 CanerisErikCanerisPremium,VIP
join:2007-10-03
Toronto, ON
kudos:2 | reply to x_bell
Re: Short in Internal Phone Wiring said by x_bell :I remember someone mentioning it in a post. Maybe it was settled in the early stages. Here is a transcript from some hearings on this matter though. "Vidéotron continues to argue that, because it needs to conduct premises visits when it installs telephone services in its new telephony customer's premises, Bell Canada should expect to do the same if it wins back those customers." » www.crtc.gc.ca/ENG/transcripts/2···0118.htm Thanks. Good read. This is one of the few instances where I unfortunately support Bell's position, for the most part. I don't support their position regarding mandating NIDs, but I agree, since I've seen with my own eyes, that Videotron (and other cablecos) says one thing and does another.
It was good to see them mention MDUs (indicating they are out of scope) as there are no NIDs and there would still be a truck roll required to disconnect/reconnect at the MTR/IT or in-suite demarc.
It was unfortunate that the impact of third party providers or other more complex configurations was not considered. There was this implicit assumption that customers would have all services from either the telco or cableco, whereas in reality, one scenario is that many of our subscribers have dry DSL from us *because* they have cable VoIP from their cableco. This creates an additional complexity with respect to ISW, where it cannot be disconnected from the Bell network entirely, so all this idiotic "wire snipping" nonsense just can't work. It's the same situation with any VoIP+DSL actually. In the end, the customer and the non-cableco SP is getting screwed. Fortunately, our ISW I&R ability allows us to mitigate all of these things successfully often.
--
Erik - Caneris Inc. |
