 | | Finally! We Canadians are proud to finally see something change. Although we do see the 'light at the end of the tunnel', we still have a long ways to go. We will continue to fight though, and never backing down! | |
|
 andybPremium join:2003-05-29 SW Ontario kudos:1 | Not over yet Bell is hinting at going to cabinet again,cabinet can over rule the CRTC on its own within 90 days.The cable co's dont like parts of either so who knows what they will do. | |
|
 Reviews:
·TekSavvy DSL
| Amazing yet it still falls short. Cable operators arnt allowed markup, and wholesalers cannot wholesale cable or satellite services. However its a step in the right direction as now theres no speed differentiation. Ill take my 7mb upload please  | |
|
 |  andybPremium join:2003-05-29 SW Ontario kudos:1 | Re: Amazing Cable has a big mark up allready built into the tariff | |
|
 |  |  Reviews:
·TekSavvy DSL
| Re: Amazing said by andyb:Cable has a big mark up allready built into the tariff then why are they complaining? | |
|
 |  |  |  andybPremium join:2003-05-29 SW Ontario kudos:1 Reviews:
·TekSavvy DSL
| Re: Amazing said by gruntlord6:said by andyb:Cable has a big mark up allready built into the tariff then why are they complaining? Because the CRTC told them to make some new access points | |
|
 |  |  |  KrKHeavy Artillery For The Little GuyPremium join:2000-01-17 Tulsa, OK Reviews:
·AT&T DSL Service
| said by gruntlord6:said by andyb:Cable has a big mark up allready built into the tariff then why are they complaining? Because they don't like having most of the pie. They want all of it. -- "Fascism should more properly be called corporatism because it is the merger of state and corporate power." -- Benito Mussolini
| |
|
 |  |  | | But not the extra markup for higher speeds that required "significant investment" to enable (IE: Docsis 3.0) that the ILECs are getting for services using new equipment. | |
|
 |  ThrowDemsOutIf you can't convince 'em, confuse 'emPremium join:2002-03-03 Mullica Hill, NJ kudos:4 | said by gruntlord6:yet it still falls short. However its a step in the right direction as now theres no speed differentiation. Ill take my 7mb upload please The catch-22 is that the 10% over wholesale cost figure is based on what the telcos say cost is. Some creative accounting can inflate the costs and the CRTC has not been very effective in auditing what telco costs REALLY are.
By fudging the real costs, the telcos can make the competitors prices non-competitive to their own,. | |
|
 | | misleading title I'm not sure I would exactly call this "Open Access". | |
|
 |  | | Re: misleading title agreed, isn't there still traffic shaping in effect when the ISP leases broadband from a large telecom? | |
|
 AkFubarNothing is more constant than change join:2005-02-28 Toronto CAN. 1 edit | An encouraging first step... ... towards the 21st century reality for Canada. Long overdue! | |
|
 | | Remotes If they open up the remotes then we could call it open access, this is only good if your ISP has equipment in bells CO and you are close enough to it.
If you are not then this ruling means absolutely... Not much. You get faster speeds on gas which is crippled as of right now.
This ruling looks like a life preserver for indy ISP's, but it is much better then they had in the first place. So its a win lose case. | |
|
 |  andybPremium join:2003-05-29 SW Ontario kudos:1 | Re: Remotes The ruling includes remotes.They use a crossover switch or something like that to connect the isp with the remote.Same way bell does it for them selves. | |
|
 Reviews:
·TekSavvy DSL
·Yak Communications
| Bring on the 2+ years of stall tactics now We'll see if this ruling has any teeth or Cabinet will just overrule it; or this will just get bogged down in red tape for the next few years with no actual usable benefits for the consumer; OR We'll get the matching speeds but they'll be so crippled with low caps (200gig or less), yes I said 200gig, I consider that a low cap for a 25mb line, and offensive overage charges, thereby making these matching speeds useless. | |
|
 KrKHeavy Artillery For The Little GuyPremium join:2000-01-17 Tulsa, OK | Positive step... but what about the Caps? Can they still force usage caps and overages? | |
|
 |  | | Re: Positive step... but what about the Caps? For the moment, yes. The decision that allowed that is currently in a "Review and Vary" process. | |
|
 Reviews:
·TekSavvy DSL
| I see whats going to happen... Bell will drag their feet and finally concede "defeat" and hand out faster speeds to wholesalers. Then drop the hammer and lower the caps with massive overage fees so all those users that finally get faster speeds hit their caps even quicker generating more cash. | |
|
 |  | | Re: I see whats going to happen... Canada is one of the only countries in the world with usage caps
Below the 49th parallel they can use their paid-for internet as they please | |
|
 pb2k join:2005-05-30 Calgary, AB kudos:1 | Networks cost money to build... I don't know how things are setup in the east, but in telus land, (as far as I can tell) the competitive ISPs have to lay out cash for little more than a regional POP and then everything else (edge router, aggregator, fiber, dslam, local loop) all belong to telus. I can certainly see why the large ISPs are irritated about spending tens of billions to build a network only to have some tiny company come along and expect to use it for a pittance. | |
|
 |  | | Re: Networks cost money to build... Correction the Canadian taxpayers paid for Bell's network and infrastructure. | |
|
 |  |  | | Re: Networks cost money to build... said by Chuck Carlso :
Correction the Canadian taxpayers paid for Bell's network and infrastructure. Taxpayers subsidized the ubiquitous and affordable phone service for all as a mandated essential service long before the IP protocol's inception. Very little of the infrastructure from those days would be usable to deliver xDSL; nearly everything had to be rebuilt over the past 15 years specifically for that and completely off Bell's own dime. | |
|
 |  |  |  | | Re: Networks cost money to build... said by InvalidError:said by Chuck Carlso :
Correction the Canadian taxpayers paid for Bell's network and infrastructure. Taxpayers subsidized the ubiquitous and affordable phone service for all as a mandated essential service long before the IP protocol's inception. Very little of the infrastructure from those days would be usable to deliver xDSL; nearly everything had to be rebuilt over the past 15 years specifically for that and completely off Bell's own dime. However, Bell's dime was generated using infrastructure that was subsidized by our pennies. Without our pennis, Bell might only have a nickel at this point. | |
|
 |  |  |  |  | | Re: Networks cost money to build... said by Chynkinese:However, Bell's dime was generated using infrastructure that was subsidized by our pennies. Without our pennis, Bell might only have a nickel at this point. And half of Canada would not have affordable phone service or would have gotten it several decades later, much like how many remote areas are paying 2-5X the price for 2-10X slower and much less reliable broadband service than urban areas today... some do not even have any viable broadband options at all.
The POTS subsidies came with the obligation to serve rural/remote areas with the same or similar phone service and pricing available in urban areas. Urban areas were always profitable so that part of the telcos' network never needed subsidizing. | |
|
 | | misleading OH GREAT i cna get 7 megabit now ....with a 75GB CAP where i had 4megabit unlimited
STUFF it is what i say give me unlimited of give me nothing sick of a 70$ bill for less value what are we 31st for download speeds and 54th for uploads?
ya and they dont consider this thorttling to 25Kbytes/sec its the morons buying into MLPPP that keep this universe of scam going and ya know one day they will realize how ripped off they are | |
|
 |  | | Re: misleading said by chronoss2009:STUFF it is what i say give me unlimited of give me nothing sick of a 70$ bill for less value what are we 31st for download speeds and 54th for uploads? its the morons buying into MLPPP that keep this universe of scam going and ya know one day they will realize how ripped off they are Um, Teksavvy 4-meg DSL, non-mlppp internet is 70$? Since when?
I'm calling BS on you. | |
|
 Reviews:
·Cybersurf Intern..
| Not open access at all. They gave the option of matched speed. Which really would kill resellers if they didnt give the matching speed. Which in of itself would end with the government needing to take action.
What we really needed was CO colocation which got denied.
Ultimately now the current situation is that the current existing giant ISPS still keep full control and actual competition of upstart isps has stayed just as impossible. -- -- if (value == 0) return value; else return 0; | |
|
 |  CanerisErikCanerisPremium,VIP join:2007-10-03 Toronto, ON kudos:2 | Re: Not open access at all. said by munky99999:What we really needed was CO colocation which got denied. CO colocation has existed for over 10 years, has been used by competitors, and wasn't under consideration in this proceeding. You're confusing the unaggregated ADSL access service that was considered here with CO colocation. -- Erik - Caneris Inc. | |
|
 |  | | Agreed. Equal speed over someone else's platform is not the same as equal access to the underlying infrastructure. For that, a truly "open networks" regime would have to be instituted that made points of interconnection readily available to all comers. | |
|
 |
|