I meant usually people aren't aware of the carrier options available to them.
Staying on one carrier's fiber for what reason? ----- Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions Midwest Internet Exchange The Brothers WISP ----- Original Message ----- From: "Steve" <li...@wavedirect.org> To: "af" <af@afmug.com> Sent: Thursday, October 6, 2016 10:14:35 AM Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Bell Canada deregulating in areas I know you can use tunnels and vlps. I've done it before with a TLS 400km's away to another provider. But it defeats the purpose of staying on one carrier's fiber lines. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Mike Hammett" <af...@ics-il.net> To: "af" <af@afmug.com> Sent: Thursday, October 6, 2016 11:10:13 AM Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Bell Canada deregulating in areas Entirely possible, but usually people aren't aware of the options available to them. ----- Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions Midwest Internet Exchange The Brothers WISP ----- Original Message ----- From: "Steve" <li...@wavedirect.org> To: "af" <af@afmug.com> Sent: Thursday, October 6, 2016 10:02:28 AM Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Bell Canada deregulating in areas Our area is very limited to choices. That is the only reason why I even considered calling Bell! ----- Original Message ----- From: "Paul Stewart" <p...@paulstewart.org> To: "af" <af@afmug.com> Sent: Thursday, October 6, 2016 10:58:03 AM Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Bell Canada deregulating in areas Hit me offline if you like …. we have a team of folks what can provide you fiber connectivity using various carriers…. ;) I don’t know the exact number but Bell is still the incumbent telco for about 75% of Ontario last I looked …. probably 90% or so in Quebec > On Oct 6, 2016, at 10:12 AM, Steve <li...@wavedirect.org> wrote: > > Ahhh thanks for the clarification. It is what I thought. They are trying to > shed their responsibility to share and resell their resources. > > I would feel the same way about our network. However they owned all the lines > and infrastructure and were a monopoly. They still do have a huge monopoly on > the copper lines and fiber as well. > > Oddly enough, reluctantly I'm looking to get Bell fiber in our area. I've > chased their sales department, my colleague has but they ignore anyone in > this area. Its like they don't want my 10k a month. They simple do not want > to sell fiber to competitors even at the wholesale level to anyone in the > area. They want to do their own thing. > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Paul Stewart" <p...@paulstewart.org> > To: "af" <af@afmug.com> > Sent: Thursday, October 6, 2016 9:51:05 AM > Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Bell Canada deregulating in areas > > This is definately having impact on third party providers (TPIA as > referenced).. > > Bell has been told that they must provide mandated access to these fiber > networks as part of a ruling fairly recently … along with the access being > opened up, there are separate hearings on disaggregation of wholesale access > as well (which has significant pros/cons all in one) > > Forborne basically means no tariffs if I understand correctly … I’m obviously > not a telecom lawyer or pretend to be one :) It doesn’t mean that they won’t > provide wholesale access to those facilities and one might argue that it > doesn’t mean they will neither … > > There’s a number of different proceedings around this ongoing - I find it > hard to follow all of them but if you know the CRTC file number happy to > provide some additional insight/opinion > > Paul > > >> On Oct 6, 2016, at 9:17 AM, Steve <li...@wavedirect.org> wrote: >> >> Locally seeing these notices popping up from Bell. So they are requesting to >> be exempt from the rules the CRTC has set forth. This would be equivalent to >> you going to the FCC and saying "your rules don't apply to us and I want you >> to recognize that in these particular areas". Is my understanding correct? >> >> Sounds like: >> A) They want permission to undercut prices in certain areas. >> B) To be exempt from other tariffs and specifically excluding people from >> using their lines. >> C) Do they want to be allowed to throttle services? >> >> Locally there has been an area they put fiber in, and terminated their dsl >> lined which left TPIA people high and dry. Tekksavvy etc could no longer >> provide service and lost a bunch of customers. I don't know what the outcome >> was but there was no rule yet in place that they had to share their fiber >> lines too. So it was a grey area. I wonder if they are trying to exempt >> themselves from a whole slew of things in certain areas. >> >> Anyway >> >> Does the FCC have any sort of provision for something similar? >> >> Have any of you used this before? >> >> Their notice was pretty vague. I'm going to see if I can find the filing. >> >> ------ >> Keeping you informed. >> >> >> As you may know, the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications >> Commission (CRTC) regulates the terms and conditions of the local services >> that Bell provides you. This limits our flexibility to provide you the types >> of competitive offers we’d like. That may all change in your area in the >> coming months. >> >> On August 26, 2016, Bell filed an application to the CRTC to have certain >> local services “forborne” from regulation. If our request is approved, local >> telecommunication services Bell offers you will be forborne or deregulated >> by the CRTC. You will continue to receive the quality services you have come >> to expect from Bell, under our Terms of Service, which were previously >> provided to you. You will find a copy at www.bell.ca/terms. The Terms of >> Service will apply to your newly unregulated local services from the date >> the CRTC issues an order approving the forbearance application for your >> local exchange area. >> >> What does this mean for you? >> >> • We will be able to provide you with more exciting offers and propose more >> innovative services. >> • We will continue to provide services on the basis of the Terms of Service. >> • As a Bell customer, you will be kept informed if the application for >> forbearance is approved.
