UBB Compromise is Almost a Step in The Right Direction; Comment Thread

[grinder]

I hate how everyone compares this to a utility, like gas or electricity. It's baloney and skewes the argument.

Utilities have controll over their product, internet service providers DONT. i.e. internet service providers do not produce the content they deliver like Netflix or Youtube. Sadly metered internet is coming, it's just a matter of time. The expensive lobbying from the Bell's of the world is to much for dumb, non-tech-educated beurocrats to resist forever.

I'd hate to be a "last mile" ISP right about now.

[batkinson001]

Originally Posted by Arinoth

... Think of all the tax payer money that goes to the CBC and to Canadian Content on TV, most of those shows are absolute garbage, and we're footing the bill!

Heh. Fixed.

This crtc ruling does nothing to help out the poor bastards like me who are stuck on one of the big 3 internet providers... I can't get teksavvy where I live, or I would have switched months ago.

[WildChild]

In the same vein, for some Netflix has been offered a free ride on provider’s infrastructure for far too long.

You make it sound like Netflix and other content "delivery" companies don't pay anything for their own internet connection, which is patently wrong. Netflix is paying huge amounts of money to their own ISP to have their datacenters connected to the internet. In November last year, Netflix signed a new deal with Level 3 to have them be their content delivery network (CDN). You don't think Netflix isn't paying Level 3 a large sum for that privilege as well?
Since everyone likes utility comparisons for bandwidth, I'm going to go with gasoline: Petro-Canada isn't requesting that Exon-Mobile pay them more for each litre of gas that I put into my car. On the same vain, Toronto Hydro doesn't request tell OPG that they need to pay them for each watt of energy I use in my home.

I just don't get how residential ISPs seem to think that its the fault of content providers that their customers want to use more bandwidth, or that how they are managing to convince the law makers that this is true as well. Even if I expect the premise that residential ISPs are experiencing congestion within THEIR network, I would expect that it would be myself, the user of that network, would be the one required to pay more to have it upgraded, not the providers I've requested give me more.

[Perineum]

Originally Posted by Sam_Reynolds

What would be the capital incentive then to expand this network and provide the most innovative and best possible service? Even a cooperative ISP, like Access Communications would have different tiers of service because it it simply unaffordable to provide a level of service to rural areas that is similar to urban areas.

Well, it's non-profit, but there would have to be a fixed price that works for everyone.

The fixed price would cover usage, maintenance, and connecting new fiber. Maybe that would work out to $0.06 per GB or something.

If I was running this service the goal would not be for the most innovative service. It would be about service. If I ran FTTP and I got a small community online that now had a minimum level of service like 5mbit down and 1mbit up I would consider it a job well done. It would certainly be better than what these people have now.

Laying fiber strategically in certain outlying areas of large centers would be a good idea. ISPs could then rent the lines right away which would then start putting money into the coffers of the system. Anyone on this fiber system could then buy internet from any ISP in Canada as they would all have access to it at the same rate.

[Sam_Reynolds]

Originally Posted by Perineum

Well, it's non-profit, but there would have to be a fixed price that works for everyone.

The fixed price would cover usage, maintenance, and connecting new fiber. Maybe that would work out to $0.06 per GB or something.

What about the profit margin? Where would the incentive be to keep improving the service?

[Sam_Reynolds]

Originally Posted by WildChild

You make it sound like Netflix and other content "delivery" companies don't pay anything for their own internet connection, which is patently wrong. Netflix is paying huge amounts of money to their own ISP to have their datacenters connected to the internet. In November last year, Netflix signed a new deal with Level 3 to have them be their content delivery network (CDN). You don't think Netflix isn't paying Level 3 a large sum for that privilege as well?

What about the ISPs who are on the receiving end of it? They have been forced to accept freight from Netflix, et. al thats creates more congestion on their network while consumers demand that the amount they are charged remain fixed.

[Skyllz]

Originally Posted by Sam_Reynolds

What about the ISPs who are on the receiving end of it? They have been forced to accept freight from Netflix, et. al thats creates more congestion on their network while consumers demand that the amount they are charged remain fixed.

ISPs are not forced to receive it, they sold an internet access to their customer and customers are actually using it.

Gone are the days an ISP can just assume 95% of their users will use 5% of their avaialable bandwith.

[chrisk]

Originally Posted by Skyllz

ISPs are not forced to receive it, they sold an internet access to their customer and customers are actually using it.

Gone are the days an ISP can just assume 95% of their users will use 5% of their avaialable bandwith.

Interesting point. ISPs got screwed because people used what was sold to em. Now they are complaining about congestion.

You so are saying they overpromised?

[JMCD]

Originally Posted by Sam_Reynolds

What about the ISPs who are on the receiving end of it? They have been forced to accept freight from Netflix, et. al thats creates more congestion on their network while consumers demand that the amount they are charged remain fixed.

That's the same with any source of content on the internet, it's their responsibility to stay on top of it with upgrades. Considering the telecos in Canada charge MORE than almost any other nation in the world and provide less, with their huge profits, this isn't much to ask. It is quite cheap in the grand scheme of things to expand capacity and operating costs keep falling. Netflix pays to send the data out to the internet, we the consume pay our ISP to receive it.

[Skyllz]

Originally Posted by chrisk

Interesting point. ISPs got screwed because people used what was sold to em. Now they are complaining about congestion.

You so are saying they overpromised?

Exactly.

Now even grand-ma and grand-pa will watch high def clips on youtube, stuff on CBC, get a netflix account, ect... Before, those people took less then a gig a month, now they are in the 10-20gb a month of not more.

There are also more and more "high useage users" in the form of teenagers downloading everything they see continually.

We have devices that use more and more banwith(smartphones, laptops, ect...).

Usage is only going up and going up rapidly.