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!

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

“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.

debunk this with an algorithm or conjured statistic:

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

“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.

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).

…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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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

I want my money back!

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?