Telecom Commission Letter addressed to Samer Bishay (Ice Wireless)

Ottawa, 3 March 2016

Our reference:  8620-J106-201601633

BY EMAIL

Mr. Samer Bishay
President & CEO
Ice Wireless
675 Cochrane Drive, 6th floor, East Tower
Markham, Ontario  L3R 0B8
regulatory@icewireless.ca

RE:  Part 1 application by Ice Wireless Inc. relating to Rogers Communications Inc. attempt to disconnect Ice Wireless Inc. and the proper interpretation of Telecom Regulatory Policy CRTC 2015-177 – Request for information

Dear Mr. Bishay:

In order for the Commission to make a decision on the interim relief requested by Ice Wireless Inc. (Ice Wireless) in the above-mentioned application, Ice Wireless is to provide the Commission with its responses to the following questions by 4 March 2016. Please repeat the questions in your response.

  1. In its 1 March 2016 response to Commission staff’s 26 February request for information, Rogers Communications Inc. (Rogers) submitted in Rogers(CRTC)26Feb2016-1 that:

Rogers is unable to distinguish between Ice Wireless customers and Sugar Mobile customers when they are roaming on Rogers’ network. Sugar Mobile customers are using the same international mobile subscriber identity (IMSI) range as Ice Wireless.

Rogers also submitted in Rogers (CRTC)26Feb2016-2 that:

A simpler and less costly solution available to Ice Wireless is if Sugar Mobile used its own IMSI range. This would allow Rogers to differentiate between Sugar Mobile and Ice Wireless subscribers. Ice Wireless could also make alternate roaming arrangements for its Sugar Mobile subscribers or simply stop allowing Sugar Mobile’s customers from accessing Rogers’ network. Ice Wireless is fully capable of preventing Sugar Mobile from using Rogers’ network if it so chose.

  1. Do Sugar Mobile customers use the same international mobile subscriber identity (IMSI) Mobile Network Code (MNC) as Ice Wireless?
  2. Does Ice Wireless agree that an “IMSI range” means a range of IMSI Mobile Subscription Identification Numbers (MSIN)? If not, please submit your definition of an IMSI range.
  3. Do Sugar Mobile customers use the same international mobile subscriber identity (IMSI) range as Ice Wireless as claimed by Rogers?
  4. Do the IMSIs for all the Sugar Mobile subscriber’s SIM cards that are in use or have been distributed, shipped or delivered to sales partners as of 26 February 2016 fall within a distinct range that could be identified by Rogers as Sugar Mobile subscribers?
  5. Comment on Rogers’ statement that if Sugar Mobile used its own IMSI range, this would allow Rogers able to differentiate between Sugar Mobile subscribers and Ice Wireless subscribers?
  6. Comment on Rogers’ statement that Ice Wireless is fully capable of preventing Sugar Mobile from using Rogers’ network if it so chose.

Please file your response with the Commission using the secured service “My CRTC Account” (Partner Log In or GCKey), serving a copy on all parties copied with this letter.

Sincerely,

Original signed by

Kay Saicheua
Director, Competition and Emergency Service Policy
Telecommunications Sector
c.c.:  Christian Tacit, ctacit@tacitlaw.com
David Watt, david.watt@rci.rogers.com
Geoffrey White, gwhite@piac.ca
John Lawford, jlawford@piac.ca
Philippe Gauvin, bell.regulatory@bell.ca
Nathalie MacDonald, regulatory.matters@corp.eastlink.ca
Jean-François Mezei, jfmezei@vaxination.ca
William Sandiford, regulatory@cnoc.ca
Kim Wardle, kim.wardle@crtc.gc.ca
Josiane Lord, josiane.lord@crtc.gc.ca

Date modified: