http://www.markevanstech.com/2005/05/31/primus-qos-issues-with-shaw/ Insight and Analysis from North of the Border Mon, 01 Dec 2008 16:41:48 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.1 http://www.markevanstech.com/2005/05/31/primus-qos-issues-with-shaw/#comment-299 Anonymous Thu, 09 Mar 2006 08:55:42 +0000 http://markevanstech.com/?p=610#comment-299 <em>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." </em> 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 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

]]> http://www.markevanstech.com/2005/05/31/primus-qos-issues-with-shaw/#comment-298 Anonymous Thu, 02 Jun 2005 17:22:34 +0000 http://markevanstech.com/?p=610#comment-298 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.) 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.)

]]> http://www.markevanstech.com/2005/05/31/primus-qos-issues-with-shaw/#comment-297 Anonymous Wed, 01 Jun 2005 14:49:50 +0000 http://markevanstech.com/?p=610#comment-297 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 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.

]]>