R0CKY
TSI Rocky
Premium,VIP
join:2005-05-19
Chatham, ON
| The Bell Disclosure! Here it is boys and girls... Have fun dissecting it! 
--
TSI Rocky - TekSavvy Solutions Inc. | |
|
 
milnoc
join:2001-03-05
H3B | Re: The Bell Disclosure! Igor! Prepare the lab!  | |
|
|
 | |
| |
R0CKY
TSI Rocky
Premium,VIP
join:2005-05-19
Chatham, ON | Re: The Bell Disclosure! Definitely an interesting table... no doubt!
--
TSI Rocky - TekSavvy Solutions Inc. | |
|
| | | 
shopkins
join:2008-05-23
Nepean, ON | Re: The Bell Disclosure! From what I read Bell basically shows that their current capacity is nearly 5X the current demand and they are expanding their capacity.
I understand peak vs off times, but I am not buying their arguments. | |
|
| | | 
TakeTheFifth
join:2004-04-20
Anjou, QC
| said by R0CKY  :Definitely an interesting table... no doubt! What I'd like to know is how/where they measure congestion at the dslam. 5.2% of the links are congested. Which ones ?
Phil | |
|
| | | | Capharnaum
join:2006-06-19
Montreal, QC
| Re: The Bell Disclosure! said by TakeTheFifth :What I'd like to know is how/where they measure congestion at the dslam. 5.2% of the links are congested. Which ones ? Phil Remember that criteria for a congestion isn't that there's an overload. It's just that their "limit" (which isn't 100%) was passed four times out of 1344 checks within a two week span (if I understand the documents correctly). Then that dslam is labeled as "congestioned". It doesn't mean that the dslam was overloaded at any time during the month.
It's pretty shady. | |
|
| | | | | mr_hexen
join:2007-08-02
Brampton, ON
| Re: The Bell Disclosure! said by Capharnaum :said by TakeTheFifth :What I'd like to know is how/where they measure congestion at the dslam. 5.2% of the links are congested. Which ones ? Phil Remember that criteria for a congestion isn't that there's an overload. It's just that their "limit" (which isn't 100%) was passed four times out of 1344 checks within a two week span (if I understand the documents correctly). Then that dslam is labeled as "congestioned". It doesn't mean that the dslam was overloaded at any time during the month. It's pretty shady. I did the numbers on page 1 or 2. it's 0.37% time.
if the available time over 14 days is congested as little as 0.37% they mark the entire 14 days as congested 24/7.
riiiight. | |
|
| | | | | | DSL_Ricer
Premium
join:2007-07-22
| Re: The Bell Disclosure! said by mr_hexen :I did the numbers on page 1 or 2. it's 0.37% time. if the available time over 14 days is congested as little as 0.37% they mark the entire 14 days as congested 24/7. riiiight. If you were trying to call 911 on a voip phone during that 0.37% of the time, would you be OK with the congestion?
A couple month ago Teksavvy failed to account for how long it would take Bell to install another Gig-E. That was a pretty awful few weeks.
Bell's criteria for considering a link congested isn't all that bad. Their decision to solve it with DPI, however, was.
Now can someone please explain to me exactly from where to where in the network diagram their DSLAM category is, and why they can't selectively target traffic on congested links? | |
|
| | | | | | | mr_hexen
join:2007-08-02
Brampton, ON
1 edit | Re: The Bell Disclosure! said by DSL_Ricer :said by mr_hexen :I did the numbers on page 1 or 2. it's 0.37% time. if the available time over 14 days is congested as little as 0.37% they mark the entire 14 days as congested 24/7. riiiight. If you were trying to call 911 on a voip phone during that 0.37% of the time, would you be OK with the congestion? A couple month ago Teksavvy failed to account for how long it would take Bell to install another Gig-E. That was a pretty awful few weeks. Bell's criteria for considering a link congested isn't all that bad. Their decision to solve it with DPI, however, was. Now can someone please explain to me exactly from where to where in the network diagram their DSLAM category is, and why they can't selectively target traffic on congested links? I dont have VOIP, and dont want it simply because I don't trust it. IMO, VOiP is too unreliable (whether due to network issues or not) to become the SOLE link for emergency services (as proved by that bc lady who moved and it all got screwed up when she called 911).
the DSLAM is the CO. This is where the 2 wires dedicated to your house get lumped into a big connection back to their offices in Toronto (the BAS, Broadband Access Server). Simply put, if a DSLAM is congested its because they oversold it. 1 port, 1 user. PERIOD. | |
|
| | | | | | |
TakeTheFifth
join:2004-04-20
Anjou, QC
1 edit | said by DSL_Ricer :Now can someone please explain to me exactly from where to where in the network diagram their DSLAM category is, and why they can't selectively target traffic on congested links? Because these would be the links carrying their Optimax traffic ?
But seriously, do these numbers include ADSL2 dslams ?
Phil | |
|
| | | | | | | 
Daryl Lamonica
@teksavvy.com
| said by DSL_Ricer :Now can someone please explain to me exactly from where to where in the network diagram their DSLAM category is, and why they can't selectively target traffic on congested links? I'm not an expert in Bell's network, so if there are any mistakes in this explanation they are mine:
In simplistic terms, a TS customer's data will traverse the following path:
a) the copper from your home to the CO (DSLAM) is speed restricted by the card in the DSLAM with provisions your service, and by the wire distance from your house to the CO. Currently Bell's DSLAM cards max out at about 7Mpbs as short distances from the CO. Typical data rates are 3-6Mbps downstream, depending on the service you purchased and the distance from the CO to your home.
2) From the DSLAM the signal goes to a concentrator (I'm using this terminology because the type of equipment used may vary) which then puts your traffic and that of other people onto a GigE type circuit (typically).
3) From there the data leaves the CO and heads to a NAP (like 151 Front St. W. in Toronto).
4) At the NAP, the data is passed over from Bell to TS's own co-located network and then onto the connections TS purchases from other providers.
I'm not 100% certain where Bell's Ellacoya boxes are physically located, but logically they could be located at either a step 2a or step 3a, and possibly even both locations to deal with upstream/downstream traffic before they hit the GigE pipes in either direction. | |
|
| | | | | | | Capharnaum
join:2006-06-19
Montreal, QC
| said by DSL_Ricer :If you were trying to call 911 on a voip phone during that 0.37% of the time, would you be OK with the congestion? Congestion doesn't mean your VOIP 911 call wouldn't go through. It means that congested dslams get to "critical" levels, but it doesn't mean that it is overloaded and wouldn't process your call. Also, it is unclear whether congestion would just slow down the links or whether it would lengthen response time and by how much.
There isn't any data that lets us think the "congestion" would affect anyone for any particular length of time. | |
|
| 
PXA
Digital Ninja
Premium
join:2008-04-02
Nepean, ON
 ·TekSavvy Solutions..
| said by HiVolt :The numbers... Can I be the first one to say... WTF? Congestion? This is seriously what they're basing their case on? If this doesn't prove they're being anti-competitive, I don't know what will. Though undeniable proof doesn't guarantee anything when the CRTC is involved.
--
Parallax Abstraction,
Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
www.pxa.ca | |
|
|
Mirko five_perct
@videotron.ca
| said by HiVolt :The numbers... Can I be the first one to say... WTF? Congestion? Hivolt, per the publicly filed report:
"While these numbers may seem low to the average lay person, they are significant to network traffic engineers".
k? | |
|
| | 
HiVolt
29
Premium
join:2000-12-28
Toronto, ON
clubs:
·TekSavvy Solutions..
·Bell Sympatico
| Re: The Bell Disclosure! said by Mirko five_perct :
Hivolt, per the publicly filed report:
"While these numbers may seem low to the average lay person, they are significant to network traffic engineers".
k?
I read that... I don't buy it.
k?
--
,,!,,('-'),,!,, | |
|
| | |
R0CKY
TSI Rocky
Premium,VIP
join:2005-05-19
Chatham, ON | Re: The Bell Disclosure! Still begs the question of the ethernet side... Bell's network is being converted to it and most of their investments have gone to it.
--
TSI Rocky - TekSavvy Solutions Inc. | |
|
| | |
Mirko five_perct
@videotron.ca
| said by HiVolt :said by Mirko five_perct :
Hivolt, per the publicly filed report:
"While these numbers may seem low to the average lay person, they are significant to network traffic engineers".
k?
I read that... I don't buy it. k? ditto... K! | |
|
| | | | 
sibisties
join:2002-10-19
Montreal, QC | Re: The Bell Disclosure! I love the last graph that shows "cell loss" ! That's not caused by congestion, it's their DPI boxes that are dropping packets ! | |
|
|
R0CKY
TSI Rocky
Premium,VIP
join:2005-05-19
Chatham, ON
| said by HiVolt :The numbers... Can I be the first one to say... WTF? Congestion? Just realised... How can they put a "total" to those values... They don't relate... They all have different thresholds and mechanisms to deal with packet-loss or load. They'd need to talk on a case by case, not on a global... Some of this is on a customer to customer issue other portions are on a more aggregated level....
--
TSI Rocky - TekSavvy Solutions Inc. | |
|
| | 
mlerner
Premium
join:2000-11-25
Nepean, ON
 ·Rogers Hi-Speed
·TekSavvy Solutions..
·Bell Sympatico
| Re: The Bell Disclosure! said by R0CKY :said by HiVolt :The numbers... Can I be the first one to say... WTF? Congestion? Just realised... How can they put a "total" to those values... They don't relate... They all have different thresholds and mechanisms to deal with packet-loss or load. They'd need to talk on a case by case, not on a global... Some of this is on a customer to customer issue other portions are on a more aggregated level.... Excellent points, you should make sure these points are relayed in CAIP's reply.
--
"If bullshit was money this guy would be richer that Bill Gates." - quote by olebiker on Mirko Bibic | |
|
|
dabbadooo
@bell.ca
| The figures in the table that HiVolt posted go from to Mar 07 (pre-throttle days) to May 08.
I don't know much about networks, so I may be missing something, but if they're saying throttling is the solution to the "problem", why does their massive throttling effort show no net impact on these figures?
Also, do they provide figures for the rest of the country or did they cherry-pick Ontario & Quebec as the worst case (suggesting the real problem is not keeping up with growth)?
Does this represent all Ontario and Quebec or just the worst areas? | |
|
| |
dabbadooo
@bell.ca | Re: The Bell Disclosure! Sorry, I guess I shouldn't take a bio-break in the middle of a post. While I was out of the room, Zinc made the same observation as I did.  | |
|
| yabos
join:2003-02-16
Ingersoll, ON
| said by HiVolt :The numbers... Can I be the first one to say... WTF? Congestion? Soo, 2-5% congestion, so THROTTLE THE WHOLE NETWORK. That makes lots of sense. | |
|
| |
CitiLaptop
@teksavvy.com
| Re: The Bell Disclosure! Their definitions of congestion are pretty low too.
They deem it "congested" if the following utilizations are exceeded:
DS-3: 61%;
OC-3: 84%; and
OC-12 and OC-48: 90%.
And they measure it at 15 minutes intervals. For a link to be considered congested, the threshold must have been exceeded at least once on 5 or more different days of a 14 consecutive day period.
Presumably this 14 day figure is a rolling window.
So, if its measured to be congested at just a couple hours in a 2 week period, its considered congested for that whole month?
And only a few percent of links actually met this ridiculously low criteria for congestion?
I agree with the first couple of posters, the CRTC has all the info it needs to make a ruling yesterday. What's the freakin' holdup here? | |
|
| | |
Jman99
join:2007-04-24
Etobicoke, ON | laughable. | |
|
|
| mr_hexen
join:2007-08-02
Brampton, ON
| Re: The Bell Disclosure! said by mlerner :After a close examination it does say percent of congested links (out of several thousand) but the critical threshold would probably be around 10%. Taking the highest percent before DPI which is 6.6%, that's still not high and if it's that bad it would not have been that expensive to upgrade those links. not to mention the CRITERIA for getting ito that count of "congested links".
here are the utilization limits for congested as per Bell Canada:
DS-3 61%, OC-3 84%, OC-12 and OC-48 90%.
so, for one of those links to be considered "congested" and added to that low % graph the following has to occur (using DS-3 links as an example).
Over a 14 day period, utilization measurements are taken every 15 minutes. (snap shot of usage at that time). the limit of 61% must be exceeded atleast ONCE on 5 seperate days over that 14 day period.
what that means is that for the total UP TIME of a link over that 14 days (in minutes) is 20,160 minutes (24hrs x 60min x 14 days). The link must only be above 61% for a TOTAL 75 of those minutes to be considered "congested", or 0.37% of it's available time. Lets also not forget that there could be a sudden spike of usage right at that 15 minute mark and then die down, but i'll assume the entire 15 minute interval is at that level for simplicity, lol.
UHMM... OK. | |
|
Topher92
join:2008-06-07
Mississauga, ON
| All of the percentages are lower! I'd hate to see what they would claim if the percentages actually went up slightly!
Now we need a class action lawsuit against Bell for their illegal practices. Then institute a regulatory committee to oversee the industry to ensure these kinds of things don't happen again. Then the CRTC should split Bell into two separate companies, one for the hardware, and one for the services, that way the "last mile" is out of their hands, since they've proven they can't be trusted with it. Failing that, all of the small ISPs should band together and get a large backer to bring fibre lines to Canada and watch Bell and Rogers play catch up. We've been shafted for far too long by this duopoly! | |
|
|
R0CKY
TSI Rocky
Premium,VIP
join:2005-05-19
Chatham, ON | Re: The Bell Disclosure! I'm curious as to what the throughput is on those Ellacoya boxes.... Can they go more than 1,000Mbps (or even that fast)? Anyone?
--
TSI Rocky - TekSavvy Solutions Inc. | |
|
| |
See 10 replies to this post |
|
Bellundo
@teksavvy.com | That was to be expected seeing most people have a 60 gigabyte a month cap. | |
|
Spike
join:2008-05-16
Toronto, ON | Just what do they mean by the Backbone percentages? Are they referring to the internet backbone uplinks? If so these wouldn't even apply to wholesaler AGAS. | |
|
| zinc
Premium
join:2004-02-17
Woodbridge, ON
clubs: | Re: The Bell Disclosure! They're referring to the links in their backbone aggregation network. (i.e. the network where the BAS links terminate and connects to ISPs) | |
|
| |
R0CKY
TSI Rocky
Premium,VIP
join:2005-05-19
Chatham, ON
| Re: The Bell Disclosure! said by zinc :They're referring to the links in their backbone aggregation network. (i.e. the network where the BAS links terminate and connects to ISPs) LOL.. if that's the case, we're paying to have those dedicated (AHSSPI).
--
TSI Rocky - TekSavvy Solutions Inc. | |
|
|
|
R0CKY
TSI Rocky
Premium,VIP
join:2005-05-19
Chatham, ON
| Re: The Bell Disclosure! said by zinc :I can only assume they've added capacity to the BAS and aggregation links since otherwise it doesn't make much sense that the throttle can remove congestion from the BAS and aggregation while not affecting congestion at the DSLAM level. (If the traffic's been stopped between the Backbone and BAS, then it's not there to flow from Aggregation->DSLAM and logically that should result in less congestion at the DSLAM level...) Hehehe... that's a good point... Funny they should add stuff that is before "and" after the DPI boxes in the table... BAS and DSLAMs are definitely before the DPI devices... The only thing that would be after the DPI devices of use to that table are the Backbone and Aggregation... Aggregation we've paid for to have dedicated and backbone we've paid for to have dedicated I believe.
--
TSI Rocky - TekSavvy Solutions Inc. | |
|
| mr_hexen
join:2007-08-02
Brampton, ON
| said by zinc :More things to note... As Bell stated, congestion of any link == bad customer experience. Since throttling of 3rd party ISPs began, there's been no significant change in congestion at either the backbone or DSLAM level. So one can argue that the throttling is purely for competitive reasons as whether or not we're being throttled the amount of congested users is still the same. I can only assume they've added capacity to the BAS and aggregation links since otherwise it doesn't make much sense that the throttle can remove congestion from the BAS and aggregation while not affecting congestion at the DSLAM level. (If the traffic's been stopped between the Backbone and BAS, then it's not there to flow from Aggregation->DSLAM and logically that should result in less congestion at the DSLAM level...) Bell does touch on this. They are saying (basically) because there is less P2P, there is more HTTP and other traffic which is why no reduction is noted.
In reality, its all BCE BS
DSLAMS are the most congested by their numbers, goes back to what I said a month or so ago, they added too many users then they are capable of. | |
|
| | Capharnaum
join:2006-06-19
Montreal, QC
| Re: The Bell Disclosure! said by mr_hexen :Bell does touch on this. They are saying (basically) because there is less P2P, there is more HTTP and other traffic which is why no reduction is noted. In reality, its all BCE BS DSLAMS are the most congested by their numbers, goes back to what I said a month or so ago, they added too many users then they are capable of. The funny thing is that if throttling only moves traffic (without reducing it), then it proves that Bell uses throttling to favorise parts of the internet while deterring others.
However, I don't see why net congestion is linked to the issue at hand. CAIP pays to get connected, it should be up to Bell to make sure the bandwitdh is available. Otherwise, they can keep overselling their network while spreading the consequences over to their competition. | |
|
|
|
R0CKY
TSI Rocky
Premium,VIP
join:2005-05-19
Chatham, ON
| Re: The Bell Disclosure! said by AkFubar :Just a thought. The chart shows percentage (which is proportion). It may be difficult to tell what effect throttling has had from that data because actual volume figures are not shown and the number of customers taxing the network or actual changes in throughput is not shown. Perhaps it is possible that Bell will make the argument that the reason why the percent numbers have not changed is because throttling abated an increase in the percentage or in other words, held it where it is before it got really bad? If I were a betting man I think if anything, they took the worst numbers/areas possible to make the arguments here....
--
TSI Rocky - TekSavvy Solutions Inc. | |
|
| |
Maynard G Krebs
@teksavvy.com
| Re: The Bell Disclosure! said by R0CKY :[If I were a betting man I think if anything, they took the worst numbers/areas possible to make the arguments here.... Rocky,
I think that you/CAIP should hire some consulting help from one of the big firms with inside telco network consulting experience - maybe Ernst & Young, IBM, HP, or some firm that is recommended to you in the US (where the talent pool may be a bit deeper).
You'll get a fuller understanding of what's really missing from the Bell submission, any sensitivities their network may have, and how Bell will use that against you - ie. anything you respond with may be inaccurate because Bell is still withholding data that may be relevant.
Hopefully an experienced consultant can help you out with the "If it's X then Bell will/won't have congestion; if it's Y then ..... etc...."
If the CRTC rules against Bell and Bell appeals, then the status quo will likely stay until the end of the appeal process. And Bell might do just that if you can't anticipate what the 'hidden' data might be.
And make sure that when the CRTC gives you a ruling in your favour, that there is a drop dead date (30 days??) for Bell to remove ALL throttle/DPI from your links, and that the removal is certified as having been done by the Bell CEO & chairman of the Board.
And get the CRTC to require Bell to institute a procedure whereby they notify you/CAIP at least 30 days in advance of any changes to equipment attached to, or observation of data passing through, or parameters of your circuits. | |
|
| | | mr_hexen
join:2007-08-02
Brampton, ON
| Re: The Bell Disclosure! said by Maynard G Krebs :
And get the CRTC to require Bell to institute a procedure whereby they notify you/CAIP at least 30 days in advance of any changes to equipment attached to, or observation of data passing through, or parameters of your circuits.
this rule is already in the tarrif, Bell Canada simply ignored it anyways, lol. | |
|
| | |
An Onymous
@teksavvy.com
| >I think that you/CAIP should hire some consulting help from one of the big firms with inside telco network consulting experience - maybe Ernst & Young, IBM, HP, or some firm that is recommended to you in the US
Ask google for help. They have lots of PHD and other smart guys that know network there.
The DSLAM is the most congest part, but the numbers before the throttling and after almost show no different. The congestion dropped 2%, but that is also the same amount as short term fluctuations prior to throttling. No enough data to show trend whether or not throttling actually helped. | |
|
shinda
@teksavvy.com
| Just my thoughts (not a network guy myself):
The graphs on page 12 (Network Traffic Growth) and Network Capacity Growth (while on different scales) show that Bell (since 2003) has had sufficient network in place to manage even today's usage.
And unless I'm mis-interrupting this paragraph:
As described further in Bell Canada(CRTC)15May08-1 CAIP Part VII, Bell Canada has limited records of traffic make-up (i.e., P2P vs. non-P2P traffic) prior to exercising its traffic shaping using DPI devices. Therefore, the available data is insufficient to show a trend due to the short time period since DPI was introduced. They are conceding that P2P isn't the problem, they really don't know what the problem is (apart from increased growth in usage), which would be better correlated against the amount of new rich media content that has sprung up on the net, in the selected time frame, (YouTube for instance). | |
|
| |
| |
R0CKY
TSI Rocky
Premium,VIP
join:2005-05-19
Chatham, ON
| Re: The Bell Disclosure! Looks like you just got quoted shinda....
--
TSI Rocky - TekSavvy Solutions Inc. | |
|
CanadianIron
join:2006-10-08
Beverly Hills, CA
| "The Ellacoya e100 is available now. Because it's modular, pricing depends on hardware and software options chosen. "The price per subscriber is similar to the current generation of DPI equipment, between $1 and $2 per subscriber," Sammartino says. "
»www.isp-planet.com/equipment/200···100.html | |
|
| mr_hexen
join:2007-08-02
Brampton, ON | Re: The Bell Disclosure! dont forget that bell owns Ellacoya though, so i'm sure they got a good deal | |
|
| |
Maynard G Krebs
@teksavvy.com
| Re: The Bell Disclosure! said by mr_hexen :dont forget that bell owns Ellacoya though, so i'm sure they got a good deal Arbour Networks bought Ellacoya earlier this year. | |
|
| | | mr_hexen
join:2007-08-02
Brampton, ON
| Re: The Bell Disclosure! said by Maynard G Krebs :said by mr_hexen :dont forget that bell owns Ellacoya though, so i'm sure they got a good deal Arbour Networks bought Ellacoya earlier this year. my mistake, i thought i read that Bell bought them.. o well... | |
|
| | | | bacon612
join:2007-10-31
Etobicoke, ON | Re: The Bell Disclosure! Too early to begin asking about ADSL2 again? I think bell has room on their network for it | |
|
| | | | | |
JayMan
Whoot
Premium
join:2002-06-05
Earth
·TekSavvy Solutions..
| I have to laugh at this. I live in Pembroke, we have 1 CO, no remotes and like 12,000 people living here and we got stabbed by one of Bell's Red pins.
This is laughable because hardly anyone around here can get 5mbit unless you live within blocks of the CO which is right downtown.
But as I type this I look outside and there is 8 yes 8 Cogeco contracted White Broadband vans on the street upgrading our cable so we can get highspeed here in a about a month from what I am told. Maybe Bell will come and upgrade too. | |
|
|
Omr
join:2004-01-10
M1S-1B3
1 edit | Just surprised they considered this Confidential Trade Secrets". I guess the only secret they wanted hidden is that they have an under-used network capacity re-branded as congested beyond repair.
Now to the data, I can say there is somewhat visible data showing that Throttling has brought down "congestion" levels, but by not much worth noting ... and for them to say that other traffic came in to replace it is a bold faced lie as Rocky's own graphs show dips in usage levels through-out throttle times.
Keep in mind to get a good before and after perspective look at April 07 Vs. April 08. Those two months are clear times of no throttle, and full throttle (March it was being rolled out still).
So a quick comparison;
April 2007 vs. April 2008
Backbone | 4.5% to 1.0%
BAS | 1.2% to 0.5%
Aggregation | 3.9% to 0.7%
DSLAM | 4.6% to 5.8%
Now I hope people can start seeing a trend , Bell in all it's excellence of being the king of cheap turned the Pyramid on it's head. The Year over Year trend is that of reduction, except for the DSLAM congestion which they want to resolve. Matter of fact it would appear that the DPI is adding on to this layer cake of "congestion" right onto the DSLAM. It is cheaper to have the local connections congested rather then the external. From 4.6% in April 07 to 5.8% in April 08.
Now for the bulk of the data found on that table ... firstly the Total Margin I would presume is useless, and of no use to anyone. Second I've grown up to know that networks are predominantly garbage in and garbage out, there is a relationship. Now this chart personally looks quite shady, especially in it's current form which is not to scale or even fabricated?
DSLAM is related to the BAS (the knee bone is connected to the thighbone), so I think it needs greater scrutiny in areas we see the DSLAM % Higher or equal in one Month compared to another, but the BAS % is lower compared to that other.
March 07(1) Vs. September 07(2)
- DSLAM 5.6%(1), 6.6%(2)
- BAS 3.1%(1), 0.4%(2)
April 07(1) Vs. August 07(2)
- DSLAM 4.6%(1), 4.6%(2)
- BAS 1.2%(1), 0.7%(2)
* Now keep in mind when looking at these data that it most definitely is not in context, Network Upgrades alone could fudge the relationship between numbers. Also key dates need to be understood ... Nov. 07 Sympatico Throttled, March 08 Everyone else is throttled, also we have to keep in mind the seasonality of the internet.
So now goes into how data was obtained, how it can be verified, and explaining key network events in a timeline. Also we have to question Bell's definition of "Congestion", and also get a respected Network Engineers POV of the numbers and get the knowledge individual to write a recommended guideline for congestion and the use of that word. | |
|
bgw
@teksavvy.com
| Initial view:
Not good. I don't see sufficient detail in the data to draw any solid conclusions. Right now their response seems to be too short and simple for the gravity of the situation.
I will have to read this in detail to really understand what is going on. | |
|
Kareeser
hm?
Premium
join:2006-07-18
Hamilton, ON | Funny... the download of this file slowed to a paltry 3 kb/s as I was downloading, hahaha... | |
|
davidbrown
join:2005-05-31
Toronto, ON
·Bell Sympatico
1 edit | The crtc has no plans to rule against bell (by default rogers and cogeco).
Theres far to much political pressure and money to have any other ruling other then for bell.
If you for a moment don't think back room dealing isn't going on when these guys have so much at stake your fooling yourself.
That being said there is still a chance that something leaks that forces the crtc to cover its own collective butt by ruling against bell.
This should give you a idea just how honest the crtc is and how much they care about us.
h**p://bigbry.wordpress.com/2008/02/08/c-r-t-c-on-the-take/ | |
|
| ultracat
join:2008-01-30
Toronto, ON
·TELUS
·Bell Sympatico
·TekSavvy Solutions..
| Re: The Bell Disclosure! I agree with you, I'm a cynical guy. However, even the most clever, seedy backroom dealings have to be done when no one is looking. The public and media have shone a spotlight on this issue. Do you really think Bell will win? I honestly don't at this point. Even if the CRTC rules against us, this is a political issue now and the cons are a minority. Worst case scenario this is a great problem for the other parties Lib, BQ, NDP, Green to address in their platforms in the next election (e.g. buying our votes for giving us back our unfettered internet). And don't forget there could still be a civil case even after the CRTC ruling. And don't forget that significant privacy issues have come up during this whole thing and yes even the CRTC has to be in compliance with privacy laws (adjudicated by the privacy commissioner NOT the CRTC). | |
|
davidbrown
join:2005-05-31
Toronto, ON
·Bell Sympatico
2 edits | They got away when 1.2 billion was at stake so i don't see them having any problems getting away with this.
As i said though if they get caught badly enough in the public before this goes through then there is a chance.
Bell is counting on the fact that the smaller isp's don't have the dough to go against all three (or more) of them in court.
Remember its not just bell that has a stake in this but both all the other major isp's doing the same as bell. | |
|
|
See 19 replies to this post |
|
MB9999
@teksavvy.com
| The cell loss graph is amusing. 4500 cells seems like a huge number, but each cell only carriers 48 bytes of data. So for their highest loss month they lost 216k of data or about 150 EtherNet frames.
I don't know the average data loss stats, but it's something like 99.9% and I gather 216kb of data is going to be a very tiny percentage of the total data transferred. | |
|
Bellus_atm
@cia.com
| If you look at this data and combine it with some telecom knowledge, you understand BC's major capital projects that impact xDSL services... and there are a lot of them at every level of the network... stingers to VDSL2 & Dual Gige LAG uplinks, upgraded BAS equipment, replacement of multilayer+multivendor-edge aggregation, better core capacity.
Also, for Rocky, there is still mucho ATM between your service provider GigE and the end user, although the normal MTU is great for users:
Stinger/Anymedia/Subtended DSLAM shelves: most of these use OC-3 to link up to their control units at the CO.
Al-Lu 73xx ASAM and Stinger FS+ controllers: The FS has OC-12 atm uplinks in many POP's. Same with the Alcatel equipment that controls DSLAM's/shelves.
Finally there is an ATM-to_GigE device connected to a Nortel 8600 edge device. In same cases, some of the above links are now Gige, but even 4 Gige uplinks for a device that controls dozens of DSLAM's isn't much.
---------------------------------------------------------
Even the VDSL2 upgrades to Stingers puzzle me... 3 48port LIM's on a stinger with 2 Gige uplinks. Even with multicast for the IPTV traffic, that doesn't really seem to make sense. But that is where things are going.
I really think the smart thing would be to replace their POP/CO to DSLAM point-to-point links with some sort of GPON 2.488D/1.24U or 10GEPON feeding 24/48/72port micro dslam's every couple blocks. | |
|
| heavyduty
join:2008-03-26
Brampton, ON
·Primus Telecommuni..
| Re: The Bell Disclosure! said by Bellus_atm :
I really think the smart thing would be to replace their POP/CO to DSLAM point-to-point links with some sort of GPON 2.488D/1.24U or 10GEPON feeding 24/48/72port micro dslam's every couple blocks.
Yeah, it seems there is strong need to push RDSLAMs if twisted-pair last-mile is to be used, well last 1k-2k feet is more or less the target reach.
GPON is certainly a reasonable solution. Verizon is using it (along with BPON). But somehow I suspect even with GPON, Bell would still be very stingy with bandwidth. I just don't think they have the cahones to put out 10/2, 20/5, 20/20 and 50/20 mbps services (with particular emphasis on those upstream rates).
BTW, I like the 2.488D/1.244U (2:1) ratio i like very much | |
|
|
|
|
