Capharnaum
join:2006-06-19
Montreal, QC
| reply to DSL_Ricer
Re: The Bell Disclosure!
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. |
|
Daryl Lamonica
@teksavvy.com
| reply to DSL_Ricer
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. |
|
TakeTheFifth
join:2004-04-20
Anjou, QC
1 edit | reply to DSL_Ricer
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 |
|
mr_hexen
join:2007-08-02
Brampton, ON
1 edit | reply to DSL_Ricer
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. |
|
DSL_Ricer
Premium
join:2007-07-22
| reply to mr_hexen
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
| reply to Capharnaum
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. |
|
Capharnaum
join:2006-06-19
Montreal, QC
| reply to TakeTheFifth
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. |
|
TakeTheFifth
join:2004-04-20
Anjou, QC
| reply to R0CKY
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 |
|
shopkins
join:2008-05-23
Nepean, ON | reply to R0CKY
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. |
|
R0CKY
TSI Rocky
Premium,VIP
join:2005-05-19
Chatham, ON | reply to mlerner
Definitely an interesting table... no doubt!
--
TSI Rocky - TekSavvy Solutions Inc. |
|
mlerner
Premium
join:2000-11-25
Nepean, ON
 ·Rogers Hi-Speed
 ·TekSavvy Solutions..
·Bell Sympatico
| reply to HiVolt
said by HiVolt :The numbers... Can I be the first one to say... WTF? Congestion? Seriously WTF?? How can the CRTC still be investigating. This is an open and shut case, there cannot be any congestion.
--
"If bullshit was money this guy would be richer that Bill Gates." - quote by olebiker on Mirko Bibic |
|
