LLU hearings: Questions from ICASA for mybb users

[ghoti]

Questions from ICASA listed below. Please let us have your thoughts so we can prepare the response.
Deadline for responses: 12h00 on 24 October 2011.

Please note (use the number) the question to which you're responding in your response.



Noting that MyBroadband users support Naked DSL, what do they think of Telkom’s view that this is not technically feasible?

A lie to try protect profits

Do MyBroadband users view ICASA’s approach to LLU using Chapter 8 of the ECA and the Facilities Leasing Regulations as the right way to go about unbundling the loop?

I have no faith in ICASA getting this right under any act. They are not on the side of the people, they protect the telecommunications industry and its cartel players.

Do you think LLU will help increase the broadband penetration in SA?

Without a doubt.

Are you aware that NDSL may cost more? It could be argued that if you wanted NDSL, take your voice price, plus your ADSL price, and there you go, that’s the price of Naked DSL. Have the MyBroadband users considered this? That NDSL might actually cost more.

If it does cost more its just Telkom abusing the system to try retain some of its profits. There is absolutely no reason for it to increase in price.

MyBroadband end-users are very interested in Full LLU, but they’re consumers, not network builders. [ICASA] didn’t know that consumers cared about how they got their services, just that they cared about the quality of the service and that they enjoyed their service. So from an end-user’s perspective, is there a difference between bitstream and full loop unbundling? Because they’re different, from a network topology and access point of view, but not necessarily different from an end-user’s perspective if the end-user gets an SLA that they’re happy with. So how did your end-users justify bitstream to full loop unbundling?

I dont understand the question.

Why would the end user worry about predatory pricing? It’s when the monopoly charges a price below cost. How does this negatively impact the end-user?

It doesnt, but it nails the competition.

Did the forum members have any opinion regarding whether LLU should include the wireless local loop as well?

None, do your job ICASA and get wired LLU done first. This is more important and should have being done over a decade ago.

The open access approach in chapter 8 that [ICASA] is talking about may also include new investment fibre networks. What would the MyBroadband forum users’ views be on the open-access regime to new investment?

I support LLU on any fixed line where its not an open market.

[J0n0]

Are you aware that NDSL may cost more? It could be argued that if you wanted NDSL, take your voice price, plus your ADSL price, and there you go, that’s the price of Naked DSL. Have the MyBroadband users considered this? That NDSL might actually cost more.

And what is the reason for that? Can Telkom not give a reason for that? Besides the excuse of using old tech in their world class internet service. Naked adsl as far as I can find about it, does not need specific hardware, but for normal dsl, you do, to split the voice and data. Naked dsl have been available since 2007 in many countries so are we running adsl on hardware much older than what was available in 2007? I do not find reasoning for having to make drastic changes that would make it so much more expensive.

In regular DSL, a cable runs from the telephone switch to a piece of equipment called a Plain Old Telephone Service (POTS) splitter. This splitter separates the DSL and voice bands. Thus the customer will have a dial tone, which allows them to use the telephone line as a regular land line while they are using it to access the Internet on their computer. A cable carrying both services runs from the splitter to the cable head, where it continues on to the customer on outside plant. (See DSLAM.)
In naked DSL, there is no cable from the telephone switch to the POTS splitter. Thus there is no dial tone on the line. However, the customer could still use the line for regular telephone service through Voice over Internet Protocol (VoIP) or a Competitive Local Exchange Carrier (CLEC) instead of the Incumbent Local Exchange Carrier (ILEC).
Naked ADSL2 and ADSL2+ provisioned with "all digital mode" Annex I or Annex J can achieve additional 256 kbit/s of upstream data rate.

The only costs that the normal user should expect are "installation" costs that would cover the labour needed to enable naked DSL. What would make the rental of an adsl line more expensive than a voice and adsl line combined?

I Think some experts in the industry (not ICASA chosen "officials"), should be allowed a full inspection of the Telkom infrastructure to a hardware level and evaluate if what Telkom is saying is in fact true.

[caroper]

The crucial part of the equation is contained within your second quote.

the customer could still use the line for regular telephone service through Voice over Internet Protocol (VoIP)

Telkom is trying to protect its voice revenue. I can't legally prevent you from using VoIP but by forcing you to have a voice service they hope that you will use it rather than VoIP as you are already paying for it.
Telkom is also saying that the true cost of the line is subsidised by the call costs and that is why they want more, for the same line, if they will no longer get the voice call revenue.

[ellipsis]

First post has been updated with some detail on Chapter 8 and the Facilities Leasing Regulations.

[j4ck455]

First post has been updated with some detail on Chapter 8 and the Facilities Leasing Regulations.

Thanks, much appreciated . My answers to questions 2 and 8:


2. ECA chapter 8 provides ICASA with the legal foundation for implementing LLU in South Africa. All accusations by Telkom et al that there is no legal basis for implementing LLU in South Africa, are effectively contraventions of the ECA chapter 8.

ICASA should already be inviting Telkom's competitors to start drafting facilities leasing agreements for gaining access to the wired local loop, these agreements should then be submitted to a dedicated department within ICASA as well as Cc'd to Telkom, ICASA can then rule on whether a proposed facilities leasing agreement is reasonable and complies with the ECA and ICASA's FLRs. This would have the potential to speed up any implementation of LLU and would also have to include local loop maintenance costs that would be shared by all service providers using the same infrastructure - this would surely be of benefit to Telkom which continually complains about the cost of maintaining wired local loops.

The "reasonable" caveat/loophole will be used against ICASA as a delaying tactic, the regulator needs to be very careful with the definition of what is and what is not considered reasonable as there are many facets to this blanket term including timeframes for the implementation of any facilities leasing agreement.



8. Any reasonable request to share access to and the cost of rolling out new infrastructure such as fibre optic, is mandated by ECA chapter 8, as such ICASA has the legal right to require the implementation of open access to all communications infrastructure provided that such request is reasonable.

[ambo]

Q1:
The consumer does not believe that it will necessarily be technically or administratively trivial to provide naked ADSL. However, it provides the lowest entry point in the process and is expected to be the easiest to implement. The consumer feels that Telkom is stalling and making excuses about things that it is technically capable of achieving.

Q4:
Telkom makes the claim that the voice and ADSL services can not be separated, yet they provide a voice only service to many consumers. Their claim that their business model requires them to cross subsidise with voice revenues is also flawed since many consumers only use the ADSL service and do not have a handset connected to their line. The consumers who are most interested in naked ADSL are already not using (incurring costs or providing revenue) on Telkom's voice network. There is no justification that a naked ADSL service could cost more when compared with the current 'naked' use of the bundled service.

Q5:
Consumers do not have an extensive knowledge of the ADSL infrastructure. They do however understand the limitations imposed on them by Telkom's failure to implement better DSL technologies and improved backhaul networks. The consumer foresees higher speeds, lower congestion, broader choice and more innovation when multiple providers are competing for their business over a fully unbundled local loop.

Q6:
Consumers are concerned that Telkom is abusing their market position to entrench their monopoly and forcing competitors out of the market. The consumer feels that the if the monopoly was broken and efficient operators where given the opportunity to compete that the prices would be similar or lower.

Q7:
The wireless local loop remains the primary method that South African consumers use to obtain Internet access. While the wireless local loop could never hope to achieve the kind of performance that consumers would like to see from true broadband services, unbundling remains an important requirement for innovation and competition in the mobile and fixed wireless sectors.

Q8:
The consumer believes that the efficient sharing of all infrastructure can lead better services, coverage and pricing. The consumers sees no reason that fibre access networks should not also be open.

[georgegolding]

I agree with j4ck455 with his/her well articulated opinion on the matter

[SkyLukeWater]

3. Do you think LLU will help increase the broadband penetration in SA?

This is a complex issue but I believe it will. If managed correctly (by iCASA) it will lead to innovation in services and product offerings.
When the SAT3 cable had competition introduced (i.e. spending on infrastructure), we the consumers experienced a gradual improvement in prices, quality and access to service offerings. With the introduction of access to new infrastructure through LLU (with this infrastructure not only in the hands of 1 company, fighting to keep control of its share prices and place in the market) there is no doubt in my mind (as a master's student of information systems of UCT) that we (consumers) will experience a surge of new services. Consumers will have more options to exercise with their income. As long as innovation is sustained, broadband penetration will spread. In my opinion it may be helpful for iCASA to think about how they wish to realize their vision. They should/could work towards protecting the conditions required for innovation to occur in all digital forms by protecting the rights of those who cannot do it for themselves...

[richev]

1. This is utter rubbish! I worked for BT in the UK for 40 years in the develpment labs, and this was one of the fallacious reasons BT gave to the regulator. Fortunately the UK had a strong regulator and his views prevailed.

2. That is probably the best way in the current environment.

3. Most definitely! However there will need to be ongoing oversight by ICASA to prevent Telkom making this difficult for new operators.

4. There are alternatives to Telkom for Voice so not necessarily a true statement.

5. SLA's are notoriously difficult to police. Personally I would prefer full unbundling. SA needs more operators!

6. Predatory pricing does not negatively the end-user initially, but ICASA should ensure those taking advantage of offers are not tied into long term contracts.

7. In my opinion the wireless local loop does not need to be unbundled. As time goes on there will be more choice in this arena for consumers anyway.

8. New investment fibre networks must be included in LLU. However there could be an initial period (2/3 years)after implementation of such networks where LLU was not a requirement to allow operators to recoup some of their investment.
The really worrying thing is where "Chapter 8 of the ECA sets out that all ECNS (electronic communications network services) licensees are obliged to enter into a facilities leasing agreement with any other ECNS licensee (or licence-exempt entity) who requests them to do so, as long as that request is regarded as ‘reasonable’". Telkom in particular would have a very different view of what is "reasonable" than other providers, hence the potential for prevarication. ICASA needs to determine and define then term "reasonable" in this case.

[Stevie G]

Questions from ICASA listed below. Please let us have your thoughts so we can prepare the response.
Deadline for responses: 12h00 on 24 October 2011.

Please note (use the number) the question to which you're responding in your response.

1. Noting that MyBroadband users support Naked DSL, what do they think of Telkom’s view that this is not technically feasible?
   
   How the hell can it not be feasible when Telkom themselves are making it feasible for them to split their voice and dsl services. Telkom is contradicting itself by saying that its not realistic when they have done it all these years. Telkom are the biggest hypocrites that i have came across
   
2. Do MyBroadband users view ICASA’s approach to LLU using Chapter 8 of the ECA and the Facilities Leasing Regulations as the right way to go about unbundling the loop?
   
   No comment for now
   
3. Do you think LLU will help increase the broadband penetration in SA?
   
   Duh!!! You don't need to be a brain surgeon to figure it out. Even a primary schoolkid will be able to give you the answer.
   Competition always regulate prices which will make it affordable to the average Joe to have adsl in his/her home. Look at the wireless providers, i.e. Cell C, 8ta, Iburst, Vodacom, MTN that have driven down the prices dramatically due to competition. LLU will make it fair game and give all ISP's equal opportunity to provide a service to the masses.
   
   
4. Are you aware that NDSL may cost more? It could be argued that if you wanted NDSL, take your voice price, plus your ADSL price, and there you go, that’s the price of Naked DSL. Have the MyBroadband users considered this? That NDSL might actually cost more.
   
   How can NDSL cost more if these are 2 different services which are charged for when internet users only want dsl to access the internet. Stupid question in the first place as the question is asked incorrectly. NDSL means that you can have more then 1 service running on 1 copper line.
   
5. MyBroadband end-users are very interested in Full LLU, but they’re consumers, not network builders. [ICASA] didn’t know that consumers cared about how they got their services, just that they cared about the quality of the service and that they enjoyed their service. So from an end-user’s perspective, is there a difference between bitstream and full loop unbundling? Because they’re different, from a network topology and access point of view, but not necessarily different from an end-user’s perspective if the end-user gets an SLA that they’re happy with. So how did your end-users justify bitstream to full loop unbundling?
   
   Stupid question again. Let me ask you if you buy a car without knowing whats it capable of doing. would you just pay any price because it has 4 wheels. you look at all the specifications and see if its worth the money spending on a car and not wasting your money or being misleaded by the product. same story with bitstream and full loop unbundling, you buy a car with all the features included and not limited. Bitstream should be implemented immediately and give ISP's access to the copper with LLU to follow shortly and open the infrastructure for equal competition.
   
6. Why would the end user worry about predatory pricing? It’s when the monopoly charges a price below cost. How does this negatively impact the end-user?
   
   In the first place we not paying below cost to answer your question. how do you justify and on what facts are we paying below cost. We charged double for a service that we don't use.
   
   
7. Did the forum members have any opinion regarding whether LLU should include the wireless local loop as well?
   
   There is enough competition for now between the wireless providers. Wireless LLU must be taken up at a later stage when NDSL LLLU have been done.
   
   
8. The open access approach in chapter 8 that [ICASA] is talking about may also include new investment fibre networks. What would the MyBroadband forum users’ views be on the open-access regime to new investment?

The only answer i have on that is that it should be properly regulated by ICASA and managed appropriately.

---
As requested, below is a short write-up on Chapter 8 and the Facilities Leasing Regulations.
Note that this is just a quick, layperson-friendly overview and does not set out all of the details relating to facilities leasing. This is just intended to educate you on the basics of what the relevant sections and regulations on facilities leasing cover in order to enable you to understand the questions posed by ICASA. The full Electronic Communications Act (ECA) and Facilities Leasing Regulations are available online or on request.

Chapter 8 of the ECA sets out that all ECNS (electronic communications network services) licensees are obliged to enter into a facilities leasing agreement with any other ECNS licensee (or licence-exempt entity) who requests them to do so, as long as that request is regarded as ‘reasonable’.

This chapter also requires (s43(8)) ICASA to prescribe a list of essential facilities

‘Electronic communications facility’ is defined in the ECA as including but not limited to any –


Chapter 8 also requires ICASA to prescribe regulations to facilitate the conclusion of facilities leasing agreements (s44(1)), which ICASA has done with the Facilities Leasing Regulations. These Regulations add some substance to the basic obligations in the ECA. It sets out when requests will be technically and financially feasible, and thus will be considered reasonable. It sets out timeframes, required information from facilities providers and facilities seekers, what must be included in a facilities leasing agreement, and the procedure when disputes arise. The Regulations require facilities leasing agreements to be filed with ICASA for review, to confirm that they comply with the ECA and the Facilities Leasing Regulations.

just my 2c

[sscholle]

what is LLU?

[ellipsis]

what is LLU?

You may read the other threads in this section and educate yourself.
Or there's always information online - see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Local-loop_unbundling for example.

[j4ck455]

Deadline for responses: 12h00 on 24 October 2011.

Less than 24 hours left for consumers to provide their responses to ICASA's LLU questions.

[Stevie G]

where are all the peeps who is complaining about LLU all the time. looks like they are all sitting on the fence and not making an effort

[ellipsis]

We've compiled the MyBB response. You're welcome to give us your comments on it. Will be submitted tomorrow.

MyBB_LLU_Supplementary_Submission_261011.pdf