CRTC - UBB Decision, we win!

[GreenEnvy]

CRTC just announced their decision on Bell and friends proposed Usage based billing.
They Rejected it!

Big telco's will have to charge small resellers (like Teksavvy) on a per speed basis, not on per volume.
So basically, they can charge a small ISP x dollars for a 100 megabit/second pipe. They can't bill them per total Gigabtyes of traffic that go through.

Yay!

This doesn't stop Bell and friends from imposing that UBB on their own customers, but it does mean they can't do it to the small companies. So, switch off the big guys!

[Jeff R]

This is good news. Now, I would wish CRTC tackle the issue of throttling.

[WiseGuy]

ESS YOU SEE SEE EEE ESS ESS

[ugly]

Here are Michael Geist's comments on it

Or if you're short on reading material here's the decision

[Sweetlou]

good to hear,

[ugly]

I haven't read the decision, but based on what others have said, it seems that the CRTC has also approved increased tariffs. So, perhaps this isn't the big win it sounded like - more like a middle ground option. Independent ISPs may be able to offer unlimited, but the prices will likely go up.

TekSavvy has announced that they are unhappy with the decision

---------- Post added at 05:50 PM ---------- Previous post was at 05:44 PM ----------

Here's a post where someone breaks down some of the costs

So we have 7000$/month more per 2000 users (3.5$/user increase).

[SniperGimp]

Ya beat me to it.

http://www.crtc.gc.ca/eng/archive/2011/2011-703.htm

The Commission has decided that there are two acceptable billing models. The first is a capacity-based billing model in which independent service providers determine in advance the amount of capacity they will need. Should demand exceed this capacity, they will have to manage their network capacity until they purchase more. The second model is the existing flat rate model, where independent service providers pay a flat fee per month regardless of usage.

The Commission has also decided that rates for either model should be based on each of the individual large cable and telephone companies’ costs to provide the service plus a reasonable markup, and further, that these markups be comparable for all cable and telephone companies. As an exception to this and consistent with the Commission’s decisions in Telecom Regulatory Policy 2010-632, the telephone companies may charge an additional 10 percent markup for usage and access to the faster fibre-to-the-node services. This will encourage companies to continue to invest in this new technology.

I do not believe this to be a win at all. I don't see anything in here that stops an ISP from creating high cost packages for Independents, or form creating additional packages for Independents that go over their limits.

For that matter I also see ISPs being able to charge additional premiums to Independents in order to gain access to competitive speeds in emerging technology.

[WiseGuy]

EFF EH EYE ELL YOU ARE EEE

[GreenEnvy]

Ya beat me to it.

http://www.crtc.gc.ca/eng/archive/2011/2011-703.htm


I do not believe this to be a win at all. I don't see anything in here that stops an ISP from creating high cost packages for Independents, or form creating additional packages for Independents that go over their limits.

For that matter I also see ISPs being able to charge additional premiums to Independents in order to gain access to competitive speeds in emerging technology.

The big ISP's don't get to decide what to charge the small ones from what I can see. The CRTC sets the rates they are allowed to charge.
It's certainly not a total victory, as the costs to the smaller ISP's will go up a bit, but overall it is a victory.

An ISP will look at how much peak traffic they use, maybe thats 300Mbit/sec, maybe it's 2Gbit/sec. They purchase that amount from the big telco. It doesn't matter if their customers soak up 1GByte a month or 300GByte a month, they pay the same.
Thats not all that different to how it is now, but the costs for it will rise a bit.

[Sweetlou]

how much do you think it will rise?