Re: Airtel wants to pierce net neutrality, charges more for VoIP

If 'toll road' is the only road available, or if the operator of toll road,
deliberately chokes the free service-road to unfairly increase uptake of
it's toll roads, then it is very much anti net-neutrality. In this
particular case, it was the former, where 'toll way' would have been the
only way. BTW, we do have one such real life example... the elevated
expressway to the Bangalore International Airport !! There is simply no
alternative. This isn't anywhere close to being "level playing field".

The prioritization of traffic is something that the open public Internet
has tried to support for several years now, in form of various forms of
end-to-end QoS, but the heterogeneity of access technologies and the
"weakest link" have made it somewhat difficult to achieve.

What Airtel tried to do might not be against any current Indian regulation
(I do not know for sure), however one can argue that in the greater public
interest such regulation be introduced post haste. Prioritization of vital
traffic is acceptable (like in the case of M2M traffic that is a matter of
life-and-death or mission-critical), however this should be an exception
not a rule. However there needs to be transparency in terms of what traffic
is considered mission-critical and thus set at a higher priority. What is
not acceptable is deliberate slow-down or charging-extra for (delivery of)
OTT traffic, to create a disincentive for it's usage, and to give the
service provider the undue advantage.


On Mon, Dec 29, 2014 at 3:15 PM, Kiritkumar Lathia <[email protected]>
wrote:

> Dear All,
>
> I think a lot of issues are being treated under "net neutrality". "Net
> Neutrality", *according to my understanding*, means that all internet
> services providers (not just ISPs) should treat all lawful traffic in the
> same manner (in terms of priority) and should not
> favour/block/discriminate/... one type of traffic compared to other; i.e.
> no "toll roads", "censorship", "discrimination", ...
>
> Net neutrality does not mean there can not be different pricing for
> different string types of 1's and 0's (traffic, content, ...) (business
> models) - clearly what Airtel is trying to do.
>
> What major backbone operators were trying to do was to have "toll roads"
> for certain types of traffic and, guess what, those who would have to pay
> the toll are most vociferous with army of lobbyists to block toll roads
> concept since why should they share their revenue from (internet)
> contents/services they sell to the pipe owners who delivers these to end
> user? Why should there be "ordinary, first class, bulk, heavy packages,
> courier" (postal) delivery services (on internet)? Why should one (heavy)
> service not hog the network? To me these are the "net neutrality" issues
> being debated everywhere.
>
> However, these are to some extent yesterday's issues (in terms of net
> evolution). With M2M, D2D, "smart" everything, driverless cars, etc. etc.
> the internet is going to change completely with human traffic a small part
> and one needs to look at the issue with different perspectives! Should
> medical emergency (e-Health - think of ambulances) have the same priority
> as movie download/upload (think of a big truck hogging the road and
> ambulance can not go through)? What happens then? Movie downloaded
> perfectly but the human is dead!
>
> Could Airtel action as a "pipe provider" be considered "discriminatory"
> and hence against "net neutrality"? But then is that against Indian
> regulations? If so, which ones since I do not believe there are any
> regulations against what Airtel is doing as part of its business model?
>
> Not an easy subject!
>
> BR
> Kirit
>
>
>
>
>
> On 29 December 2014 at 08:35, Banibrata Dutta <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>> We have 4-5 odd service providers per circle, and at a time there were
>> 7-8. Competition played a crucial role in keeping telecom prices in check
>> and bringing them down, over the last decade. However, the 4-5 service
>> providers have kind-of settled into their niches (how so ever vast or
>> wide), and you hardly see any movers-n-shakers in the competitions as far
>> as pricing is concerned. The price changes are highly cartelized, and it is
>> functioning like a typical oligarchy. One operator announces a price change
>> and others follow. Of late, most of the changes have been removal of
>> promotional tariffs, removing discounts, increasing fares. Adding Reliance
>> Jio to the mix is expected to cause some shakeout, and we already saw some
>> effect of that with Airtel pricing 4G-LTE data at price-points
>> same-as/lower than 3G. However, it is a matter of time before things settle
>> back. For something that is dependent on limited resource (RF spectrum),
>> there is a limit to how many competitors you can finally have. So,
>> competition alone - is not going to be beneficial for consumers. We do need
>> pro net-neutrality regulations as well.
>>
>> On the question of net neutrality, and inferior quality internet services
>> -- that is a bogey as good or bad as any other. For a moment, let us go
>> back 5 years in time when many operators introduced 3G and video
>> (technologies like H.324/M which gave fairly usable quality of video
>> conversation and conferencing)... what was the uptake ? What was the
>> revenue that operators were making through ill-conceived and ill-priced
>> offerings ? What chunk of that revenue has been eroded by Skype ?
>>
>> Finally, I have no idea how net-neutrality is a backdoor effort to bring
>> more government interference ? I've not doubt that Govt would love to get
>> it's finger on every internet user's pulse (wiretap) and have a kill-switch
>> handy !! IMHO, net-neturality does exactly the opposite. Net neutrality
>> federates the ability and intelligence to have meaningful communication...
>> highly decentralizing it... technology and business-model wise.
>>
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Dec 29, 2014 at 3:10 AM, Ratnendra Pandey <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> We  should allow Airtel to charge for VOIP or streaming if market would
>>> let it do so.  And we should also allow consumers to choose a provider with
>>> whom they agree on charges and service levels. This will bring more profits
>>> into the industry which will be then followed by more suppliers trying to
>>> take a share out of that profit.   The consumers best bet is a strong
>>> competition providers, a  market in which suppliers are fighting like cats
>>> and dogs for business from consumers.
>>>
>>>   The problem is VOIP is prohibited in India ( My knowledge of Indian
>>> telecom my be outdated. I would like to be excused and corrected if the
>>> facts have changed).  The consumers will immensely benefit if we have free
>>> competition among providers and consumer use their purchasing power and
>>> market knowledge to  pick the right services. These kind of disputes will
>>> disappear if the market is freed and innovation is allowed in product and
>>> services.
>>>
>>> Some have suggested net-neutrality. All the talk of net-neutrality is a
>>> backdoor effort to bring more government interference into already
>>> substandard internet/telecom market in India. We may like to talk of fancy
>>> words like net-neutrality and what not. But, I think the focus should be on
>>> making high quality internet available to anyone who is willing to pay
>>> market price for it.
>>>
>>>
>>> If I have to make a choice between net-neutrality and net-availability.
>>> Net-availability will be my choice.  I do not want an inferior internet
>>> that net-neutrality will bring.
>>>
>>> Instead suggesting more restrictions on Airtel, why do we not petition
>>> for opening markets and removing legal barriers on commercialization of any
>>> technology?
>>>
>>> Sincerely,
>>> Ratnendra Pandey
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ------------------------------
>>> Date: Sat, 27 Dec 2014 06:40:24 +0530
>>> From: [email protected]
>>> To: [email protected]
>>> CC: [email protected]
>>> Subject: Re: [india-gii] Airtel wants to pierce net neutrality, charges
>>> more for VoIP
>>>
>>>
>>> Is anyone aware of any organised response / reaction to this issue? The
>>> line silence is deafening
>>>
>>> On Thu, Dec 25, 2014 at 10:51 PM, Srini RamaKrishnan <[email protected]>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Airtel to charge up to 16 times* the standard data rate for using
>>> Skype and other VoIP services
>>>
>>> Airtel seems to be implying that this move has TRAI sanction.
>>>
>>> *per rate mentioned in other newspapers
>>>
>>> --
>>>
>>> Airtel wants you to pay extra for using Skype, Viber, more
>>>
>>> If you use services like Skype or Viber to make calls over Airtel's
>>> mobile data network, be prepared to pay extra. Yes, we know you
>>> already pay Airtel for for that data. Doesn't matter. Airtel has added
>>> this line to the terms and conditions of its 2G and 3G data plans:
>>> "All Internet/data packs or plans (through which customer can avail
>>> discounted rate) shall only be valid for internet browsing and will
>>> exclude VoIP (Both incoming/ Outgoing). VoIP over data connectivity
>>> would be charged at standard data rates of 4p / 10 KB (3G service) and
>>> 10p / 10 KB (2G service)."
>>>
>>> VoIP, or Voice over IP, simply means voice data that is tranferred
>>> over the internet. The next time you're shooting the breeze on Viber,
>>> Skype or Google Hangouts on your phone, keep in mind that Airtel will
>>> charge you you even if you're already paying for that data.
>>>
>>> Airtel's move flies in the face of net neutrality, which is a hot
>>> topic round the globe. In the United States, for instance, there is a
>>> proposal to provide "fast lanes" for data intensive video-streaming
>>> services like Netflix and Hulu. Simply put, internet services
>>> providers want to charge these companies extra for carrying their bits
>>> to the consumer, even though the consumers are already paying the
>>> service providers for internet access in the first place. Last month,
>>> President Barack Obama came out strongly in support of net neutrality
>>> by saying that "a free and open internet was as critical to Americans'
>>> lives as electricity and telephone service and should be regulated
>>> like those utilities to protect consumers."
>>>
>>> The timing of this move isn't surprising. Whatsapp, which has wiped
>>> off a large part of SMS revenues for mobile service providers in
>>> India, has long been rumoured to introduce voice-calling over data.
>>> Indians already pay some of the lowest rates in the world for voice
>>> calls and carriers like Airtel are afraid that once people start using
>>> data to make voice calls, these revenues will be wiped out as well.
>>>
>>> Indeed, in August, the Telecom Regulation Authority of India (TRAI)
>>> had quashed a proposal from Indian telecom companies to charge
>>> over-the-top players like Whatsapp and Viber extra "connectivity
>>> charges." TRAI stated that telcos could make up for the lost revenue
>>> with the increase in mobile data usage.
>>>
>>> In a statement to Hindustan Times, an Airtel spokesperson said: "We
>>> have made some revisions in the composition of our data packs, and
>>> will offer VoIP (Voice over internet protocol) connectivity through an
>>> independent pack that will be launched shortly. Our customers can
>>> continue enjoying voice calls over data connectivity by opting for
>>> this VoIP pack, or simply use VoIP services on pay-as-you-go basis."
>>>
>>> Which basically means this: unless you buy a seperate VoIP pack,
>>> you'll be charged extra for making calls using Skype, Viber and other
>>> services. If you don't think net neutrality is something to lose sleep
>>> over yet, think about this: If it's VoIP today, operators might start
>>> charging you extra to stream YouTube or use a music service like Saavn
>>> tomorrow. It is not immediately clear if other operators will follow
>>> Airtel's move.
>>>
>>> http://www.hindustantimes.com/StoryPage/Print/1300013.aspx
>>> © Copyright © 2013 HT Media Limited. All Rights Reserved.
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> India-gii mailing list
>>> India-gii-IAPFreCvJWP2/[email protected]
>>> https://lists.india-gii.org/mailman/listinfo/india-gii
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________ India-gii mailing list
>>> India-gii-IAPFreCvJWP2/[email protected]
>>> https://lists.india-gii.org/mailman/listinfo/india-gii
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> India-gii mailing list
>>> India-gii-IAPFreCvJWP2/[email protected]
>>> https://lists.india-gii.org/mailman/listinfo/india-gii
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> regards,
>> Banibrata
>> http://www.linkedin.com/in/bdutta
>> http://twitter.com/edgeliving
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> India-gii mailing list
>> India-gii-IAPFreCvJWP2/[email protected]
>> https://lists.india-gii.org/mailman/listinfo/india-gii
>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> India-gii mailing list
> India-gii-IAPFreCvJWP2/[email protected]
> https://lists.india-gii.org/mailman/listinfo/india-gii
>
>


-- 
regards,
Banibrata
http://www.linkedin.com/in/bdutta
http://twitter.com/edgeliving

_______________________________________________
India-gii mailing list
India-gii-IAPFreCvJWP2/[email protected]
https://lists.india-gii.org/mailman/listinfo/india-gii