Canadian TV, Computing and Home Theatre Forums banner

1 - 14 of 14 Posts

·
Member #1
Joined
·
47,683 Posts
Discussion Starter #1

·
Member #1
Joined
·
47,683 Posts
Discussion Starter #2

·
Member #1
Joined
·
47,683 Posts
Discussion Starter #3
Really don't understand all of this

but my impression is that this could lead to a scenario where 3rd parties could eventually create their own facilities based network that would not simply be buying capacity from Bell.

Anyone got a good handle on this?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,022 Posts
The part i took away was the new fee structure for loops, which essentiqlly means my dry loop cost will go up 50% from $11 to $17 with Teksavvy.

Bell is really fighting a competitive marketplace on all fronts here.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
772 Posts
This was Rocky's response :

"Gang,

Haven't read responses yet but the ULL decision applies to CLEC and DSLSPs.... Not GAS.

What it however does is potentially make central office investments a little more challenging.

Rocky
--
TSI Rocky - TekSavvy Solutions Inc."

So, to me, it seems like the decision won't affect our dry loop rates. Yet!!
 

·
Member #1
Joined
·
47,683 Posts
Discussion Starter #6
the decision won't affect our dry loop rates.

From point #74

In light of the above, the Commission approves on a final basis the revised monthly recurring rates for Type A unbundled loops set out in Appendix 1 to this decision and the revised service charge rates for Type A and Type B unbundled local loops set out in Appendix 2.
That sound pretty unequivocal so what did you read in the decision that makes you think otherwise?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
772 Posts
According to others re: this ruling, the experts are saying that unbundling rates /= dry loop rates. When I first read it yesterday, my first thought was that my dry loop rates were going up by ~$5 a month, but apparently this isn't the case. I'm no expert by any means so I'm relying on what the real experts are saying is their interpretation of the ruling.

Teksavvy residential is defined as "GAS" I believe, so if what Rocky says is true as quoted above, then our dry loop rates shouldn't be affected by this ruling.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
51 Posts
Independant ISP

I have heard few Small ISP's are already offering Independant Internet Service where they are not dependant on any one else, Only problem their service is not avaliable at all places.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
405 Posts
According to others re: this ruling, the experts are saying that unbundling rates /= dry loop rates
I'm certainly no expert on the subject, but I can't see what else this is referring to other than dry-loop rates for residential and business DSL. Why else would there be so many points about copper pairs between the CO and customers, and discussions about DSL service charges. For example:

The Bell companies’ proposed time estimate increases compared to the 2001 cost studies were primarily due to the more complex jumper wire work associated with orders for customers subscribed to both voice and DSL services. Jumper wire work for voice-only service is less complex.
and

For ILEC orders, for the network interface device (NID) work[33] activity, use same rate for residence and business loop orders, based on SME estimate.
I'm not making any specific points about these 2 quote, other than to illustrate that I believe that this decision does indeed refer to residential dry-loop DSL.

Another important point is about providing the loops to the smaller ISPs:

32. The Commission notes that under the NBV costing approach, the unbundled loop rates are not set to recover costs associated with purchasing additional copper cables to meet new CLEC demand. Consistent with this approach, the Commission considers that it is appropriate not to require the Bell companies to provide unbundled loops to CLECs if to do so would require them to purchase additional copper cables to meet the CLECs’ requests for such loops.
I interpret this to mean that if you want Teksavvy or Primus in your area and there's not room on the existing hardware, you're SOL.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
405 Posts
Oops, my bad

Ok, upon further reading I may have to recind my previous opinion. From the CRTC document, down in the definitions at the bottom it states:

[3] A Type B unbundled loop is a transmission path that supports the transmission of Integrated Services Digital Network (ISDN) Base Rate Interface (BRI)-type signals between a customer’s premises and a CO.
And looking up ISDN on Wikipedia, it looks like this is a very specialized technology that likely has very little actual use in Canada today.

ISDN-BRI has never gained popularity as a general use telephone access technology in Canada and the US and today remains a niche product. The service was seen as a solution in search of a problem,[4] and the extensive array of options and features were difficult for most customers to understand and utilize. ISDN has long been known by several derogatory acronyms highlighting these issues, such as It Still Does Nothing, Innovations Subscribers Don't Need, and I Still Don't kNow.

...

Once the concept of broadband Internet access came to be associated with data rates incoming to the customer at 256 kbit/s or more,[7] and alternatives like ADSL grew in popularity, the consumer market for BRI imploded.

...

ISDN-BRI is currently primarily used in industries with specialized and very specific needs. High-end videoconferencing made by companies such as Sony, Polycom, Tandberg, and LifeSize via the LifeSize Networker bond up to 8 B-channels together (using a BRI circuit for every 2 channels) to provide digital, circuit-switched video connections to almost anywhere in the world.
So it looks to me like only a very specific group of customers would be using this service, and it's not the same as DSL.

Next time I'll read up a bit more before posting on subjects upon which i know very little :confused:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,310 Posts
it looks like this is a very specialized technology that likely has very little actual use in Canada today.
Actually, I have set up systems over ISDN many times. I've used them with PBX extenders that allow digital phones, such as Nortel or Avaya, to be at locations remote from the PBX. The systems I've set up can support up to 24 extensions, though only 10 can be on a call at any given time (using G.729), if connected via ISDN. The full 24 can be supported when connected via fractional T1 or IP.

ISDN had a lot of promise, but incompatibilities among carriers slowed it down and eventually it was largely bypassed by high speed internet connections. That said, there's still a fair bit still in service. All the ISDN circuits I've worked on have been provided by the local carrier, be it Bell in Ontario, Telus in B.C & Alberta, and whoever the phone company (I've forgotten) is in St. John N.B.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
42 Posts
I think CRTC is trying to get the small ISP to build their own network in some specific place. For exemple, if distributel have a lot of custumer in Rimouski, Qc for exemple, they could build their own network around this city and try to get the most customers they can. I don't know for Ontario, but in Qc, there is a lot of local telco company, like "maskatel" in St-Hyacinthe, "verision Trois-Pistole" in Trois-Pistole, "shanon vision" in Shanon, etc. Some of these company provide only tv and others provide tv, internet and phone line. I don't know if they have their own network, but most of them are well established in their region. I think this is what will happen.

One question I have is a company like "sogetel" who have their own network around Nicolet, Lac Etchemin and a couple of small city for phone line, internet and IPTV and provide internet and IPTV on bell's network in Quebec city. Does the IPTV will count for bandwith usage? If it does, they won't be able to offer tv services anymore! At this time I did not see anything about this in CRTC'S decisions. ( Maybe I just missed a part, I had a lot of difficulties trying to understand every part of the document as I'm really not 100% bilangual)

For those who do not know sogetel, they offer phone line where bell is available and IPTV and internet in Quebec city and some place around Nicolet. : www.sogetel.com (not sure if I have the right to post this link though...)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,131 Posts
the Commission considers that it is appropriate not to require the Bell companies to provide unbundled loops to CLECs if to do so would require them to purchase additional copper cables to meet the CLECs’ requests for such loops.
This obviously plays into Bell's hands. They can simply underbuild and say "sorry no lines available." Then, when the customer turns to Bell, a line will suddenly become available. I wonder what checks and balances the CRTC plans to install in order to prevent fraud on the part of Bell.
 
1 - 14 of 14 Posts
Top