dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
17046
share rss forum feed


andyb
Premium
join:2003-05-29
SW Ontario
kudos:1
reply to resa1983

Re: CNOC Files w/ CRTC Against Rogers

If you has signed up for UBB stuff you would get everything still.I get everything for this rogers tariff too from that.Well except from CNOC who seem incapable of sending to anyone but the CRTC


resa1983
Premium
join:2008-03-10
North York, ON
kudos:10
reply to resa1983

Here's Rogers's final response to TN28-30. They sent it to me directly for once.
--
Battle.net Tech Support MVP

resa1983
Premium
join:2008-03-10
North York, ON
kudos:10
reply to AOD

Rogers doesn't have to file til 8pm EST.

I haven't received anything from JF today - he's been forwarding me everything as I'm not on any of the established email lists.
--
Battle.net Tech Support MVP



AOD
Premium
join:2008-01-24
Etobicoke, ON
kudos:1
reply to PrettyPink

said by PrettyPink :

Any word on Roger's response today?

+1?


PrettyPink

@telus.com
reply to HeadSpinning

Any word on Roger's response today?


HeadSpinning
MNSi Internet

join:2005-05-29
Windsor, ON
kudos:5
reply to Anon

said by HiVolt:

Are you f'n kidding me? It was probably Bell ordering the hit on him last time, now it's probably Rogers! LOL.

He's fine. Car not so much...
--
MNSi Internet - »www.mnsi.net
Expand your moderator at work


Shrug

@videotron.ca
reply to resa1983

Re: CNOC Files w/ CRTC Against Rogers

I'm glad CNOC made reference to your filing and more or less copied it. I'm pretty sure it would have went ignored, as they always have in the past.

CNOC and JF made sure it didn't.

But then again, we have seen over the years how CNOC, CAIP, and JF referenced blatant lies people have pointed out and the CRTC ignored it anyhow. *shrug*

I'm also kind of surprised that PIAC or the consumers union didn't bother with this one (equal access). But then again Since Anthony Hemond left the consumers union I find they aren't the same, or as involved or as vocal.

You did good. +1 to you. Let's wait and see how (if) the CRTC acknowledges it.


resa1983
Premium
join:2008-03-10
North York, ON
kudos:10
reply to Feelings

said by Feelings :

I have a good feeling.

Karma is definitely on the side of CNOC

First the prez of CNOC gets struck by lightning and lived to tell about it
»Prez of CNOC Hit by Lightening

and now he just got in a car accident which totaled his car on the 401 and he's still chugging away.

Both heaven and hell doesn't want this guy. Guess he's stuck in CRTC purgatory.

Lawlz. I was talking with someone about that this morning.

For those who don't know: Bill was cut off on the 401 Express, and totaled his car. He's ok.
--
Battle.net Tech Support MVP


Feelings

@videotron.ca
reply to resa1983

I have a good feeling.

Karma is definitely on the side of CNOC

First the prez of CNOC gets struck by lightning and lived to tell about it
»Prez of CNOC Hit by Lightening

and now he just got in a car accident which totaled his car on the 401 and he's still chugging away.

Both heaven and hell doesn't want this guy. Guess he's stuck in CRTC purgatory.


resa1983
Premium
join:2008-03-10
North York, ON
kudos:10
reply to resa1983

CNOC refiled their submission. Will update my html page in a minute.

EDIT: Done. Looks like they added a pdf printout of Rogers' own press release showing they said it was re-speeding, and not 'new' tiers like Rogers had stated.
--
Battle.net Tech Support MVP

resa1983
Premium
join:2008-03-10
North York, ON
kudos:10
reply to HiVolt

said by HiVolt:

said by TakeOffEh :

Sigh. It's as I feared. We won't be seeing any resolution on this until next year.

Which was probably precisely Rogers' plan, given that they had to know that TPIA providers would protest and the CRTC back & forth isn't quick...

Its quicker than usual as this is an expedited process. Some of those other processes can take months on end.

Its very possible the CRTC decides before the beginning of Christmas break, and order they provide the upgrades immediately.
--
Battle.net Tech Support MVP


HiVolt
Premium
join:2000-12-28
Toronto, ON
kudos:21
Reviews:
·TekSavvy DSL
·TekSavvy Cable
reply to TakeOffEh

said by TakeOffEh :

Sigh. It's as I feared. We won't be seeing any resolution on this until next year.

Which was probably precisely Rogers' plan, given that they had to know that TPIA providers would protest and the CRTC back & forth isn't quick...


TakeOffEh

@teksavvy.com
reply to resa1983

said by resa1983:

Someone in IRC asked me to create an easier to follow timeline of everything, because the CRTC's site really sucks, and cuz this thread bounced a bit between the 2 proceedings.

Thanks, that helped immensely.

Sigh. It's as I feared. We won't be seeing any resolution on this until next year.

resa1983
Premium
join:2008-03-10
North York, ON
kudos:10
reply to bt

Someone in IRC asked me to create an easier to follow timeline of everything, because the CRTC's site really sucks, and cuz this thread bounced a bit between the 2 proceedings.

So here's the full timeline with links, and a bit of a summary:
»dl.dropbox.com/u/9038867/Rogers/CRTC.html
--
Battle.net Tech Support MVP


bt

join:2009-02-26
canada
kudos:1
reply to TakeOffEh

said by TakeOffEh :

So CNOC filed, Rogers responded, CNOC followed up, now it's time for CRTC to decide? Is that correct? As far as I can tell, that seems to be the case.

Rogers response to the CNOC response is due Tuesday, IIRC.


TakeOffEh

@teksavvy.com
reply to aaah

So CNOC filed, Rogers responded, CNOC followed up, now it's time for CRTC to decide? Is that correct? As far as I can tell, that seems to be the case. If so, could that mean we may finally see a decision some time next week?


resa1983
Premium
join:2008-03-10
North York, ON
kudos:10
reply to Guspaz

Read it right after I posted it.

The "crystal clear" comment was in the email I sent to the TN28-30 filing (ie the 2011-703 participants).
--
Battle.net Tech Support MVP



Guspaz
Guspaz
Premium,MVM
join:2001-11-05
Montreal, QC
kudos:23

1 edit
reply to aaah

Hmm, a few typos in the CNOC letters. Orphan words, asking the CRTC to be "grating" them relief, etc.

resa: the reference to you, on top of the "is in receipt of" thing at the start, appears to be these paragraphs:

said by CNOC :

As noted by Ms. Murphy, it is crystal clear that for those Rogers retail end-users that have or acquire DOCSIS 3.0 modems, the speed increases are automatic (i.e., do constitute a “re-speeding”) and do not involve any rate increase as admitted by Rogers in the press release attached to this reply in which Rogers announced the speed increases;

and
said by CNOC :

Finally, CNOC shares the concern expressed by Ms. Murphy that upstream speed increases provided to Rogers’ retail end-users free of charge are not also being extended to end-users of TPIA customers as required by paragraph 210 of Decision 2006-77, and so CNOC urges the Commission to act on this matter as well, but without holding up the etermination of the CNOC Application as it related to Rogers Tariff Notice 28.

--
Developer: Tomato/MLPPP, Linux/MLPPP, etc »fixppp.org

resa1983
Premium
join:2008-03-10
North York, ON
kudos:10
reply to resa1983

CNOC's final filing to their Part 1 application requesting enforcement for speedmatching.

Haven't read it yet (JF just forwarded it to me), but a nice gentlemen yesterday informed me they'd be referencing my submission.
--
Battle.net Tech Support MVP

resa1983
Premium
join:2008-03-10
North York, ON
kudos:10
reply to The Tone

CNOC's filing on Wed re: Rogers TN28

This deals with the pricing of the 'new' speeds.
--
Battle.net Tech Support MVP


The Tone

@videotron.ca
reply to Robleh

said by Robleh:

Sorry but, has anything been said about the speed matching on non-argg poi's?

Nothing written in stone yet.


Robleh

join:2009-07-14
canada
reply to aaah

Sorry but, has anything been said about the speed matching on non-argg poi's?



hm

@videotron.ca
reply to resa1983

said by resa1983:

I wouldn't say ignored. I'd say someone who is much more experienced than I, read my submission, took information I gathered, and put it into a submission the CRTC would take much more seriously and accept.

No Resa. Your submission should should be taken equally as serious as JF's submission or Bell's submission.

Don't put yourself down or even think that you are less important or less serious.

You did well. You showed and brought up Rogers lies that both CNOC and JF missed at first chance. The Harper governments CRTC *chose* to ignore you.

I hope you now explore how to file an access to Information request to see all the info that was used to judge this case. I would also hope JF does as well.

I've never done one so i'm access to Information dumb. But I'm sure JF would help you if you asked him. Or maybe someone else here who has experience in it.

Then you can post it for all to see.

You did very well and are also seeing how for years people have been screaming and the CRTC just ignores everyone except for Bell and Rogers. Even when they are blatantly lying through their teeth and everyone knows it (yet the Harper CRTC chooses to pretend it doesn't exist).

resa1983
Premium
join:2008-03-10
North York, ON
kudos:10
reply to hm

I wouldn't say ignored. I'd say someone who is much more experienced than I, read my submission, took information I gathered, and put it into a submission the CRTC would take much more seriously and accept.

Curious how they're going to try to wiggle out of these not being upgrades, instead of new packages like they stated though.

--
Battle.net Tech Support MVP



hm

@videotron.ca
reply to resa1983

said by resa1983:

New JF submission for TN28-30. Haven't read it yet.

Basically JF is stating this:

Point #1:
1) The CRTC is giving preference to Rogers over Bell in allowing a cost increase for the speed tiers. The commission already stated that Bell is to give the same speed upgrades at no cost. So if the CRTC allows Rogers to increase costs Bell can & will file an undue preference and demand the same.

This in turn will also justify Bell increasing rates for no reason.

In addition the CRTC will disregard & toss out previous policy.

Also, JF points out the lies you caught them in which the CRTC is once again ignoring.

Ramifications:
Both resellers and customers of resellers will be getting price increases.

Summary:
if the CRTC allows this a an of worms will be opened for price hikes across the board for everything. Be prepared for price hikes to your 3rd party internet provider. Both cable and DSL for each miniscule 1-meg increase.

In addition to the raising of rates for all 3rd party internet service, Bell and rogers will undercut price since the CRTC is allowing & putting price hikes in stone for resellers but not for the incumbents, Bell, Rogers et al.

Simply put, the CRTC is tossing out speed match policies and also creating new pricing policies.

+1 JF!

It's pretty clear Bell is going to jump on the band-wagon. And if the CRTC refuses then Bell can state the CRTC is giving Rogers a competitive advantage.

However, the CRTC already said Cable-co costs are more than DSL in a previous ruling. So this is the only wiggle room I see for both CNOC and the CRTC to use to disapprove a Bell rate hike. And this one point may be weak.

CNOC turn in this chess match.

Ressa went ignored.

resa1983
Premium
join:2008-03-10
North York, ON
kudos:10
reply to i LOLd

New JF submission for TN28-30. Haven't read it yet.
--
Battle.net Tech Support MVP


i LOLd

@videotron.ca
reply to resa1983

Resa, seems to me Rogers got away with another lie.

As you are finding out, the CRTC doesn't care Bell or Rogers say one thing and do another. Or lie through their teeth. Their is no honour nor integrity at this Canadian government institution.

See:
»Re: CNOC Files w/ CRTC Against Rogers

However, I think it would be funny if someone pushed the issue and directly asked the CRTC chair why they accept the lies as is while ignoring what is actually happening.


resa1983
Premium
join:2008-03-10
North York, ON
kudos:10
reply to resa1983

Click for full size
downloadTN2829Addendum.pdf 56,413 bytes
Added the following .pdf file to my revised submission to make it crystal clear these are not 'new' tiers, but upgrades.
--
Battle.net Tech Support MVP