Topic 'CRTC Posting comments re: TN7181 with your info included' in forum 'TekSavvy' - dslreports.com http://www.dslreports.com/forum/CRTC-Posting-comments-re-TN7181-with-your-info-included-22278476 en Fri, 10 Feb 2012 03:36:48 EDT Fri, 10 Feb 2012 03:36:48 EDT Re: CRTC Posting comments re: TN7181 with your info included http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-CRTC-Posting-comments-re-TN7181-with-your-info-included-22421574 said by Maynard G Krebs :

Of course Bell, in its capacity as ruler of all things connectivity-wise, would unilaterally cut TS off from all its GAS links when TS refuses to pay the amounts in dispute.

Haven't we seen that sort of action by Bell recently with another ISP?
An ISP withholding payment as a form of protest and an ISP withholding partial payment while trying to resolve a discrepancy between Bell's and the ISP's own numbers are two very different things. In the first case, the ISP is only testing the limits of Bell's patience and knows full well what is bound to happen sooner or later. In the second case, the ISP has a legitimate reason to withhold or delay at least part of the payment.

Since we know that Bell loves billing mistakes and the internet has become an essential service for many, Bell cannot suspend AHSPPI or GAS on a whim. This is true today and will become essential if/when UBB comes to be.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-CRTC-Posting-comments-re-TN7181-with-your-info-included-22421574 Thu, 21 May 2009 09:43:22 EDT Re: CRTC Posting comments re: TN7181 with your info included http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-CRTC-Posting-comments-re-TN7181-with-your-info-included-22421361 That should be 'GAS' links - my keyboard is a bit flaky.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-CRTC-Posting-comments-re-TN7181-with-your-info-included-22421361 Thu, 21 May 2009 08:56:44 EDT Re: CRTC Posting comments re: TN7181 with your info included http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-CRTC-Posting-comments-re-TN7181-with-your-info-included-22421359 said by InvalidError:

said by Maynard G Krebs :

And who are you going to get to mediate any differences with?

Does TS have enough information to clearly identify that, I, their customer, was overcharged? Will TS want to go to bat for 25,000 or 8,273, or even just 27 customers per month and dispute each account individually? These cost to TS of doing that is prohibitive.
You don't do anything, this would be the ISP's problem. TSI Premium already tracks usage for TSI's own UBB-esque business model: 200GB included, $0.25/GB afterwards.

If the amount of traffic Bell is reporting and billing a particular line/login/whatever for diverges too much from the amounts logged at TSI's end, TSI would bill for the lowest of the two and request a refund/credit for the balance from Bell if Bell's bill is higher. Individual subscribers should not even have to hear a word about it.

Of course Bell, in its capacity as ruler of all things connectivity-wise, would unilaterally cut TS off from all its GS links when TS refuses to pay the amounts in dispute.

Haven't we seen that sort of action by Bell recently with another ISP?]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-CRTC-Posting-comments-re-TN7181-with-your-info-included-22421359 Thu, 21 May 2009 08:55:44 EDT Re: CRTC Posting comments re: TN7181 with your info included http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-CRTC-Posting-comments-re-TN7181-with-your-info-included-22420232 said by Maynard G Krebs :

And who are you going to get to mediate any differences with?

Does TS have enough information to clearly identify that, I, their customer, was overcharged? Will TS want to go to bat for 25,000 or 8,273, or even just 27 customers per month and dispute each account individually? These cost to TS of doing that is prohibitive.
You don't do anything, this would be the ISP's problem. TSI Premium already tracks usage for TSI's own UBB-esque business model: 200GB included, $0.25/GB afterwards.

If the amount of traffic Bell is reporting and billing a particular line/login/whatever for diverges too much from the amounts logged at TSI's end, TSI would bill for the lowest of the two and request a refund/credit for the balance from Bell if Bell's bill is higher. Individual subscribers should not even have to hear a word about it.

Edit: punctuation tweak.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-CRTC-Posting-comments-re-TN7181-with-your-info-included-22420232 Wed, 20 May 2009 22:55:35 EDT Re: CRTC Posting comments re: TN7181 with your info included http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-CRTC-Posting-comments-re-TN7181-with-your-info-included-22420211 said by Maynard G Krebs :

said by InvalidError:

said by Maynard G Krebs :

Who is going to certify that Bell's counters are accurate and that they don't have their thumb on the scale?

Probably nobody, Videotron, Sympatico and others have been billing bandwidth without oversight from anybody. The current "resolution mechanism" is for everyone to meter their own usage and dispute charges when there is a significant disagreement between the two.

UBB would be billed through your ISP. Most ISPs already do metering for internal purposes and could easily verify that the numbers line up sufficiently well with Bell's before charging your account.

Since any traffic dropped/blocked by the DPI boxes is invisible to the ISP sitting on the other side of the AHSPPI, dropped traffic should be unbillable since it is unverifiable.

Do you want to know what my biggest issue with UBB+Throttling is? Any packets dropped by throttling will cause NACKs/re-sends to occur and I bet this "extra usage" will be counted. So, if you try to transfer faster than the throttle limit, the resulting re-sends may cause the amount of billable network traffic to be much higher than the amount actually successfully received or delivered.

Since throttling (or even legitimate congestion) will interfere with UBB metering verifiability, Bell should have to pick one or the other. If we pay for bandwidth UBB-style, Bell has to deliver it unconditionally. If Bell throttles us, we should not have to pay more for degraded service because Bell is already controlling costs by limiting bandwidth.

And who are you going to get to mediate any differences with?

Does TS have enough information to clearly identify that, I, their customer, was overcharged? Will TS want to go to bat for 25,000 or 8,273, or even just 27 customers per month and dispute each account individually? These cost to TS of doing that is prohibitive.

And since I don't have a direct contractual agreement with Bell, any 1st year law student who Bell sends to small claims court to defend any action I might bring against Bell for overcharging would get my case thrown out because I don't have a contract with Bell.

So how does anyone in practice dispute anything Bell holds up to be 'the truth'? The little downloaded app that I might use to keep track of the traffic stats can't really see the reset packets, and since the provenance and accuracy of the app could be disputed, it'll just come down to a pissing contest as to whom is to be believed - me, or the app written by a crackerjack team of programmers in based in India or Moldova for Bell?
Regardless, some people track. Its TSI's problem to solve any problem/discrepancy since they are your supplier.

Otherwise its off to the CRTC for a formal complaint since TSI is not a CCTS member.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-CRTC-Posting-comments-re-TN7181-with-your-info-included-22420211 Wed, 20 May 2009 22:50:13 EDT Re: CRTC Posting comments re: TN7181 with your info included http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-CRTC-Posting-comments-re-TN7181-with-your-info-included-22420013 said by InvalidError:

said by Maynard G Krebs :

Who is going to certify that Bell's counters are accurate and that they don't have their thumb on the scale?

Probably nobody, Videotron, Sympatico and others have been billing bandwidth without oversight from anybody. The current "resolution mechanism" is for everyone to meter their own usage and dispute charges when there is a significant disagreement between the two.

UBB would be billed through your ISP. Most ISPs already do metering for internal purposes and could easily verify that the numbers line up sufficiently well with Bell's before charging your account.

Since any traffic dropped/blocked by the DPI boxes is invisible to the ISP sitting on the other side of the AHSPPI, dropped traffic should be unbillable since it is unverifiable.

Do you want to know what my biggest issue with UBB+Throttling is? Any packets dropped by throttling will cause NACKs/re-sends to occur and I bet this "extra usage" will be counted. So, if you try to transfer faster than the throttle limit, the resulting re-sends may cause the amount of billable network traffic to be much higher than the amount actually successfully received or delivered.

Since throttling (or even legitimate congestion) will interfere with UBB metering verifiability, Bell should have to pick one or the other. If we pay for bandwidth UBB-style, Bell has to deliver it unconditionally. If Bell throttles us, we should not have to pay more for degraded service because Bell is already controlling costs by limiting bandwidth.

And who are you going to get to mediate any differences with?

Does TS have enough information to clearly identify that, I, their customer, was overcharged? Will TS want to go to bat for 25,000 or 8,273, or even just 27 customers per month and dispute each account individually? These cost to TS of doing that is prohibitive.

And since I don't have a direct contractual agreement with Bell, any 1st year law student who Bell sends to small claims court to defend any action I might bring against Bell for overcharging would get my case thrown out because I don't have a contract with Bell.

So how does anyone in practice dispute anything Bell holds up to be 'the truth'? The little downloaded app that I might use to keep track of the traffic stats can't really see the reset packets, and since the provenance and accuracy of the app could be disputed, it'll just come down to a pissing contest as to whom is to be believed - me, or the app written by a crackerjack team of programmers in based in India or Moldova for Bell?]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-CRTC-Posting-comments-re-TN7181-with-your-info-included-22420013 Wed, 20 May 2009 22:20:34 EDT Re: CRTC Posting comments re: TN7181 with your info included http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-CRTC-Posting-comments-re-TN7181-with-your-info-included-22419913 said by Maynard G Krebs :

Who is going to certify that Bell's counters are accurate and that they don't have their thumb on the scale?
Probably nobody, Videotron, Sympatico and others have been billing bandwidth without oversight from anybody. The current "resolution mechanism" is for everyone to meter their own usage and dispute charges when there is a significant disagreement between the two.

UBB would be billed through your ISP. Most ISPs already do metering for internal purposes and could easily verify that the numbers line up sufficiently well with Bell's before charging your account.

Since any traffic dropped/blocked by the DPI boxes is invisible to the ISP sitting on the other side of the AHSPPI, dropped traffic should be unbillable since it is unverifiable.

Do you want to know what my biggest issue with UBB+Throttling is? Any packets dropped by throttling will cause NACKs/re-sends to occur and I bet this "extra usage" will be counted. So, if you try to transfer faster than the throttle limit, the resulting re-sends may cause the amount of billable network traffic to be much higher than the amount actually successfully received or delivered.

Since throttling (or even legitimate congestion) will interfere with UBB metering verifiability, Bell should have to pick one or the other. If we pay for bandwidth UBB-style, Bell has to deliver it unconditionally. If Bell throttles us, we should not have to pay more for degraded service because Bell is already controlling costs by limiting bandwidth.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-CRTC-Posting-comments-re-TN7181-with-your-info-included-22419913 Wed, 20 May 2009 22:02:20 EDT Re: CRTC Posting comments re: TN7181 with your info included http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-CRTC-Posting-comments-re-TN7181-with-your-info-included-22418970
Invalid there is a limit on the comment section as to how much you can type.You need to add it as an Attachment.Just put desription in comment and attach a pdf or doc file.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-CRTC-Posting-comments-re-TN7181-with-your-info-included-22418970 Wed, 20 May 2009 18:38:22 EDT Re: CRTC Posting comments re: TN7181 with your info included http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-CRTC-Posting-comments-re-TN7181-with-your-info-included-22418740 said by InvalidError:

To the above, I would also add:
4) Bell is already getting paid for bandwidth via the AHSPPI tariff. At $1750/Gbps/month, this traffic has an effective cost under $0.01/GB. Shouldn't a GAS-side transit fee, if ever permitted, be of a similar magnitude?

Apropos your comment, I would concur - not that I agree with UBB in the first place.

However, let's assume that Bell gets its way with UBB. How are they going to measure the actual traffic for billing purposes?

Bell is saying that bits on their network are not flat rate and should be treated exactly like buying gasoline at the pump. Well at the pump I can see exactly how much I've purchased, I can choose to buy more or less quantity in real-time, and I can see the exact cost in real-time.

But with the net I may not know exactly how much quantity I will get with each streaming video or download, it is imperative that I know my quantities and costs in real time. How is that metering information going to be delivered to me in real time? Is the delivery of those metered numbers going to be charged against me or displayed for free?

Who is going to certify that Bell's counters are accurate and that they don't have their thumb on the scale?

Since the scale of what Bell is proposing is massive and will amount to extracting huge monthly sums of money from Canadians, somebody like the Auditor General (more likely Industry Canada - same people who certify gas pumps & scales + people from the provincial ministries responsible for consumer protection) should be charged with inspecting Bell's billing counting/billing algorithms prior to implementation and on a random basis every month thereafter.

Bell should be required to post open-source code for the entire aggregation/billing and if the billing does not match against a randomly extracted set of data every month run against an independently compiled executable made from the open source, Bell should be charged with fraud.

Adequate safeguards would have to be place in the procedures to ensure that Bell couldn't 'buy off' the government examiners (do you get the sense that I don't trust Bell very much?).

Any discrepancy in the extracted data and resulting independent UBB calculation should be construed that the entire month's UBB is wrong for all customers and Bell should be forced to disgorge all earning from UBB back to those charged UBB fees + a 100% penalty within 5 business days. ]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-CRTC-Posting-comments-re-TN7181-with-your-info-included-22418740 Wed, 20 May 2009 17:52:54 EDT Re: CRTC Posting comments re: TN7181 with your info included http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-CRTC-Posting-comments-re-TN7181-with-your-info-included-22418530 http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-CRTC-Posting-comments-re-TN7181-with-your-info-included-22418530 Wed, 20 May 2009 17:13:22 EDT Re: CRTC Posting comments re: TN7181 with your info included http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-CRTC-Posting-comments-re-TN7181-with-your-info-included-22418132 said by Commenter :

Hey it looks like all the comments are finally up (no more missing letters or unlinked names).

I still don't see my comment though; maybe I broke some arbitrary commenting rule.
I posted something close to a two pages comment on that thing, still seems to be nowhere to be found as well.

Since my rant gave a couple of bandwidth pricing references to prove the insanity of UBB's pricing, I would not be too surprised if a Bell cronie within the CRTC pulled it so my post would not end up prompting more people to review my numbers and come up with even more damning evidence.

One of the references I used in my post was the overall cost of the first 300GB through GAS given UBB's caps and overage pricing: $20.50/month GAS + $22.50 overage cap up to a total of 300GB = $43/300GB = $0.143/GB. Therefore, any UBB overage costs above $0.15/GB is unconscionable, there is simply absolutely no way transit through Bell's network can cost this much. Yet, Bell wants to charge $1.25/GB for the first $22.50 extra, give a beak 'till 300GB and then start charging $0.75/GB again.

Other questions I raised in my long 7181 comment:
1) Why are the 80th to 300th GB free on a usage-based billing scheme?
2) Would it not make more sense to spread the overage cap over the full 60-300GB range (and beyond) at a rate of $0.10/GB? ($22.50/240GB = $0.09375/GB)
3) Also, why should overage in excess of 300GB be 8X more expensive ($0.75/GB) than that from 60 to 300?

These are all legitimate questions, wonder how many comments touched those same areas. Hopefully enough to get noticed.

To the above, I would also add:
4) Bell is already getting paid for bandwidth via the AHSPPI tariff. At $1750/Gbps/month, this traffic has an effective cost under $0.01/GB. Shouldn't a GAS-side transit fee, if ever permitted, be of a similar magnitude?]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-CRTC-Posting-comments-re-TN7181-with-your-info-included-22418132 Wed, 20 May 2009 16:08:47 EDT Re: CRTC Posting comments re: TN7181 with your info included http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-CRTC-Posting-comments-re-TN7181-with-your-info-included-22416564
I still don't see my comment though; maybe I broke some arbitrary commenting rule.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-CRTC-Posting-comments-re-TN7181-with-your-info-included-22416564 Wed, 20 May 2009 11:31:37 EDT Re: CRTC Posting comments re: TN7181 with your info included http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-CRTC-Posting-comments-re-TN7181-with-your-info-included-22394174 http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-CRTC-Posting-comments-re-TN7181-with-your-info-included-22394174 Fri, 15 May 2009 13:25:52 EDT Re: CRTC Posting comments re: TN7181 with your info included http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-CRTC-Posting-comments-re-TN7181-with-your-info-included-22394062
The links to the tariff responses on page 15 are still working at the moment.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-CRTC-Posting-comments-re-TN7181-with-your-info-included-22394062 Fri, 15 May 2009 13:07:04 EDT Re: CRTC Posting comments re: TN7181 with your info included http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-CRTC-Posting-comments-re-TN7181-with-your-info-included-22384574 »support.crtc.gc.ca/applicant/app···9&lang=E

here is the main link
»www.crtc.gc.ca/PartVII/eng/2008/···m#RelDoc]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-CRTC-Posting-comments-re-TN7181-with-your-info-included-22384574 Wed, 13 May 2009 17:51:09 EDT Re: CRTC Posting comments re: TN7181 with your info included http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-CRTC-Posting-comments-re-TN7181-with-your-info-included-22383991 http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-CRTC-Posting-comments-re-TN7181-with-your-info-included-22383991 Wed, 13 May 2009 16:12:36 EDT Re: CRTC Posting comments re: TN7181 with your info included http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-CRTC-Posting-comments-re-TN7181-with-your-info-included-22383532
Also, If you asked your submission to be taken down they likely just deleted the link from the webpage with the list of names and the page with your info is still on the CRTC server.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-CRTC-Posting-comments-re-TN7181-with-your-info-included-22383532 Wed, 13 May 2009 15:00:14 EDT Re: CRTC Posting comments re: TN7181 with your info included http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-CRTC-Posting-comments-re-TN7181-with-your-info-included-22363158 said by andyb:

Unreachable because they took it offline till noon sunday.Some power related upgrades or something going on.It was posted on thier site the last 3 days.
Interesting. They should have made it a little bit more obvious. I had no idea that they posted it on the site. That thing that they call is a website is an absolute mess!

I managed to get on the site about an hour before it went down yesterday. I think around 5 PM. They added the rest of the "G"s and "C"s as well, although the "C" link at the top of the page wasn't active for whatever reason.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-CRTC-Posting-comments-re-TN7181-with-your-info-included-22363158 Sat, 09 May 2009 10:38:52 EDT Re: CRTC Posting comments re: TN7181 with your info included http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-CRTC-Posting-comments-re-TN7181-with-your-info-included-22362757 http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-CRTC-Posting-comments-re-TN7181-with-your-info-included-22362757 Sat, 09 May 2009 07:34:24 EDT Re: CRTC Posting comments re: TN7181 with your info included http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-CRTC-Posting-comments-re-TN7181-with-your-info-included-22361804 http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-CRTC-Posting-comments-re-TN7181-with-your-info-included-22361804 Fri, 08 May 2009 22:43:23 EDT Re: CRTC Posting comments re: TN7181 with your info included http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-CRTC-Posting-comments-re-TN7181-with-your-info-included-22361729 said by mlerner:

Not really, their firewall just doesn't respond to pings.
Their server doesn't respond to Firefox either...

Maybe it's because the server is under federal regulation, i.e. unreachable after 3PM on Fridays until 9:30AM Monday :D]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-CRTC-Posting-comments-re-TN7181-with-your-info-included-22361729 Fri, 08 May 2009 22:23:34 EDT Re: CRTC Posting comments re: TN7181 with your info included http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-CRTC-Posting-comments-re-TN7181-with-your-info-included-22361535 http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-CRTC-Posting-comments-re-TN7181-with-your-info-included-22361535 Fri, 08 May 2009 21:38:05 EDT Re: CRTC Posting comments re: TN7181 with your info included http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-CRTC-Posting-comments-re-TN7181-with-your-info-included-22361501 
>tracert www.crtc.gc.ca Tracing route to liveweb.crtc.gc.ca [198.103.61.7]over a maximum of 30 hops:   1    <1 ms    <1 ms    <1 ms  192.168.2.1  2   115 ms    91 ms    11 ms  lo-100.erx06.tor.packetflow.ca [206.248.154.106]   3     8 ms     8 ms     8 ms  2150.ae0.bdr01.tor.packetflow.ca [69.196.136.161]  4     8 ms     8 ms     9 ms  69.90.79.81  5     9 ms     9 ms     8 ms  216.191.190.105  6    13 ms    13 ms    12 ms  ge7-2.hcap4-ott.bb.allstream.net [199.212.172.14]  7     *        *        *     Request timed out.  8  216.191.30.154  reports: Destination net unreachable. Trace complete.
]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-CRTC-Posting-comments-re-TN7181-with-your-info-included-22361501 Fri, 08 May 2009 21:28:55 EDT Re: CRTC Posting comments re: TN7181 with your info included http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-CRTC-Posting-comments-re-TN7181-with-your-info-included-22354189
Still, it's going on a month and all the comments are still not up yet; is that saying something good about Canadian internet users or something bad about the CRTC?]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-CRTC-Posting-comments-re-TN7181-with-your-info-included-22354189 Thu, 07 May 2009 13:43:31 EDT Re: CRTC Posting comments re: TN7181 with your info included http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-CRTC-Posting-comments-re-TN7181-with-your-info-included-22354118
I betting most of these 2000+ (and counting) comments were made with less than 1 days notice, spurred on by Rocky's email. I hope this causes the CRTC to consider their position carefully.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-CRTC-Posting-comments-re-TN7181-with-your-info-included-22354118 Thu, 07 May 2009 13:31:45 EDT Re: CRTC Posting comments re: TN7181 with your info included http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-CRTC-Posting-comments-re-TN7181-with-your-info-included-22351566 C - The CRTC apparently forgot the order of our alphabet.

Ah! That's why they put Corporations in front of Canadians on their priority list. :(]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-CRTC-Posting-comments-re-TN7181-with-your-info-included-22351566 Wed, 06 May 2009 22:41:12 EDT Re: CRTC Posting comments re: TN7181 with your info included http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-CRTC-Posting-comments-re-TN7181-with-your-info-included-22351200
There are 2237 submissions so far. Might want to subtract a few because of multi-part submissions.

EDIT:

A - 194
B - 387
C - The CRTC apparently forgot the order of our alphabet.
D - 314
E - 71
F - 196
G - 287
H - 345
I - 48
J - 115
K - 280]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-CRTC-Posting-comments-re-TN7181-with-your-info-included-22351200 Wed, 06 May 2009 21:30:39 EDT Re: CRTC Posting comments re: TN7181 with your info included http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-CRTC-Posting-comments-re-TN7181-with-your-info-included-22327046 said by El Quintron:

Not to derail the thread but let's look at the Harper govt's motivations.

Harper gov't is supported by Alberta Oil...

Alberta Oil needs good relations with the US because it wants to sell expensive oil to them...

Alberta Oil tells the Harperites you need to keep in good with Uncle Sam, or you lose our support.

Maybe what we need to do is convince the Harperites that Net Neutrality is good for our relationship with Uncle Sam?

:D
Yes, thats correct. Its ALL the Conservatives fault!

(And yes, you're derailing the thread)]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-CRTC-Posting-comments-re-TN7181-with-your-info-included-22327046 Fri, 01 May 2009 22:04:02 EDT Re: CRTC Posting comments re: TN7181 with your info included http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-CRTC-Posting-comments-re-TN7181-with-your-info-included-22326987

»www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xl6NfQyNLto

For those of you who don't want to use the bandwidth
"Pink Floyd - Money"
Money is really all the government cares about and all it ever will care about... oops and votes. ]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-CRTC-Posting-comments-re-TN7181-with-your-info-included-22326987 Fri, 01 May 2009 21:51:22 EDT Re: CRTC Posting comments re: TN7181 with your info included http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-CRTC-Posting-comments-re-TN7181-with-your-info-included-22324991
Harper gov't is supported by Alberta Oil...

Alberta Oil needs good relations with the US because it wants to sell expensive oil to them...

Alberta Oil tells the Harperites you need to keep in good with Uncle Sam, or you lose our support.

Maybe what we need to do is convince the Harperites that Net Neutrality is good for our relationship with Uncle Sam?

:D
--
Working to bring you closer to a Bell and Rogers free household.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-CRTC-Posting-comments-re-TN7181-with-your-info-included-22324991 Fri, 01 May 2009 14:45:34 EDT Re: CRTC Posting comments re: TN7181 with your info included http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-CRTC-Posting-comments-re-TN7181-with-your-info-included-22324934
Agreed. Sadly, the Harper cabinet doesn't give a flying fuck what we want.
They're more concerned with bending over for whomever happens to be sending the most $$'s across the border.

Our government is comprised of a bunch of dancing bears.
They spend all the damn time standing around on the american hot plates, dancing to the tune dictated by uncle sam.

It's just insane, I mean, we're all around them from one end of the country to the other, shouting "STOP IT YOU CRAZY FUCKERS! YOU'RE RUINING EVERYTHING!" and yet they pretend not to hear or see us.
I just wonder where exactly in a politicians brain logic just ceases to factor into any decisions that effect millions.

This whole debacle just makes my head hurt so damn bad. ]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-CRTC-Posting-comments-re-TN7181-with-your-info-included-22324934 Fri, 01 May 2009 14:36:13 EDT Re: CRTC Posting comments re: TN7181 with your info included http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-CRTC-Posting-comments-re-TN7181-with-your-info-included-22324640 said by mactalla_ :

Has any news outlet (CBC?) picked up on this yet? It's pretty clear which side non-Bell employees are on. We'll need some good coverage if the CRTC makes a stupid move.
The CBC is biting somewhat, but there's a definite lack of coverage outside the CBC and Torstar (note the two only networks not owned by Telecom)

I think it's time to start approaching the Minister or Heritage, Industry and their Respective members of the Shadow Cabinet.
--
Working to bring you closer to a Bell and Rogers free household.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-CRTC-Posting-comments-re-TN7181-with-your-info-included-22324640 Fri, 01 May 2009 13:41:31 EDT Re: CRTC Posting comments re: TN7181 with your info included http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-CRTC-Posting-comments-re-TN7181-with-your-info-included-22323930
I've started reading through them. Read the A's, into the B's (a few of the links in B give 404's) and aside from those unreadable ones and a couple that reference attached files that don't seem to be posted the score is Sanity: 100% vs. BellER: 0%

Many people reference TekSavvy and/or receiving the email notice at the last minute. That should make it very clear that Rocky did the right thing in sending out that notice!

Has any news outlet (CBC?) picked up on this yet? It's pretty clear which side non-Bell employees are on. We'll need some good coverage if the CRTC makes a stupid move.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-CRTC-Posting-comments-re-TN7181-with-your-info-included-22323930 Fri, 01 May 2009 11:33:39 EDT Re: CRTC Posting comments re: TN7181 with your info included http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-CRTC-Posting-comments-re-TN7181-with-your-info-included-22318308 http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-CRTC-Posting-comments-re-TN7181-with-your-info-included-22318308 Thu, 30 Apr 2009 10:59:58 EDT Re: CRTC Posting comments re: TN7181 with your info included http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-CRTC-Posting-comments-re-TN7181-with-your-info-included-22315013 said by cpsycho:

I wont care if our names are posted if we win what we want. Would you?I guess I wouldn't care, but they skipped my letter between B and G.
I guess either they pull letters out of a hat or they use a random number generator.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-CRTC-Posting-comments-re-TN7181-with-your-info-included-22315013 Wed, 29 Apr 2009 17:24:23 EDT Re: CRTC Posting comments re: TN7181 with your info included http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-CRTC-Posting-comments-re-TN7181-with-your-info-included-22313702 http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-CRTC-Posting-comments-re-TN7181-with-your-info-included-22313702 Wed, 29 Apr 2009 13:07:08 EDT Re: CRTC Posting comments re: TN7181 with your info included http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-CRTC-Posting-comments-re-TN7181-with-your-info-included-22312594 --
"No matter where you go, there you are." - Buckaroo Banzai]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-CRTC-Posting-comments-re-TN7181-with-your-info-included-22312594 Wed, 29 Apr 2009 09:52:54 EDT Re: CRTC Posting comments re: TN7181 with your info included http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-CRTC-Posting-comments-re-TN7181-with-your-info-included-22312572 said by R0CKY:

said by mactalla_ :

I don't know what order they're posting... A-E only has the A names, and F-J only has the H names.

Hopefully at the least they've got a clue that more than a couple people are concerned about this topic!
It is kind of funny to see the numbers by alphabet and that only two letters are accounted for in there!
let us PRAY they're as incompetent in this as in everything else, at least that way only 10% of your customers might have to ask for an email addy change :hmm:

Edit: OR maybe, just perhaps an employee or two with something on the BALL are messing it up and ""BLAME THE COMPUTER DUDEing em" lolol
--
In theory, a bumble bee cannot fly!]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-CRTC-Posting-comments-re-TN7181-with-your-info-included-22312572 Wed, 29 Apr 2009 09:48:44 EDT Re: CRTC Posting comments re: TN7181 with your info included http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-CRTC-Posting-comments-re-TN7181-with-your-info-included-22312543 http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-CRTC-Posting-comments-re-TN7181-with-your-info-included-22312543 Wed, 29 Apr 2009 09:42:05 EDT Re: CRTC Posting comments re: TN7181 with your info included http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-CRTC-Posting-comments-re-TN7181-with-your-info-included-22310379 http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-CRTC-Posting-comments-re-TN7181-with-your-info-included-22310379 Tue, 28 Apr 2009 20:38:13 EDT Re: CRTC Posting comments re: TN7181 with your info included http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-CRTC-Posting-comments-re-TN7181-with-your-info-included-22310351 Taking the blame away the large monopoly ISP's.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-CRTC-Posting-comments-re-TN7181-with-your-info-included-22310351 Tue, 28 Apr 2009 20:33:07 EDT Re: CRTC Posting comments re: TN7181 with your info included http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-CRTC-Posting-comments-re-TN7181-with-your-info-included-22310268 http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-CRTC-Posting-comments-re-TN7181-with-your-info-included-22310268 Tue, 28 Apr 2009 20:19:37 EDT Re: CRTC Posting comments re: TN7181 with your info included http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-CRTC-Posting-comments-re-TN7181-with-your-info-included-22310208
This way Bell can get another stay, on the grounds all the comments have to been posted and therefore they cannot respond to all of them. ;)]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-CRTC-Posting-comments-re-TN7181-with-your-info-included-22310208 Tue, 28 Apr 2009 20:07:34 EDT Re: CRTC Posting comments re: TN7181 with your info included http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-CRTC-Posting-comments-re-TN7181-with-your-info-included-22308823 said by TSI Gabe:

Talking about Star Gates. Bell apparently can send letters in the past.
I saw that episode too !!!!]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-CRTC-Posting-comments-re-TN7181-with-your-info-included-22308823 Tue, 28 Apr 2009 16:03:07 EDT Re: CRTC Posting comments re: TN7181 with your info included http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-CRTC-Posting-comments-re-TN7181-with-your-info-included-22308431 said by HiVolt:

said by R0CKY:

It is kind of funny to see the numbers by alphabet and that only two letters are accounted for in there!
Bell is throttling the other letters! ;)
LOL]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-CRTC-Posting-comments-re-TN7181-with-your-info-included-22308431 Tue, 28 Apr 2009 14:57:25 EDT Re: CRTC Posting comments re: TN7181 with your info included http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-CRTC-Posting-comments-re-TN7181-with-your-info-included-22308405 http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-CRTC-Posting-comments-re-TN7181-with-your-info-included-22308405 Tue, 28 Apr 2009 14:51:36 EDT Re: CRTC Posting comments re: TN7181 with your info included http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-CRTC-Posting-comments-re-TN7181-with-your-info-included-22308403 said by R0CKY:

It is kind of funny to see the numbers by alphabet and that only two letters are accounted for in there!
Bell is throttling the other letters! ;)
--
GOLF LEAFS GOLF!]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-CRTC-Posting-comments-re-TN7181-with-your-info-included-22308403 Tue, 28 Apr 2009 14:50:36 EDT Re: CRTC Posting comments re: TN7181 with your info included http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-CRTC-Posting-comments-re-TN7181-with-your-info-included-22308040 said by mactalla_ :

I don't know what order they're posting... A-E only has the A names, and F-J only has the H names.

Hopefully at the least they've got a clue that more than a couple people are concerned about this topic!
It is kind of funny to see the numbers by alphabet and that only two letters are accounted for in there!
--
TSI Rocky - TekSavvy Solutions Inc.

Authorized TSI employee ( »TekSavvy FAQ »Official support in the forum )
]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-CRTC-Posting-comments-re-TN7181-with-your-info-included-22308040 Tue, 28 Apr 2009 13:37:53 EDT Re: CRTC Posting comments re: TN7181 with your info included http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-CRTC-Posting-comments-re-TN7181-with-your-info-included-22307389
Hopefully at the least they've got a clue that more than a couple people are concerned about this topic!]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-CRTC-Posting-comments-re-TN7181-with-your-info-included-22307389 Tue, 28 Apr 2009 11:45:50 EDT Re: CRTC Posting comments re: TN7181 with your info included http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-CRTC-Posting-comments-re-TN7181-with-your-info-included-22305734
»www.crtc.gc.ca/public/8740/2009/···_com.htm

EDIT: Seems that F-J also exists;

»www.crtc.gc.ca/8740/eng/2009/b2_7181.htm

if you click A-E, you will get the list of names before, plus more ... and F-J is linked too, but they only have the names listed rather the info contained within it.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-CRTC-Posting-comments-re-TN7181-with-your-info-included-22305734 Tue, 28 Apr 2009 00:42:49 EDT