Large ISPs under CRTC pressure to disclose traffic management practices

Some of Canada’s largest Internet service providers have until Feb. 22 to comply with a CRTC request to more prominently disclose their Internet traffic management policies. In January, the commission sent letters to Bell Canada, Rogers Communications Inc., Shaw Communications Inc., Primus Telecommunications Canada Inc., Bragg Communications Inc. and Barrett Xplore Inc. regarding their public disclosure of Internet traffic management practices. The letters were part of a procedural follow-up from the CRTC’s review in October of Internet traffic management practices. According to the CRTC’s decision issued in October, ISPs can manage Internet traffic to deal with congestion. But the CRTC’s letter to Barrett Xplore notes, “ISPs must disclose to their customers information regarding any technical Internet traffic management practices that they apply to retail Internet services.” The companies were found to be non-compliant with the CRTC’s decision because they did not make their traffic management policies prominent enough on their websites--or did not list any information at all. Bell Canada previously disclosed its traffic management information on a difficult-to-locate page on its website. Now the company provides a link on the front page of its Internet service site that leads to a page with more detailed information about traffic management. In early February, the CRTC confirmed that Bell was compliant with the commission’s framework on Internet traffic management. Rogers’ network management policy is less detailed. The company says it throttles upstream peer-to-peer traffic with a maximum upload speed of 80 kbps, but does not provide additional information. The Wire Report contacted Bell, Rogers, Barrett Xplore and Shaw for comment, but none of the companies responded by deadline Tuesday. But John Lawford, counsel with the Public Interest Advocacy Centre (PIAC), told The Wire Report that even the level of detail provided by Bell is not enough. “I just don’t think the level of detail—even Bell’s level of detail—is adequate for someone to bring a reasoned complaint ,” Lawford said. Lawford has criticized the complaints-based regulatory approach the CRTC has put into place to enforce Internet traffic management practices. “Unless you’re a deep-pocketed competitor with a lot of money at stake, you’re probably not going to be able to challenge the decisions that are being made at the switch,” he told The Wire Report last month. “I don’t think you’ll see any complaints at all.” There has been one complaint to the commission about Internet traffic management. The complaint related to the difficulty in finding information about Internet throttling on the ISPs’ websites. “By better balancing Internet traffic, this solution helps protect and improve the performance of these common applications for all customers,” Bell’s traffic management policy says. Bell’s website says it uses deep packet inspection to manage peer-to-peer traffic between the hours of 4:30 p.m. and 2 a.m. on Bell Internet DSL and between 4:30 p.m. to 1:00 a.m. on Bell portable and rural Internet services. Deep packet inspection analyzes the type of traffic flowing through the network, allowing providers to slow down specific traffic. “Rogers is committed to ensuring the best possible online experience for all our valued customers. To meet this goal, Rogers uses a variety of traffic management techniques,” Rogers’ policy says. “We use packet inspection to determine the type (but not the content) of upstream traffic only.” Lawford said the CRTC’s decision on Internet traffic management practices did not go far enough. He said it is legitimate for ISPs to throttle users who harm the network or other users through their online activities. “I think that there’s certainly a need for traffic management,” agreed Tom Copeland, chair of the Canadian Association of Internet Providers (CAIP), an industry group representing small ISPs. But Copeland added that Bell’s throttling at peak periods goes beyond managing the network and relieving congestion. “I don’t think they’re being honest with anybody about the extent of the network congestion, if it exists,” he said. If the ISPs do not comply with the CRTC’s letters by the deadline on Feb. 22, the commission cannot issue monetary penalties. In the event of non-compliance, the CRTC would send more letters to the ISPs and, failing that, could raise the matter before the commission. In some instances cases can go to the Federal Court of Appeal. “They’ll probably send nasty letters for a while and hope that a consumer group or someone else will take that as a cue to file a Part VII complaint, and then they’ll make another order,” Lawford said. “I just don’t hold out any hope that they will actually do anything.”

Large ISPs under CRTC pressure to disclose traffic management practices

News | 02/16/2010 10:31 pm EST

To keep reading, get a free trial.

Already a Subscriber?

Reuse & Permissions

Inside The Wire Report

Information

Hill Times Publishing

Get in Touch With Us