Many of the parties submitting comments in the CRTC’s network management proceeding have looked at flow control and suggested that this results in a form of control of the content of the telecommunications, in contravention of S.36 of the Telecom Act.

The Open Internet Coalition parses the language of that section, word for word – even looking at the French language version of the section to confirm its interpretation of the meaning.

Some of the parties suggest that delaying the completion of a file transfer, such as a movie could inhibit the use of the file for the intended purpose, such as entertainment for that evening.

Let’s look back to the old days of circuit switched telephonic voice communications to examine a metaphor for which S.36 also applied.

After all, the section was written in the predominantly voice pre-internet era.

Let me take you back to a time not so long ago…

Active network management was required to handle voice network congestion. Whether it was a weather related event, Mothers’ Day or other peak times, at times, the network could not handle the full load. Certain applications, such as radio station contest lines, would get choked during peak traffic loads.

Not all Mothers’ Day long distance calls got through. Sometimes, a percentage of capacity was reserved for other applications or users. Some callers experienced constrained capacity to allow incoming overseas calls to get through.

Various techniques would be employed to manage the traffic – some of them invoked on the fly – responding to conditions the best way the industry could. In some cases, no matter how many times you dialled the numbers you just couldn’t get through to Mom on Mothers’ Day. [As an aside, I remember that a colleague of mine – here is my shout out to you, Corrie – was the voice of the Windsor toll switch Mothers’ Day congestion announcement. She had wanted to say “For all of you who couldn’t be bothered to stay in touch all year long, shame on you…”]

When you couldn’t get through on Mothers’ Day, the meaning of your call the next week just wasn’t the same, but I don’t recall people arguing that this was a violation of S.36. A Mothers’ Day call on the following Monday is no longer a Mothers’ Day call.

There was no control of the content of your message to mom. No knowledge of what you wanted to say. No invasion of privacy. Simple re-prioritization of certain traffic because the network just couldn’t handle all of the offered load. And this was in the days of fully regulated monopoly telcos. No competitive long distance choice. No wireless alternatives. Our only competition came from Hallmark and the Post Office.

Maximizing utility of the network.

Skimming through the submissions, I enjoyed reading the views of some of the academics who suggest that over-provisioning is more effective than QOS or prioritizing certain types of traffic over others. Who do they think is going to pay for this over-provisioning?

We’ll have more to say about the submissions in the coming days.

Technorati Tags:
network management, CRTC

On Monday evening, many parties filed hundreds of pages of comments, supplemented by expert reports and consultant studies, in response to the CRTC’s call for comments in the network management proceeding.

In addition, another 285 comments had been filed electronically at the time of the writing of this posting.

These interventions add to the record created by the comments filed by the dozen or so ISPs that were named in the Public Notice.

The next step in the schedule for the proceeding is for the CRTC to decide on whether to ask additional questions of the intervenors and for them to file responses by the end of the month. Reply comments are schedule to get filed by April 30.

That would form the final paper record, prior to the commencement of an oral hearing on July 6.

The Commission’s schedule does not currently provide for a final round of comments following the oral proceeding. Yesterday, Bell filed an application asking for a final reply:

The Companies submit that parties must have the opportunity to address any issues or comments raised at the oral stage, particularly given the technical nature of this proceeding.

Their proposal calls for the final submission to be no more than 10 pages long submitted by July 17 – a week after the hearings are expected to conclude.

Yesterday, the CRTC sided with MTS Allstream in a billing dispute with TELUS.

In early September, TELUS had reinterpreted its tariff for aggregating digital channels and began billing its competitors at a higher rate.

While the CRTC agreed that the wording in the tariff was a little ambiguous on the point, the Commission found that TELUS’s reinterpretation was contrary to long standing industry practices. Further, the Commission felt that there should not be discretion in how to interpret the ratings, in that this lack of predictability could lead to arbitrary and discriminatory practices.

As a result, TELUS was ordered to refund any money it collected under the new interpretation and revert to the former method of calculation.

Technorati Tags:
TELUS, CRTC

Are there solutions to give Canadian content access to the fast lane on our domestic network?

An idea floated in a conversation with GlassBox TV was whether Canadian ISPs should treat “.ca” traffic with priority.

GlassBox seemed to be more concerned about access to Canadian content from within walled gardens – such as mobile TV services offered by wireless service providers.

Does this accomplish enough to satisfy the concerns of Canada’s creative community that our content needs support to ensure that Canadian voices will have a platform?

Questions from both vice-chairs touched on this kind of discrimination. One question went so far as to ask about using deep packet inspection to give preference to Canadian content.

I’ll go further: what if Canadian content was exempted from monthly download caps? Would that help ensure opportunities for content distribution?

The global competition issue is where the new media proceeding meets the net neutrality debate. Elements of Canada’s creative community, seeking to impose content regulation on defined Canadian websites may end up handicapping the ability of web operators to succeed by limiting their flexibility in business models.

Are there forms of incentives that make for a better approach than allocating a pre-set percentage on content availability?

In a decision released on Friday, the CRTC set out its reasons for choosing Bell’s proposal to apply to transition services being provided to the department of defense network while TELUS completes its transition.

I think the key statement in the decision is:

Based on the past failures to accurately predict the time required for transition and the amount of work left to be done, the Commission considers that there is a significant risk that DND will not have issued disconnect orders to Bell Canada for all remaining Other Services within PWGSC’s proposed transition schedule.

The Commission chose Bell’s final proposal because it balanced the risk that the transition may take longer to execute than planned (given the record to date), while passing through cost savings should the targets be met.

When contracting for complex services, are you paying enough attention to transition clauses and developing appropriate strategies to manage supplier risk?

There are lessons for service providers and customers alike.

Technorati Tags:
CRTC, PWGSC, DND