TobiasFunke
Premium
join:2007-02-27
Toronto, ON
1 edit | Illustrating the network and throttling for non-tech people I've come up with a simplified network diagram to use when introducing the current network infrastructure to non-techie people who want to understand the issue. The idea is to present the main pieces of the network that matter in this conversation: 1. what Bell owns and controls, 2. what TSI owns and controls and 3. what TSI leases from Bell.
With that said, I present the diagram for comments. Is anything wrong? Have I missed anything important? Is anything just unclear?
Thanks guys and gals! | |
|
 
infamouskid
join:2007-01-24
North York, ON | Re: Illustrating the network and throttling for non-tech people nice post. i think some users will be asking. where does the throttling take place?
--
"carpe diem" | |
|
 | TobiasFunke
Premium
join:2007-02-27
Toronto, ON | Re: Illustrating the network and throttling for non-tech people Good point. AFAIK, it's taking place at the BRAS? Is that right? I'll see if I can highlight it a little better. | |
|
infamouskid
join:2007-01-24
North York, ON | well we could only assume for now where it is. we dont know what kind of throttling they are using yet do we?
lets hope to god they aint sandvine boxes.
--
"carpe diem" | |
|
| TobiasFunke
Premium
join:2007-02-27
Toronto, ON
| Re: Illustrating the network and throttling for non-tech people Ok, so here's another one, but I'm not certain this is an accurate picture of what they're doing.
I have another idea I'll post shortly. | |
|
| | 
Comment
@teksavvy.com
| Re: Illustrating the network and throttling for non-tech people said by TobiasFunke  :Ok, so here's another one, but I'm not certain this is an accurate picture of what they're doing. I have another idea I'll post shortly. My only suggestion is that you drag the BAS+Throttle to the left so they are part of the 'blue' area - which all falls under Access Services and CRTC regulation.
This would make clearer the three sections of Access Provider, Internet Service Provider and the actual Internet itself.
| |
|
Grounded
join:2007-12-13
canada
| This looks great. Could you also do an alternate version showing proportionally how much of the overall network is Bell, how much is TSI, how much is Peer1/Cogent,etc. ( as you accurately put it, that's really the Internet & it's not part of Bell.)
What I'm worried about is letting Bell take hold of the narrative where they already have most people believing that the bandwidth that TS & its users are using is actually Bell's resource. They are also pushing the argument that The Internet, not just Bell's switches, is being degraded by these protocols and they are not just preserving their own networks, but somehow protecting the integrity of the Internet for Canadians. | |
|
An Onymous
@teksavvy.com
| This is my dummy guide version...
The nasty part of this deal is as follows:
When a user downloads a file, the data gets from the internet to TSI who pays for the full use of their link to the user on a leasted part of Bell Annex's network.
The bandwidth is limited by how much capacities that TSI already paid for. There is no way the user can overflow the traffic at Bell Annex at all!! Not unless Bell Annex does not live up to their part of the bargain and not have enough capacity, but oversell their network.
The user at TSI downloading is no way affecting anyone other than fellow users at TSI. TSI actually doubled their capacities for the last few days... | |
|
| 
sbrook
Premium,Mod
join:2001-12-14
H0H 0H0
1 edit | Re: Illustrating the network and throttling for non-tech people Just to clarify that piccie a bit ... that's Leased lines (as opposed to least lines - which would mean the fewest lines  ) | |
|
| HeadSpinning
join:2005-05-29
Windsor, ON | Who is Bell Annex? I've heard of Bell Aliant, and Bell Nexxia (no longer exists), but never Bell Annex. | |
|
| | 
CanerisErik
Caneris
Premium,VIP
join:2007-10-03
Toronto, ON
| Re: Illustrating the network and throttling for non-tech people said by HeadSpinning :Who is Bell Annex? I've heard of Bell Aliant, and Bell Nexxia (no longer exists), but never Bell Annex. He tried to spell Nexxia backwards, but the throttling caused Annex to come out. | |
|
| |
An Onymous
@teksavvy.com
| Thanks guys for the spell checks... | |
|
ultracat
join:2008-01-30
Toronto, ON | Love the idea and effort, but have a look at all these diagrams in the thread. Are any of them simple enough for a non-tech person to understand? | |
|
|
An Onymous
@teksavvy.com
 from:
matradley
| Re: Illustrating the network and throttling for non-tech people ISP pays money to Bell. Bell screw ISP.
This simple enough? | |
|
| | Riplin
join:2002-05-13
canada | Re: Illustrating the network and throttling for non-tech people The most accurate representation yet. | |
|
| | 
andyb
Premium
join:2003-05-29
SW Ontario | LOL at least some people have a sence of humour rather than hate against idividuals not involved. | |
|
| | tranceduden
join:2007-05-16
Mississauga, ON | said by An Onymous :
ISP pays money to Bell. Bell screw ISP.
This simple enough?
rofl, nice | |
|
| | ultracat
join:2008-01-30
Toronto, ON
 ·TELUS
·Bell Sympatico
·TekSavvy Solutions..
| said by An Onymous :
ISP pays money to Bell. Bell screw ISP.
This simple enough?
hahaha : ) Perfect! No seriously, I wasn't trying to poo-poo the efforts, but I really do think the layperson would need a 2-3 step diagram at most to grasp it. | |
|
| | |
An Onymous
@teksavvy.com
| Re: Illustrating the network and throttling for non-tech people "Everything should be as simple as it is, but not simpler." - Albert Einstein
For complex issues such as this, you can't always over simplify things. I have been reading websites for the last few days and noticed most of the readers' comments are incorrect. I guess this is the fault of the "U.S.A. Today" style media and the short attention span generation. | |
|
| | |
MikeG
Premium
join:2004-10-02
Hamilton, ON
 ·Mountain Cable
| Put this one together, pretty basic.. could of taken out the routers i guess, but it looks better this way.
--
Success is measured by effort.
Discover Hamilton | |
|
| Jabus
join:2002-11-24
Mississauga, ON
·Bell Sympatico
·TekSavvy Solutions..
| Re: Illustrating the network and throttling for non-tech people There you go. You took out everything complicated, and now I'm not scared when I look at the picture and I understand the bottom line. Though why TSI needs to go through Bell might need to be explained to those who don't know anything about how it works in Ontario. | |
|
| | 
R0CKY
TSI Rocky
Premium,VIP
join:2005-05-19
Chatham, ON | Re: Illustrating the network and throttling for non-tech people Nice explanations guys! | |
|
| | | TobiasFunke
Premium
join:2007-02-27
Toronto, ON | Re: Illustrating the network and throttling for non-tech people Rocky, does emoci have that right? Do you pay $20/mo/subscriber to Bell for the phone line and an additional amount for the backhaul over Bell's network? Or does that $20 cover everything from modem->BRAS? | |
|
| | | | 
Guspaz
Guspaz
Premium,MVM
join:2001-11-05
Montreal, QC | Re: Illustrating the network and throttling for non-tech people Well, $19.50-$20.50, so close enough.
They then pay another $1800 (can't remember the exact fee) per GigE to Bell's network. | |
|
| | | | | TobiasFunke
Premium
join:2007-02-27
Toronto, ON | Re: Illustrating the network and throttling for non-tech people Oh, I see, but that's not actually on Bell's voice-data network, it's the link inside 151 Front St W, right? | |
|
| |
| |
emoci
join:2007-05-29
York, ON
| I took the liberty to divide the Bell/TSI operated parts of the network and any associated costs | |
|
|
Guspaz
Guspaz
Premium,MVM
join:2001-11-05
Montreal, QC
·Colbanet
| Re: Illustrating the network and throttling for non-tech people In fact, while they may pay thousands to maintain the network (~$1800 per line last I checked, so $7200 total), they pay up to $1,000,000 per month for the DSL lines of all their customers and resellers ($420,000 for just their own DSL customers).
They spend a lot more on those loop fees than they do to Bell for the transit. | |
|
TobiasFunke
Premium
join:2007-02-27
Toronto, ON
| 
not so win | 
win |
Also, if anyone would like a high-quality PDF version, let me know. | |
|
| Grounded
join:2007-12-13
canada
| Re: Illustrating the network and throttling for non-tech people This is the best yet. But for an outside audience this also shows that Bell's portion of the TS network is huge. Remember that many people will at it like an illustrated pie chart - they'll see all those large areas dedicated to Bell, a much smaller area dedicated to TSI, and an area dedicated to Internet that appears smaller than the Bell portion.
On quick glance all these various diagrams make it look like Bell is providing the largest portion of the overall network. By extension, it looks like Bell has the most legitimate cause to be wary of heavy traffic.
While the diagram is accurate, it could be effectively used as pro-Bell propaganda. All Bell needs to do is throw in their own numbers: i.e. "Sympatico serving xx million individuals and xx corporate customers across x provinces. They can easily use this to continue to mislead media & public into believing they are protecting the entire Internet & all the people who use it. It's bullshit, but it is their argument & people are buying into that. | |
|
| | TobiasFunke
Premium
join:2007-02-27
Toronto, ON
| Re: Illustrating the network and throttling for non-tech people Good points.
How about something along these lines? | |
|
| | | Jabus
join:2002-11-24
Mississauga, ON
·Bell Sympatico
·TekSavvy Solutions..
| Re: Illustrating the network and throttling for non-tech people Tobias: I think it creates an issue for non-tech people at point number 2. Do normal people know what a Broadband Remote Access Server is, also most people will assume since it travels over 'Bell private network it might have people thinking that's normal and they should have the ability to throttle. Anyway to fix that? | |
|
| | | Name96
join:2008-03-28
| That's good, but you have to make the point that the connection between points 1, 2 and 4 is regulated by the CRTC as common carrier infrastructure. Bell has no legal right to impede competition by disrupting connections between customers and non-Bell service providers.
I'd suggest making two illustrations. Do one of the network prior to wholesale filtering, with the #3 filter installed in the Sympatico portion of the network. Point out that Sympatico chose, as a business decision, to filter its customers' traffic.
For the second illustration, leave the #3 box where it isin your current graph, in the common carrier portion. Point out that Bell imposed Sympatico's filtering model at the common carrier level so no DSL ISP can offer better service than Sympatico chooses to offer.
The anticompetitive aspects are key to this. Making the it clear that Bell is doing things to stifle competition won't endear them to the public regardless of what 'P2P is illegal' smokescreen they cough up. | |
|
ultracat
join:2008-01-30
Toronto, ON | I think that's better. Especially with the point by point explanation on the right. | |
|
TobiasFunke
Premium
join:2007-02-27
Toronto, ON
| Good suggestions, all... here's my handiwork so far... | |
|
|
nitpicker
@teksavvy.com | Re: Illustrating the network and throttling for non-tech people unless i'm colour blind, on the right of the chart it says it's illustrated as green, but the line on the left is Red.  | |
|
| |
nvm
@teksavvy.com | Re: Illustrating the network and throttling for non-tech people nvm Teksavvy at bottom is in green, I read it as the single line of red is teksavvy customer, not the bottom portion.. | |
|
| Name96
join:2008-03-28
| I suggest a few more tweaks to work the anti-competitive aspects in:
For the first illustration, change description (4) to read "Internet access for Sympatico customers is throttled because Bell claims the Sympatico network is overloaded. Sympatico charges XX dollars a month for throttled access."
Change description (5) to read "Teksavvy provides unthrottled Internet service through Cogent and Peer1. Teksavvy charges XX dollars a month for unthrottled access."
For the second illustration, change (4) to read "Teksavvy is no longer able to provide unthrottled access."
Because Bell has provided no objective evidence that they're experiencing a bandwidth crunch, their claim of 'limited bandwidth' should not be repeated uncritically. It's b**ls**t and should be treated as such.
--
Coridon Henshaw -=- »www.talisiorder.ca | |
|
| mbind
join:2008-03-30
| Hello Tobias,
*wow* are you creating graphs for a living? Perfect style
But one question: is Bell throttling traffic _to_ TekSavvy/Peer1 or _from_ ?
Taking into account that the upload speed is physically only around 800kbit/s anyway I assume they throttle the download direction?
In this case Bell could easily dismiss this diagram as wrong because of the description in point "4".
Regards, Marc | |
|
| | TobiasFunke
Premium
join:2007-02-27
Toronto, ON
| Re: Illustrating the network and throttling for non-tech people Thanks Marc - I used to do a little bit of graphic design a few years back, still like to do it once in a while.
As for the to/from stuff, my understanding is that it's a little bit of both that Bell does. In the case of Bittorrent, throttling user uploads actually has the effect of decreasing download speeds. That said, it appears that Bell's system just applies a blanket cap once it detects P2P (it may not even be that sophisticated!), but I'm not sure how to explain that in the limited space that's available. | |
|
Grounded
join:2007-12-13
canada
| Tobias, this is much better!
I'd still try and think more pie-chart in sizing the different portions - I don't know the accurate percentages, but even in this illustration Bell is large in comparison to TSI & the Internet. Obviously you cannot illustrate the physical size of the Internet but there should be some way to show that it is the common carrier for all traffic (Bell, TSI, Rogers, Gov't. etc.) And that companies such as TSI pay for, and manage their own bandwidth usage in this portion of the illustration.
The filtering servers could probably be reduced to little more than a dash - again you want to remove the impression that Bell is providing the largest piece of the entire Internet pie.
Sorry to keep hammering at this point, but I've spent many years working on strategic media plans and I look at this as I would from Bell's POV. Anything that can be used to show how much they provide helps them. What we want to show is the accurate position that, although they are an essential step, they are a fairly small part of the overall TSI network. Most people will look at the final image for only a second or two and that will either change their opinion of the situation or reaffirm their opinion. | |
|
|
| InvalidError
join:2008-02-03
·TekSavvy Solutions..
·Videotron
| Re: Illustrating the network and throttling for non-tech people Sadly, BBR does not offer a 0/5 rating and this is skewing all scores up by 1. Otherwise, it would have been a done deal several weeks ago. | |
|
|
cutoff
@teksavvy.com
| LOL it's gone now. And it's not over yet, the HMCS Sympatico is taking on water fast | |
|
DabberDan
join:2004-11-15
Gatineau, ON | What exactly is a BRAS? How does it relate to the 5Mbps I'm supposed to get? | |
|
| emoci
join:2007-05-29
York, ON
| Re: Illustrating the network and throttling for non-tech people said by DabberDan :What exactly is a BRAS? How does it relate to the 5Mbps I'm supposed to get? BRAS: Broadband Remote Access Server
Others can correct me if I am wrong, but this equipment is found at every CO.....the closer to the CO you are (this is not neccessarily physical closeness, but close in phone line length) the better your speeds should be...
By the way, I edited one of the previously posted illustrations a bit (although the original author could may want tomake it look better)
It may also be worth pointing that the part in blue background here, is the Network operated by Bell, which has been put together via the contributions of both Bell Phone and Sympatico users and third party users as well as government subsidies | |
|
| | Grounded
join:2007-12-13
canada
| Re: Illustrating the network and throttling for non-tech people As you can clearly see from this illustration, Bell Canada / Sympatico provides the greatest portion of the entire network and is responsible for providing and maintaining the service of all our resellers, on top of the million + Sympatico customers. Teksavvy, (and all of our other resellers) provide only a small portion of the vital network, and therefore do not have the same great responsibilities & concerns that we at Bell Canada have. This is why we are working pro-actively to protect the integrity of Internet services, not just for those subscribing directly to Bell Sympatico, but for all Canadians.
If I was working for Bell, that is how I would use these illustrations. I think there is danger in laying out any of this in a way that can be perverted to bolster Bell's claims. We've all seen the comments at the Globe & far too many of those believe that Bell is the protector of the public good.
If you want to use an illustration like this for PR purposes you need to target it directly at your audience & focus the message. So far, this seems to be targeted for us - for people who are already pro-TSI, but lack the network knowledge to be able to picture the breakdown properly. | |
|
TobiasFunke
Premium
join:2007-02-27
Toronto, ON
| Ok guys, I've tried to incorporate feedback as much as possible. I agree with the pie chart idea, but at this point it would be total conjecture, so I've tried to use that philosophy in sizing the shaded areas instead.
I also need to get some real-life work done in the next little while, so if anyone would like to take this up and make additional changes, please PM me and I can send the OmniGraffle source files (or Visio if you prefer). That said, I'll still check in and I can make minor changes if need be. | |
|
Guspaz
Guspaz
Premium,MVM
join:2001-11-05
Montreal, QC | Might want to consider branding Bell differently to further reinforce the difference between Bell and Bell Sympatico.
"Bell Nexxia" perhaps? Although I understand Nexxia doesn't exist anymore. | |
|
TobiasFunke
Premium
join:2007-02-27
Toronto, ON
| I spotted some small layout mistakes and typos, then decided to try to rework the phrasing to avoid the "to/from" problem. Here's the result. | |
|
| RobertR
join:2002-07-30
London, ON
·TekSavvy Solutions..
| Re: Illustrating the network and throttling for non-tech people How do we know that Bell is throttling its wholesale customers' connections the same way as it's own? For what we know, Bell is using different methods to throttle it's own network or running it wide open and just throttling its wholesale customers (which would be anti-competitive.) The diagram above suggests that Bell is treating itself and wholesale customers the same, which may not be the case. I think the diagram should be changed to reflect this by placing item 3 on TekSavvy's pipe only. Customers are also being denied service on an individual basis so they should each get pink boxes as well.
There are several issues here. Traffic shaping, retail customer service denial and wholesale customer service denial.(IMHO, throttling is too technical and has no legal connotation.) Bell is not practicing traffic shaping (as they like to imply) but service denial. Furthermore, the service denial implementation is based on their perceived, and probably inaccurate, analysis of customer data. | |
|
| | 
theninjasqua
join:2007-09-26
Oakville, ON | Re: Illustrating the network and throttling for non-tech people I can tell you as a Bell customer that I am being throttled during the same time frame as you guys. I wont be a customer with them for much longer however.
--
-theninjasquad | |
|
| 
shikotee
join:2007-01-11
Toronto, ON | Awesome work Tobias! Kudos!
LoL!
I can't help but wonder - while you are doing this in front of your computer, if you are wearing your blue paint, just in case! | |
|
TobiasFunke
Premium
join:2007-02-27
Toronto, ON
| Hey guys,
I have done a little bit of research and realized that my diagrams are unfortunately more than a little inaccurate. It appears that I was working from the false impression that Bell's traffic-shaping is taking place at 151 Front - whereas in reality it is much more distributed... basically at every CO, which makes a lot of sense if you think about how it is being rolled out. Don't know why it didn't occur to me sooner.
As much as I want a positive outcome for TSI and us users, I don't like the idea of misrepresenting the situation, so I'd ask that you refrain from spreading my diagrams around until I get the chance to update them.
Also, I've discovered Bell's problem seems to be much more fundamental than I'd originally thought. Specifically, Bell does not have just a Sympatico problem, they believe they have a core network problem and they are or will be facing chronic core network congestion unless they can do something about it. Keep in mind that it's not just our Internet that runs over the core, but also a very large chunk of the national voice network and other services. | |
|
SmithCanada
join:2003-06-22
Canada
| One point that I have seen referenced indirectly in some posts regarding Bells infrastructure is the idea that the BRAS are not always co-located with the DSL infrastructure -- or, as a question, is there a BRAS in *every* CO?
As I understand it, Teksavvy (and other ISPs) pay for carriage from the BRAS to their connection. However, if the BRAS is not at the same location as the DSL infrastructure in every CO, then there may be places where Bell has to carry the DSL-to-BRAS traffic - possible over a considerable distance - but can't bill it back to anyone.
It is *also* possible that although the above network architecture is correct, Teksavvy is actually paying for carriage from the DSL infrastructure to their connection point. In such a case, all the bandwidth between the DSL and the BRAS should be covered by the tarrifs, with the BRAS appearing as a complex router to separate the traffic according to the ISP that the DSL is signed on to.
Can anyone clarify any of this so that the diagrams can be as accurate as possible? | |
|
| TobiasFunke
Premium
join:2007-02-27
Toronto, ON
| Re: Illustrating the network and throttling for non-tech people What I've recently been told is that there is indeed a BRAS, sometimes more than one, in every CO. From the BRAS, traffic is routed over the Bell core network in an L2TP tunnel to 151 Front, where it is connected to TekSavvy's bank of routers.
One thing I'm still not entirely clear on is whether TekSavvy pays Bell for transit over their core network. I wish someone from TSI could shed some light on this. I realize they pay for the DSL connect, and they pay for the 1 Gbps links at 151 Front, but AFAICT, TSI doesn't pay anything specifically for the tunnelled traffic on Bell's core network. | |
|
| | mbind
join:2008-03-30
| Re: Illustrating the network and throttling for non-tech people Hello Tobias,
I don't know the Bell network in detail but some generic thoughts:
the problem shouldn't be the 800kbit/s upstream, likely the large number of ADSL lines with a multi-Mbit/s _downstream_ speed is overwhelming the network. Saying this I doubt that the focus of the throttling is upstream but think it is downstream. Upstream throttling would be done as close to the copper wire as possible. Throttling downstream though would happen as close as possible to the entry point of the IP or L2TP traffic, i.e. the exchange in Toronto (and isn't there one in Montreal?).In this case your diagram would be fine regarding the position of the throttle box, IMHO.
Regards, Marc | |
|
| | |
An Onymous
@teksavvy.com
| Re: Illustrating the network and throttling for non-tech people said by mbind :Hello Tobias, I don't know the Bell network in detail but some generic thoughts: the problem shouldn't be the 800kbit/s upstream, likely the large number of ADSL lines with a multi-Mbit/s _downstream_ speed is overwhelming the network. Regards, Marc The downstream speed is *limited* by how many pipes ISP/TSI has to connect to Bell's network. Furthermore, the ISP can do traffic shaping before it reaches Bell's network. If Bell cannot handle the traffic, they should tell the ISP when they are ordering the pipes.
The 800kbps upstream traffic is unbounded as there are no QoS/routers going upstream. The only way traffic control is when TCP packets get tossed out after when they hit the exit pipe to ISP. | |
|
| | | | mbind
join:2008-03-30
| Re: Illustrating the network and throttling for non-tech people Sorry, doesn't make too much sense what you write:
(i) if you want upstream control then you bring in a device like a router as soon as possible. This would be in-line with Tobias' comment that they have BRAS in all COs.
(ii) if Bell really has a congested network then you don't throw away traffic at the exit of your network - then it's too late and pretty useless as packets made their way through already. You throw away as soon as possible
(iii) not all P2P is TCP, e.g. newer version use UDP as well
(iv) if Bell can handle traffic or not depends on many factors, including geographical distribution. Not a problem of the pipe to TSI and others.
(v) I don't mint if the ISP "can" traffic shape -Bell would not control the game but depend on the ISP. Very likely ... .
Regards, Marc | |
|
| | |
TobiasFunke
Premium
join:2007-02-27
Toronto, ON
1 edit | The throttling is being done at the BRAS, which is more or less at the subscriber entry point into the Bell core network. This obviously makes it easy to throttle upstream, but it's not all that much harder to throttle downstream - you don't need DPI devices at the peering routers. All that's necessary is to delay TCP ACKs from the DSL user (i.e., at the BRAS in the CO) and the sender - wherever it may be - will correspondingly delay sending more packets until it receives ACKs for what it already transmitted.
If you've ever saturated your upstream data rate, you'll know exactly how effective this can be at limiting downstream data rates. | |
|
| TobiasFunke
Premium
join:2007-02-27
Toronto, ON
1 edit | Re: Illustrating the network and throttling for non-tech people I think this is a truer picture of what's going on and it avoids the whole Sympatico issue altogether, focusing instead on what Bell is doing that is contrary to the letter and/or spirit of the GAS tariff (and net neutrality more generally). | |
|
| | puzz1ed
join:2005-02-20
Markham, ON
1 edit | Re: Illustrating the network and throttling for non-tech people The best one yet.
What strikes me is that the tunnel must be so insignificant in the grand scheme of things. Sympatico has in the neighbourhood of 2 million high speed subscribers according to the latest annual report. TekSavvy claims about 50,000 all told and CAIP claims to represent 100,000. Bell's core network would have capacity for all the other things it's being used for as well. It'll be interesting to see some hard numbers from Bell to support their claim of congestion. | |
|
| |
Comment
@teksavvy.com
| said by TobiasFunke :I think this is a truer picture of what's going on and it avoids the whole Sympatico issue altogether, focusing instead on what Bell is doing that is contrary to the letter and/or spirit of the GAS tariff (and net neutrality more generally). Two thoughts:
Bell will DENY that they are inspecting the CONTENT. (They'll interpret "CONTENT" as the clear data.) Better to describe it as "opening your message" (then Bell can try to explain that they're looking at the shape of the letter and the ink that is used, not the words).
You're buying into Bell's "framing" of the situation. They're not "inspecting", they're WIRE-TAPPING WITHOUT A WARRANT. P2P itself is no more "abusive" than HTTP. Better to say "any messages Bell doesn't like". After "protect its core network" put in brackets "(increase profitability)" and put quotes around "protect". | |
|
recneps
join:2006-06-24
Whitby, ON
| Not to offend anyone in the general public, but if you want someone to understand the message clearly (like if you submitted this to a newspaper)
"dumb it down".
90% of the population (made up number) has no idea how this magical 'series of tubes' we call 'the internet' works. Make it as simple and to the point as possible, and people may understand the issue.
1) As a customer, with TS, you are using the phone line to your house, owned by Bell. TS pays to lease this line.
2) your data then moves over the phone line and bell's DSL equipment, where the signal is transferred to TS through a high-bandwidth link, paid for by TS based on a set bandwidth amount.
3) Bell has recently throttled this link, essentially not providing the service TS has paid for.
4) From there, TS has their own links to the internet, separate from Bell Sympatico customers. | |
|
|
|
|
