The Canadian Press is reporting on a Harris-Decima poll that it says shows that Canadians are supportive of traffic management provided that all users are treated fairly. The survey indicated that Canadians are generally happy with their Internet service. Interestingly, just prior to the release of the survey, one of […]
Post Tagged with: "net neutrality"
CRTC Network Management Hearing, Day Seven: Bell
Day seven of the CRTC's network management hearing featured just one company: Bell. As the prime target for much of the criticism associated with traffic management, Bell executives faced questions for nearly three hours, far longer than anyone else.
Key points included new details on Bell's traffic and traffic management practices, claims that the company cannot separate retail and wholesale Internet traffic, and the company's support for a "reasonableness" standard, rather than the "least intrusive" approach advocated by several groups.
Today's summary was again compiled by Sean Murtha, a law student at the University of Ottawa. Other coverage available from the National Post liveblog, CBC.ca, the National Post, and twitter feeds from CIPPIC and me.
New NetNeutrality.ca Launches
The CRTC's network management hearing has concluded, but the net neutrality issue will continue for the foreseeable future as we await the CRTC decision and the political parties jockey on the issue. Given the interest, I've relaunched the NetNeutrality.ca website with more information and a cleaner look. Suggestions for improvements […]
CRTC Network Management Hearing, Day Six: Union des Consommateurs, Rogers, Videotron, Shaw
Day six of the CRTC's network management hearings opened with a final consumer group (Union des Consommateurs) and closed with three of Canada's biggest ISPs – Rogers, Videotron, and Shaw. Bell was scheduled to appear today but has been pushed back until Tuesday.
The big storyline of the day was the disclosure by Rogers and Shaw of previously undisclosed information. Rogers revealed its traffic management practices (throttling P2P upload speeds) and shockingly admitted that all its tiers receive the same upload treatment, regardless of the price paid by the consumer. This is true even though its promotional material tell customers that higher tiered service offer faster upload speeds. Shaw disclosed that it engages in similar practices and provided insight into its throttling practices, noting that it guarantees 80 kilobits per second for throttled P2P sessions and that it reserves 30 percent of its bandwidth for P2P use (it said that 10 percent of its users account for the P2P traffic).
Videotron, the third cable ISP in the mix, complicated the analysis further by noting that it does not traffic shape. Rather, it uses economic measures, the new euphamism for bit caps, to discourage overuse of P2P. The ISP indicated that it is very happy with the effectiveness of its approach.
Today's summary was again compiled by Sean Murtha, a law student at the University of Ottawa. Other coverage available from the National Post liveblog, CBC.ca, the National Post, Cartt.ca, and twitter feeds from CIPPIC and me.
Questions For Bell
CRTC Chair Konrad von Finckenstein closed today's session of the network management hearing by noting that the "Bell interrogation" will begin tomorrow morning. With Bell the final party to appear, the previous six days have raised many questions in need of answers. I've posted some below. Readers should feel free to add here or post to Twitter (#q4bell).
Traffic management
- Your disclosure statement indicates that you shape from 4:30 pm to 2:00 am? Why not more specifically during periods of congestion?
- Your online disclosure does not specify the reduction in speeds due to shaping. What are they?
- Rogers claims that P2P causes congestion at all times. Do you have a different experience?
- Many major carriers from both DSL and cable do not traffic shape at all. Why the difference?
- Do you traffic shape upload and download or just upload?
- What are the minimum speeds for upload (Shaw's are 80 kilobits/sec)?
- What percentage of bandwidth is reserved for P2P traffic (Shaw is 30%)?
- What percentage of your users are active P2P users?
- Is the shaping the same for all customers regardless of the tiered service?
- Do you shape wireless data services?
- Have you tried economic approaches (ie. Videotron's caps) to address congestion?
- What would be your costs to adopt the Comcast approach?
- Have you considered the Juniper technology of customer controlled prioritization?
- How do you address the privacy concerns associated with DPI?
- Do you have any information on the throttling experience raised by the CFTPA presentation?
Recent Posts
The Law Bytes Podcast, Episode 232: What Will Canadian Digital Policy Look Like Under the New Liberal Carney Government? 
The Law Bytes Podcast, Episode 231: Sara Bannerman on How Canadian Political Parties Maximize Voter Data Collection and Minimize Privacy Safeguards 
The Law Bytes Podcast, Episode 230: Aengus Bridgman on the 2025 Federal Election, Social Media Platforms, and Misinformation 
The Law Bytes Podcast, Episode 229: My Digital Access Day Keynote – Assessing the Canadian Digital Policy Record 
Queen’s University Trustees Reject Divestment Efforts Emphasizing the Importance of Institutional Neutrality
