Re: [AFMUG] Bell Canada deregulating in areas

[Casey | WISPA]

We've got a bunch of these GSI watchdogs around. I stick a mikrotik hAP lite in 
and forward ports through it. Port 80 is all I allow and they never have any 
problems getting in. I setup a dns entry like lname.airlink123.com and the 
farmers get along just fine with it. Never any issues with security. Yet. 

Casey

Sent from my iPhone

> On Oct 7, 2016, at 6:28 AM, Paul Stewart  wrote:
> 
> Lol... yeah that happens sometimes too but we are very persistent on that 
> kind of stuff ;)
> 
> Sent from my iPhone
> 
>> On Oct 6, 2016, at 9:52 PM, George Skorup  wrote:
>> 
>> "Sorry, LEC says no ports available."
>> 
>>> On 10/6/2016 8:22 PM, Paul Stewart wrote:
>>> Big decision for us Canadians today who utilize wholesale access networks a 
>>> lot … (besides our own infrastructure)
>>> 
 http://www.bnn.ca/crtc-slashes-wholesale-fees-charged-by-incumbent-isps-in-bid-to-stay-competitive-1.580977
>>> 
>>> Great news!
>>> 
>>> Paul
>>> 
>>> 
> On Oct 6, 2016, at 9:51 AM, Paul Stewart  wrote:
 
 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  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.
 
>>> 
>> 

Re: [AFMUG] Bell Canada deregulating in areas

[Paul Stewart]

Lol... yeah that happens sometimes too but we are very persistent on that kind 
of stuff ;)

Sent from my iPhone

> On Oct 6, 2016, at 9:52 PM, George Skorup  wrote:
> 
> "Sorry, LEC says no ports available."
> 
>> On 10/6/2016 8:22 PM, Paul Stewart wrote:
>> Big decision for us Canadians today who utilize wholesale access networks a 
>> lot … (besides our own infrastructure)
>> 
>>> http://www.bnn.ca/crtc-slashes-wholesale-fees-charged-by-incumbent-isps-in-bid-to-stay-competitive-1.580977
>> 
>> Great news!
>> 
>> Paul
>> 
>> 
 On Oct 6, 2016, at 9:51 AM, Paul Stewart  wrote:
>>> 
>>> 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  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.
>>> 
>> 
> 

Re: [AFMUG] Bell Canada deregulating in areas

[George Skorup]

"Sorry, LEC says no ports available."

On 10/6/2016 8:22 PM, Paul Stewart wrote:
Big decision for us Canadians today who utilize wholesale access 
networks a lot … (besides our own infrastructure)



http://www.bnn.ca/crtc-slashes-wholesale-fees-charged-by-incumbent-isps-in-bid-to-stay-competitive-1.580977


Great news!

Paul


On Oct 6, 2016, at 9:51 AM, Paul Stewart > wrote:


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 > 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.

Re: [AFMUG] Bell Canada deregulating in areas

[Paul Stewart]

Big decision for us Canadians today who utilize wholesale access networks a lot 
… (besides our own infrastructure)

> http://www.bnn.ca/crtc-slashes-wholesale-fees-charged-by-incumbent-isps-in-bid-to-stay-competitive-1.580977
>  
> 
Great news!

Paul


> On Oct 6, 2016, at 9:51 AM, Paul Stewart  wrote:
> 
> 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  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.
> 

Re: [AFMUG] Bell Canada deregulating in areas

[Paul Stewart]

Yeah, no we wouldn’t offer service using that method mentioned….

We have significant relationships with carriers like Bell and others across 
Canada - so if they have an option they can deliver so do we (generally 
speaking)

Totally up to you and not here to do sales pitch (I’m not remotely involved 
with sales side)


> On Oct 6, 2016, at 11:14 AM, Steve <li...@wavedirect.org> wrote:
> 
> 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 
>>> us

Re: [AFMUG] Bell Canada deregulating in areas

[Mike Hammett]

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 fi

Re: [AFMUG] Bell Canada deregulating in areas

[Steve]

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

Re: [AFMUG] Bell Canada deregulating in areas

[Mike Hammett]

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. 
>> 
>> 

Re: [AFMUG] Bell Canada deregulating in areas

[Steve]

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 wer

Re: [AFMUG] Bell Canada deregulating in areas

[Paul Stewart]

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.

Re: [AFMUG] Bell Canada deregulating in areas

[Steve]

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.

Re: [AFMUG] Bell Canada deregulating in areas

[Steve]

Well here they are mainly DSL but do have fiber too.  Some wireless (reeaaaly 
bad).  

I hope they shoot this down.  

- Original Message -
From: "Ken Hohhof" <af...@kwisp.com>
To: "af" <af@afmug.com>
Sent: Thursday, October 6, 2016 9:46:42 AM
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Bell Canada deregulating in areas

What you describe sounds l like what big telcos like AT have done over the 
past 10 years in the US.  And much of this is regulated at the state level not 
federal, although the current FCC seems to want to expand its regulatory turf.

AT for example would put in their hybrid/fiber UVerse system and stop selling 
DSL to new customers.  It was partly their way of getting around federal 
requirements that they resell unbundled copper loops, since they had persuaded 
states this did not apply to "sub-loops".  Of course now they are pushing 
DirecTV on new customers for the portion of the bundle, I'm not sure that 
necessarily means satellite TV, in the long run maybe it means a DirecTV 
streaming box fed by high speed Internet.  They have stomped the CLEC threat 
out of existence, so maybe they are focusing back on their traditional enemy 
the cable companies, or maybe just wanting to be a 100% wireless company.


-Original Message-
From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Steve
Sent: Thursday, October 6, 2016 8:18 AM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: [AFMUG] Bell Canada deregulating in areas

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.

Re: [AFMUG] Bell Canada deregulating in areas

[Paul Stewart]

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  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.

Re: [AFMUG] Bell Canada deregulating in areas

[Ken Hohhof]

What you describe sounds l like what big telcos like AT have done over the 
past 10 years in the US.  And much of this is regulated at the state level not 
federal, although the current FCC seems to want to expand its regulatory turf.

AT for example would put in their hybrid/fiber UVerse system and stop selling 
DSL to new customers.  It was partly their way of getting around federal 
requirements that they resell unbundled copper loops, since they had persuaded 
states this did not apply to "sub-loops".  Of course now they are pushing 
DirecTV on new customers for the portion of the bundle, I'm not sure that 
necessarily means satellite TV, in the long run maybe it means a DirecTV 
streaming box fed by high speed Internet.  They have stomped the CLEC threat 
out of existence, so maybe they are focusing back on their traditional enemy 
the cable companies, or maybe just wanting to be a 100% wireless company.


-Original Message-
From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Steve
Sent: Thursday, October 6, 2016 8:18 AM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: [AFMUG] Bell Canada deregulating in areas

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.

[AFMUG] Bell Canada deregulating in areas

[Steve]

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.