Canadian Broadband → Re: CRTC 2013-80 Optional Upstream Speeds, DSL Modem Cert

I approve of everything Bell said, which is that modem certification makes no sense, they don't want to do it, wholesalers can use whatever they want, try don't have to use the sagemcom. There is nothing in the filing that CNOC could disagree with. They even make some good points about why cable modem certification shouldn't be required for cable either (because the requirement predates widespread DOCSIS, which is now mature and ubiquitous).

The only problem is that in practice Bell is requiring wholesalers to use sagemcom modems with registered serial numbers in direct conflict with their position in this filing.

Bell never addressed the issue CNOC brought up about these modems being materially defective.

Was this the part they censored?

CNOC should make a demand for the information to be made public.

And for i don't know how many hundreds of thousands of people, Bell is stating they have only one sole source of modems. heh

Reminds me of when a sole source RAM manufacturer in China went up in flames and 1-gig sticks were selling for 300$ back in the 90's.

I think what Bell could be hiding here is their flukey defective hardware that works with nothing else.

Not every VDSL2 modem has 100% interoperability with every other VDSL2 remote and the same goes with modems.

Bell has no reason to object to people BYOMing since Bell will be charging ISPs $95 diagnostic when subscribers complain about sync/speed problems and the tech call determines that the modem must be the problem - "Works fine with Sagem/Cellpipe, bad customer-owned CPE."

Things are a little bit more touchy on cable where one rogue modem can fudge up the whole node for all subscribers and services on it. On xDSL, a bad modem is unlikely to have much effect on other lines unless it experiences some sort of catastrophic failure.

BTW, CNOC wasted their time with the $3.75 upload option since Bell removed the fee from their tariffs in February.