dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
12301
share rss forum feed

bt

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

Re: CRTC Decision

said by Gone:

said by mlord:

Well for one, it'll wreak havic with our VoIP telephones.

SIP and RTP can be given priority even when traffic management is in effect, so that argument is invalid.

And a POTS-quality VoIP signal doesn't actually require much bandwidth. Crowding it out could become an issue though, if you haven't set up QoS on your router.


Gone
Premium
join:2011-01-24
Fort Erie, ON
kudos:4
Yeah, G.711 uses about 90-120kbit/s both ways. It's minuscule compared to just about everything else out there nowadays.

mlord

join:2006-11-05
Nepean, ON
kudos:13
Reviews:
·Start Communicat..
reply to bt
said by bt:

And a POTS-quality VoIP signal doesn't actually require much bandwidth. Crowding it out could become an issue though, if you haven't set up QoS on your router.

To set it up correctly on the router requires knowing what the available bandwidth will be. If that changes dynamically (upstream throttling), then the router settings become out of whack.

Now let's get back on topic here, please.


Gone
Premium
join:2011-01-24
Fort Erie, ON
kudos:4
I run a VoIP connection at home using Start's 30/2 cable over Cogeco and I can be bringing something in or sending something out from my workstation upstairs at full bore while my wife is on the phone and she doesn't even notice even though I've never had any sort of QoS enabled on my router. I've always been of the opinion that QoS is far less important with VoIP than most people think, and while there are some situations where it can make a difference - particularly when using multiple lines over a slower DSL connection - for most it's a waste of time and router resources.

And this very much is on topic, unless your own comments about ISP traffic management "wrecking havoc" on VoIP were off topic to begin with.

bt

join:2009-02-26
canada
kudos:1
reply to mlord
said by mlord:

said by bt:

And a POTS-quality VoIP signal doesn't actually require much bandwidth. Crowding it out could become an issue though, if you haven't set up QoS on your router.

To set it up correctly on the router requires knowing what the available bandwidth will be.

Not on my router...

said by mlord:

Now let's get back on topic here, please.

You brought it up in response to the concept of throttling after the cap rather than charging overages - something which is definitely on topic.

mlord

join:2006-11-05
Nepean, ON
kudos:13
Reviews:
·Start Communicat..
said by bt:

said by mlord:

To set it up correctly on the router requires knowing what the available bandwidth will be.

Not on my router...

There, you've just proven you don't understand QoS. Let's discuss that in one of the multitude of existing threads on QoS.

I doubt Rocca would be interested in it here, and this thread is very much about trying to help/influence Rocca as he ponders how best to help us stay with Start.ca while remaining profitable.

Cheers

bt

join:2009-02-26
canada
kudos:1
said by mlord:

said by bt:

said by mlord:

To set it up correctly on the router requires knowing what the available bandwidth will be.

Not on my router...

There, you've just proven you don't understand QoS. Let's discuss that in one of the multitude of existing threads on QoS.

Why bother? It's a fact and you would rather dismiss it than consider the possibility.


Gone
Premium
join:2011-01-24
Fort Erie, ON
kudos:4
reply to mlord
said by mlord:

this thread is very much about trying to help/influence Rocca as he ponders how best to help us stay with Start.ca while remaining profitable.

I'm sure he is smart enough to not need people to give him free advice on how to keep a company he has run since 1995 profitable and has far more important things to deal with than people who think they know how to run an ISP telling him what he should and shouldn't do.

mlord

join:2006-11-05
Nepean, ON
kudos:13
Reviews:
·Start Communicat..
said by Gone:

I'm sure he (Rocca) is smart enough to not need people to give him free advice

Me too. And as a businessman I'm also sure he understands the value of listening to his customers. Maybe not doing what they ask all of the time, but listening. This is our opportunity to let him know what we want. I'm sure he'll consider it and then do what's best for his business.

Cheers


rocca
Start.ca
Premium
join:2008-11-16
London, ON
kudos:23
Indeed, appreciate the feedback. I don't think we'll be able to make everyone happy, but we'll keep doing our best to provide an excellent service at a fair price.


Gone
Premium
join:2011-01-24
Fort Erie, ON
kudos:4
said by rocca:

Indeed, appreciate the feedback. I don't think we'll be able to make everyone happy, but we'll keep doing our best to provide an excellent service at a fair price.

The problem is that everyone wants unlimited 60/2 for $20/month.


rocca
Start.ca
Premium
join:2008-11-16
London, ON
kudos:23
Add a couple zeros after that (no decimals) and we're all set!

dan mackay

join:2008-10-11
Barrie, ON
reply to Crashrun2003
then theres rogers, where you could have 150/10 for what, 99999999999999999999 pesos


Davesnothere
No-BHELL-ity DOES have its Advantages
Premium
join:2009-06-15
START Today!
kudos:7
reply to londoner1
said by londoner1:

What about QOS. is that not in some sense throttling? Maybe that's how we should address the issue of efficient usage of a finite bandwidth. QOS http traffic to an appropriate level, voip slightly higher, p2p lower, etc

 
That's more-or-less what Bell tried, but their settings were so extremely unbalanced and their plan so half-baked, as well as not telling anyone beforehand what they would be doing (and then denying it for a period of time), that it royally pissed off the multitudes, and destroyed our impression about how a 'good' throttling model COULD behave.

Bell also ruined some other perfectly good words/expressions/practices by their arrogant, sloppy, inconsiderate, greedy use of them.

'UBB' was one, and the term 'Bandwidth' was another.

By now, we now have all been psychologically conditioned to think negatively/incorrectly of those terms, and cringe whenever we are exposed to them.


Davesnothere
No-BHELL-ity DOES have its Advantages
Premium
join:2009-06-15
START Today!
kudos:7
reply to Gone
said by Gone:

said by rocca:

Indeed, appreciate the feedback. I don't think we'll be able to make everyone happy, but we'll keep doing our best to provide an excellent service at a fair price.

The problem is that everyone wants unlimited 60/2 for $20/month.

 
Well not EVERYone, but yes, enough to upset the apple cart.

And START's recent customer instantaneous (peak) bandwidth demand stats apparently are already on file to demonstrate it.

That's why there is renewed talk about throttling as part of a balanced solution to the peak demand (see my last above post).

Guru

join:2008-10-01
kudos:2
Reviews:
·TekSavvy DSL
Anyone who is tek savvy and understands the value of it, will never ask 60/2 for $20/month. I certainly don't and I don't even understand half of it cost wise but I know the value and know that it can cost quite a bit.

So it's bit silly to even think that.. but eh...there could be one CHEAPO out there who would want that but that cheapo is probably ignorant!!


silvercat

join:2007-11-07
I'm just hoping for a package that satisfies my needs (a bit of prime time video streaming, and a bit of unlimited off-peak usage) that doesn't go past $80.

Guru

join:2008-10-01
kudos:2
Reviews:
·TekSavvy DSL
said by silvercat:

I'm just hoping for a package that satisfies my needs (a bit of prime time video streaming, and a bit of unlimited off-peak usage) that doesn't go past $80.

I partially +0.5....

It's really hard to predict what the prices will be as Rocca haven't hinted anything yet....

Rocca, last week you said we'd know end of this week....are you going to be able to come up with something by then? Just curious of course as we are anxious...


silvercat

join:2007-11-07
said by Guru:

Rocca, last week you said we'd know end of this week....are you going to be able to come up with something by then? Just curious of course as we are anxious...

Don't rush him ! Do you want well thought out packages or not ?

Guru

join:2008-10-01
kudos:2
Reviews:
·TekSavvy DSL
said by silvercat:

said by Guru:

Rocca, last week you said we'd know end of this week....are you going to be able to come up with something by then? Just curious of course as we are anxious...

Don't rush him ! Do you want well thought out packages or not ?

ye but we don't want him to get comfortable either..

mlord

join:2006-11-05
Nepean, ON
kudos:13
Reviews:
·Start Communicat..
reply to rocca
said by rocca:

Add a couple zeros after that (no decimals) and we're all set!

:)

The math for this isn't quite as dismal as we've all been making it out to be, though. Even with a lot of subscribers who want to use tons of prime-time bandwidth, statistical averaging kicks in and helps keep things affordable.

Not every "300GB prime time" account is going to be streaming every night, or even at the exact same instants when they are.

Throw enough of them into a large enough pool, and peak bandwidth used will be quite a bit below what one gets with simple multiplication. That's why we all use retail ISPs rather than dedicated bandwidth connections. We know we don't need it 100% 24/7, or even 100% 6/7 during prime time. So we're willing to share to a degree by pooling with others.

And that's the business model for an ISP, too. So let's not just roll over and play dead when people toss out 2X and 3X current rates as "necessary."

The recent CRTC rate adjustments for Rogers only increased costs by perhaps 10% overall. I don't know how much ISPs may (or may not) have been "underbilling" on Rogers, but let's say they guessed low by another 10%. So this ought to result in no more than a 20% increase in retail rates for plans very similar to what we have today, or for plans that only meter prime-time usage.

It'll be interesting to see what the various ISPs come out with for rates. I don't expect Teksavvy's rates for Rogers to change by very much, if any, until they go aggregated, because their costs haven't gone up by more than a few percent.

In the past, Start.ca rates were similar to Teksavvy's rates, but with a slight discount. That will change, since Start.ca is already on the more expensive aggregated setup, which just got 10% more expensive than before.

But 2X or 3X current rates? No way.

Cheers


rocca
Start.ca
Premium
join:2008-11-16
London, ON
kudos:23
reply to Guru
said by Guru:

Rocca, last week you said we'd know end of this week....are you going to be able to come up with something by then? Just curious of course as we are anxious...

Very close.

For cable, at this time I don't anticipate a significant (or perhaps any) change on the Red side, but just trying to figure out a way to manage Cogeco accounts without taking a drastic usage cut. Just increasing costs won't help, ie even $5/customer doesn't do much when CBB is that far out of whack and puts us too close to retail Cogeco pricing to be attractive. If we can come up with a 'heavy users plan' that incorporates shifting or limiting traffic at peak that might help alleviate some of those existing users that are skewing the average currently and enabling us to keep the existing packages at/near where they are. With speeds where they are now it only takes 1-2% of users to make a significant difference to peak requirements.

On the DSL side, we have our packages done (they've been done for a couple weeks as the Bell CBB wasn't that far off from where we projected) but had some backend development work to do to support the new plans. That work was completed yesterday, so just need staff training and signoff from our service desk manager and then will get them posted.

nirajshah7

join:2008-11-12
Markham, ON
Rocca.. are you going to provide 50/10 DSL where available?

sssscary

join:2007-10-23
Brockville, ON
reply to Crashrun2003
I am for time shifting traffic, but against speed limiting. Just my 2 cents

bt

join:2009-02-26
canada
kudos:1
reply to Gone
said by Gone:

said by rocca:

Indeed, appreciate the feedback. I don't think we'll be able to make everyone happy, but we'll keep doing our best to provide an excellent service at a fair price.

The problem is that everyone wants unlimited 60/2 for $20/month.

Just because I know it isn't plausible, it doesn't mean I don't still want it!

Though faster and cheaper, please

londoner1

join:2007-04-26
London, ON
Reviews:
·Start Communicat..
·TekSavvy Cable
reply to rocca
Now this will no doubt anger some....however could Start or any provider for that matter simply cancel the service for those few gluttonous users?....Clear abuse of an 'unlimited' concept (think usage in the TB range)....really what residential ISP would want that customer....sure maybe Rogers, Bell, etc might accept them (with an unlimited plan) but they have the advantage of so many more users...

mlord

join:2006-11-05
Nepean, ON
kudos:13
Reviews:
·Start Communicat..
said by londoner1:

Clear abuse of an 'unlimited' concept (think usage in the TB range)...

A user transferring TB's monthly only has a negative impact when those transfers occur regularly during prime-time peak hours. If they happen outside of peak hours, they don't cost anybody anything extra.

But they do currently violate the service terms that Start.ca offers. Hopefully that will get fixed -- unlimited offpeak transfers is something I think a lot of us would like to have sanctioned. (*)I'm not after TB's here myself, but a few hundred GB extra would be quite useful.

Cheers


rocca
Start.ca
Premium
join:2008-11-16
London, ON
kudos:23
reply to londoner1
said by londoner1:

Now this will no doubt anger some....however could Start or any provider for that matter simply cancel the service for those few gluttonous users?

Some ISP's do have 'fair use' clauses that enable termination if the usage is x times the average, but personally I'd prefer being upfront with it. If we say 'unlimited' then it has to be that IMHO, now it could say something like 'unlimited, no overage charges and full speed until you hit x GB and then y speed', but again being upfront about it. Just telling people after the fact that they've used more than some number I had in my head and therefore I'm cancelling their service isn't too cool with me.


rocca
Start.ca
Premium
join:2008-11-16
London, ON
kudos:23
reply to nirajshah7
said by nirajshah7:

Rocca.. are you going to provide 50/10 DSL where available?

Yes, I don't know on the timing yet of the VDSL2 based services though - there are still lots of things I don't like about them and it's such a new service that there are going to be bugs to work out still, but yes, it will become part of our offering at some point.

madchikun

join:2004-07-18
Canada
Reviews:
·Start Communicat..
reply to rocca
said by rocca:

Some ISP's do have 'fair use' clauses that enable termination if the usage is x times the average, but personally I'd prefer being upfront with it. If we say 'unlimited' then it has to be that IMHO, now it could say something like 'unlimited, no overage charges and full speed until you hit x GB and then y speed', but again being upfront about it. Just telling people after the fact that they've used more than some number I had in my head and therefore I'm cancelling their service isn't too cool with me.

And that is why we appreciate Start so much! I know I've experienced the kind of surprise that you've mentioned with other service providers and it is not a pleasant feeling.