Internet backbone interconnection arrangements should remain unregulated, the International Chamber of Commerce Commission on E-Business, IT and Telecoms said Tuesday in a discussion paper. Commercially negotiated contracts connecting the national and international backbone, content and Internet service providers have “fuelled and sustained the massive growth” of the Internet, it said. But despite the huge success of these agreements, some governments have proposed regulating them based on claims that regulation could spur further investment, it said. The different forms of interconnection contracts, such as paid peering, settlement-free peering and transit, have made possible mushrooming Internet usage as well as corresponding increases in traffic from new multimedia content, it said. Routing of international Internet traffic used to be U.S.-centric, and then became more established in Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development countries, it said. The latest trend is for routing to be “rest of world-centric,” with Internet Exchange Points increasingly prevalent in emerging markets, fostering global development of local traffic and content and further reducing inefficient international Internet traffic flows, it said. The impact of the trends on worldwide Internet traffic has been significant, it said. Bandwidth connections from each region of the world to North America have dropped over the last decade, and local IXPs in multiple countries have now supplanted most of the need for international connectivity, it said. As regional fiber networks roll out, bringing regional connectivity, expensive, non-optimal, trans-Atlantic and trans-Pacific routing has decreased, it said. Europe has surpassed the U.S. as the preferred transit point for African traffic, it said; Latin America is now the region most heavily reliant on U.S. connectivity. IXPs tend to be created in metropolitan areas where it’s less expensive for ISPs to connect, it said. A bottom-up, ISP community-driven approach that’s flexible in terms of voluntary interconnection has been shown to be more effective in developing nations than top-down mandates, it said. Current proposals to regulate international Internet infrastructure are an attempt to shift costs between countries instead of the underlying traffic flows that cause those costs, it said. But the latter approach has “been the successful market-driven model over the past 15 years,” and policymakers should promote successful competitive models before imposing rules that could suppress traffic flows and investment incentives, it said. There has long been long-standing interest expressed in the ITU-T study group on economic policy issues for moving from the commercially driven framework for international interconnection agreements to a model that would involve government intervention on the structure of such agreements and the payment mechanisms, the International Chamber of Commerce told us. Since 2008, there are growing calls in preparation for two major ITU conferences in 2012 for implementation of an ITU recommendation on alternative approaches to the commercially driven model, it said. The two events in 2012 are the World Telecommunication Standardization Assembly, and the World Conference on International Telecommunications (WCIT-12), it said. Going into WCIT-12, there are proposals to amend the International Telecommunications Regulations to include the principles raised in discussions, it said. The study group beginning in 1992 discussed “International Charging Arrangements for Internet Services” (ICAIS) starting in 1998, it said. The 2000 World Telecommunications Standardization Assembly (WTSA) adopted recommendation D.50, which included ICAIS proposals, it said. The study group examined the proposals from 2001 to 2004, it said. Certain countries proposed or supported the concept of a traditional settlement framework for measuring the flow of Internet traffic in each direction and assigning a payment methodology to the flows, it said. The concept would apply the traditional voice accounting rate/settlement model to Internet traffic, it said. Studies between 2005 and 2008 further focused on a new approach to Internet interconnection charges in particular for traffic between developed and developing countries, it said. The 2008 WTSA amended recommendation D.50 to include the possible need for a “network externality” premium to be paid to developing countries in the context of such agreements, it said. The WTSA amendment to add the network externality premium was adopted “notwithstanding an unprecedented 28 Member States taking a Reservation, and stating that they would not support the recommendation,” it said.
The “diametrically opposed regulatory paradigms” in the states that govern the energy and broadband sectors is hindering rather than encouraging smart grid partnerships between the two sectors, said a Time Warner Cable study. “The economic incentives created and fostered by these disparate regulatory regimes have divided two sets of potential partners in the smart grid space,” said the report from Time Warner’s Research Program on Digital Communications.
The National Public Safety Telecom Council’s Broadband Working Group took a stab at clarifying definitions of “mission critical voice” for broadband emergency alerts. “The effort to establish an accepted definition for mission critical voice was undertaken by NPSTC because as public safety transitions to the Nationwide Public Safety Broadband Wireless Network, voice communications may transition from today’s Land Mobile Radio (LMR) channelized narrowband voice systems to voice over the broadband network. If this transition is to be accomplished, it is imperative that those companies who will be developing the technology to provide voice over broadband fully understand all of the requirements that make up public safety mission critical voice,” the working group said in a news release Friday with its report (http://xrl.us/bmcbj7). The group said its effort “is not designed to provide a road map for those who desire to build mission critical voice into wireless broadband technologies, but has been written to provide a basis for a common understanding of the meaning of and the multiple requirements of mission critical voice."
White space devices (WSDs) will be allowed to access TV spectrum provided there’s no harmful interference with existing services such as terrestrial DTV or wireless microphones, or future uses, the U.K. Office of Communications said Thursday. The regulator in November proposed exempting appropriate devices from Wireless Telegraphy Act licenses; making arrangements to allow information about licensed services in the relevant spectrum to be made available in a database; and specifying rules for geolocation databases seeking Ofcom accreditation. Based on the mostly favorable responses to its proposals, the regulator said it will open the 470 MHz-790 MHz band for opportunistic use, but will monitor ongoing practical trials to validate that using the geolocation approach prevents harmful interference. While the market for WSDs is “far from certain,” there’s substantial interest and potentially significant value in white space applications, it said. A harmonized, pan-European approach is ideally the best way to ensure that U.K. consumers and citizens receive maximum value from the spectrum, so Ofcom will help move EU harmonization efforts along, it said. With work in Europe at an early stage, and the development of relevant standards several years away, the U.K. has decided to enable deployment of WSDs, it said. Once EU standards are complete, they will supersede national regulations, it said. If no standards emerge in a suitable time frame, Ofcom will expect manufacturers and other industry parties to come up with proposals for a voluntary national specification to cover this area, it said. There may be many different options for database ownership, and Ofcom will take a flexible approach to them, it said. Parties interested in running such a database will have to apply for a listing on an Ofcom- or third-party-hosted website from which WSDs can select their preferred database, it said. Ofcom will rate applications against certain minimum requirements and may require contracts and payment for listings, it said. Ofcom will now further define the requirements third-party geolocation databases must meet, and study how to make industry information about licensed services available to a database, it said.
State regulators in California and Hawaii are putting their review of AT&T/T-Mobile on hold in light of the Department of Justice’s complaint against the deal, state officials told us. The potential collapse of the deal could be bad news even for AT&T’s rivals, some analysts said. Meanwhile, Public Knowledge late Thursday asked the FCC to act now to reject the transaction in light of DOJ’s challenge.
Some CE stores were still closed Tuesday, two days after Hurricane Irene passed by, due to continued power outages and inaccessibility caused by the storm, according to retailers we polled. But they reported no serious damage to their stores or injuries to customers or employees. Most were still studying Irene’s impact on their businesses.
Public interest groups led by Public Knowledge asked the FCC to issue a declaratory ruling that law enforcement agencies have no authority to suspend or deny wireless service (http://xrl.us/bmbve2). The emergency petition also asks the FCC to declare that the Bay Area Rapid Transit District (BART) violated the Communications Act Aug. 11 when it “deliberately interfered” with CMRS access by shutting down wireless services at four stations to head off a feared riot (CD Aug 16 p8). The FCC is investigating the shutdown. “As the Commission itself has recognized … members of the public increasingly rely on CMRS for emergency communication,” the petition said. “Unilateral action by law enforcement, however well-intentioned, risks depriving the public of vital emergency communications at the worst possible moment. Because any impairment of CMRS impacts both critical issues of public safety and important principles of free expression, the Commission must act swiftly to clarify that local authorities may not turn off wireless networks before other local jurisdictions seek to replicate the actions of BART.” The groups said that “despite public outcry and critical news coverage” BART has released statements “attempting to justify its actions, and in fact has announced that it plans to assess in what future instances further shutoffs will be deemed appropriate, including, apparently, whether such decisions will be made according to an as-yet unformulated policy of its board of directors, or on an ad hoc basis by BART staff.” While BART’s source of authority for shutting CMRS service was unclear, it could only take the action “pursuant to one of three theories: as a network operator or agent of a network operator, as an agent of state or local government exercising police power, or as a private actor,” the petition said. “In each case, however, such a shutoff conflicts with the law.” As a network operator, BART “would be subject to Section 214(a), which prohibits discontinuing or impairing service without prior authorization from the Commission,” the groups argue. “As a government agent exercising police power, BART would be in conflict with existing case law, which prohibits disruption of telecommunications networks on mere suspicion of illegal activity and grants the FCC authority to exercise its preemptive power consistent with the law. As a private party, BART would be in violation of Section 333, which prohibits any person from willfully interfering with any station licensed or otherwise authorized under the Act.” The Broadband Institute of California, the Center for Democracy and Technology, the Center for Media Justice, the Electronic Frontier Foundation, the Media Access Project, the Minority Media and Telecommunications Council and the National Hispanic Media Coalition signed the petition.
Public interest groups led by Public Knowledge asked the FCC to issue a declaratory ruling that law enforcement agencies have no authority to suspend or deny wireless service (http://xrl.us/bmbve2). The emergency petition also asks the FCC to declare that the Bay Area Rapid Transit District (BART) violated the Communications Act Aug. 11 when it “deliberately interfered” with CMRS access by shutting down wireless services at four stations to head off a feared riot (WID Aug 16 p6). The FCC is investigating the shutdown. “As the Commission itself has recognized … members of the public increasingly rely on CMRS for emergency communication,” the petition said. “Unilateral action by law enforcement, however well-intentioned, risks depriving the public of vital emergency communications at the worst possible moment. Because any impairment of CMRS impacts both critical issues of public safety and important principles of free expression, the Commission must act swiftly to clarify that local authorities may not turn off wireless networks before other local jurisdictions seek to replicate the actions of BART.” The groups said that “despite public outcry and critical news coverage” BART has released statements “attempting to justify its actions, and in fact has announced that it plans to assess in what future instances further shutoffs will be deemed appropriate, including, apparently, whether such decisions will be made according to an as-yet unformulated policy of its board of directors, or on an ad hoc basis by BART staff.” While BART’s source of authority for shutting CMRS service was unclear, it could only take the action “pursuant to one of three theories: as a network operator or agent of a network operator, as an agent of state or local government exercising police power, or as a private actor,” the petition said. “In each case, however, such a shutoff conflicts with the law.” As a network operator, BART “would be subject to Section 214(a), which prohibits discontinuing or impairing service without prior authorization from the Commission,” the groups argue. “As a government agent exercising police power, BART would be in conflict with existing case law, which prohibits disruption of telecommunications networks on mere suspicion of illegal activity and grants the FCC authority to exercise its preemptive power consistent with the law. As a private party, BART would be in violation of Section 333, which prohibits any person from willfully interfering with any station licensed or otherwise authorized under the Act.” The Broadband Institute of California, the Center for Democracy and Technology, the Center for Media Justice, the Electronic Frontier Foundation, the Media Access Project, the Minority Media and Telecommunications Council and the National Hispanic Media Coalition signed the petition.
South Korea will require wireless Internet service operators and cable broadcasting service providers to provide immediate warning notification according to disaster severity degrees, the nation’s National Emergency Management Agency said in an Aug. 22 notification to the World Trade Organization Committee on Technical Barriers to Trade. The WTO circulated the notification Aug. 29. The notification was made because a relevant international standard doesn’t exist or the technical content isn’t in accordance with relevant international standards and because the technical regulation may have a significant effect on the trade of other WTO members. Warning types will include typhoon, flood, downpour, earthquake and others, it said. Global mobile device manufacturers will have to install public warning system-user equipment (PWS-UE) to provide warning notification in devices that are manufactured in or imported to South Korea, that country said. A draft revision calls for PWS-UE installed in devices to provide warning notification in Korean as soon as natural disasters, man-made disasters or other severely urgent disasters happen, it said. “Reception and presentation of warning notifications to the users shall not interrupt any voice calling and warning notifications shall be popped-up on the monitor under any circumstances.” The size of the warning notification is up to a maximum of 180 bytes, which is 90 characters in the Korean language, it said. PWS-UE will provide alerting indication through an audio attention signal or vibration at the discretion of the wireless Internet and cable providers, it said. Comments are due Oct. 28. Jan. 1, 2013, is the proposed date of entry into force.
South Korea will require wireless Internet service operators and cable broadcasting service providers to provide immediate warning notification according to disaster severity degrees, the nation’s National Emergency Management Agency said in an Aug. 22 notification to the World Trade Organization Committee on Technical Barriers to Trade. The WTO circulated the notification Aug. 29. The notification was made because a relevant international standard doesn’t exist or the technical content isn’t in accordance with relevant international standards and because the technical regulation may have a significant effect on the trade of other WTO members. Warning types will include typhoon, flood, downpour, earthquake and others, it said. Global mobile device manufacturers will have to install public warning system-user equipment (PWS-UE) to provide warning notification in devices that are manufactured in or imported to South Korea, that country said. A draft revision calls for PWS-UE installed in devices to provide warning notification in Korean as soon as natural disasters, man-made disasters or other severely urgent disasters happen, it said. “Reception and presentation of warning notifications to the users shall not interrupt any voice calling and warning notifications shall be popped-up on the monitor under any circumstances.” The size of the warning notification is up to a maximum of 180 bytes, which is 90 characters in the Korean language, it said. PWS-UE will provide alerting indication through an audio attention signal or vibration at the discretion of the wireless Internet and cable providers, it said. Comments are due Oct. 28. Jan. 1, 2013, is the proposed date of entry into force.