It appears that Videotron is truly realy to enable 10gbps links, but with conditions CNOC does not approve of.

quote:

---

April 10, 2012 FILED VIA ACCESS KEY

John Traversy
Secretary General Canadian Radio-television and
Telecommunications Commission
Gatineau, Quebec K1A 0N2

Subject: Canadian Network Operators Consortium Inc. Application to review and vary Telecom Regulatory Policy CRTC 2011-703 and Telecom Regulatory Policy CRTC 2011-704 (CRTC File No. 8662-C182-201202324)
Dear Mr. Traversy,

1. Canadian Network Operators Consortium Inc. (“CNOC”) is in receipt of answers from Bell Aliant Regional Communications, Limited Partnership and Bell Canada (collectively, “Bell Companies”), Cogeco Cable Inc., Quebecor Media Inc., on behalf of its affiliate Videotron G.P., Rogers Communications Partnership and Shaw Communications Inc. (collectively, “Cable Carriers”), MTS Inc. and Allstream Inc. (collectively, “MTSA”), Telus Communications Company and Vaxination Informatique.

2. As matters now stand, CNOC’s reply to these submissions would be due on 16 April 2012. However, there are three factors that make it impossible for CNOC to meet this deadline. First, the collective volume and complexity of the answers cited above submissions is considerable. Second, CNOC’s ability to convene the internal regulatory resources required to analyze the answers and prepare a reply is delayed by the Easter long weekend as a number of relevant resources will not be available until today. This effectively shortens the working period for the preparation of reply by four days. Finally, CNOC’s Annual General Meeting (“AGM”) is taking place tomorrow and some of the same resources required to assist with the preparation of a reply will be tied up today through Thursday of this week with the AGM and related travel.

3. As a result of these factors, CNOC is requesting a delay in the date for filing its reply in this proceeding to 23 April 2012. This is only a delay of five business days but will be of great assistance to CNOC in managing the reply process given all of the circumstances just described.

Yours very truly,
William Sandiford Chair of the Board and President

---

The issue is, if you don't allocate the capacity block to an interface, how will it work? Nobody has been able to demonstrate a setup whereby a fixed quantity of ordered capacity can be dynamically allocated among several links.

quote:

---

There is a problem with establishing profit levels as a percentage of costs. This does not incent incumbents to cut costs since it reduces their profits. In fact, they have every incentive to find ways to increase costs since increased costs means increased profits for GAS and TPIA services, and this is totally contrary to normal business practices in commercial competitive environments.

---

I think Bell has make it very clear that the capacity pays for their core + transport cost for spanning the area served and physical facilities and has nothing to do with AHSSPI inside a shelf. This follows that the capacity charges should then be billed as separate items and not to tie to individual AHSSPI.

This allows for IISP flexibility for AHSSPI level link redundancy without paying for capacity that they cannot used under the current rules.

quote:

---

No "#" characters were harmed during he production of this document.

---

And finally... Vaxination's comments.

quote:

---

Or perhaps the Commission meant to remove the AHSSPI completely since all its costs were factored into the capacity rate but Bell Canada didn't get the memo and still bills it to ISPs ?

---

quote:

---

The costing studies were prepared before the January/February "UBB Winter" civil uprising which forced a regime change by toppling the incumbant dictated UBB.

---

quote:

---

MTS Allstream concurs with CNOC’s conclusion that Bell’s new capacity rate is
unjustifiably high, reflecting a per Gigabyte (GB) rate contrary to the Commission’s
findings in TRP 2011703, and according to Bell’s own cost evidence

---

quote:

---

Further, Bell’s own evidence points out the fantastical nature of the $2,213 rate. [...] From its various comments and submissions in various recent proceedings, what is clear is that Bell is confused about the difference between economic Internet traffic management practices (ITMPs), i.e. economic penalties to reduce network consumption, and capacity based billing

---

I think we should all move to Manitoba.

quote:

---

Further, Bell’s own evidence points out the fantastical nature of the $2,213 rate. [...] From its various comments and submissions in various recent proceedings, what is clear is that Bell is confused about the difference between economic Internet traffic management practices (ITMPs), i.e. economic penalties to reduce network consumption, and capacity based billing

---

The reason 3rd-party ISPs have a hard time growing their market share is that lower prices on a single service alone are insufficient to convince the average incumbent subscribers to switch... people like sticking to the devil they know.

Indies should be owning about 20-35% of the total market in order for the marketplace to be considered competitive. That would generally mean that the telco/cableco regional monopolies would each have about 30-45% market share in each of their service areas (depending on the day), with a multitude of indies fighting over the scraps.

In the AGI report, they state:

It is more likely that independent ISPs will continue to lose share to the incumbents under the current rate structure. Accordingly, Canadian consumers will lose out on different competitive market options in terms of price, connectivity, and choice. [emphasis added]

34. As is, the capacity-based rates struck for Bell Aliant/Bell Canada, Cogeco, Rogers and Videotron clearly deter independent ISPs from investing in increased capacity and growing their consumer base, particularly because annual increases in per-user peak demand are expected to exceed 20%. It is therefore unlikely that the independent ISPs will increase their market share in Internet services provision beyond the current level of 6%.56 It is more likely that independent ISPs will continue to lose share to the incumbents under the current rate structure. Accordingly, Canadian consumers will lose out on different competitive market options in terms of price, connectivity, and choice. [emphasis added]

LiQuiD, I just now noticed your reply.

I take it you are talking about deploying into Bell central offices? We are deployed into the Chatham CO, we haven't done anything with it because they increased all the rates on us last year. We have laid fibre on hydro poles, we've dug fibre into the ground, we've hung fibre over railway tracks, we've installed GPON, we've done LDDS circuits, we've done CO Access, we've installed into the home, we've installed into existing conduits. We've done engineering on all those things, we've installed wireless on two different spectrums in Chatham, I wouldn't say we have done it all, many here have done more of any one of those but I've done enough of each to know that it's a very hostile environment for anybody like TekSavvy who has a big bullseye on their backs from nearly every incumbent and competitor in the country. I'm not complaining, I'm speaking the truth and I've put my money where my mouth is and will continue to fight for those things. I think it's fair to say that TekSavvy has played a major role to date in changing the landscape on a number of these fronts. Others are much more involved now and that's great to see, I don't want too discount anybody else but at the same time I don't accept your general depiction of how it all works. I've never been afraid of hard work and working for my fair share and that's what you're saying is happening, I strongly disagree. TekSavvy has fought for every inch of what it's gotten, don't you doubt my resolve for one second. That others are deploying into COs as you say youve worked at, to me is just a good thing, many need to try to do these things and collectively we need to stand together and fight to improve the existing situation. You have rich Egyptians who have bailed on Canada because it's impossible to compete against the entrenched incumbents. I'm not crying wolf here, I'm not saying I want more for less. I'm saying there's a better way and I'm fighting for that better way. There's a better way for all Canadians. These things benefit all of us. Don't make me the enemy just because you plugged some cables too. We're on the same side and I'm not upset with you.

This is just a post to keep this topic active as there will b many posts to it in the next couple of weeks.

I still ROFL at how those guys could deadpan deliver the funny lines !

applies to the story about the guy offering the girl in the bar increasing amounts of money to go to bed with him.

....So he passed the integrity test as far as I am concerned.... :-)

Doctor Rumack passed away in a hospital (a large building with sick people in it - BUT THAT'S NOT IMPORTANT RIGHT NOW....).

 
I have the flick saved offline, and yes, that's Otto ! :) :D

I know, but you missed an (Airplane) joke. And you know what else we missed? The topic.

Katz got a brand new computer with a tetrabyte food processor with 8 gigahertz of RAM. He received Bibic and Depatie's bribe emails so fast that he asked for another bribe.

(there, now we're somewhat back on topic)

Wasn't Otto the name of the inflatable Auto-Pilot in the movie Airplane?