|
to CanerisErik
Re: New Rogers TPIA rates: UBB by July 1You say that like my Ubuntu or Mac OS installations don't receive 100 MB worth of security and bug fixes every other week. |
|
MaynardKrebsWe did it. We heaved Steve. Yipee. Premium Member join:2009-06-17
1 recommendation |
said by TouchMyBox :You say that like my Ubuntu or Mac OS installations don't receive 100 MB worth of security and bug fixes every other week.
with apologies to Lou Reed..... Little Cope never once gave it away Everybody had to pay and pay A hustle here and a hustle there Gatineau's the place where they say, Hey babe, take a walk on the wild side I said, Hey Konrad Take a walk on the wild side |
|
sbrook Mod join:2001-12-14 Ottawa |
to MaynardKrebs
said by MaynardKrebs:This needs to come up at the hearings in the new year (CNOC / CAIP, et. al. will all need better lawyers than they've been using thus far for this). If KvF tries to shut discussion about this anti-trust precedent down, he's going to have a lot of 'splainin' to do in the press (that's assuming that the incumbent-owned press will even give it airtime, printers ink, or not program the DPI boxes to censor mentions of it). I hate to say this, but Belusgers will be able to put this down in one very easy swoop ... "American law and precedent setting decisions do not apply in Canada", which other than "for information" will carry no weight in the decision whatsoever without political interference to create new law. |
|
|
Technicolor TC4350 Asus RT-AC56 Grandstream HandyTone 702/704
|
to sbrook
said by sbrook:It's worth also noting that that the Service Control Engine (aka the DPI throtting box) is in the path between the headend and the TPIA provider, implying that throttling is in the TPIA user's future. Is this path being used by any of Rogers retail customers? I would only expect to see throttling if affects them. |
|
MaynardKrebsWe did it. We heaved Steve. Yipee. Premium Member join:2009-06-17 |
to sbrook
said by sbrook:said by MaynardKrebs:This needs to come up at the hearings in the new year (CNOC / CAIP, et. al. will all need better lawyers than they've been using thus far for this). If KvF tries to shut discussion about this anti-trust precedent down, he's going to have a lot of 'splainin' to do in the press (that's assuming that the incumbent-owned press will even give it airtime, printers ink, or not program the DPI boxes to censor mentions of it). I hate to say this, but Belusgers will be able to put this down in one very easy swoop ... "American law and precedent setting decisions do not apply in Canada", which other than "for information" will carry no weight in the decision whatsoever without political interference to create new law. It's going to be on the table » www.crtc.gc.ca/eng/archi ··· -783.htmReview of the regulatory framework relating to vertical integration
Deadline for submission of interventions/comments: 7 March 2011
The Commission hereby initiates a public proceeding to review its regulatory framework relating to vertical integration.
.....5. During the proceeding leading up to Broadcasting Decision 2010-782, several interveners expressed concerns that vertically integrated distributors have the potential to behave in an anti-competitive manner, to the detriment of the Canadian broadcasting industry. These parties proposed several safeguards in addition to those already in place to further dissuade anti-competitive behavior including, where they do not already exist, reverse onus provisions as they apply to undue preference or disadvantage allegations. ----------- I think that a letter writing campaign to MP's, the press, and to the Competition Bureau ought to begin now to empower the Competition Bureau to be a formal party to the hearings, and the terms of reference be broadened to include anti-competitive cross-'platform' behavior, ie. Rogers IPTV exclusion, or somebody else's no VoIP clause, or no 'over-the-top' video surveillance clause, etc... because it impinges on their God-given revenue stream. The CRTC is dead wrong in dealing with things in piecemeal fashion. Getting the Competition Bureau involved ex-ante is far better than trying to deal with things ex-post. |
|
|
UBBCharge
Anon
2010-Dec-11 3:17 pm
If the UBB they blame to fix the congestion as well as to punish those high usage abuse internet users then the price they proposed is reverse to the intention The least internet abuser "Ultra-Lite" is the most punishment for paying UBB fee = $5 / GB. quote: Utra-Lite: limit 2 GB (overage $5 / GB) Lite: limit 15 GB (overage $4 / GB) Express: limit 60 GB (overage $2 / GB) Extreme: limit 80 GB (overage $1.5 / GB) Extreme Plus: limit 125 GB (overage $1.25 / GB) Ultimate 175: limit GB (overage $0.50 / GB)
|
|
|
to TSI Marc
said by TSI Marc:I guess I'll make a bit of space in my own knowledge to add that Rogers isn't doing UBB anything like Bell is, they are generally only looking for abusive users whereas Bell is trying to monetize it as a new line of revenue. In other words, I don't believe Rogers is sending invoices out to each user who is 1gig over. Not the case at all. They charge for every gig you go over your cap up to a max of $50. Thats one of the biggest reasons people are switching from Rogers to your product, Teksavvy cable, as its unlimited. Is the agreement you have with Rogers outside of TPIA? |
|
sbrook Mod join:2001-12-14 Ottawa |
to UBBCharge
That is absolutely correct UBBCharge about the least users possible get hit with the highest possible charge. That's clearly NOT about managing congestion and really about revenue generation.
The rest of your post makes no sense whatsoever. |
|
DavesnothereChange is NOT Necessarily Progress Premium Member join:2009-06-15 Canada 2 edits |
to chaos1105
said by chaos1105:said by TSI Marc:I guess I'll make a bit of space in my own knowledge to add that Rogers isn't doing UBB anything like Bell is, they are generally only looking for abusive users whereas Bell is trying to monetize it as a new line of revenue. In other words, I don't believe Rogers is sending invoices out to each user who is 1gig over. Not the case at all. They charge for every gig you go over your cap up to a max of $50. Thats one of the biggest reasons people are switching from Rogers to your product, Teksavvy cable, as its unlimited. Is the agreement you have with Rogers outside of TPIA ? - I have heard both Yes AND No in answer to that last question. To illustrate the point, please read my post of 2010-12-01 at 11:53 in the below thread : » CRTC/CNOC 2010-803I had stated that I believed TSI's deal with Rogers to be outside of TPIA, but was corrected on this, and in an edit, I ack'd my updated info. However, the docs linked from the current thread would appear to ADD a UBB component to Rogers' TPIA tariff. I join the ranks of those who watch with bated breath for Marc's next reply on this. |
|
|
chuckcar to jfmezei
Anon
2010-Dec-11 7:35 pm
to jfmezei
This hurts people like me who live in the *snow* patch or the snow belt and can't really get outside in the winter. Ottawa has many, many months of winter and this means the people who are on the internet most will be hurt the most. I can't afford to travel and take vacations and get free internet in the hotels like the people with money. Something just doesn't seem fair. |
|
koreybOpen the Canadian Market NOW join:2005-01-08 Etobicoke, ON |
to jfmezei
IS anyone really surprised by this? They are only doing this because Bell got away with it.. Why not? I'm sure they have the option to wave the ubb fees for agreements made outside of the agreement... This is just getting out of control now.. If this is approved, competition is officially over in Canada.. I for one see little point of staying with any 3rd party at the point they have no way to offer any deference. I have no issue if the caps are used to control abuse which means the caps would have to be around the 200-250 gig mark. 60 gigs or under is set to have most people, especially with multi-member/computer families hit these caps just to be forced to pay more. |
|
koreyb |
to Davesnothere
said by Davesnothere:I had stated that I believed TSI's deal with Rogers to be outside of TPIA, but was corrected on this, and in an edit, I ack'd my updated info.
However, the docs linked from the current thread would appear to ADD a UBB component to Rogers' TPIA tariff.
Rogers always had ubb in the Rogers TPIA Tariff, they are just changing the price points etc. Rogers only has 2 TPIA clients...3web/Distrubutel and TSI It's hardly worth this BS really.. I would see little advantage for ISP's to be on Rogers other than speed, which speed with no usage is pointless.. I would rather have base fees increase a little than having some low cap and huge overages. |
|
MaynardKrebsWe did it. We heaved Steve. Yipee. Premium Member join:2009-06-17 |
to chuckcar
said by chuckcar :This hurts people like me who live in the *snow* patch or the snow belt and can't really get outside in the winter. Ottawa has many, many months of winter and this means the people who are on the internet most will be hurt the most. I can't afford to travel and take vacations and get free internet in the hotels like the people with money. Something just doesn't seem fair.
Yes, but due to your proximity you CAN attend the CRTC hearings in Gatineau in-person for a rollicking good laugh......especially if Mr. Hennessey of Telus brings his show to town again.....and don't forget you might also get to see Dear Leader Kim Il Cope and his MIB roll-in. Those of us in Toronto don't often get to see high farce like this in-person. |
|
|
ANCOM to jfmezei
Anon
2010-Dec-11 9:40 pm
to jfmezei
Oh. I was thinking to recommend my friends to join after I got the cable from TSI. I guess not any more. And staying with DSL is cheaper if they all have UBB. |
|
jfmezei Premium Member join:2007-01-03 Pointe-Claire, QC |
to koreyb
The current Rogers TPIA rates in effect today do not have a UBB component. They merely reserve the right to introduce UBB when they feel like it. (requiring a new tariff be filed). There was a UBB component in the past, but not in the current tarriffs.
Now, they have filed a new tariff with increased aggregation and re-introduction of UBB.
But this tariff also includes a new POI: ONTARIO. (855 York Mills Road) With one connection, serve all of ontario. (similar POIs for New Brunswick and NewFoundLand. |
|
koreybOpen the Canadian Market NOW join:2005-01-08 Etobicoke, ON 1 edit |
koreyb
Member
2010-Dec-11 11:02 pm
I must have mistaken Rogers for someone else then.. I hate to say it but the CRTC will just approve this like everything else.. so I guess If June is the date, I have until then to enjoy my internet. After that, if no option, I guess it's off to anyone who doesn't use Rogers or Bell. Not crazy on using a Data stick for my home internet but Wind and Mobilicity both offer great plans with REASONABLE traffic management approaches.. (Wind more so) It is an option I guess. I'm about ready to send my Cellphone over to one of the new guys very soon from Rogers... Not crazy on loosing my unlocked Blackberry Storm but I've got to start sending my message with my pocket book fully. |
|
DavesnothereChange is NOT Necessarily Progress Premium Member join:2009-06-15 Canada |
to jfmezei
said by jfmezei:Now, they [Rogers] have filed a new tariff with increased aggregation and re-introduction of UBB.
But this tariff also includes a new POI: ONTARIO. (855 York Mills Road) With one connection, serve all of Ontario. (similar POIs for New Brunswick and NewFoundLand. - Is this new Ontario POI active yet ? Or is this just a statement of intent on Rogers' part for next July 1st ? It would certainly have the potential to simplify the connectivity between Rogers and any Indie, including TSI, rather than using the piece-meal approach which seems to be how TSI has been connecting to Rogers so far. One fat Fibre link from 855 to 151 Front, or to wherever TSI's best Toronto PoP is. Nice ! BTW, there wouldn't happen to be a Timmies next to 855, would there ? |
|
koreybOpen the Canadian Market NOW join:2005-01-08 Etobicoke, ON |
koreyb
Member
2010-Dec-12 12:40 am
I can for sure say if that ontario poi is used, you will be accepting their new cap plan |
|
Technicolor TC4350 Asus RT-AC56 Grandstream HandyTone 702/704
|
to Davesnothere
said by Davesnothere:said by jfmezei:Now, they [Rogers] have filed a new tariff with increased aggregation and re-introduction of UBB.
But this tariff also includes a new POI: ONTARIO. (855 York Mills Road) With one connection, serve all of Ontario. (similar POIs for New Brunswick and NewFoundLand. - Is this new Ontario POI active yet ? Or is this just a statement of intent on Rogers' part for next July 1st ? It would certainly have the potential to simplify the connectivity between Rogers and any Indie, including TSI, rather than using the piece-meal approach which seems to be how TSI has been connecting to Rogers so far. One fat Fibre link from 855 to 151 Front, or to wherever TSI's best Toronto PoP is. Nice ! BTW, there wouldn't happen to be a Timmies next to 855, would there ? I don't want this new POI. I want to get off the Roger's network as soon after the last mile as is possible. I expect TSI to pay for transit to the Internet. I don't see any reason to have UBB in this scenario. |
|
|
to jfmezei
I was going to make the move from DSL to cable but now I am no longer sure. As the price to move (modem, activation, etc), makes it no longer worth it for the 6 months of 200GB or unlimited.
There also seems to be no mention of a $50 cap in the tariffs that Rogers does currently for their customers. So skies the limit it seems. Does that mean Rogers will eventually remove the cap on their retail customers? And maybe Rogers will "grandfather" the current people?
I understand TSI and such will try to fight it. But with Bell's UBB approved, I don't see them even possible to delay this one. |
|
markf join:2008-01-24 Scarborough, ON |
to jfmezei
Is there any question that UBB is soley a revenue generator? Seriously?
I know with the DSL situation, as it stands to be there will be a 60GB cap, then you pay about $1.15 or so to get to about 120 GB (I'm rounding to the $60 max overcharge), then after 120GB you're free until 300GB. Buy 120GB at an insane price and get the next 180GB free!
How exactly is this supposed to stop the "abusers"? If anything, many people will get hit with $20 or $30 overage charges and it ends there. How many will actually hit the $60 charge? If you do hit the $60 charge, how many are actually going to let Bell get away with charging them so much for only 120GB. If I hit 120GB, I'll make sure I get pretty darn close to 300GB, even if I just leave video streaming all day or download and delete Linux distros. How exactly does that help with the traffic situation?
This is such a farce I cannot believe it's even happening. Konrad must have a good pension coming courtesy his future "consultant" role with Bell and/or Rogers. You scratch my back, I'll scratch yours is the way it's going in Gatineau these days. |
|
|
indeedy to sbrook
Anon
2010-Dec-12 2:09 am
to sbrook
said by sbrook:It's worth also noting that that the Service Control Engine (aka the DPI throtting box) is in the path between the headend and the TPIA provider, implying that throttling is in the TPIA user's future. Yup. Rogers states in it's filing: The Service Control Engine applies Rogers internet traffic management practices to Rogers retail and wholesale TPIA internet traffic.Rogers is going to throttle TPIA. |
|
DavesnothereChange is NOT Necessarily Progress Premium Member join:2009-06-15 Canada |
to koreyb
said by koreyb:I can for sure say if that ontario poi is used, you will be accepting their new cap plan - Along with Rogers' latest proposed version of UBB. It's a trick. Good Point ! |
|
1 edit |
to jfmezei
So there you go. Robbers shows its old self and now robs once it has the captive customer base.
If this comes into force, why would anyone stay with Teksavvy?
What would diferentiate TSI as a competitor other than to call the call center and talk about monkeys, bananas or Georges Laracque? |
|
|
No more choice so no where really to move to. Rogers will have the same caps and Bell's caps are lower with higher prices. |
|
MaynardKrebsWe did it. We heaved Steve. Yipee. Premium Member join:2009-06-17 |
to jfmezei
Having a single POI for a province MIGHT allow the wholesale ISP to reap some large economies of scale on their backhaul to the NAP, and hence give them some breathing room to subsidize/re-allocate the UBB charges to flat-rate all their customers.
That might be a viable business model. |
|
DavesnothereChange is NOT Necessarily Progress Premium Member join:2009-06-15 Canada 1 edit |
said by MaynardKrebs:Having a single POI for a province....
....That might be a viable business model. - Rocky's numbers peeps are prob'ly already busy as we speak, crunching the numbers to see whether that might be worthwhile. |
|
sbrook Mod join:2001-12-14 Ottawa |
sbrook
Mod
2010-Dec-12 11:55 am
All a single POI does is ensure that TPIAs pay the transit from the head ends to the POI to Rogers instead of some other carrier. You can be sure that the POI for Rogers will be 151 Front in Toronto. As it is now, a TPIA has to arrange his own transit to each head end himself, paying somebody else to provide that transit.
Single POI is just another way for the incumbent to rape the independents. |
|
DavesnothereChange is NOT Necessarily Progress Premium Member join:2009-06-15 Canada |
said by sbrook:All a single POI does.... - Let me count the ways ! Yes, convenience always comes at a cost. The operative exercise here is to determine whether the convenience is WORTH the cost. But as I am in Cogeco-Land, I have even less newsflashes (than Rogers area peeps) about which to speculate. Bloody LUXURY ! |
|
34764170 (banned) join:2007-09-06 Etobicoke, ON |
to Davesnothere
said by Davesnothere:It would certainly have the potential to simplify the connectivity between Rogers and any Indie, including TSI, rather than using the piece-meal approach which seems to be how TSI has been connecting to Rogers so far. Except that just gives them 100% justification for UBB by moving to this POI. said by Davesnothere:BTW, there wouldn't happen to be a Timmies next to 855, would there ? Yes, there is. |
|