ICASA ADSL Draft Regulations Feedback Form

rpm

rpm

Admin
Staff member
Joined
Jul 22, 2003
Messages
66,805
Reaction score
5,057
Location
Johannesburg
Hi folks

Here is the ICASA ADSL Draft Regulations Feedback Form. If you notice any mistakes please let me know. The details on what to do with the forum after completion are given in the document.

I hope this makes it easier for you to comment. Please note that you only have to comment on sections which you feel is of value.

Regards,

RPM
 

Attachments

Thanks rpm, I will send my feedback to Icasa as soon as possible
 
Ok Done, my comments were:

2.3 How will this charge be calculated?
Will the subscriber be forced to pay for and use the network operator’s modem or may they opt for ICASA approved alternatives?

2.4 Access to the international cables (SAT3/SAFE) should be controlled by a separate body, possibly ICASA, and an administration fee paid to Telkom. This would ensure fair and equitable access to bandwidth to all ISPs.

3.4 This is still way bellow international norms. If multimedia content (Internet Radio, video, VoIP) are to be accessed, in the manner that ADSL was meant to provide, a minimum cap of 30GB or 1GB /day would be more realistic.

8 All instances of the word “Maximum” in the above should rather read “Minimum”.

General comment: I would like to record my thanks to ICASA for taking this stand on behalf of the consumers. It is unfortunate that regulation of such basic features are required in order to prevent the incumbent operator from providing vastly inferior product at excessive rates.
It is my hope that competition from the SNO will eventually make such regulations unnecessary.
 
2.1. The structure of an ADSL tariff shall compromise of a connectivity charge, a monthly telephone line rental for basic telephony and a bandwidth charge.
Click to expand...

Hehehehehehe.
 
What do they mean by "Local Bandwidth" ?

SAIX could argue that anything inside the 165.165.x.x and 165.147.x.x range (i.e the SAIX backbone) is "local", and everything outside that range would be subject to a cap.

Do they define "local" by means of the URL? i.e. mweb.co.za is local but iafrica.com is "international" ?

I think "local" should be "hosted in the Republic of South Africa".

3.4. Local bandwidth usage shall not be subject to the cap. The cap shall be increased to a minimum level of 10 GigaBytes (GB) per month.
Click to expand...

The minimum cap of 10GB worries me. It would mean the basic service costs will be high, because a user who only does email and uses 1GB a month is paying for 9GB that isn't used. If they really meant maximum cap then does it mean that I can't buy more than 10GB if I want?

This is very confusing. It says "no cap" and then promptly mentions a cap. who wrote this stuff??

Perhaps it should read:
3.4. Local bandwidth usage shall not be subject to the cap referred to in 3.2, provided that local bandwidth usage does not exceed 10 GigaBytes (GB) per month. Usage over and above this shall be subject to the purchase of a top up as referred to in 3.2.
Click to expand...

What do you think?
 
"local bandwidth usage does not exceed 10 GigaBytes (GB) per month."

uhm... please no. that would imply a cap on local traffic. which is rubish.
 
Ben

I am of full support for 10 GB mention. Appriciate ACASA ADSL Draft This could only improve ADSL the way it was intended to be.

Keep up the good work on behalf of us all . Thanks Again

Ex Telkom ????
 
silversurfer said:
"local bandwidth usage does not exceed 10 GigaBytes (GB) per month."

uhm... please no. that would imply a cap on local traffic. which is rubish.
Click to expand...

There should be no local cap, period. The network operators have to figure out a way to properly dsitinguish between local and international bandwidth.

"3.4. Local bandwidth usage shall not be subject to the cap. The cap shall be increased to a minimum level of 10 GigaBytes (GB) per month."

Still a bit confusing to put this into the same paragraph. Hence my comment:

"Agreed, but the increase should not have a substantial impact on the current subscription fee (optimally, the subscription fee should stay the same). Otherwise this is going to deter current subscribers for whom the ADSL line becomes to expensive. ‘Local bandwidth’ also needs a clear definition. What is ‘local bandwidth’? Bandwidth whtin the network boundaries of Telkom/Saix? Destinations hosted in South Africa? How will service providers differ between local and international bandwidth?"

(edited because of mistakes)
 
Last edited:
Hey Rainynight65:

Yup the draft is as u say. I was commenting on "donn_edwards" comment and suggestion just above my post:

Perhaps it should read:
Quote:
3.4. Local bandwidth usage shall not be subject to the cap referred to in 3.2, provided that local bandwidth usage does not exceed 10 GigaBytes (GB) per month. Usage over and above this shall be subject to the purchase of a top up as referred to in 3.2.

What do you think?
Click to expand...

ie.... no i dont think so.
 
2.3. The connectivity charge to ADSL services shall be a once off charge for the cost of providing connectivity of such services. A network operator or a licensed service provider of broadband infrastructure shall offer users an option to pay the connectivity charge over a specified period of time which shall not be longer than twelve (12) months.
Click to expand...

Comments:

What about customers who have been paying the current monthly rental fees, we have already over paid for our services. I will not pay a connectivity charge, as I am already connected.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X