Add real-time p2pnet headlines to YOUR site ! Click here to download our newsfeed code

79 Responses to “‘Canadian surfers don’t know physics’”

1. a regular dummy Says:
   July 8th, 2009 at 2:20 pm

   Tom,
   Keep in mind that 2 years ago the throttle came about due ONLY to 5% of the 2.2-million Bell Canada subscribers using more than 60-gigs of B/W per month. Don’t forget that.

   Bell Arbitrary made 60-gigs the threshold. Anything above that and you were a B/W hog (per their media/press releases).

   “In my ISP days we calculated utilisation based on the average user utilizing 27 minutes of internet per day. The following year it was 49 minutes per day. The year after 1 hour and five minutes.”

   Your day is gone. Today and tomorrow that 5% has grown to be 10%, 20%, 50%. etc…

   Today and tomorrow more and more are spending more and more time on the net and with the likes of streaming video (which probably equals that of P2P or surpasses it, and will be 90+% of the traffic in 1.2 years per cisco) this phenomena will not slow down. Especially as more and more rural area’s are hooked up.

   Yes, everyone oversells. This is still true today with yesterdays network.

   Demand has risen, “size matters” (ie it no longer fits on a 1.44 floppy like in the 90′s, Tom), and more and more B/W intensive uses (aside from P2P) is emerging, ON yesterdays network.

   DPI is a bandaid to the real problem of lack of investment in yesterdays network. All the Sandvines companies are doing is selling band-aids for past technologies and retrofitting yesterdays network demand to today’s demand, as more and more technologies and people come online and explore the net, and actually use it (p2p aside).

   Also keep in mind that 20$/month from x-million users and also 7-10$/month in network access fee’s from x-million users IS SUPPOSED to be geared to network maintenance and upgrades. Then there is an average of 10$/month from x-million users for line maintenance (ie loop fee’s).

   That’s a lot of money, Tom.

   Where is it going?

   Tom, I’m below your level of education, and maybe not as competent as you are. I’m just a nobody that continues paying and continues being abused (btw I don’t use P2P. I used it once to see what it’s like, I grab some tunes off of irc, thats about it). Yet if I want to see video’s from Iranian or Chinese people who uploaded them to bittorrent, I’m punished.

   If I want to watch a streamed movie in my mother tongue from the originating country (legit), I am punished, but Bell will stream to me via IPTV (in english only and for big costs). I already pay 3x over for network fee’s, upgrades and maintenance.

   “I being of sound mind do hereby understand my 6 Mbps connection is shared by at least eight other people and as a good net citizen I undertake not use more than one eighth of the capacity offered to me on my DSL plan.”

   Tom, then Bell and other ISP’s should be upfront and say you don’t actually get what you pay for. Matter of fact Bell Canada’s web pages state “always fast, NEVER SHARED”.

   “However one thing is becoming clear from the hearings – Telcos don’t peer are having a hard time justifying there restrictive business practices to the Commission members .”

   Yep.

   Kudos Tom.

   I enjoy your topics.

2. a regualr dummy Says:
   July 8th, 2009 at 2:22 pm

   I forgot to add to my original post, I also pay UBB.

   How much more can I pay? Or should I pay?

3. Ahmed Naser Says:
   July 8th, 2009 at 2:32 pm

   Of course what you are saying is ridiculous. It also goes to show that your business model was wrong 10 years ago and continues to be so. If you are selling one eight of the bandwidth then why not say so? Just say, I am selling you 800 kbps instead of tricking people into thinking they have 6 mbps.

   The dirty truth of course is that its not about bandwidth sharing but rather the lopsided relationship between network operators and service providers.

4. Robert Says:
   July 8th, 2009 at 2:34 pm

   Interesting that you think our networks are actually at their limits. I don’t believe they are. If they were, why is it that Telus was promising video on demand through the internet, in HD, not low quality AVI?

   You see, what we consider Net Neutrality is the NON-blocking/throttling of YouTube or P2P or streaming videos from some artists site, in favour of TelusTV in HD or FoxNews or what-have-you.

   That’s the issue. If Bell gets their way, you won’t have access to much of anything except what Bell wants you to access. This isn’t about Physics, it’s been about profits and control.

   Who controls the media here Tom? Bell and Rogers. So the Internet is the only source we have to all information. If we say “Oh, it’s physics, we can’t argue with that” Bell/Rogers will take even more and charge even more!

   You keep thinking like we’re in the same boat as Australia, but it does not appear that way, not by a long shot.

   And if you can only provide 1.5Mbps, they do NOT sell it as 6Mbps! That’s false advertising. That’s like selling me a car who’s speedometer says max of 200km/h, but the car only goes 100km/h, well below the governed 160km/h on some cars (such as a Pontiac Grand Prix SE from 1989). Whether or not you can actually exceed our speed limits, and sometimes you need to, you don’t sell someone something on false pretenses and use loopholes like “sure, you could get 6Mbps if you were the only one in Canada online, and you were in our Central Office, on our main trunk line, directly connected to the fiber” written in 0.2 font (commonly viewed as a line on the page).

   That’s another beef, false advertising. Maybe you didnt’ see all those Rogers/Sympatico (Bell) speed comparison commercials, where Rogers claims you’ll get your 1.5Mbps (back in the day when that was the promised limit) CONSISTENTLY (yes that’s what the commercial said).

   It’s more than just physics Tom. I hope if you understand this you can acknowledge it and reduce the amount of flaming against you.

5. a regular dummy Says:
   July 8th, 2009 at 2:43 pm

   @Ahmed Naser,
   The business model worked 10-years ago and continued to work till about 2 to 3-years ago.

   He isn’t wrong.

   @Robert,
   Yep.

   However, Tom made some great points in the comment area here:
   http://www.p2pnet.net/story/24594

   @no one in particular
   I think Tom is proving a point here. +1

   Also he just cast level 9 flame proof suit

6. Anonymous Says:
   July 8th, 2009 at 2:44 pm

   Also, this business model of 10-yrs ago still works today.

7. surfer Says:
   July 8th, 2009 at 3:19 pm

   ‘I was amazed. They genuinely believe if they buy an access port then bandwidth is available to then 24/7 x 365 P.A.’

   then your just another mouthpiece Tom. Post all the numbers you want, you miss the point.

   I paid for my 790hrs@ 6mbit, keep your end of the bargain and supply it, quit bitching about people using what they paid for.

   ‘small minds are easily amused’ – Dorris Lessing

   so are the amazed…

   stw

8. across the board Says:
   July 8th, 2009 at 3:44 pm

   Tom,
   You also don’t take into account that out of the 5-6-meg connection Bell sells, only a small proportion of the population can actually get that speed.

   The average is around 2.5-meg yet Bell sells 5-6-meg.

   So you should also factor in actual speed versus theoretical.

   let us review Bell Canada’s “high speed” wireless for remote regions in Canada:

   http://forums.bell.ca/viewtopic.php?f=16&t=1175&sid=49f1975a7318204d8d4dfd922ed18ec4

   (please search Bell Canada’s forum for many additional rural internet and regular internet low speed issues.)

   Tom, people pay a lot to get poor 30kB/s with latency in the thousands on what should be a 3-meg connection (note, this is not due to p2p).

   Its oversold and throttled to death. People are paying Bell for this crap.

   There should be a class action against this.

   Also, user choice in content and choice is Email service (yes even Email) is tossed away on bell mobiles wireless internet. Refer to:
   http://www.p2pnet.net/story/18665

   Bell actually blocked free Gmail and had people PAY for character limited MSN Email (think it was 7-10/month)

   (also search Bell Canada’s forum for this)

   Again there should have been a class action, in my opinion.

   Content and choice is being blocked.

   Also there are phones with built in GPS being blocked in favor of Bell’s pay for GPS.
   (again search Bell Canada’s own forum)

   Again there should have be a class action, in my opinion.

   This is not just limited to only Bell’s landline DSL service.

   It’s all their services across the board.

   Is it like that in oz?

   Do you get to buy an internet “smart phone” in oz and have all its features disabled (email included) in favor of pay-4 aussie telco’s walled gardens?

   This neutrality/throttle issue is more than just DSL. It affects everything, Rural internet, Mobile phone and future technologies included.

9. Anonymous Says:
   July 8th, 2009 at 3:49 pm

   “I being of sound mind do hereby understand my 6 Mbps connection is shared by at least eight other people and as a good net citizen I undertake not use more than one eighth of the capacity offered to me on my DSL plan.”

   Stop overselling, and advertise what you can actually DELIVER. We are tired of “up to” pricing and broken promises.

   And the cost model should include both the cap and deliverable speed. Those having 3 Mbps should pay less than those who have 6 Mbps, even at the same cap. It is NOT my fault that I live 5 km away and my neighbour lives 2 km away.

   And stop making it cost 1000 or 10000 more in overage than in the included plan. There is NO physical commodity on Earth that can cost $1 AND $10000 at the same time in the same conditions.

10. Anonymous Says:
    July 8th, 2009 at 3:49 pm

    A wowser indeed.

    This is why we badly need the Sex Party in Canada.

11. Anonymous Says:
    July 8th, 2009 at 4:01 pm

    Tom, tell me why I can download the SAME amount at full speed from Youtube or Rapidshare, yet not from Bittorrent? After all, the bandwidth I use and the cost to the ISP remains the same, yet only torrents are throttled.

    Wait, you told me that assumptions were made that usage would be interactive (e.g. 27 minutes per day or something), but now it is not and the model of overselling is failing. I guess the CRTC needs to regulate advertising so that ISPs advertise actual speeds that they deliver to *average* customers. It would quickly fall to 3 Mbps, because this is what most of Canada gets anyway. This would get Canada the rating it deserves – slowest and most expensive. Hopefully someone in the government then will wake up.

12. Anonymous Says:
    July 8th, 2009 at 4:03 pm

    I think the next generation of P2P protocols will be steganographic. It will emulate FTP, HTTP and even POP3, actually any protocol that includes payloads. So, to do file transfers, peers will issue HTTP and FTP requests to each other, and payloads will be the encrypted p2p transfers disguised as files. And DPI will see it as HTTP and FTP transfer. Control channels for searching peers, tracking, etc., can be relayed over Tor to stop DPI from correlating data streams with control streams.

    And throttling HTTP and FTP will kill the Internet experience for all customers.

13. Devil's Advocate Says:
    July 8th, 2009 at 4:08 pm

    Just when I thought you were getting a clue, you go and post this page.

    Sorry, Tom…
    It’s still “horse”, THEN “cart”, no matter how many ways you repeat it, and no matter how many ways you attempt to insult the masses.

    I’ll put it to you, a self-acclaimed “economist”, in another way that even your misguided ego can understand…
    1) The Customer runs the market.
    2) The Customer sets the demand.
    3) The demand sets the supply.
    4) Satisfying demand sets the market.
    5) Competition sets availability and prices, driving a healthy market with choice.
    6) Oh wait!… We don’t have competition!!…
    6a) Monopoly creates a captive market.
    6b) A captive market incites greed.
    6c) Greed incites abuse….

    …You KNOW where this is going.
    According to what you’re saying, you should certainly know how to complete it.
    I haven’t got the time or desire to get into the history of Canada’s last decade with Bell Canada with someone who is so resistant to the basic concept of a business living up to its expectations.

    As others here have tried to show you, public money built the infrastructure and when that network was deregulated and given to a few backbone providers, it came with a few conditions:
    a) Use some of the profits to finance needed upgrades to keep up with demand and give honour to our nation’s resource.
    b) Allow competition on this network (and there were rules to this).

    Since the first of these conditions wasn’t met, and the second condition is being reneged on (which prompted the first hearing last year), we’re back at the CRTC level, looking to see how the whole thing might be salvaged and possibly establish some workable model. People are justifiably angry at Bell and a few other providers. They were totally arrogant, basically saying the same things you’re saying, Tom – that the public should just “stay out of it”, as they “just don’t know what they’re talking about” – while sinking our internet into the ground!

    “Physics” (a curious choice of word, really) has absolutely NOTHING to do with this, and you are putting the wrong analogy into something you clearly know less of than even I gave you credit for in the beginning – that being, what’s happening to Canadian internet service. If I was to apply “your physics” to create the analogy, I would say people aren’t trying to “overfill” anything, they’re trying to put in at least half of what the container says, only to discover it’s leaking out some hidden hole in the middle.

    But, that kind of analogy is just stupid. The issue is larger than just “capacity”.
    The issue encompasses:
    1) the right to your information not being inspected without a warrant.
    2) traffic needs to MOVE, and any “management” needs to promote that (not hold it back).
    3) “P2P/traffic management/throttling” may just be a smokescreen to justify “control”.
    4) proof has never been shown that any harmful levels of congestion exist in this country.
    5) too many “3rd-party” interests in DPI implimentation.
    …yada, yada, yada.

    I would urge you to acquaint yourself with what’s actually going on over here, before hurling anymore “summary insults” at the Canadian Public at large. You want to insult me or someone else that hasn’t “watched his words” with you, that’s fair – go for it! But just lashing out at every Canadian internet user just makes you look more retarded and reduces your credibility every time you do that.

14. SteelWolf Says:
    July 8th, 2009 at 4:15 pm

    Tom, every time you post you talk about capacity, yet continually fail to acknowledge the fact that bandwidth is being marketed and sold as something that (according to your posts) it is not.

    Wait, so people actually using their connections these days puts too much strain on the network? Fine. Stop selling it as eight times what I’m actually allowed to use. If these companies were selling what they are actually giving their customers, there would be a lot less of an issue. Instead, they sell far more than they are capable of, and you complain about people using too much.

    The complementary issue to this is that network capacity DOES need to be increased. There’s a lot more high-bandwidth applications out there than p2p, with streaming video being a major player. With grandparents on YouTube and streaming HD video approaching, more and more people are demanding high-capacity internet access. Throttling is, at best, a temporary solution. You can blame the customer all you want but it doesn’t change the reality that each user has a higher bandwidth requirement than they did last year, or the year before. When every TV ad is screaming “unlimited,” I find it hard to sympathize with your frustration that paying customers are using modern web applications to get the most out of the connections they were sold.

15. SteelWolf Says:
    July 8th, 2009 at 4:29 pm

    Also, this is a salient issue in the United States as well as Canada, so you might as well widen your insult dispersion pattern. It’s frustrating as hell to live in an area where companies like Comcast regularly:

    -sell people “unlimited” “high-speed” connections
    -charge premium prices for those connections, yet
    -punish customers for actually using said connection, and
    -refuse to allow customers to switch providers, since they hold an ironclad monopoly over the area.

    There is little quantifiable evidence that these doomsday bandwidth scenarios are actually occurring in the first place. With ISPs branching into content providing, it seems like little more than a smokescreen to grab more control over how their customers use the internet. We’ve seen this before many times, with lobbyists marching on Capitol Hill screaming “child porn” and our own government crying “terrorism.”

16. insanity Says:
    July 8th, 2009 at 4:53 pm

    @ the RW who said P2P will emulate PoP3:

    Please note, Bell has given notice a year ago, and Bell Aliant does throttle Email.

    People are allowed to check Email only once per 5 minutes.

    Notice has been given. It’s also in the ToS.

    Yes, an Email THROTTLE, Tom.

    Can you f’n believe that?

    We should have made a collection to fly Tom here for the hearings. But, Maybe he would never have gotten the donation for plane tickets since Bell will throttle my Email to him and I thought I would had sent it.

    Yes, an Email THROTTLE, Tom.

    http://productsandservice.aliant.net/PS/ns/english/common/termsconditions_internet.jsp
    “..such as, but not limited to, checking e-mail every 5 minutes 24 hours a day).”

    Some employee’s have been saying that Email will be restricted to checking once per 5 minutes. It’s in the Bell aliant ToS above already. You deduct…

    Also the hot news of the past couple of days:

    Bell is now decreasing their B/W from 60-gigs to something like 25-gigs now:
    http://www.dslreports.com/forum/r22661140-wow-is-this-for-real
    http://www.dslreports.com/forum/r22662900-Bells-New-Internet-Packages

    2 years ago 60-gig user were abusers (5%)
    As of 2 days ago, abusers seem to be those who use more than 25-gigs.

17. Sukasa Says:
    July 8th, 2009 at 5:43 pm

    If you’re selling 8 times your available bandwidth, that’s fine.

    If you start to run out because you oversold and people are using what they paid for, then the problem is not with the users – it’s the ISP who needs to maintain their end of the deal. Don’t sell what you don’t have and whine because other people use what they pay for.

18. Anonymous Says:
    July 8th, 2009 at 5:45 pm

    “People are allowed to check Email only once per 5 minutes.”

    Does this apply to THEIR email outsourced to Hotmail? Or to ALL e-mail accounts?

    Because many are not using their hotmail accounts, but instead POP their mail from webmail providers (many support POP3).

19. Devil's Advocate Says:
    July 8th, 2009 at 6:28 pm

    “Does this apply to THEIR email outsourced to Hotmail? Or to ALL e-mail accounts?”

    They appear to be throttling POP3 transfers to the client mail programs.
    The web interfaces to the same accounts move much faster.

    The difference is actually quite noticeable.

20. lando calrissian Says:
    July 8th, 2009 at 6:41 pm

    These comments are better than the article. Tom I dunno what goes on in the land of Steve Irwin, but here in Canada we put up with a lot of BS just read these comments, every single one is true. I also question your level of expertise seeing as you favor getting rid of torrents all together when its a far more efficient way to transfer anything.

    I laughed when I read

    ” I was amazed. They genuinely believe if they buy an access port then bandwidth is available to then 24/7 x 365 P.A.
    Pssst, I have a secret for you, it’s not”

    PSSST TOM I have a secret for you. ISP’s (in Canada) have to provide that bandwidth 24/7 or they are violating the competition act and have openly lied to all Canadians. For one my family was one of the first to get a cable modem in my local city wayyy back. At the time companies like Rogers advertised “Unlimited High-Speed” … So Tom, please go back to your local matters and stop the dingos from eating babies (/s).

21. Devil's Advocate Says:
    July 8th, 2009 at 8:07 pm

    “…I dunno what goes on in the land of Steve Irwin…”

    “CROYKEE!! That’s a BIG TORRENT!…
    I’ll just sneak up behind the bloyter and try to grab it by the BITS!”
    

22. Christopher Parsons Says:
    July 8th, 2009 at 8:09 pm

    I don’t think that Canadians should be enthused about DPI-based throttling, especially given how it is occurring today. There are legitimate worries with application-specific throttling (and the technology itself, given the chance of lawful access provisions being put into law). Application-specific throttles tend to disrupt whatever the ‘new technology of the day’ happens to be, which makes it more difficult for emerging technologies to take hold in markets. Giving ISPs a pass on P2P establishes precedent for them to discriminate against future ‘problem traffic’ and genuinely be the gatekeepers of the next century. If we must throttle, the need should be clearly demonstrated to the public (i.e. not just filed in confidence) and then done in a protocol-agnostic fashion.

    One of the issues that is regularly noted in Canadian discourse is that the major telcos are also major content providers – this means that limiting the activities of some users who are using P2P to access content can actually be a boon to the telco business model. I’ve no idea if this is a similar case in Australia. From my perspective, if a dominant carrier wants to throttle the hell out of their retail users, that’s fine. It becomes a *real issue* when the same dominant carriers throttle all wholesale traffic as well. There are alternate ways of dealing with wholesalers, that could include higher traffic costs when their users are generating disproportionate amounts of congestion on the network – this might see wholesalers to deploy appliances of their own to address congestion while ensuring QoS, and effectively encourage new ways to deal with these issues. DPI need not be the only solution to these issues; you might see smaller ISPs adopt P4P, or other techniques and technologies to alleviate congestion.

    Most of the telecommunications carriers recognize that pricing mechanisms *will* affect usage patterns, the issue is the time that it takes for those patterns to be changed. Cogeco, in their filings to the CRTC, was reasonably explicit about this. At the moment, however, Canadian wholesalers of DSL are in a situation where Bell can change the contract and are only required to inform the downstream ISPs if there are ‘material changes’. The issue: ‘material’ remains just as ambiguous as the definition of ‘congestion’ for the ISPs presently involved in the bandwidth management proceeding.

    (On an aside: I’ve spoken with owners of small (under 10K users) ISPs, and they’re scared to death that Bell could come out of nowhere and just raise rates and only provide a 30 day warning (an increased rate constitutes a ‘material’ change). Bell just doesn’t tend to play well with others, but the ISPs most worried about being screwed are terrified to speak up, for fear that Bell will turn their eye on them. The market here has a titan or two, and those who are trying to eek out existences off the titans’ networks are worried about being crushed like gnats.)

    When there are frequent power shortages that limit the provision of electricity to homes, this is recognized as a critical public issue, just as when there isn’t enough water in Australia to prevent a drought. In Canada, there are continuing efforts to digitize information flows and shift more and more away from ‘analog’ modes of data transmission. As a result, there are going to be increasing expectations, on the part of Canadians, that digital communications systems are able to transmit data as reliably as analogue means of transmission. Now, I agree with Tom – ISPs operate best effort networks. At the same time, we’re in a situation where Canadians are expecting more and more services to be piped over networks, and ISPs’ marketing machines are spewing rhetoric about how they can meet these expectations. Unfortunately, in ISPs’ competition to win market share, they are failing to inform customers that these networks are best effort. I imagine that if less ‘car rhetoric’ was used to describe packet flows, and there was a concerted effort to actually educate consumers, that there would be fewer complaints. I also tend to treat my fellow Canadians as smart enough to understand packet flow dynamics, given some time and a bit of attention span…

    As for ‘net neutrality’, it’s a term that is horrifically ambiguous, at best. Personally, I’d be happier if we dumped that chant and start speaking about the very specific underwriting the chant, and think through who developed those principles and the motivations.

23. Thomas Koltai Says:
    July 8th, 2009 at 9:04 pm

    Okay, (ignoring the personal attacks) now we’re getting to the good stuff……

    So Bell Canada and Other ISP’s are attmpting to arbitrage additional profit on varying products that according to the expectations of Canadians should be included in the cost of Internet access.
    To me the issues are now breaking down to :

    Failure to deliver some services at 6 Mb but able to deliver other services (their own content) at 6 Mb.
    This would appear to be unfair and possibly misleading trade practices. .
    However, let’s also remember that the path of their content comes from their servers – therefore they control the level of delivery – BitTorrent extends outside of their network and they cannot control the quality (except by interdicting Torrent Streams with Noise – RTSD packets – possibly in conjunction with Content owners to slow it down, or just by forcing all torrent through a smartswitch capable of shaping the traffic).

    Therefore – Unlimited is now limited to 730 hours by 30 kbits/per second which of course is no longer unlimited.

    Class action – good idea.

    But folks – it doesnt need a class action.

    It just needs one determined man, with about a spare 1.5 million to take the Bells to court for unfair, illegal and deceptive billing practices.
    Michael – where are you ? What is the relevent section of Canadian Trade Practices Legislation (here in Oz – it’s Section 52G).

    Can it be done – yes – I did it in Australia. Three times over four years.
    Did I win – yes. Three times in Federal Court against the biggest Corporate in Australia – Telstra.

    But someone needs to take the first step. Plead and draft a summons. File a summons. And then one needs to ring the newspapers, the radio stations and off course all your blogging mates.

    The case will be won with publicity – not in the courts.
    There is one thing that no Bell can afford.
    Proof that they are committing billing fraud in their customers.

    @ ChristopherParsons – Do I see you sticking up your hand ?

    In Australia we created a Neutral exchange – paid for by the ISPS at that neutral exchange the ISP’s decided the rules not Telstra.
    I understand that in some areas – @Bell has a monopoly – OK – in those areas you’re stuffed – keep writing to you local member, your local newspaper. But in other areas – You the customers can make a difference.
    I wasnt jopking the other day when I said – stick uo a 28 DB gain wifi antennae on the roof and start sharing torrents with people in your street.
    Today its one street, tommorrow two streets, the day after – the whole of downtown Montreal. (OK – I know Canada is a big place, but I only know Vancouver, BC and Montreal. – My sister used live in Champlagne, NY and we went up to Montreal for excitement)

    So we appear to have an agenda….

    1.

24. Thomas Koltai Says:
    July 8th, 2009 at 9:06 pm

    ooops – i wasnt finished…..

    1. Give evidence to CRTC
    2. Buy a WIFI 29 DB stick – put on roof. (about $30 CAN on Ebay)
    3.

25. Thomas Koltai Says:
    July 8th, 2009 at 9:10 pm

    wow…. someone up there doesnt like me……

    OK

    3. Run a court case. Even if it’s one user sueing for illegal billing practices.

    That’s all it takes – one person who isnt afraid of being at the forefront.
    You can turn it into a class action circus later.

    The court likes simplicity. One man, one bill, one action is a very good plac to start.

    As for DPI – I have already said it is almost irrelevent – unless the CRTC give bells permission to use it – which would be bad – so although it is almost irrelevent – vote no to DPI.

26. surfer Says:
    July 8th, 2009 at 9:28 pm

    ‘These comments are better than the article. ‘ – lando calrissian

    I read alot of boards, Ray’s, Paul’s, Mike’s, even ernesto’s

    There is a reason I post here and not on their blogs, the membership here has an outstanding opinions, and trolls last about 1.2 secs.

    I especially like Henry’s bitch slap sessions.

    I think the fault Tom didn’t figure into his multitude of algorithms, and multitude of irrelevant numbers, is the intelligent level of the typical p2pnet user…

    @ Tom, I respect your intellect, but you are dissecting a Cisco Switch, when less than 1% of members here even know what a Cisco Switch is. Your technobabble is impressing 0%. AND your missing the points. Instead of submitting white papers to Jon to be published, perhaps you should actually read some of the context posted in rebuttal, from, like, everyone here, including fence sitters.

    If you don’t start ‘coming down to our level’ soon, your +9 flame suit isn’t going to do you much good against my +30 sword. Evaluate the situation with our knowledge, while implicating our concerns, THEN write….

    stw

27. Devil's Advocate Says:
    July 8th, 2009 at 9:34 pm

    @Chris:

    Nice to see you here, sir! Thanks for adding your voice.
    I really appreciated your recent “Politics of DPI” write.
    Nice going!

28. surfer Says:
    July 8th, 2009 at 9:34 pm

    I have a buddy in oz, goes by ‘x’ underground, been doing your job longer than you have. He senior’s your largest ISP, and he thinks your full of shit.

    so there

    stw

29. Devil's Advocate Says:
    July 8th, 2009 at 9:35 pm

    @surfer:

    Hang on!
    Something might just be happening here.

30. surfer Says:
    July 8th, 2009 at 9:36 pm

    hint: kill.com, I can email you a copy if needed, I keep things like this.

    oh, and btw Tom, what are you doing about the massive botnet in oz? reports say, well, zip. got them too….

31. Devil's Advocate Says:
    July 8th, 2009 at 9:37 pm

    @Tom:

    Are you saying you’re starting to appreciate what we’re up against now?

32. surfer Says:
    July 8th, 2009 at 9:37 pm

    hang on?

    heheheh, Tom is borderline prey….

33. surfer Says:
    July 8th, 2009 at 9:41 pm

    Tom is IT guru, which answers business demands, not influences them.

34. Devil's Advocate Says:
    July 8th, 2009 at 9:42 pm

    @surfer:

    I’m saying, keep the riot gear in the closet for now, and let’s see if the facts are starting to sink in. Some recent entries reflect a possible change of understanding.

35. surfer Says:
    July 8th, 2009 at 9:44 pm

    Tom, re-understand, cmon.

36. surfer Says:
    July 8th, 2009 at 9:46 pm

    the only thing that will motivate him is a wtf moment… I can arrange such a moment….

37. Devil's Advocate Says:
    July 8th, 2009 at 9:47 pm

    Patience, Grasshopper!
    

38. surfer Says:
    July 8th, 2009 at 9:50 pm

    わたし わ しはん

39. Devil's Advocate Says:
    July 8th, 2009 at 9:53 pm

    What are you transferring?
    (My Japanese is not that good, eh!)

40. Thomas Koltai Says:
    July 8th, 2009 at 9:55 pm

    BTW – I would have to spend all day reading all the links you guys provided –

    @ insanity – thank-you some great points there.
    As to flying for the CRTC hearings – ummm could have afforded to go without the donation – however I used to fly about 1.5 million miles a year. Im a permanent UA Premier 100K Gold member….. – I’m over flying around – I prefer to to tend to my Bonsai plants……

    @lando calrissian – you are mostly correct except unlimited means – over the month as in total bytes – not as in total Mbps.

    @ DA – I used to live in Darwin where occassionally crocs did cross the road and you had to stop to let them cross because they are a protected species – but I was never tempted to grab them by the “bits”

    @Steelwolf – -refuse to allow customers to switch providers, since they hold an ironclad monopoly over the area. is the kicker in your argument. But I am not familiar with Canadian Trade Practices – However I am sure that there is something in there for Dominant Monopolistic activity…. Michael Geist?????

    @across the board – OK – so possibly the question I should be asking is – are they throttling only between ISP’s or – are they throttling Per ISP. Here is an experiment folks – Find a piece of content out of Copyright…. could I suggest: ed2k://|file|Buster%20Keaton%20-%20New%20York%20holidays%20-%20(1922).avi|49059840|471C7BB11EDFAF8E07F3BFE97280764A|/

    Now Rename it to something really boring – like “My slide show of Holiday in Palm Springs” and share it with users on your ISP. Ring as many people as you can who are connected to the same DSL node as you – Record the transfer speeds. Now you have some real data about what they are doing.

    @RW – You are right on the button.

    “I think the next generation of P2P protocols will be steganographic. It will emulate FTP, HTTP and even POP3, actually any protocol that includes payloads. So, to do file transfers, peers will issue HTTP and FTP requests to each other, and payloads will be the encrypted p2p transfers disguised as files. And DPI will see it as HTTP and FTP transfer. Control channels for searching peers, tracking, etc., can be relayed over Tor to stop DPI from correlating data streams with control streams.
    And throttling HTTP and FTP will kill the Internet experience for all customers.”

    Quite a bit of all of that is already happening. Although Tor might not be the most reliable transport methodology. There is hardware out there now that is throttling Tor. But I will write about that another day.

    Unfortunately – the net nasties (as I like to call them) those freaks that like to look at pictures of short people also use those methods – so we are in a hard place. I do know that there are methods for tracking some of this content but I dont wish to discuss this in a public forum.

    @ robert – Unfortunately the networks are always at their MAX. PAIX and most other exchanges are always dropping packets.
    Network management is not about allowing your video file through – its about minimising packet loss. But those not in the industry – will never quite understand this. I am starting to get it. Me saying it doesnt make it so in your minds.
    There is no easy way to transfer the knowledge from one to another. However – you could look at it this way…. Why would I lie?

    Here’s a link that was in my article that Jon dropped… http://www.digilink.net/get-a-quote.shtml
    Digilink is an isp provider in the USA. $275 per month has been the price of a T1 for a long time.

    There were other links that Jon dropped. One to an article I write some time ago that showed that P2P software was being downloaded more frequently than windows.
    Another that predicted that we would all have P2P software on our computers by the end of 2011 according to a six month research project carried out by big champagne.

    On a final note Robert….. from discord comes change – the greater the disruption, the greater the change.
    If I wasnt flame-proof I could never be the agent-provocateur that I have been so successfully for so many years.

    OK – It’s been a productive night. For me – I have to actually do some productive work stuff like water some bonsais.

    Canadians – tommorrow – make a difference – posting in here is good – but actually letting the CRTC commission know how you feel is far more important.
    Here’s the link – you know what to do…. http://www.crtc.gc.ca/RapidsCCM/Register.asp?lang=E

41. surfer Says:
    July 8th, 2009 at 9:58 pm

    I am the master….

42. surfer Says:
    July 8th, 2009 at 9:59 pm

    watashi wa shihon..

43. Thomas Koltai Says:
    July 8th, 2009 at 10:00 pm

    ahem Jon…. moderation of comment please…..

44. Devil's Advocate Says:
    July 8th, 2009 at 10:00 pm

    Yeah, when I said my Japanese wasn’t very good, I meant wasn’t at all!
    

45. surfer Says:
    July 8th, 2009 at 10:01 pm

    japanese is my first language, sumimasen

46. surfer Says:
    July 8th, 2009 at 10:02 pm

    moderation, how bout an answer instead…

47. surfer Says:
    July 8th, 2009 at 10:03 pm

    your knickers are showing…

48. Devil's Advocate Says:
    July 8th, 2009 at 10:03 pm

    HE’S HERE!! HE’S HERE!!!
    (Take it away, Tom!…)

49. surfer Says:
    July 8th, 2009 at 10:06 pm

    ‘whine, complain, point, addendum computation forthcoming.’ – Tomas Koltai

50. Thomas Koltai Says:
    July 8th, 2009 at 10:07 pm

    I posted an answer but its awaiting moderation……. zzzzzzz waiting for Jon to stop watching HBO…..

51. Thomas Koltai Says:
    July 8th, 2009 at 10:08 pm

    Probably cause it had an ed2k link in it…..

52. M&M Says:
    July 8th, 2009 at 10:08 pm

    heh
    Tom, you are good.

    All we have to say.

    Thumbs up.

    Chris, excellent post.

    “but the ISPs most worried about being screwed are terrified to speak up, for fear that Bell will turn their eye on them. ”

    Yup, we have been told the same by some ISP’s. They are indeed scared. Not to hard for a mammoth to squish a small ISP.

    Plain old “billing errors” will squish a small ISP. Pay now complain later, or hire lawyer$ to run to the CRTC for you. If you don’t bell will run circles around you.

    A few ISP’s have been through this game in Canada already.

    They should be scared.

    +1 to both of you.

53. Jon Says:
    July 8th, 2009 at 10:08 pm

    @ Tom:

    I start at 3:00 am and try to finish at around 2:00 pm. It’s now 6:19 pm. If you hadn’t included 3 urls, it would have gone straight through. Akismet doesn’t like more than 2, and sometimes balks even then.

    It’s also good at classifying non-spam as spam. But it catches hundreds of real spam comments every day. So it stays.

    Cheers!

54. Devil's Advocate Says:
    July 8th, 2009 at 10:09 pm

    We might have overloaded the page by posting too many quick comments.
    (OOooooops!)

55. Devil's Advocate Says:
    July 8th, 2009 at 10:13 pm

    Well, tell Akismet to be a good doggie, and let the man in!
    : )

56. surfer Says:
    July 8th, 2009 at 10:20 pm

    sok, Toms 11am is my 9pm, I will gladly make him look bad today/his tomorow, my time, not his.

57. Devil's Advocate Says:
    July 8th, 2009 at 10:21 pm

    Down, surfer, DOWN!
    

58. surfer Says:
    July 8th, 2009 at 10:22 pm

    pink, poke, Tom, you are less-ing yourself….(Jon/eDk inference…)

59. players and played Says:
    July 8th, 2009 at 10:22 pm

    @surfer:
    “Your technobabble is impressing 0%. AND your missing the points. Instead of submitting white papers to Jon to be published, perhaps you should actually read some of the context posted in rebuttal, from, like, everyone here, including fence sitters.”

    he doesn’t even have to take a hard look at the comments. He’s in the business. he knows. Been there, done that, has the t-shirt. He’s passing you his hand me downs.

    It should impress you, or leave an impression on u.

    Maybe you didn’t follow his posts over the week (or understand them). Or maybe you never read his other “published white papers” over the year. No insult intended.

    

60. Devil's Advocate Says:
    July 8th, 2009 at 10:23 pm

    Hey, Jon, what time’s this place open ’til?
    8P

61. Thomas Koltai Says:
    July 8th, 2009 at 10:23 pm

    @Jon – I know, I was just pulling your chain.

62. surfer Says:
    July 8th, 2009 at 10:24 pm

    hahahahahhahaha

63. Thomas Koltai Says:
    July 8th, 2009 at 10:33 pm

    @Players and Played…..

    Actually my Nanog Conference T-Shirts from the nineties are starting to wear out.
    But I registered a new Domain name the other day

    P2PUNION.ORG

    I was thinking of making a T-Shirt….

    Don’t F*$& with me, I’m a member of the P2PUnion

    Anyone know a cheap T-shirt manufacturer?

64. Devil's Advocate Says:
    July 8th, 2009 at 10:38 pm

    Shit! Can’t believe I delayed making coffee waiting for *that post* to show up!
    

    “…here’s the CRTC link, you know what to do…”
    (cute)

    I want my money back!
    

65. Christopher Parsons Says:
    July 8th, 2009 at 10:43 pm

    @ Tom

    Starting a lawsuit while preparing for my doctoral comprehensive exams plus another project that will hopefully be public by the end of the summer would be terrifically counter-productive to my long-term goals I do agree, however, that something needs to be done. I did file to the CRTC (and am one of the few individuals that are participating in the proceeding), and would similarly encourage other Canadians to send messages to the CRTC about this. While people are inclined to think that their voices won’t count, they do. I would similarly encourage people to write their MPs and MPPs, and given that all parties save for the Conservative government have endorsed network neutrality I’d suggest leveraging that in any communications to your MPs.

    As for resource groups, CIPPIC and PIAC are both groups that are always interested in supporting the consumer, and both are involved in the proceeding. Further, they have legal staff on hand As civil advocacy groups they are massively underfunded and under resourced – offering any assistance that is possible to these groups (including money!) is likely to be well received.

    As for ‘who is throttling what’, this is how it tends to happen in Canada.

    A dominant carrier decides that they are going to throttle traffic, typically using DPI in Canada. They apply rule sets to *all* traffic crossing their network – this includes reseller traffic – and, in the case of Bell, apply those rules to their wholesalers. Now, initially Bell only throttled their retail traffic, but are now claiming that it is impossible to distinguish between retail and wholesale traffic. That sounds suspicious to me, but enough of Bell’s network topology is kept confidential that it’s pretty well impossible to objectively validate their claims. Further, Bell has previously been found to throttle encrypted traffic (including VPN), though I haven’t found whether this was just retail or retail and wholesale. Rogers, another major Canadian Cableco, has engaged in similar practices. This said, your suggestion that massive analysis of where and how much traffic is throttled is likely not all that necessary – Bell, at least, is (relatively) open about what they are doing, after their fight with CAIP last year. Link: http://service.sympatico.ca/index.cfm?method=content.view&content_id=12119

    What will probably be the most interesting thing to come out of the CRTC hearing is *not* a ruling on DPI. I doubt that the commissioners will say yay or nay to the technology (I presume that the buck will largely be passed to the privacy commissioner, who is currently investigating ISPs’ use of DPI). What the commissioners *will* talk about is whether or not wireless and wireline traffic is to be treated similarly. At the Canadian Telecom Summit this year, every single person I spoke with basically said the same thing: the wireline is a dead end growth environment. Wireless is now king. If no regulations come down for wireless, then what is happening to the wireline environment will likely seem as being almost benevolent compared to the crud major telcos and cablecos are going to start throwing in the wireless environment. There is good reason that not a lot of money has gone into the last-mile, and instead has been focused on local loops and upgrades to DOCSIS 3.0 – using wireless, you can get to the home without the costs of digging up lawns.

66. Thomas Koltai Says:
    July 8th, 2009 at 10:57 pm

    Guys – there’s the difference between an old fart and a young one…. My coffee making stuff is four foot away from me……

    But Im serious – if every poster in this tread posted one para to the CRTC, the commissioners would start to understan that whether or not they are holding this inqury as a political sop to voters – is irrelevent because the voters are interested, watching AND participating. It’s not just the equipment manufacturers looking for inclusion in next year budget allocations.

    So please – go and post….

    I’ll get you started.

    ————————————————————
    I dont believe the Post Office opens my letters, therefore I dont think that bell should be allowed to open my TCP-IP packets

    I am happy to buy Video on Demand products from Bell, but as this comes from their own in-house servers, and I am directly connected to their own in-house servers how does this justify their throttling my other traffic ?

    I am a Uni Student and we regularly download our assignments via BitTorrent. I dont see why Bell should be allowed to interfere with my educ ation in this manner.

    I vote, I pay my taxes but it would seem to me that filtering by Bell is a form of unauthorised and illegal taxation imposed on the people of Canada by an organisation that is not the Government.

    I am too young to vote, but I will be voting in xxx years and all of my friends will be voting. Neither I or they would consider voting for a Government that permitted private companies to invade our private commmunications in such an insiduous manner.

    The US Justice Department considered that Microsoft was using its software to gain unfair power of the population. How is Bell’s position in the Canadian IAP marketplaceany different? Isnt time that Bell was broken up into baby belles owned by the communities that they serve ?
    ——————————————————–

    Hint just one of the above per posting huh …….
    and of course,just one osting per email address of course.

    I’ll write some more today and post them tonight…

    Good luck Canadians, you have no idea how important these hearings are on a global basis.
    We, the rest of the world need you guys to win this round.

67. M2 Says:
    July 8th, 2009 at 11:02 pm

    Tom the link you gave is not applicable for internet.

    We have to use the CCTS for what you planned, and this is not within the “scope” of the CCTS.

    Its a customer circle.

    1. “Internet rates, quality of service, and business practices

    The CRTC does not regulate rates, quality of service issues, or business practices for Internet service providers. This is because there is enough competition in the market that customers can shop around for a variety of service packages at reasonable rates. However, the CRTC does continually monitor the sector and associated trends. ”

    2. Since I am no longer with Bell, I can’t contact the CCTS to file a complaint.

    However, if you want me to at least try it and see where it goes, I’ll post the reply here for you to see.

    You get to decide if I get to waste my time.

    If you say go for it, then I’ll write it up tomorrow night and ask that it be taken into consideration with the hearings.

    But I know what the reply I will get will be.

    The system is made as such.

68. Thomas Koltai Says:
    July 8th, 2009 at 11:35 pm

    @M2, I understand the system is not actually designed to “listen” to the voters.
    So – regardless, we use what we can of the system to let them know that we care enough to post a query/complaint in reference to the hearings they are currently holding.
    Even if every person receives an email back saying:

    Dear Citizen,
    This is not the correct forum for your posts.
    Please send your concerns to ——-

    Even then – someone – somewhere inside CRTC will tell the Commissioners

    Konrad von Finckenstein Chairperson
    Len Katz Commissioner
    Suzanne Lamarre Commissioner
    Candice Molnar Commissioner
    Timothy Denton Commissioner

    that they are starting to receive a lot of email.
    In fact I am pretty sure the press will pick up on it.
    And if the press pick up on it (millions of canadians express personal views to CRTC commission holding hearings) then the politicians will follow. They have no choice – they’re politicians.

    I am not suggesting that the CRTC should replace the formal Telecommunications grievance lodgement system that exists in Canada.
    I am suggesting that the Commissioners into this hearing would benefit from receiving the Canadian Populations feedback additional to the formal submissions being made by interest/lobby/manufacturing groups.

    In fact, they might even find it refreshing.
    And as any good commissioner knows, public opinion is important if you want that next gig……

    Post M2, and ask your friends to do so as well – and get them to ask their friends. Hell make your dog sign up for a gmail account and get him to post. (OK – maybe I’m joking about the dog……. – Smacks Dr Strangelove hand down off keyboard)

    Every avalanche starts with a single snowflake.

69. Anonymous Says:
    July 9th, 2009 at 12:03 am

    @insanity

    Steganographic protocols don’t have to use POP3 if it is throttled. They use whatever works best in each case and new overlay protocols are easily added to the application, as external modules.

    Also, UDP with port hopping will make it as many short flows. And it is easier to implement than its analog radio cousin, low-power wideband.

    If there is a will, there is a way. Simply the players in application/protocol design did not start to play hardball with telcos and DPI makers yet.

70. Devil's Advocate Says:
    July 9th, 2009 at 12:16 am

    Tom,

    I honestly thought you were kidding about posting to the CRTC.
    I can see I’m mistaken about that.

    I can tell you, pretty well everyone who posts here and other online forums have made their submissions to the CRTC on this and related issues ad nauseum. (That’s why I thought you were kidding.)

    Part of our difficulty is that many avenues we’re supposed to have to vent and ask for change have been deliberately closed by the CRTC, the companies involved, and our government, and the media is all owned by the same assholes we’re complaining about. Most complaint procedures we’re given have been engineered to keep us running in a “circle” as M2 stated.

    Many of us also believe that the CRTC is in Bell’s pocket, anyway, as many of these proceedings always come out in Bell’s favour, regardless of the logic.

71. Thomas Koltai Says:
    July 9th, 2009 at 2:01 am

    @DA You are one of the few that obviously groks my sense of dry humour.

    However, CRTC commissioners, whether or not in Bells pockets actually have a duty of care to the Canadian public as per the commission of their instructions.

    They can’t actually refuse comments from the public.
    They may try to bluster, “we dont have the means to collate individual suggestions or complaints”
    but then that would make an excellent press statement.

    In other words – did the Government specifically select them to conduct the hearings because they didnt have the necessary support infrastructure to receive all of the public commentary ?
    Now that’s almost a 60 minutes episode – so I sure that isnt the case and that individual public submissions will be welcomed by the CRTC and considered in their deliberations.

    And, yes, I am aware that many P2Pnet readers would have already made formal submission.
    I was entreating those that hadnt or considered that they were too small fry to contribute.
    In a matter like this, there is no such thing as small fry, there are only “Voters”.

    In 1997, I asked 730 ISP’s in Australia to post a letter to your senator on their Users web pages.
    The result was 62,000+ facsimiles were sent to australian senators tying up the “official parliamentary facsimile machines for over three days.
    Consequently “B” party charging (that’s the receiving party of packets) was not implemented and VOIP continued to grow in Oz.

    The little guy CAN make a difference, but only if lots of little guys speak up at the same time.

72. Devil's Advocate Says:
    July 9th, 2009 at 2:46 am

    “The little guy CAN make a difference, but only if lots of little guys speak up at the same time.”

    …And sites like this help unite the little voices and encourage them to do just that.
    (I’m tempted to ask you what your point is.)

    As for our entire mainstream media, they haven’t been there for us in a few decades.
    They ARE owned by the very people they’d be featuring.
    ____________________________________

    “CRTC commissioners, …have a duty of care to the Canadian public …”

    They may have this duty. They just keep demonstrating the opposite.
    Case in Point: Last year’s hearings…

    You may have noticed in summaries of this week’s Day 3 of the hearings a few mentions of a judgement made by the CRTC last year, when CAIP (Canadian Association of Internet Providers – 3rd party wholesale providers buying bandwidth from Bell) filed a huge complaint about the wholesalers being throttled by Bell. Their filing made two requests: 1) immediate cease and desist before ultimate judgement and 2) demand for the practice to be banned, as per a few existing CRTC ordinances.

    Not only did the CRTC quickly turn down the first request, but after months of deliberation and thousands of submission from the public and industries overwhelmingly against the throttling, the CRTC stated Bell had the right to do it, mostly based on the fact that Bell also throttled its own RETAIL service (Sympatico), and therefore wasn’t “discriminating”. The only saving grace to the decision was the announcement of further hearings to delve more deeply into the issue of throttling, traffic management, and net neutrality (which we’re now having). Unfortunately, it gave Bell the go-ahead to throttle the shit out of them in the interim, and set the stage for more from them and others.

    The trouble with the decision was obvious to most, but apparently completely escaped the CRTC…
    Sympatico was a retail service issued directly from Bell, while CAIP members supplied GAS service, purchasing their wholesale bandwidth from Bell. Sympatico, on the other hand, doesn’t purchase bandwidth from the mother company, and is not subject to 3rd party contract rules, and isn’t directly competing with GAS clients, as it enjoys connections that GAS providers don’t have access to. Throttling GAS, by definition, is blatantly discriminatory to the competition.

    Suddenly today, the subject was brought up in a blunder by the CRTC questioning (there was supposed to be a separate screening of this subject in a 2nd filing made by CAIP, beginning next week). It was clear after not so many words by a few presenters that the CRTC may have indeed seen its own error staring them in the face. This could change the landscape of this story very nicely, if the CRTC has any shred of duty to the public left in its agenda.

    What they do with that revelation will show just how much Bell does or doesn’t own them.

73. surfer Says:
    July 9th, 2009 at 6:12 am

    our ‘p2pnet’ longest thread yet….

74. Robert Says:
    July 9th, 2009 at 7:19 am

    @Tom,
    The CRTC didn’t use to be in Bell’s pocket. While working at Bell, 97-98, the CRTC ruled in favour of deregulation, to encourage competition for long distance and local phones. Cell phones were around but all you had was Bell Mobility at the time.

    So the CRTC supposedly opened up the market for other players. Not many could survive because Bell made it really difficult to be profitable and competitive against Bell’s phone plan, because they owned the lines they could charge carriers more.

    The CRTC has been around a long time and it is their job to conduct these hearings, it is their job to investigate throttling, it is their job to figure out what to do with the new bandwidth from 2011′s analog TV broadcast termination.

    They are supposed to have a duty to the Public, but also control everything relating to telecom and TV.

    But then again, Senators/MP’s are supposed to listen to the public too, but they are mostly self-serving and do as they please, which doesn’t usually coincide to what the public wants (unless they want to get into power).

75. IratePirate Says:
    July 9th, 2009 at 9:49 am

    Wow, I’m gone for one day and an article with 74 comments pops up. Is that a new record for the site? Anyways it all took me a while to read them all and have to say there were a lot of good posts made by everyone. I won’t bother reiterating what has already been pointed out ad nauseum about DPI and Bell’s business practices as I think everyone gets the idea by now, even Tom. Speaking of which, even a few of Tom’s comments struck a chord with me. They reminded me of something Paul Watson said in the documentary Sharkwater:

    “All social change comes from the passion and intervention of individuals or small groups of individuals. Slavery wasn’t ended by any government or any institution. Women got the right to vote not because of any government. The civil rights movement, the same thing. India with Mahatma Gandhi, South Africa with Nelson Mandela. Again, it’s always individuals. You need those individuals with the passion and the energy to get involved. In fact, I don’t know of any government or any institutions that are doing anything to solve any of these problems.”

    We can’t expect the government to ever do what is right. It really is up to all of us to stand up and force things to change. The first commenter mentioned how DPI is a bandaid to yesterdays network for today’s problems. It got me wondering about the future. What if ISP’s around the world we’re allowed to go willy-nilly with DPI? We know the number of people connected to the internet is increasing at a fast pace. We also know that use of P2P and video streaming is also increasing at an alarming pace. Is it possible that in 10 to 20 years the internet has the potential to become a slow unusable mess? I have to agree with ‘a regular dummy’, DPI is a bandaid. It’s clear that ISP’s underestimated demand and given a choice between upgrading their network and implementing throttling, they are choosing the latter for obvious reasons. For one, it is a lot cheaper. Whether it would end up being abused is harder to say, but given human nature my guess the answer is that it would be. Hopefully the CRTC will see the light and set very specific rules governing it’s use if ISP’s are allowed to continue employing DPI.

76. surfer Says:
    July 9th, 2009 at 10:04 am

    @Tom

    debunk this with an algorithm or conjured statistic:

    http://www.kyle-brady.com/2009/07/09/incorrect-base-assumptions-about-network-management/

77. Thomas Koltai Says:
    July 9th, 2009 at 10:15 am

    @ Robert

    “it is their job to figure out what to do with the new bandwidth from 2011’s analog TV broadcast termination.”

    Hmmm, VHF and UHF…. handy frequencies too…… Excellent for delivering data long distance…… Packet data.
    Should be reserved for P2P use exclusively……

    The Govt should install a torrent seeder, with requests made via DSL and transmitted via VHF….. everyone could just pay a “license” fee for a receiver license.

    Well we all know that television is dead.

    Sorry folks – just a flight of fancy.

    @Robert, Although we dont have a CRTC in Oz, you speak a language that I am familiar with.
    I think what you are saying is that the Government make up the rules to suit the outcome.
    and what I’m sayiong is that the posters in this forum have already made known that they dont want to play by the governments rules.

    In Oz, we organise ourselves to play by our own rules.
    We organise petitions, we flood facsimile machines and we pay for advertising on commercial TV (and in flight….. article later today) so that everyone knows our point of view.

    P2PNet is wonderful forum and is one of many, but the reality is that only a very small percentage of the Canadian population will read these comments and further even less will be motivated to get off their backsides.

    the Government, the Bells and the Broadcasting interests exagerate, misrepresent and on occassion mislead and deceive – mainly by spreading FUD amongst the population.

    Internet users need to do the same in reverse.

    Tom FUD1 = Television Advertising is a brainwashing of viewers. P2P allows users to watch content without brainwashing.
    Tom FUD2 = Television News influences the voters, not always in the best interests of the candidate. Recent elections in South Korea and Iran have demonstrated that the Internet is capable of generating crowd sentiment in favour of honest politicians. Future Elections will no doubt be decided on the Inrternet and not by Broadcast interests.
    Tom FUD3 = Continued attempts at filtering/throttling against the desires of the users will result in pirate ISP’s springing up all over Canada utlilising ISM radio spectrum bandwith to achieve a network totally outside the reach or control of the Government. The resulting loss of revenues to the Bells will severly impact taxation receipts by the Government.

    But I also believe that self-regulation needs to be mooted somehere.
    An organisation of users, that can act as one. The concept of a an ISP or P2P Union springs to mind.

    I think the guys at Saveournet.ca are doing a brilliant job.
    I urge every reader who has not already done so sign their petition…….

    http://www.neutrality.ca/index.php?option=com_performs&formid=1&Itemid=3

    They have 12,000 signatures. This tells me Canadians arnt really interested.
    Hey – Canadians – there’s 30 million of you.
    Earlier this year when Australians signed the petition against the Internet Filter, we had 100,000 signatures in just a few weeks and there’s only 20 million of us.

    For a chuckle – checkout the video on the bottom left of http://www.getup.org.au/

    Where am I going with this?
    Well, I guess, if the CRTC approve DPI in Canada it will be a green light to every other Commonwealth country to follow suit.
    I would be pleased if DPI wasnt just rubber stamped.

    Although I also believe that there needs to be an education process like:

    Our water is precious – conserve it.
    Electricity causes CO2 emissions – switch it off when not in the room.
    Flat out Torrent is killing the net, slow it down and enjoy a higher average throughput per month.

    Possibly the CRTC could agree to look into educational programs instead of rubber stamping DPI.

    No-one has really offered them any alternatives.
    Education and self regulation is an alternative but Canadians need to suggest it – not some guy from Oz.

    We all know that the Wizard of Oz is just a short little grumpy man behind the curtain with a big loud speaker system.

78. Thomas Koltai Says:
    July 9th, 2009 at 10:32 am

    @Surfer.

    I think it’s a very interesting blog with some interesting annecdotal opininon and annecdotal references compiled in a manner designed to present Kyles opinion in a favourable light.

    It doesnt answer why companies like Juniper (that provide most of the biggest iron at the majority of the worlds largest internet exchanges)
    spend 18 billion a year in R&D to try and make their switches not drop packets – CRTC hearing evidence yesterday.
    Juniper wouldnt defelop a white and black list unless it was needed by customers.
    And believe me – it isnt only the Bells that are buying those switches….. it’s the Internet Exchanges.

    I don’t think I need to provide any further evidence. But I have presented it – and in quite some detail.
    Please help yourself to the resource. http://www.perceptric.com/blog?cmd=search&keywords=p2p

79. Robert Says:
    July 9th, 2009 at 10:35 am

    @Tom

    Canadians would be interested if they knew about it, if they saw how it affected them. If Canada was such a p2p pirate haven, why is there such a large number of those connected who know nothing about Net Neutrality? Rather odd for a pirate haven country eh?

    The problem is education of the public. Much like the U.S., our citizens are preoccupied with their own lives or that of Canadian Idol/Canada’s Next Top Model/Michael Jackon’s death, etc… to really think about their civil liberties. Unions seem to get more public opinions going than anything else.

    Maybe we need the brilliant analysts at CAW to complain how p2p file sharing hurts their wasteline, I mean hurts their power to bleed companies dry while trying to justify their existence to their members?

    Basically, we’re not France. We don’t get upset at much. No one gives a shit about the abuse of rights in the name of the Olympics in Vancouver. Just take a read as to what the Police are saying over there. Yeah “we’ll move the homeless out of the way for their own protection” Riiiiiight!

    Anyway, much like the US it is difficult to educate the populous on how they can help themselves. It’s like cattle standing there outside the slaughterhouse, none of them have a clue that they could stampede through the gates and make a run for it. They even hear the slaughtered screams inside and they just sit there. That’s us, sadly. That’s the general population of North Americans.

    Now change it and say “no more supersize” or “no more fast food” and you’ll see an uproar. Change that to “no more Tim Horton’s” and you’ll have a full scale riot!

Leave a Reply