reply to aaah
Re: CNOC Files w/ CRTC Against Rogers 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 :and
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;
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