wholesalers the have to offload there call support to India so bell ...
... Telling wholesalers they have to offload THEIR call support ...

said by Jaggie See Profile :

You can bet if bell had it's way there would be no wholesalers just Bell and a few Resellers like Robbers.
You can bet if bell had ITS way there would ... (if you write "it's", just think of it as meaning "it is" ... so does "if bell had it is way there would ..." make any sense? not really.

But basically,

The boy went over there. The boy pointed over there. The boy lived in the Arctic. It was cold there.

vs.

The boy pointed at their house. Their office is too small. Bell tries to mess with their customers... etc.

Use "there" when referring to a concrete or abstract object, or when referring to a place.

Use "their" to indicate possession. So in the case of bell offloading "their" call support .. it is their call centre, so use "their".

End rant... Please, please, please try to use there/their/they're correctly.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20874048 Wed, 30 Jul 2008 18:49:49 EDT Re: Acanac http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20874017 TOPDAWG : So this idea has to go before the CRTC first before bell can do it right? They may tell bell to fork off on the idea.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20874017 Wed, 30 Jul 2008 18:42:45 EDT Re: Acanac http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20873752 Jaggie : Bell's Next Step:
Telling wholesalers the have to offload there call support to India so bell can compete with Acanc/Teksavvy/Ebox etc... far Superior call centers.

This seems to be bell's new line of thinking in competing with there wholesale brotherins. THROTTLE/CAP/CRIPPLE so they offer roughly the same service as sympatico does or til wholesalers fizzle out and fade away leaving only Bell.

You can bet if bell had it's way there would be no wholesalers just Bell and a few Resellers like Robbers.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20873752 Wed, 30 Jul 2008 17:42:27 EDT Re: Acanac http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20873683 andyb : Thats why I asked if it's legal under the regulations inplace now.May need to launch a lawsuit or somethin.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20873683 Wed, 30 Jul 2008 17:29:40 EDT Re: Acanac http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20873661 Jaggie : Wow Wow Wow what a bunch of scumbags bell is.

There trying to limit there Wholesalers to the same low *** caps they impose on there own customers but at a slower speed. Don't see what give them the right to do so since u guys don't buy your bandwith off them.

If this was to go though the only difference between Wholesalers and Bell would be Tech Support and slower "UP TO" then what bell offers atm.

Also seeing how there 7Meg DSL is now $42 and 10Meg With 100GB is $52, These steps bell is taking look more and more anti-competitive everyday as they try to kill off Wholesalers something needs to be done.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20873661 Wed, 30 Jul 2008 17:26:04 EDT Re: Acanac http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20873487 Acanac Inc : 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.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20873487 Wed, 30 Jul 2008 16:50:00 EDT Re: Acanac http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20873287 CanerisErik :
said by Guspaz See Profile :

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.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20873287 Wed, 30 Jul 2008 16:15:25 EDT Re: Acanac http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20873283 andyb : Is that even allowed under the regulations?Somethin doesn't seem legal in all this.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20873283 Wed, 30 Jul 2008 16:14:53 EDT Re: Acanac http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20873232 Guspaz : 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.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20873232 Wed, 30 Jul 2008 16:05:16 EDT Re: Acanac http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20872676 Acanac Inc : Just got back from the conference and here is what Bell is proposing.

512Kbps service will be limited to 2GB per month
5Mbps service will be limited to 60GB per month

They did not disclose what the overcharges will be, but don't expect it to be cheap. Simply put DSL as we know it right now will no longer exist.
We find this proposal to be totally unexceptable. 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. Bell proposes to start shadow billing in October and usage based billing in Jan of 2009.

This has given me a new sense urgency to setup our own equipment at the CO. I will be approaching a few other ISP in the next little while to see if we can come to some type of agreement. We prefer not to do this alone.

As for having control of the profile: They hope to offer us this ability towards the end of the year.

Best Regards,
Paul
www.acanac.ca]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20872676 Wed, 30 Jul 2008 14:28:07 EDT Re: Acanac http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20871891 anon : Paul, what time is the conference call with bell? I'm anxious to know what comes out of it!]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20871891 Wed, 30 Jul 2008 12:13:48 EDT Re: Acanac http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20866751 andyb : Also tell em to stuff the usage based billing,along with the throttling :o]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20866751 Tue, 29 Jul 2008 14:32:07 EDT Re: Acanac http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20866708 Acanac Inc :
I was never given a date, but I will ask them for one tomorrow.

Best Regards,
Paul
»www.acanac.ca]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20866708 Tue, 29 Jul 2008 14:24:18 EDT Re: Acanac http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20866223 anon : hey acanac

what ever happened to this ??? has bell followed through on their promise?]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20866223 Tue, 29 Jul 2008 13:03:55 EDT Re: Acanac http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20847312 Acanac Inc : I hope your wrong, but we should get a bit more info on the 30th of this month. Bell has called in all the ISP's to discus the new proposed user based billing system. I will be sure to bring this up at this conference.

I want to clarify that one of the Bell VP's is the person who mentioned this to me. The same one who is pushing for user based billing. It's the carrot and stick approach.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20847312 Fri, 25 Jul 2008 11:51:54 EDT Re: Acanac http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20846907 anon : That will never happen.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20846907 Fri, 25 Jul 2008 10:32:08 EDT Re: Acanac http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20845320 Guspaz : That'll be a big step. So often we hear about Bell refusing to set profiles that a customer line can clearly support.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20845320 Thu, 24 Jul 2008 22:32:45 EDT Re: Acanac http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20845301 j3richo :
said by Acanac Inc See Profile :

Bell is a pain. Either they don't show up at all or at odds times. This is something all the wholesalers have to deal with. I was told by one of there reps that we should shortly have control of the profiles. This should clear up well over 70% of all tickets we put in with Bell. We have been asking for this feature for years now.

Lets hope they keep there promise.

Best Regards,
Paul
www.acanac.ca
oh snap, that should be awesome]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20845301 Thu, 24 Jul 2008 22:28:27 EDT Re: Acanac http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20844832 anon :
said by Acanac Inc See Profile :

Bell is a pain.
Amen.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20844832 Thu, 24 Jul 2008 20:54:26 EDT Re: Acanac http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20844146 Acanac Inc : Bell is a pain. Either they don't show up at all or at odds times. This is something all the wholesalers have to deal with. I was told by one of there reps that we should shortly have control of the profiles. This should clear up well over 70% of all tickets we put in with Bell. We have been asking for this feature for years now.

Lets hope they keep there promise.

Best Regards,
Paul
www.acanac.ca]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20844146 Thu, 24 Jul 2008 18:33:49 EDT Re: Acanac http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20844067 Last Parade : I've moved once on Acanac and it was a less than pleasant experience, they didn't tell me that Bell was going to show up randomly.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20844067 Thu, 24 Jul 2008 18:21:18 EDT Re: Acanac http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20843892 Acanac Inc :
Thank you for your interest in our service.

The first move is free. Every other move will cost $20.

If you have any other questions please let me know.

Best Regards,
Paul
»www.acanac.ca]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20843892 Thu, 24 Jul 2008 17:52:09 EDT Re: Acanac http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20837026 bryanviper : give them a call or send them an e-mail. There is somebody on these forums from Acanac but he there is a good chance he could be busy so you might not get an answer very soon.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20837026 Wed, 23 Jul 2008 14:42:00 EDT Acanac http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20832591 anon : On the Acanac website on the registration form, i don't see any activation date. I cancel my connection recently, just want to try out Acanac.

+ on the middle of the year, if i decide to move to a new house, will you guys charge if i decide to change my phone number.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20832591 Tue, 22 Jul 2008 17:58:14 EDT