Re: cellular operator association has bizarre interpretation of Net neutrality

Okay, perhaps the point about NIXI being international POP is not accurate.
Found some text which indicates carrying international traffic via NIXI is
prohibited. I think there are lot of knowledgeable people on this forum who
know lot better about this arrangement. However, does it still change the
cost-structure argument so much ? I wonder.

On Thu, May 7, 2015 at 8:15 PM, Banibrata Dutta <[email protected]>
wrote:

> Admittedly, I'm not too clued into the access/core network architeture of
> ISPs in India, but my simplistic view was:
>
> - Data ISP's "own" and "operate" the access network (I'm not aware of any
> exceptions, since access isn't unbundled in India)
> - Data ISP's use leased-line (the only copper, fiber-optic or such, that
> could be riding over infrastructure of the multi-play telco biggies)
> transmission link to NIXI
> - NIXI runs the domestic and international POPs
>
> There is indeed a significant infrastructure cost for the transmission
> network, but I really doubt that this cost is the the common denominator
> determining profitability of service providers. Much of this infrastructure
> that is already laid out, is already paid for. Incremental investment in
> this, should be fully recoverable from data revenues, without pushing price
> to subscriber to 6x.
>
>
> On Thu, May 7, 2015 at 7:51 PM, Kiritkumar Lathia <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>> Banibrata,
>>
>> You are only looking at the "access" part - the so called last mile. Most
>> ISP in India lease the copper connection (your telephone wire) and the
>> investment required is not so much compared to the whole communication
>> infrastructure. That is why the "back haul" AT&T went bankrupt.
>>
>> I sincerely believe that the today's model of Internet is not sustainable
>> in the long term. The best way to imagine is the following:
>>
>> - someone builds the roads connecting two cities
>> - On The Top of this travel pedestrians, bicycles, carts, (private) cars,
>> lorries, buses, etc.
>>
>> Net Neutrality is that all travelers have equal access and no one is
>> favoured or charged extra for using the road
>> However, (some of) those using the roads charge their clients directly
>> (eg Skype-phone call, Netflix, On-line Stores, ...) or indirectly (i.e ad
>> revenue - Google/Facebook, etc.)
>>
>> The question then becomes: Who pays for the road builder who needs to
>> keep on improving the capacity and maintain the roads? How does he make
>> money on his investments? (I have used "he" as in English/English and so is
>> gender neutral!).
>>
>> Today, most fixed/mobile operators made money from pedestrians (voice
>> calls / sms / mms) but as these guys migrate to using cars / buses and do
>> not wish to charged anymore - who pays the road builder?
>>
>> Note:
>> - What COAI is proposing is that
>> --- *either*: all pedestrians pay more when they use cars/buses (6x
>> current rate may be exaggerated) - ie everybody pays a "toll charge"; or
>> else
>> --- *or*: all car / bus companies who took away their (pedestrian)
>> customers have to play by the same rules (build roads, pay for the land to
>> build roads, etc. - ie same norms). *They call this "net neutrality!"* -
>> not what everybody had defined it as such.
>>
>> - Facebook came up with a "free road usage" called "internet.org"
>> whereby the pedestrians pay nothing but only those bus/lorry companies (who
>> will provide service to pedestrian) who pay Facebook will be allowed to use
>> their road - this was breaking the "net neutrality" as is understood today
>> and the Facebook model was defended by its creator as "enabling
>> pedestrians" to be able to use road in the first place!
>>
>> So what next?
>>
>> Best wishes,
>> Kirit
>>
>>
>>
>> On 7 May 2015 at 15:08, Banibrata Dutta <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> If pure-play data ISP's can offer competing and sometimes much better
>>> data plans (check out ACT, YOU...), without any cross-subsidy from voice
>>> revenue, I wonder how can voice-centric telco's cook up this 6x increase in
>>> data-tariffs figure, especially given the massive difference in scale, at
>>> which the two operate. The pure-play data ISP has to contend with high (but
>>> not as high as RF) capex, and very high opex, due to the very challenging
>>> last-mile. Is the mobile telco's argument then boil down to cost of
>>> spectrum alone ?
>>>
>>> On Thu, May 7, 2015 at 5:59 PM, Kiritkumar Lathia <[email protected]>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Arun,
>>>>
>>>> Interesting definition indeed!
>>>>
>>>> I suppose they have sent sms to their clients asking them whether they
>>>> wish data rate to go up 6x or have "net neutrality" / "level playing field"
>>>> - so a normal person would agree with the second one as nobody wants their
>>>> data cost increased!
>>>>
>>>> What they are highlighting is the issue with "internet" per-se
>>>> globally. The classic example was in USA where the "pipe provider" was
>>>> (long distance) AT&T and it went bankrupt. It was bought by a "baby bell"
>>>> mobile company and kept the name AT&T). Most of the investment is in
>>>> providing connectivity and the "last mile" people (ISP or mobile) make
>>>> (some) money by direct link with end customer.
>>>>
>>>> All, incl. mobile operator, use IP since the circuit switched
>>>> "exchanges" are being phased out rapidly since they are no longer
>>>> economical. The main revenue return-on-investment was and still is "voice";
>>>> so if OTT cannabilises the main revenue stream, who pays for the massive
>>>> investments required?
>>>>
>>>> Best wishes,
>>>> Kirit
>>>>
>>>> On 7 May 2015 at 08:43, Arun Mehta <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> The cellular operators want the exact opposite of Net neutrality. They
>>>>> want anyone offering Net telephony, such as Skype, Whatsapp and Google
>>>>> Hangouts, to be forced to obtain a license and pay license fees.  If not,
>>>>> they will be forced to raise the cost for the awful data connectivity they
>>>>> offer by up to 6 times! Gee. Blackmail!
>>>>>
>>>>> They claim that within 10 days of launching an online campaign, they
>>>>> already have 4 million messages of support.
>>>>>
>>>>> I would like to know how they formulated the questions they asked.
>>>>> Unfortunately, you can't get any information from their website, until you
>>>>> register. Talk about openness.
>>>>>
>>>>> Airtel has already received a thrashing on Net neutrality. What does
>>>>> COAI expect, after such blackmail attempts?
>>>>>
>>>>> warmly,
>>>>>
>>>>> Arun Mehta
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> http://tech.firstpost.com/news-analysis/net-neutrality-cellular-operators-association-gets-support-of-4-million-indians-265981.html
>>>>>
>>>>> Four million mobile subscribers have supported COAI’s campaign
>>>>> favouring net neutrality for internet-based communication services like
>>>>> WhatsApp and Skype and their being subject to norms similar to those
>>>>> applying to mobile phone operators, the apex body of cellular operators
>>>>> said.
>>>>>
>>>>> “Sabka Internet, Sab ka Vikas — the campaign for net neutrality, net
>>>>> equality and consumer choice, has received support from over 40 lakh Indian
>>>>> mobile users in under a week,” the Cellular Operators Association of India
>>>>> (COAI) said in a statement here.
>>>>>
>>>>> “The entire mobile number database of supporters is auditable on
>>>>> request by the appropriate agency,” it added.
>>>>>
>>>>> Launched last week, “Sabka Internet, Sab ka Vikas”, a campaign about
>>>>> making the Internet accessible and affordable for every Indian, seeks a
>>>>> level playing field with net-based services like Skype and WhatApp.
>>>>>
>>>>> The industry body said if the telecom operators are not offered a
>>>>> level playing field with net-based services, then their businesses would be
>>>>> viable only by raising data prices by up to six times.
>>>>>
>>>>> It comes against the backdrop of the debate over net neutrality and
>>>>> allegations that telecom operators are hurting the concept of free internet
>>>>> access by giving preferential treatment to a select few service providers.
>>>>>
>>>>> “COAI started the outreach effort to ensure that mobile customers have
>>>>> the freedom to benefit from the power of the Internet in the way they would
>>>>> wish to, including the choice of platform, device and technology,” said
>>>>> COAI director general Rajan S. Mathews.
>>>>>
>>>>> The net neutrality principle came into focus in India following mobile
>>>>> operator Airtel’s launch of an open marketing platform ‘Airtel Zero’, and
>>>>> the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India’s consultation paper on whether
>>>>> telecom firms could be allowed to charge different rates for different uses
>>>>> of Internet data such as e-mail, browsing and for use of apps like
>>>>> Whatsapp, Viber and Skype.
>>>>>
>>>>> *IANS*
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> 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
>>>
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> regards,
> Banibrata
> http://www.linkedin.com/in/bdutta
> http://twitter.com/edgeliving
>



-- 
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