The packet prioritization bogeyman raised its ugly head again yesterday when Primus Telecommunications Canada lashed out at Shaw Communications for providing terrible broadband service to Primus' Internet telephony customers. This is not a new problem for Primus but one that doesn't seem to be going away despite attempts to raise it with Shaw. Primus V.P. Matt Stein said his company has been “suffering”, and that he is particularly disturbed by Shaw's sale of a $10 a month “quality of service enhancement” product that improve the performance of third-party Internet telephony services such as Primus and Vonage. Stein derided it as a “VOIP Tax”. Shaw, meanwhile, seems untroubled by Primus' complaints. CEO Jim Shaw said Primus is riding on the Internet for free so it shouldn't be complaining. For an extra fee, he said Shaw could offer better QoS. You pay for what you get is how it came across. While Bell and Telus have told the CRTC they will not fool around with the packets of rivals on their networks, Shaw has made no such claims. Can it only be a matter of time before Primus complains to the regulator?
-
Mark’s Blogs
Find ME Online
-
3 Comments
I am curious to see if the CRTC will do anything at all to Shaw. With the recent ruling on VoIP, it seems that the 'fair regulator' is letting the cable companies do what ever they want. I am taking a 'wait and see' attitude.
I suspect that the CRTC will do what it usually does — wait for someone to file some actual evidence.
If Primus has any, now would be the time.
Anecdotally … I'm not convinced that this packet preferencing thing is going on. (Heck, I'm not convinced that Shaw, today, could do it if they even tried.)
In its submission to the CRTC, Vonage described the QoS surcharge as a possible “red herring” because Shaw had refused to provide a technical explanation for how its enhancement works or why it is necessary. The company went on to say that “Because Vonage competes directly with the telephone services of the network operators that also provide the high-speed Internet access, the incentives to discriminate against us are clear.”
It isn't about discrimination. The software (the same one used to limit the amount of traffic bittorrent uses) is designed to help with the prioritizing of packets — specifically voice packets used in VoIP service. This service costs Shaw money and therefore it must be passed onto the customer if they wish to use 3rd party carriers for VoIP. It isn't a case of Shaw being anti-competitive. It's a case of Vonage having a shitty service that should do the hardware QoS on the customer's “Vonage Router”. Shaw shouldn't be responsible for every 3rd party company's services. Just like with my side business, we shouldn't be responsible because our DID lines don't work in synch with a 3rd party application like AMP (Asterisk Management Portal).
Shaw's explanation is pretty clear:
http://www.shaw.ca/en-ca/ProductsServices/Internet/ServiceEnhancement.htm