how-to block ads
|
jfmezei
Premium
join:2007-01-03
Beaconsfield, QC
 ·ELECTRONICBOX
| reply to Angelo_
Re: Status of 2008-108 Throttling Review and Vary
>this is the wrong time to ask for a cost study.
I update my submission hours before submitting it when I find out that the CRTC was asking for a cost study anyways.
All the issues are interrelated and come down to one simple issue:
increased average use by customer who will download more and more media-heavy files (aka: large files, angello, you, of all people, should know this). This is not very different from dial-up days when Bell's busy hour moved to the evening because of dial-up internet suddently changed average call duration and wrecked Bell's capacity models. Yet, Bell reacted by adding sufficient capacity to handle the load.
In the case of GAS, there are changing patterns from the old style HTTP only transactions that were short bursts with large amount sof iddle time while the user read the text page. Bell is reacting by preventing the changing patterms by throttling those who have evolved into new style of internet usage, this, despite ISPs paying for the capacity that is requyire to service the new generation of users.
Sympatico may have decided to not invest to support the new generation of internet usage. But some other ISP is willing to purchase the capacity needed to provide this service, Bell shouldn't be allowed to prevent this.
To this end, proving that GAS rates reflect the costs of providing the capacity that is being purchased is critical to show that Bell has no right to claim that GAS customers are using more than they are paying for.
The ultimate result should be that the CRTC forces Sympatico to buy GAS from Bell, or that the CRTC decide that GAS is a totally separate service from Sympatico and that Bell cannot be allowed to manage it in the same way.
In the later case, proving that GAS rates match or exceed the cost of providing the service means that Bell should be obligate to have sufficient capacity in its network to deleiver the purchased products.
If there is sufficient capacity, then usage within the bounds of what is being purchased should not negatively affect other users. | |
Maynard G Krebs
@teksavvy.com
| said by jfmezei  :...... This is not very different from dial-up days when Bell's busy hour moved to the evening because of dial-up internet suddently changed average call duration and wrecked Bell's capacity models. Yet, Bell reacted by adding sufficient capacity to handle the load. Absolutely correct.
Look at the timeline:
Independent ISP's corporately, and their users, experienced no capacity issues prior to August/November 2007 when Bell began to throttle Sympatico users.
It's not as if Sympatico users suddenly began to consume dramatically more bandwidth.
Then in the period between November 2007 - March 2008 when Bell began the stealth throttle of ISP GAS links, none of the independent ISP's were having any capacity issues on GAS except for their normal growth patterns - necessitating merely normal capacity planning on their part.
Subsequent to March 2008, Bell pulls back the curtain on their on-line movie store.
It's abundantly clear that what Bell was/is doing is attempting to discriminate against all by reserving bandwidth for paid content offered by one of their subsidiaries during the evening hours when the bulk of such content is typically viewed.
Bell could have run fiber from its movie store head-end to each CO to give themselves a dedicated pipe for their paid content, and bypassed the allegedly congested GAS-tariffed pipes (bought and paid for by independent ISP's), but they didn't. | |
-
|
