cpsycho
join:2008-06-03
Orangeville, ON | reply to O G
Re: Its the Traffic Management Super Bowl!
sometimes she was going slow enough for me to understand some of it. lol |
|
InvalidError
join:2008-02-03
 ·TekSavvy Solutions..
 ·Videotron
| reply to DJMASACRE
said by DJMASACRE  :is she trying to speak french to confuse them ? =P yay official languages ! I do not like this guy's presentation too much, he's getting the part of privacy that's the responsibility of individual users with privacy where the carrier can snoop on users' traffic to further their own purposes.
ZIP.ca made a good point on this this morning by showing concern with Bell or others monitoring ZIP orders to profile GAS users and decide what to put on their own VoD services. |
|
51019512
join:2009-05-19
151 Front St | reply to O G
For those who do not know french you can listen to the translator version at »www.crtc.gc.ca/streaming/stream1-eng.asx |
|
51019512
join:2009-05-19
151 Front St | reply to O G
Lunch Break: Return at 1:15pm. |
|
cpsycho
join:2008-06-03
Orangeville, ON | reply to O G
I wish they were streaming video. |
|
tor
@teksavvy.com | That would cause "congestion".
:P |
|
InvalidError
join:2008-02-03
·TekSavvy Solutions..
·Videotron
| reply to cpsycho
said by cpsycho :I wish they were streaming video. Wonder if their network could handle the load... they probably have more people tuned in for this hearing right now than any other proceeding ever. |
|
cpsycho
join:2008-06-03
Orangeville, ON
·Wightman Telecom
·Rogers Hi-Speed
1 edit | reply to InvalidError
Im not sure if I liked it either. He was not to keen on the idea of symmetrical networks by my understanding and only suggesting new tech for the current network setup.
Edit: still bad idea of having new tech to off set bandwidth of old tech. Still leaves canada in the stone ages when it comes to non symmetrical setups. |
|
InvalidError
join:2008-02-03
·TekSavvy Solutions..
·Videotron
| said by cpsycho :Im not sure if I liked it either. He was not to keen on the idea of symmetrical networks by my understanding and only suggesting new tech for the current network setup. Worse than that, he even said that some ISPs were happy that Bell footed the cost for doing their traffic management in their stead, saying that if Bell wasn't doing it, every GAS ISP would need to buy similar equipment for $30k+ to do their own management.
Google's opening intervention was the best there, saying that the best management is to deploy more capacity so that no incapacitating congestion occurs and let TCP/IP's built-in congestion management sort it out, as has been the norm over the internet's 20+ years history. |
|
mlerner
Premium
join:2000-11-25
Nepean, ON
·Rogers Hi-Speed
·TekSavvy Solutions..
·Bell Sympatico
| reply to cpsycho
said by cpsycho :Edit: still bad idea of having new tech to off set bandwidth of old tech. Still leaves canada in the stone ages when it comes to non symmetrical setups. The problem is the old tech! The congestion they claimed is crippling their network is the result of not upgrading legacy links and hardware. |
|
cpsycho
join:2008-06-03
Orangeville, ON | reply to O G
So my thought on his presentation was DPI lite is the best way to go. Still only a band-aid solution to the bandwidth problems. |
|
static416
join:2007-01-26
Toronto, ON
·TekSavvy Solutions..
·Rogers Hi-Speed
| reply to cpsycho
said by cpsycho :Im not sure if I liked it either. He was not to keen on the idea of symmetrical networks by my understanding and only suggesting new tech for the current network setup. Edit: still bad idea of having new tech to off set bandwidth of old tech. Still leaves canada in the stone ages when it comes to non symmetrical setups. We should keep in mind that this guy is still respresenting ISPs. Third-party ISPs, but ISPs just the same. Same goes for when CAIP testifies.
As consumers we like to lump ourselves in with the CAIP and Rocky, because they have similar goals in some ways. But they are still businesses and as such will differ in some ways we may not like.
A good example is that most third-party ISPs would not be in favor of enshrining net neutrality in law, even if drafted perfectly. Not throttling is a great way to differentiate their business from Rogers and Bell. If you make Bell and Rogers play nice, they lose part of their business model. They'd prefer competition to regulation. Whereas consumers just want better service, the method of getting it is less important. |
|
cpsycho
join:2008-06-03
Orangeville, ON
·Wightman Telecom
·Rogers Hi-Speed
| said by static416 :
If you make Bell and Rogers play nice, they lose part of their business model. They'd prefer competition to regulation.
But what they are doing is not competition, they are forcing other ISP's onto their business model.
I still would love a nice symmetrical 25/25 line. But the way the CRTC has not regulated and the government does not care, im not going to see this in Canada in my life time.
I honestly wish I could move to another social nation that offers these speeds. |
|
InvalidError
join:2008-02-03
·TekSavvy Solutions..
·Videotron
| reply to cpsycho
said by cpsycho :Edit: still bad idea of having new tech to off set bandwidth of old tech. Still leaves canada in the stone ages when it comes to non symmetrical setups. Bell is replacing its ATM gear with more efficient 10GbE equipment, there was an article a few months ago about this that was referred to in the CAIP filing in the paragraphs on Bell's claims of congestion. From that article, it seemed like congestion was actually a pretty sparse issue across Bell's territory and that Bell believed the couple of GbE switches they deployed were going to solve bandwidth issues in most of those areas.
Bell's plan is clearly to standardize on 10GbE, a low-cost and higher-performance alternative to its aging ATM. With a more efficient, cheaper and faster network, Bell's costs will actually drop significantly once ATM is completely phased out so it really bugs me when Frankenstein (whatever his name is) keeps saying that faster unmolested internet HAS to be more expensive (customers or shareholders will have to 'foot the bill') than it currently is.
Bell is doing cost-cutting upgrades and has apparently convinced the CRTC that its new upgrades cost them more. |
|
cpsycho
join:2008-06-03
Orangeville, ON
·Wightman Telecom
·Rogers Hi-Speed
2 edits | reply to O G
here is another reason why we need more CO's.
»www.spacedatabase.com/SearchAvai···ngID=476
edit:unless it is broken. zero space available. |
|
An_Onymous
@teksavvy.com
| reply to DJMASACRE
>and Fickle says ¨... and then the ISPS need this ¨new technology¨.. and who will pay for this ... the shareholders ? ¨
Isn't this called investing? You know put down money for capital equipment and reap the profits?
If you don't invest, then what exactly did you sell the shareholders? |
|
mlerner
Premium
join:2000-11-25
Nepean, ON | Well right now they're selling a steam pile of old crap and then they wonder why they're not seeing any sales. |
|
twizlar
I dont think so.
Premium
join:2003-12-24
Brantford, ON
| reply to cpsycho
All that says is that there are no open suites at 151 front....
--
Broadline Networks Inc. |
|
cpsycho
join:2008-06-03
Orangeville, ON
1 edit | ahhhh I was not sure...
Maybe wee need a few more 151 front streets. To bring down the cost? |
|
twizlar
I dont think so.
Premium
join:2003-12-24
Brantford, ON | The cost of what? There are pleanty of datacenters in and around Toronto... all with competitive pricing.
--
Broadline Networks Inc. |
|
