Realistically the conditions I imagine being allowed under this statute are things like the customer doesn't use [this] hardware and the customer isn't given access to things like BGP.

Whatever conditions you impose they're going to have to

- Preserve access, because the wording of the law makes it clear that can't be removed.

- Be necessary to protect the telecommunications system from a threat (by the definition of 15.2)

- By the charter not be things that are punitive, substantially impact the ability of someone to speak (i.e. to access the internet), etc. For clarity free speech in Canada includes anonymity.

And I really don't see much of interest that complies with all of those. Were it not for the charter part I agree the conditions could be onerous, but "defacto termination of service" would likely be the bar where courts say that's too onerous without the charter.

> - Preserve access, because the wording of the law makes it clear that can't be removed.

How's it clear?

Another thing to keep in mind is that these details can and likely will be clarified in the future as it goes through process.