Canadian TV, Computing and Home Theatre Forums banner

CRTC okays use of bandwidth throttling

Jump to Latest

The Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission (CRTC) this week introduced a new framework which the federal regulator says will guide Internet service providers (ISPs) in their use of bandwidth throttling practices.

To the disappointment of consumers, rather than banning the practice of bandwidth throttling, the CRTC gives ISP's carte blanche to use any type of traffic management they wish but they ask that it only be used as a last resort and that consumers be notified of what type of bandwidth throttling they will be using.



In simple terms, the CRTC is continuing to allow Internet Service Providers to violate every principle of net neutrality so long as they tell the customer who they are going to violate those principles and do so 30 days in advance!

The following is the complete text of the CRTC regulatory policy issued this week.

Telecom Regulatory Policy CRTC 2009-657


No code has to be inserted here.Footnotes:

A primary ISP is an ISP that is also a Canadian carrier, generally offering both retail Internet services and tariffed wholesale services.

A secondary ISP uses tariffed wholesale services from a primary ISP to provide, among other things, its own retail Internet services.

In this decision, the term “wholesale service” refers to a tariffed service offered by a primary ISP and used by a secondary ISP to provide, among other things, its own retail Internet services.

Order Issuing a Direction to the CRTC on Implementing the Canadian Telecommunications Policy Objectives, P.C. 2006‑1534, 14 December 2006

technical ITMPs include slowing down a user’s traffic, prioritizing traffic, and detecting heavy users in order to limit their bandwidth.

Economic ITMPs include monthly bandwidth capacity limits, where users who exceed a predefined threshold must pay additional money for bandwidth consumed, and time-of-day pricing for bandwidth consumed.

Subsection 27(2) states: “No Canadian carrier shall, in relation to the provision of a telecommunications service or the charging of a rate for it, unjustly discriminate or give an undue or unreasonable preference toward any person, including itself, or subject any person to an undue or unreasonable disadvantage.”

Application-specific ITMPs are those which degrade or prefer one application, class of application, or protocol over another.

In the context of this decision, the term “temporarily” refers to the minimum amount of time required to address a particular problem.

Monthly bit caps are predefined upper limits on the volume of traffic permitted per connection. Additional charges can be applied when this limit is exceeded.

A number of freely available online tools allow consumers to check the upload and download speeds of their Internet connection at a particular moment in time.

Such information, or links to it, should be provided on web pages that describe the actual retail Internet service offerings; for example, where speeds are described, there should be links to information describing how ITMPs may impact these services.

The full report can be found on the Commission’s website at http://www.crtc.gc.ca/PartVII/eng/2008/8646/isp-fsi.pdf

Blocking content refers to an ISP preventing a user from accessing the content of his or her choice, or an ITMP that effectively severs a connection that a user may have to a website or online application.

Jitter is a random variation in the timing of a signal. Jitter results in packets arriving at varying time intervals, causing distortion in the signal. This is best illustrated by the example of broken audio that is experienced with VoIP signals travelling great distances.
 


5 Replies

·
Registered
Joined
·
6 Posts
With decisions like this, Canada will as recently reported remain at the bottom of the world heap instead of our once proud lead. When reported on the national news, ISP responded that the survey was flawed.
I contend that it is the ISP's that are flawed.
It's all a scam as they offer high bandwidth packages are high prices to match, but cap them such that limits are easily exceeded and then do a cash crab as a penalty.

Years ago I calculated and then questioned ISP Shaw after the introduced their internet streaming music service and the radio ads for "Rich Multimedia Content.
We determined that the radio stream would violate the AUP caps in about 8 days if left on.
It's interesting that in some areas of the country, often served by smaller organizations and to smaller centres, that Fibre to The Home is becoming commonly available, yet in the large ISP and market areas,, it the usual crap service for big $$$.

This whole Net Neutrality needs to be addressed in a world court and the INTERNET is a WORLD asset and members countries need to abide by the decisions.
As WE are the citizens of the WORLD and not the ISP's, then the outcome must be clear in favour of Neutrality of the NET as we know if it is going to grow and flourish further with additional technological advancements
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5 Posts
We're screwed. ISPs will just charge more to provide the third world service we Canadians have become acustom to. The US government is going to bat for consumers... The CRTC is useless and kills innovation and competiton. Can't wait to find out how bad we're going to be gouged from all the BIG ISPs. As a country we should be ashamed of our BS political system that keeps fair practices and competition alive.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5 Posts
Sorry to clarify the last post... We should be ashamed that our BS political system does NOTHING to protect fair practice and innovation.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2 Posts
another example where we see who the CRTC serves and it's certanly not consumer interests
i'll say it again the CRTC in 30 years of existence caused more troubles than fixed problems
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
25 Posts
I have been questioning for some time why internet pricing has yet to drop. If anything the pricing has gone up and now ISP's have the power to limit our useage and still charge top dollar. This is bogus and another example of the very corporate CRTC putting big dollar organizations ahead of the public that it is intended to protect.
 
1 - 6 of 6 Posts
Top