Re: why strict Net neutrality works best: simple beats complex

The bandwidth issues was to be and still is to be solved by fiber-optics.
It seems like a distant dream, but should it be ?

Here's the penetration of FTTH by country, with S.Korea at the top.
http://www.thefoa.org/tech/ref/appln/2012_global_ranking_ftth_all_countries.jpg

S.Korea has a pop density of ~600/sq.km, India has ~400/sq.km.
There is a strong positive correlation between population density and FTTH
availability.
So I think ~50% penetration of fiber to the building or village in say
10-15 years is achievable -
given the high density of population in Indian cities. India has much
higher rural population,
which is why I say Fiber to the village.

People would be willing to pay for this if startups or telcos dangled a
juicy enough carrot -
no need to violate net neutrality. Those carrots do exist.

In fact FTTH brings an argument in favor of net neutrality.
This paper from Japan indicates that net neutrality helps in eventual
migration to FTTH.
So if FTTH is a goal as I believe it should be, then it is better for the
net to stay neutral.
http://www.tku.ac.jp/%7Ekuroda/Does%20net%20neutrality%20help%20the%20migration%20to%20FTTH_final.pdf



On Wed, May 20, 2015 at 12:33 AM, Ruchir T <[email protected]> wrote:

> Well, that should give more impetus to innovative applications that are
> lead by telcos right ?
>
> How about 3d stereoscopic video on demand ? Or HDMI video conferencing ?
> There's probably a reason why Facebook bought Oculus Rift. So much
> innovation is happening
> on kickstarter but nobody in the telco universe (or even this list) seems
> to notice.
> See this - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AOI5UW9khoQ . Beyond the cost
> question,
> you have to try imagine what the future internet should look like.
>
> Ten-fifteen years back one heard arguments about video and voice services
> needing higher
> priority or QoS. Now we see netflix and skype work just fine and the net
> is still neutral.
> So if the telcos have an argument to make, they are certainly not making
> it effectively.
>
> Vickram is right, the road analogy only goes so far and the politicians
> are not the ones
> you have to convince.
>
> On Wed, May 20, 2015 at 12:09 AM, Suresh Ramasubramanian <
> [email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Compare the costs of phone and data service in India with that elsewhere
>> - what we have is almost the cheapest in the world
>>
>> Wafer thin margins which generally get padded by value added services not
>> plain voice and data which are already commodity - and which require
>> exactly the same sort of software and equipment that telcos use worldwide
>>
>> --srs
>>
>> > On 20-May-2015, at 12:15 pm, Narendra Sisodiya <
>> narendra-djpCnAWmwNRnjiQx+Zhyb1aTQe2KTcn/@public.gmane.org> wrote:
>> >
>> > I simply do not understand that why people are saying telco put huge
>> investment or telco need lots of money for infrastructure.
>> > See we public are not responsible
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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