P2P throttling leading to net neutrality showdown in Canada

Mr. Anderson at ArsTechnica posts another insightful update about Bell Canada's attack on independent ISPs like Wireless Nomad. (quoting our application to the CRTC, nonetheless!)

Want to run a server at home? Have a public-access WiFi node? Send mail through Port 25 to your own server? Run encrypted SSH without taking a 90% speed hit? Use torrents or Limewire at the full speed of the broadband you pay for each month?

Then you'd better not get a Bell Canada internet account... and better hope that the CRTC takes action on this soon, and puts a quick end to Bell's attempt to eliminate any competition in the form of the terms of service available to Canadian internet subscribers.

LINK

Supporting CAIP at the CRTC against Bell's "Throttling"

22 April 2008

Mr. Robert A. Morin
Secretary General
Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission
Ottawa, Ontario
K1A 0N2


Dear Mr. Morin,

Re: An application requesting certain orders directing Bell Canada to cease and desist from "throttling" its wholesale ADSL access services."


1. The Canadian Association of Internet Providers (CAIP) has requested that the Commission direct Bell Canada to cease and desist from "throttling" wholesale ADSL Internet services and in particular, the Gateway Access Service (GAS) wholesale internet service.

2. Wireless Nomad requests that the Commission grant CAIP’s request for an interim order directing Bell Canada to stop "throttling" its GAS service. This order should remain in effect until the Commission issues a decision as to the substantive portion of CAIP’s application.

3. "Throttling" of GAS services by Bell Canada is undermining its competitors in the Internet services marketplace, unduly impairing a system upon which competitors must rely, cripples ADSL by approximately 90% for modern applications that most require significant bandwidth, unduly impairs legitimate communications such as encrypted sessions, and the need for Bell Canada to do so is not substantiated with any evidence whatsoever.


About Wireless Nomad ISP Co-Op

4. Wireless Nomad ISP Co-op is a subscriber-owned high-speed Internet and public WiFi provider operating in Toronto since February, 2005. We resell high-speed Internet service to our subscribers, who in turn provide shared public wireless Internet access using the 802.11b/g “WiFi” system.

5. Our network is built on the basis of collaborative use of Internet resources, open access, and corporate transparency. The Internet connections of our subscribers are theirs to use as they see fit, within the bounds of the law. Wireless Nomad does not alter or interfere with the communications of our subscribers, regardless of transmission protocol, operating system, or content of the communication.

6. Wireless Nomad's commitment to the neutrality of our network has played a significant role in our organization earning a share of Toronto’s Internet services business, despite the market dominance of the incumbent ADSL provider, Bell Canada.


CAIP’s Application Raises a Significant Issue for Consideration by the Commission

7. Wireless Nomad submits that the application by CAIP raises a significant issue for consideration by the Commission. Specifically, it raises the issue of whether or not Bell Canada is providing undue and unreasonable preference for its services, and disadvantage for other providers, which would be in contravention of S. 27(2) of the Telecommunications Act, which states (emphasis added):

27(2) No Canadian carrier shall, in relation to the provision of a telecommunications service or the charging of a rate for it, unjustly discriminate or give an undue or unreasonable preference toward any person, including itself, or subject any person to an undue or unreasonable disadvantage.


"Throttling" Impairs Internet Access of Our Subscribers

8. In our experience, Bell Canada’s "throttling" of GAS services has significantly impaired the Internet access of our subscribers. By discriminating against certain types of our subscribers’ communications, Bell Canada has reduced the Internet access speed of those communications by approximately 90%.

9. At a time when 20-megabit or even 50-megabit home Internet access is becoming commonplace in other developed economies, it defies common sense to reduce our already inadequate 5-megabit Internet connections by 90% for the very applications that require modern high-speed access most of all.

10. Furthermore, in its quest to discriminate against so-called “peer-to-peer” communications, Bell Canada, in our experience, classifies many forms of encrypted communications (including SSH sessions) as potentially “peer-to-peer”, and cripples Internet access for those communications by reducing their speed by approximately 90%.



There is No Alternative to GAS Services for Competitive Access

11. In Telecom Decision CRTC 2008-17, the Commission confirmed that independent Internet providers creating competitive alternatives in the high-speed Internet access market must rely on infrastructure controlled by incumbent carriers such as Bell Canada.

12. In our experience, this is absolutely correct: fibre-to-the-home is costly, and wireless alternatives have significant limitations. In short, there is no technological or economic alternative to the current GAS-based system.


"Throttling" by Bell Canada is Harmful to its Competitors

13. The interference by the incumbent telecommunications carrier in the operations of independent high-speed Internet access providers is highly detrimental to the business interests of said independent internet providers, and to the personal and commercial interests of the subscribers of said independent internet providers.

14. This interference significantly reduces the options available to Internet access consumers. Competition in the Internet services marketplace takes place in more dimensions than brand-name and price. Customer service plays a significant role, as does the type of customer premises equipment provided, as well as the length of service contracts. Also critically important in differentiating offerings by various Internet providers are the terms of service negotiated with Internet service subscribers.


Having Different Terms of Service is a Competitive Tool

15. Critically important in differentiating offerings by various Internet providers are the terms of service -- the policies that an Internet provider has in relation to e-mail transmission, blocking ports, the connection of multiple computers on a home network, the use of shared wireless access devices, total data transfer per month, and whether or not a provider interferes with any communications going across its network.

16. Bell Canada has chosen to have a particular set of policies comprise its terms of service. It blocks Port 25 (outgoing email), limits many types of applications

17. Wireless Nomad, like many other independent Internet providers, has chosen to have a different set of policies comprise its terms of service. This is part of our business model, and it has been a successful one. It is not, however, part of Bell Canada's business model- that is, until Bell Canada began to interfere with our access to GAS services and crippled the Internet connections of our subscribers in such a way as to match Bell Canada's idea of what an Internet provider's terms of service should be.

18. Accordingly, Bell Canada's "throttling" of GAS services is an anti-competitive move that eliminates a source of product differentiation that was popular amongst consumers. To allow Bell Canada to continue its "throttling" will only serve to alienate consumers, undermine independent providers, and reduce competition in the Internet services marketplace.

19. To help preserve competition in the terms of service available to Internet subscribers, Wireless Nomad submits that the Commission should prevent Bell Canada from using its privileged position as an incumbent carrier to eliminate this source of competition.


There Is No Evidence That Internet Access Needs to Be "Throttled"

20. In relation to Bell Canada’s claims about Internet traffic volumes requiring that they interfere with the communications of the subscribers of independent providers, Wireless Nomad submits that, in our experience, our subscribers have been generally satisfied with the speed of their Internet connections given the limited specifications of ADSL as deployed by Bell Canada and the terms of service for which they contracted.

21. In our experience, there is no Internet service "rush hour" problem that needs to be fixed. Demands on the network increase every year, just as computational power, storage capacity, and network bandwidth increase each year. Congestion should be addressed by using faster, cheaper, and better technologies as they become available, rather than relying upon a "build-once, sell over-and-over” strategy.

22. Furthermore, Wireless Nomad submits that, in our experience, there has been no increase in general Internet access speed for any of our subscribers. This fact contradicts the assertion by Bell Canada that the so-called "throttling" of GAS services is required to ease traffic congestion, so as to provide more speed for Internet use is that it does not discriminate against.

23. Given that no additional speed has been experienced by our subscribers while using applications that are not subject to "throttling", and instead our subscribers have found that valuable applications they rely upon daily have been crippled, we submit to the Commission that there is no evidence that "throttling" has anything to do with improving or maintaining Internet access speeds for any type of application.


Ordering Bell Canada to Cease "Throttling" Would be Proportionate, Effective, and Prevent Ongoing Harm to Bell Canada's Competitors

24. Wireless Nomad submits that an interim order by the Commission directing Bell Canada to cease "throttling" GAS would be a proportionate and effective measure that would help support a functioning marketplace for Internet services.

25. Wireless Nomad also submits that its business interests and the interests of its subscribers are harmed each and every day that Bell Canada is permitted to "throttle" GAS services- our position in the marketplace is being undermined, and our subscribers are not getting the Internet service that they pay good money for.

26. For these reasons, and the others discussed above, Wireless Nomad requests that the Commission allow CAIP’s application and order Bell Canada to cease and desist "throttling" GAS services until such a time as the Commission may consider the entire matter on its merits.

As a public utility, Toronto Hydro Telecom could supply Internet to homes across Toronto

Toronto's wireless network has fallen behind other cities

TheStar.com - Comment

March 31, 2008

Andrew Clement
Amelia Bryne Potter

Mayor David Miller's recent request to Toronto Hydro Corporation that it hold off on selling its wholly owned subsidiary Toronto Hydro Telecom (THT) marks a welcome reprieve for what could be a great asset to Torontonians.

In 2006, THT announced boldly that it would bring affordable broadband Internet access to all 1 million households and 80,000 businesses in Toronto.

At the time, it seemed well-positioned to take the lead internationally in providing universal Internet connectivity. THT already operated a 450-kilometre fibre optic network providing data services to many of Toronto's major businesses.

With the recent acquisition of the city's street lighting poles by its sister company, it could relatively cheaply and easily deploy wireless meshing technologies to blanket the entire 600-plus square kilometres of metropolitan Toronto.

One Zone, THT's wireless Internet service, proved to be a resounding technical success. Novarum, an independent broadband wireless consulting firm that tested all the major wireless services in North America, announced that One Zone was by far the leader in terms of speed. It was especially impressed that "this exceptional performance is being delivered in the challenging environment of a dense urban canyon."

However, after one year of operation, One Zone remains confined to just six square kilometres of the downtown core (at $29/month, $9.99/day, $4.99/hour) with little sign of it going any further. Toronto has fallen behind other cities, which are now doing a much better job of bringing the benefits of broadband Internet to their citizens.

Behind this story of raised hopes and faltering promise lie several complexities and missed opportunities. These mainly stem from THT acting as a commercial competitor, in effect, seeking to make a profit from Toronto residents by charging them for access to facilities they already own. Instead, THT could more efficiently and directly provide services of greater benefit to the public.

Operating as a public utility, THT could ubiquitously supply the basic residential Internet service now needed by nearly all Toronto citizens for an average annual household cost in the range of $100.

If funded through property taxes the same way as street lighting, the roughly 60 per cent of households currently subscribing to broadband Internet service would save, on average, $300 to $400 per year.

The cost savings would be even greater, if the envisioned link to the provincial Smart Meter program could go through. It would also enable many of the more than 20 per cent of households that do not have Internet access to get it for the first time.

In addition, a THT city-wide fibre/wireless network could be an important boost to city departments and other civic services that have growing needs for networking, such as education, libraries, police and emergency health services.

Not only would the city's major institutions be better served if linked via city-controlled fibre, as "anchor tenants" they would further reduce the cost of connecting residences and businesses in their vicinity.

Toronto Hydro Telecom faces several technical and business hurdles in achieving this public benefit vision for its wireless and fibre networks, but the most significant challenge may be its governance structure.

THT is treated legally as a private corporation, in which pursuing profit is put ahead of the public interest. This status resulted from provincial reregulation of the electricity industry in the 1990s.

The Tory government of the time required cities in Ontario to privatize their public electricity distribution enterprises and spin off certain company assets, such as telecommunications, into separate, private corporations. One of these became THT. The perverse result is that while the taxpayers of Toronto still own THT, they are, in effect, blocked from using it as a means to directly serve their networking needs.

Toronto Hydro Telecom has the resources and experience to build a broadband network that would serve Torontonians well, but this opportunity has so far been missed because of political short-sightedness.

This could change with strong political leadership at the municipal level and working creatively within the current legislated framework.

An important precedent for this is the way in which Toronto Hydro-Electric, THT's sister company which distributes electricity in Toronto, actively promotes energy- saving measures. Cutting energy consumption runs counter to Toronto Hydro's short-term financial interests but is responsive to strong popular and political pressures to promote long-term environmental sustainability.

A similar approach can be taken for universal, affordable broadband services.

The cash-strapped City of Toronto may still be tempted to sell this asset, but if it were to exercise its current ownership of THT intelligently, the citizens of Toronto would stand to save money and gain a valuable public infrastructure appropriate to this information age.

Andrew Clement is a professor in the Faculty of Information Studies, University of Toronto, and a co-investigator with the Community Wireless Infrastructure Research Project (CWIRP.ca). Amelia Bryne Potter is a researcher with CWIRP and the Ethos Better Broadband Toolkit (ethostoolkit.net).

LINK to Star article

Wireless Nomad config Project Page

Still in beta, but here's a link to the web-based config system for the Wireless Nomad routers, created by Jorge Torres-Solis (funded by Prof. Andrew Clement's CWIRP). More on this later, this posting is so everyone interested has a place to go and find it.

Thanks, Jorge and Andrew!

-Damien


LINK

Canadians debating net neutrality in wake of Bell throttling

"The Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission (CRTC) is Canada's version of the FCC, and its acronym is just as vowel-free as its US counterpart. It has been the target of a complaint against Bell's tactics brought last week by the National Union of Public and General Employees. The labor labour union complained to CRTC's wonderfully-named boss, Konrad W. von Finckenstein, and demanded a full investigation.

"These Internet Service Providers are, with little or no public accountability, implementing measures that will discriminate against the use of legal software for legitimate uses," said the NUPGE letter. "This is unacceptable. The potential for violations of the privacy rights of users is clear. The continued silence on these matters by the CRTC and the Canadian government violates the trust the Canadian people have placed in you."

In addition, the Campaign for Democratic Media today launched a pressure campaign of its own called "Stop the Throttler." The campaign targets both Bell and Rogers for traffic shaping, pointing out the many legal uses of a technology that is now being adopted by even the biggest of media companies, such as NBC Universal in the US.

"Big Telecom Corporations should not dictate what Canadians access on the Internet," said Campaign for Democratic Media national coordinator Steve Anderson. "These Internet service providers are discriminating against Internet content and services, without any public accountability. The government needs to take action to guarantee equal access to the Internet for all."

LINK

Bell's 'Throttling' Plan a Threat to a Competitive Net

From Prof. Geist's Blog:

---------------------
My weekly technology law column (Toronto Star version, Vancouver Sun version, Ottawa Citizen version, homepage version) focuses on the competition concerns raised by Bell's throttling plans. I begin by noting that the CRTC has long acknowledged that Canadians enjoy limited competition for high-speed Internet services. In response, it has supported independent ISPs by requiring incumbents like Bell to provide wholesale broadband Internet service at regulated rates. While it is difficult to price-compete - the Bell wholesale pricing creates an effective minimum price - independent ISPs such as Chatham-based Teksavvy and Ottawa’s National Capital Freenet [don't forget Wireless Nomad, too! -D.F.] have carved a niche in the Canadian market through attention to customer service, innovative bundling approaches, targeted network investments, and community ownership.

Last week, this important piece of the Canadian Internet connectivity puzzle learned that its future viability has been put at risk due to Bell's plans to "throttle" its wholesale services. Last year, Bell began installing "deep packet inspection" capabilities into its network. The DPI capabilities - which allow ISPs to identify the type of content that runs on their networks - did not go unnoticed by the independent ISPs since DPI is also used to "throttle" Internet content by scaling back the amount of bandwidth allocated to particular applications.

While Bell employed these throttling technologies with their own Sympatico customers, some independent ISPs sought assurances that it would not be applied to the wholesale services. Sources advise that Bell responded positively that its plans were limited to its own customers, consistent with its 2003 assurance to the CRTC that it would only engage in limiting bandwidth for wholesale services "in cases of troubleshooting or to protect the network infrastructure from congestion resulting from malfunctioning or mis-configured equipment or malicious hacking."


LINK