Allow ISPs to access inside wire — for a fee: CNOC

The CRTC should set up a regime to allow internet service providers to use the inside wire of a multi-unit building, but they should have to pay for that access, a group representing small internet service providers is arguing. The Canadian Network Operators Consortium (CNOC) asked the regulator to “create a cost recovery mechanism that would enable the owners of new fibre inside wire to recover their costs of providing access to inside wire when facilities-based seek such access.” CNOC was responding to a Part 1 application filed by a company called Cloudwifi Inc. The company is asking the CRTC to order BCE Inc. to give Cloudwifi access to Bell’s fibre connections inside a Toronto apartment building in order to deliver internet service. The regulator has a regime that states competitors can use the in-building infrastructure of another company for free or a nominal charge, and it has been used to deliver phone, TV and internet service over copper infrastructure -- but not for fibre connections. Bell has argued that Cloudwifi shouldn’t be granted access because it’s not designated by the CRTC as a competitive local exchange carrier (CLEC), or landline phone service provider. CNOC said in its submission that argument “represents a reliance on outdated regulation that is neither competitively nor technologically neutral,” and that any telecom service provider, including facilities-based ISPs, should have access. “Bell Canada has chosen to take an unduly narrow interpretation of the Commission’s past decisions regarding access to inside wire, which only dealt with access by LECs and broadcasting distribution undertakings … as these types of facilities-based were the only parties seeking access to inside wire in the late 1990s and early 2000s,” CNOC said. Iristel Inc. also said in its own filing that requirement was outdated, calling it “odd and burdensome.” If upheld, it means ISPs would have to register as CLECs even if they don’t intend to offer landline service, creating a regulatory burden on both the small ISPs and the CRTC, it said. CNOC argued that one aspect of fibre that’s very different from copper wire is that the costs of deploying haven’t yet been fully recovered. “The recovery of the costs of deploying fibre inside wire is a particular concern for the many non-incumbent that are expending significant and scarce capital in deploying fibre inside wire in buildings on the assumption that they will be able to recover their costs and make a reasonable return on their investment by selling services to end-users,” CNOC said. CNOC’s position, though, wasn’t shared by all small ISPs. Novus Entertainment Inc., which provides telecoms services to multi-dwelling units in the Vancouver area, said inside wire is generally regarded as the building’s common property. “Not once have we, or our competitors, been concerned with the ownership of the inside wiring or the P3000 box that may form part of the inside wiring. There is a good reason for this in existing buildings. More often than not, there is no record of payment for the inside wiring and so no one can assert ownership,” Novus said in its filing. “Also, most condominium corporations would be more than a little surprised to learn that the inside wiring is not part of the common property of the condominium development.” It said it has never paid another company for the use of inside wiring or been asked to do so, and it’s never denied another telecom access to its own inside wire. “It is Novus’ position that inside wiring should always be considered to be a part of the common property owned and controlled by the condominium corporation, regardless of which party paid for its installation. This allows individual unit owners to have the service provider of their choice, just as a single family home owner has that choice,” it said. The idea of choice was also echoed in the submission from the Public Interest Advocacy Centre (PIAC), which argued that allowing “facilities-based ISPs access to the inside wire owned by carriers and BDUs would promote competition and maximize consumer choice in subscribing to the telecommunications services that best meet their needs.” Bell also filed its response to the application Tuesday, doubling down on its earlier argument. “Because Cloudwifi lacks the status of a BDU or a LEC, Cloudwifi has no legal, regulatory or other rights of use or access to the Bell-owned facilities at issue,” it said. Bell also took issue with the way Cloudwifi has been interconnecting with its equipment, including refusing to inform Bell of those interconnections. “From Cloudwifi's repeated illegal use and interconnection with our in-building wire and equipment at the eight MDU properties herein described, it is now apparent that Cloudwifi's practice is to use equipment which is technically incompatible with ours, and to perform installations using substandard workmanship,” Bell said. “This is demonstrated by their repeated pattern of installing their wire and other equipment that does not fit within our service enclosures, leaving equipment hanging and generally in a haphazard condition, and failing to ensure that our enclosures are closed and properly secured to prevent damage and degradation to the delicate fibre optic wire inside.” Cloudwifi co-founder Gary Kenning said in an email Wednesday those allegations are “baseless and untrue,” and that the company would be filing information in its reply “that will disprove the allegations.” — With reporting by Anja Karadeglija at akarad@thewirereport.ca and editing by Ahmad Hathout at ahathout@thewirereport.ca

Allow ISPs to access inside wire — for a fee: CNOC

News | October 17, 2018

Unlock all the Canadian telecom, broadcasting and digital media news you need.

FREE TRIAL

SUBSCRIBE

Inside The Wire Report

Information

Hill Times Publishing

Get in Touch With Us

Allow ISPs to access inside wire — for a fee: CNOC

News | October 17, 2018

Unlock all the Canadian telecom, broadcasting and digital media news you need.

FREE TRIAL

SUBSCRIBE

Related Stories

Telus’ arguments for incumbent access to wholesale regime not supported by competitors

Bell won’t participate in subsidized broadband projects if wholesale access for Big Three continues, signs agreement with CNOC

Rogers’ purchase of Bell’s MLSE stake not being challenged by Competition Bureau ‘at this time’

Telecom industry players look to Senate for greater copper theft prevention

Reuse & Permissions

Inside The Wire Report

Information

Hill Times Publishing

Get in Touch With Us