The ruling last year: http://www.crtc.gc.ca/eng/archive/2010/2010-802.htm
The result of consultation on the ruling, and dates for its application: http://crtc.gc.ca/eng/archive/2011/2011-44.htm
This affects the "Gateway Access Services (GAS)" customers. Wholesale Bell customers. (Product details here http://www.wholesale.bell.ca/pdfs/GASDSL.pdf)
And "Third Party Internet Access (TPIA)" customers. Rogers & Shaw Wholesale customers.
The GAS is not local loop unbundling. That is "(ADSL) Access Service" (http://www.bce.ca/en/aboutbce/regulatoryinformation/tarrifs/...)
There are essentially three options for an ISP. Diagrammed below.
PoP = Point of Presence. This is the handover from the access network to the provider network. The equipment found here is often called a BRAS.
------------The Internet------------
| | | |
----------Peering Location----------
| | | | <-.
ISP1 ISP2 TekS BELL \
| | \ / <---- Private network.
PoP1 PoP2 PoP3
| |# |**
Priv.Fiber LeasedLine Bell
| | |** <---- "Backhaul" "Transmission Network"
Priv.DSLAM Priv.DSLAM -Bell DSLAM-
|~ |~ | |* <-- "Local Loop" "Last Mile"
CPE CPE TekSCPE BellCPE
* Bell's retail capacity based pricing.
** Bell's wholesale capacity based pricing.
~ ADSL Access Service
# Bell does actually lease lambdas on its fiber.
This is Bell's transit network. Whilst technically the UBB is on the individuals and not what is transited, it is essentially what is being billed for.
Bell is claiming that it's links on the transit network are being crippled by heavy users. This may actually be true during busy hour. But in reality this shouldn't happen, as Bell can increase the bandwidth of most these relatively cheaply, as most are fiber. There are probably a few 100 that aren't fibered, causing the biggest problem.
But OK. The more I read about this, the clearer it becomes that the problem doesn't really exist at the moment. This is Bell's way of sabotaging the GAS product that it has been forced to sell by the regulator.
I hope this is a move that will force the independents to group together to purchase their own DSLAMS and transit. And then Bell faces much stiffer competition. In the UK, BT is facing real and consistent competition, thanks to our regulator getting tough in the last few years. BT now even have to allow competitors to lease it's ducting to roll their own fiber.
EDIT: I found this: http://www.vaxination.ca/crtc/ADSL_intro.pdf
Which suggests that the only bit that could conceivably have contention, which the wholesale customer does not control, is the connection between the DSLAM and the BAS. From the BAS's to their handoff PoP/CO, they have to pay for these "AHSSPI/AHSSL (Aggregated High-Speed Service Provider Interface/Link)" in 1gbps increments.
Really? I was under the impression that Bell was just selling access to their last-mile infrastructure
Your understanding is wrong. If TekSavvy were just terminating the loop, Bell wouldn't even have the technical ability to do anything to restrict or harm them.
The situation here is that Teksavvy has access to bulk wholesale Nexxia (Bell's backbone) rates that were forced upon Bell by the CRTC. Again, this was an agreement that was established when Bell was overwhelmingly dominant in certain areas of Canada. If those wholesale rates are "fair", however, then clearly Teksavvy can just arrange with another provider to handle that service. The reason they can't, of course, is that the rates they were paying were essentially monopoly subsidized.
There ARE DSL providers that locate hardware in Bell switching centers and don't use the Nexxia network. Primus is an example. Funny thing about Primus is that they, too, are implementing UBB, but it isn't because of Bell: It's because they don't want the ultra high throughput users that are being punted from TekSavvy from all migrating to their network.
When I was living in Toronto the quality of internet service (at least with Bell) depended very much on the area. In some areas the lines/infrastructure was really crappy and rather than fix it Bell would just blame the end-user (you need to reboot your computer, that's why the bandwidth is so slow) or acts of god (I know that you've been complaining about the bandwidth for months, but it was really caused by that large storm last night. It should be fine now.).
Really? I was under the impression that Bell was just selling access to their last-mile infrastructure and companies like TekSavvy were providing their own peering arrangements for getting the customers to the internet. Would you care to explain to me what the real situation is? It's my understanding that the infrastructure looks like the above diagram. In this case, Bell is not selling bandwidth to the internet to 3rd-party ISPs, they are just selling access to their (government-subsidized) last-mile lines.