technology

As someone that’s been watching the
rogers
vs
crtc
go round and round since october, 2010, it came as no surprise when the following
story
rolled across my desk.

CRTC Slaps Rogers for Throttling Non-P2P Traffic
Posted by Jason Koblovsky on Saturday, January 21, 2012 – 01:38
January 20, 2012 – The Canadian Gamers Organization got word today that the CRTC’s enforcement division has found Rogers to not be non-compliant with CRTC net neutrality policy, and that it’s throttling software and hardware are actively misclassifying a wide range of applications and communication ports. The CRTC has cited evidence obtained and published by Cisco Systems (the hardware and software vendor Rogers uses for throttling), and has threatened a show/cause hearing on this subject if Rogers’ response is insufficient or fails to respond. If it goes to a hearing, the CRTC could file an order with the courts to force Rogers to reimburse affected customers.
In its letter the CRTC stated:
As you know, prior Commission approval is required pursuant to section 36 of the Act, as described at paragraphs 126 and 127 of TRP CRTC 2009-657, for implementing a technical ITMP that results in:
• noticeable degradation to time-sensitive traffic, or
• the slowing of non-time-sensitive traffic to the extent that it amounts to blocking the content and therefore controlling the content and influencing the meaning and purpose of the telecommunication.
Within two weeks, I look forward to you either presenting us with a rebuttal of our evidence or providing us with a plan to come into compliance with the Act. Failure to provide a meaningful rebuttal or an effective plan will result in my recommendation to Commissioners to hold a show-cause hearing. I look forward to your response by 12:00 pm, February 3, 2012.
“This is a historic day in Canadian tech and telecom history. This is a big win for not just Canadian Internet users but also for game developers, who have also been extremely frustrated with the use of throttling. We hope that the evidence uncovered today by the CRTC’s investigations will also help game developers improve online environments. Their product is being hindered by Cisco’s throttling equipment causing problems with connectivity and lag in a lot of gaming environments.” Co-Founder Jason Koblovsky stated.
Co-Founder Teresa Murphy added, “I think we’re all just glad that the CRTC looked further into the issue and essentially agreed with our October 14th response to the Commission where we stated other games and programs were being affected by faulty throttling equipment and software. Jason, myself, and I’m sure many other gamers on Rogers Cable Internet, are all looking forward to the day that this entire fiasco is resolved, as its been a long time coming now. I hope in the future, Rogers will run more extensive testing of their throttling rules before pushing them to all their systems. I also hope that in the future, if a Rogers employee promises to their customers that they’ll have the update reverted because it caused problems with multiple programs (as what happened in October 2010 on the Rogers forum on DSLReports.com – a forum which Rogers employees release official statements on), Rogers will actually follow through on the promise instead of leaving customers blowing in the wind.”

In other words, they got owned, hard.
Because I was curious, I pulled the PDF copy of the letter from
here

Letter Ottawa, 20 January 2012
Our Reference: 545613
BY EMAIL
Mr. Ken Thompson
Director and Counsel Copyright and Broadband Law
Rogers Communications Inc.
333 Bloor Street, East
Toronto, ON M4W 1G9
ken.thompson@rci.rogers.com
Dear Mr. Thompson:
Re: File 545613,
Internet Traffic Management Practice (“ITMP”),
Section 36 of the Telecommunications Act, S.C. 1993, c. 38, as amended (“Act”), and Paragraphs 126 and 127 of Telecom Regulatory Policy CRTC 2009-657 (“TRP CRTC 2009-657”)
I am writing with respect to the above noted file that was transferred to the Compliance and Enforcement Sector by the Telecommunications Sector on October 27, 2011.
Compliance and Enforcement Sector staff has been reviewing this file since its referral to our sector. Based on the preliminary results of our ongoing investigation, Commission staff is of the belief that Rogers Communications Inc. (“Rogers”) applies a technical ITMP to unidentified traffic using default peer-to-peer (“P2P”) ports. On the basis of our evidence to date, any traffic from an unidentified time-sensitive application making use of P2P ports will be throttled resulting in noticeable degradation of such traffic. Enclosed please find a summary of our evidence. Full details, if necessary can be obtained by request through my office.
As you know, prior Commission approval is required pursuant to section 36 of the Act, as described at paragraphs 126 and 127 of TRP CRTC 2009-657, for implementing a technical ITMP that results in:
noticeable degradation to time-sensitive traffic, or
the slowing of non-time-sensitive traffic to the extent that it amounts to blocking the content and therefore controlling the content and influencing the meaning and purpose of the telecommunication.
Within two weeks, I look forward to you either presenting us with a rebuttal of our evidence or providing us with a plan to come into compliance with the Act. Failure to provide a meaningful rebuttal or an effective plan will result in my recommendation to Commissioners to hold a show-cause hearing. I look forward to your response by 12:00 pm, February 3, 2012.
Sincerely,
Andrea Rosen
Chief Compliance and Enforcement Officer
Summary of Evidence
File 545613
This attachment summarizes evidence pursuant to the above noted file, which is an ongoing investigation of Rogers Communications Inc.’s (“Rogers”) Internet Traffic Management Practice (“ITMP”) by the Compliance and Enforcement Sector.
The Compliance and Enforcement Sector’s ongoing investigation includes examining a number of key performance indicators (“KPIs”), such as:
TCP resets, TCP syn/acks, connection status
Latency in milliseconds
TCP Window size
Packet loss
Packets per second
Average packet sizes
Retransmission of packets
Dropped connections
Active connections/sessions
Upstream available bandwidth limits
Packet sequence numbers
Other TCP and UDP traffic statistics and analysis.
As Cisco is Rogers’ vendor,1 the Compliance and Enforcement Sector had and continues to have tests conducted against information from the website of Cisco Systems, Inc. (“Cisco”). Preliminary testing results indicate that unidentified traffic using default P2P ports, as identified in the Cisco SCA BB Protocol Reference Guide,2 is throttled. Such results further indicate that:
default P2P ports for TCP traffic are subject to throttling, except port 6969, and
until December 20, 2011, all default P2P ports for UDP traffic were subject to throttling.
Compliance and Enforcement Sector staff also notes Rogers’ disclosure of its network management policy, which indicates that an application may not attain full speed if encrypted and not using a standard port for the application/protocol in question.3 Moreover, while Rogers has stated that misclassification occurs in only a few cases,4 staff notes that Cisco identifies various applications that may have been misclassified.5
——————————————————————————–
1 Rogers letter dated September 27, 2011, at 3.
2 Cisco SCA BB Protocol Reference Guide: [Cisco SCA BB Protocol Reference Guide].
3 Rogers Network Management Policy: [Rogers Network Management Policy].
4 Rogers letter, supra note 1 at 3.
5 Cisco Service Control Application for Broadband Protocol Pack Notes, available online: [Cisco PP Notes].

So I monitored this story to it’s conclusion this February, and we have a
promise
from rogers indicating they’d stop throttling by the end of 2012.

Rogers promises to end internet throttling
Phased-in approach will begin next month, with all customers included by end of year
Prithi Yelaja CBC News Posted: Feb 3, 2012 3:33 PM ET Last Updated: Feb 3, 2012 6:55 PM ET
Rogers has decided to end internet throttling by the end of this year in response to a CRTC probe.
net throttling?Rogers has promised to stop “throttling” internet traffic on its network by the end of this year, in response to an investigation by the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission.
In a letter to the CRTC Friday, Rogers stated it would stop all traffic shaping including bandwidth throttling — limiting a user’s upload or download speeds — through a phased-in approach that is to begin next month.
“New technologies and ongoing investments in network capacity will allow Rogers to begin phasing out that policy starting in March 2012,” wrote Kenneth Engelhart, senior vice-president of regulatory affairs.
“These changes will be introduced to half of Rogers existing internet customers by June 2012 and to its remaining customers by December 2012.”
The move follows a similar decision by Bell to cease throttling on its network starting March 1.
Internet traffic management
Internet traffic management refers to techniques used by network managers to slow down some types of traffic in favour of others. In particular, some internet service providers say they slow down applications that use large amounts of bandwidth, but don’t dramatically affect the user’s ability to use the application when they are slowed down, such as peer-to-peer file sharing.
They say that allows them to guarantee higher speeds and better quality of service for time-sensitive applications such as video streaming that don’t work properly when they are slowed down. However, problems can arise if the technology used to distinguish different types of applications mistakenly classifies time-sensitive traffic as peer-to-peer.
“This is a huge step for internet openness in Canada, and [comes] after a long uphill battle with big telecom,” said Steve Anderson of OpenMedia.ca, a grassroots advocacy group that has protested usage-based billing and is credited with preventing bills allowing electronic surveillance from being tied into the government’s omnibus crime bill.
“Within months of one another Bell and Rogers have announced that they will stop throttling the internet and limiting online choice. This has been a long time coming — more and more Canadians are up in arms about threats to internet openness, and it’s about time that big telecom bends to the public interest.”
OpenMedia.ca pushed for and won Internet openness rules in 2009, but has since been pushing for enforcement of those rules, said Anderson.
“The consumer complaints process is the sole mechanism in place and Rogers’ response to the CRTC represents a potential first step in changing this broken system,” he said.
However, Jason Koblovsky, founder of the Canadian Gamers Organization had some concerns about Rogers’ intention to end throttling.
“Rogers failed to provide the CRTC with technical data as to which games and applications they have tested themselves. Without the technical data from their tests on online games, [we] worry that Rogers’ response may be an attempt to mislead the CRTC and the public. We continue to call on Rogers to make these numbers public,” Koblovsky said.
Last month, the CRTC notified Rogers it was violating federal net neutrality rules by deliberately slowing or throttling time-sensitive internet traffic, specifically online games.
The CRTC based its findings on the results of an investigation in collaboration with Cisco Systems, the hardware and software vendor that Rogers uses.
The probe was launched last year after a complaint by the Canadian Gamers Organization that accused Rogers of hindering online games, such as World of Warcraft and Call of Duty: Black Ops, in violation of the federal regulator’s guidelines.
The Telecommunications Act and CRTC regulations allow throttling of peer-to-peer file sharing programs like BitTorrent, but not of time-sensitive internet traffic like video chatting or gaming.
Rogers had until Friday to either rebut the evidence gathered by the probe or provide the CRTC with a plan to comply with the act — or face a hearing on the matter.
As part of its rebuttal, Rogers said it would cease all traffic shaping by the end of 2012.
The company successfully dealt with the issue of throttling last March, and the CRTC’s “tests were of an issue that had nothing to do with gaming,” Engelhart told CBC News in a phone interview Friday.
“We’re pretty confident we solved those problems last year,” he said.
However, “out of an abundance of caution we have toggled the equipment so it does not slow down unclassified traffic on peer-to-peer file sharing ports.”

What’s this tell me about the major cable provider?
They can’t manage their network to save their lives, they’re looking for ways out and not providing all the data, because they want to Hhide.
As this year progresses, we’ll soon see what changes are committed to the network over the year.
Happy commenting.