Wednesday, 11 November 2009



Moderator: Mr. A. Horne, General Director, Telecommunications Regulatory Authority (TRA), Bahrain
GSR Discussion Paper on Coexistence of traditional and IP interconnection, [presentation]
Ms. Natalija Gelvanovska, Head, Network and Access Division, Communications Regulatory Authority, Lithuania
Interactive panel discussion:
  • Coexistence of both worlds: how can traditional strongly regulated interconnection coexist with self-regulated IP interconnection?
  • Data transport/interconnection: who pays for what?
  • Net neutrality: what does it mean? Is it a developed country issue? How will it affect developing countries?
  • Mr. C. Lizcano Ortiz, Executive Director, Comisión de Regulación de Comunicaciones (CRC), Colombia
  • Mr. Hirohisa Furuichi, Director, Tariff Division, Telecommunication Business Department, Telecommunication Bureau, Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communications(MIC), Japan
  • Mr. S. A. M’Poue, Secretary General, Agence des Télécommunications de Côte d'Ivoire (ATCI), Côte d’Ivoire
  • Mr. E. Ndukwe, Executive Vice Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, Nigerian Communications Commission (NCC), Nigeria
In the internet world they use a completely different model. In the PSTN they now move to a different network. The IP-world has now come to telephony. The dilemma is what the new model will be.
Colombia:  We got a regulatory framework that looks in a converged way at markets. Colombia focuses on QoS, Content, Effectiveness and Efficiency, renumeration for the networks. The role of the regulator is critical.  
Ivory Coast: Our laws don’t look at IP. Nationally we can’t do IP interconnection. Internationally we can. We all know what regulation is for. But IP interconnection is not an issue yet in our country
Japan: We use interconnection mosty for traditional networks. We do unbundling in Japan. We have changed our interconnection rules to fit with the new networks like mobile and broadband. We think that it has had a good effect. NTT is now rolling out an ALL-IP FTTH network. For us the problem is how to separate the pricing for different services. We need a different accounting system for NGN Services. It was very difficult to calculate this well. It was also difficult to convince NTT to open up more Points of Interconnection.
Mediteranean country: we are struggling with the same problems as Japan. We are going to hybrid networks with IP in the core and all other technologies go to the edge. We are very interested to see how QoS is introduced and how it is costed.
Answer Japan: In Japan we have discussed Bill and Keep we have discovered it is too early to move to Bill and Keep. One of the problems is to end up with a transparent system. Secondly we see that it will have great impact on the User Tariff. It would allow the dominant carrier to do something …. (don’t know what)
Middle East country: The main problem with IP interconnection is Quality of Service. In order to solve this we need to monitor QoS
Japan: we have monitored the network congestion. And we look at traffic imbalance. We have promoted Internet Exchange Points. We further try to do practical experiments with QoS.
Moderator: with deep packet inspection we can monitor the Quality of Service statistics. It is more than solveable.
Question: how to deal with a transition phase.
Answer: it is an issue… needs to be solved when time is right. It is necessary to open up forums and to discuss openly.
Moderator: In Bahrain we have a full-IP network. The incumbent hasn’t put forward an Wholesale IP interconnect. We think this is because it is more expensive and we won’t accept it.
Question: I have comment. In the internet networks it wasn’t about termination. It was about peering. From the basic model of the internet it was hard to do regulation and we don’t regulation we think. We don’t need to regulate the interent. We need to move to peering and transit.
Answer: In Lithuania the incumbent doesn’t want to peer anymore. But how do I deal with that. I found that I have no real tools for that.
European nation: how do you do the costing in NGN?
Japan: The basic approach to calculate network costs is similar. We did a basic calculation and then modified it by a QoS factor.
Mod: It would be good to have a forum on this topic.
Middle East: The ITU is already dealing with questions regarding interconnection and the Hybrid networks. I do think the ITU can deal with this very well and we don’t need an extra forum on this subject.
Colombia: complements the ITU on its work on interconnection already.
Middle East: I would like to ask about the question on interconnection on symmetrical and asymmetrical network. The size of the networks is very important. Large operators and smallers have different traffic load.
Japan: we implement both symmetrical and asymmetrical interconnection. We do pay attention to net neutrality as well as not to have anyone block content of others. So there are rules for packet shaping.
Question: How does Japan deal with the numbering in NGN network
Mod: We’re all looking at how to deal with this problem in the future. The thing was that incumbents weren’t present in the IP world. In Bahrain we’re now looking at the costing of IP-services. Fundamentally there shouldn’t be a difference between the IP world and the old-world. But we should move to IP fast as the hybrid model is causing more problems than solving them.

No comments:

Post a Comment

Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.