ISPA challenges Telkom over LLU

I agree with Dominic's opinions. LLU is a huge opportunity for Telkom, not a threat.
 
IPC worked well for Telkom in the ISP market, and I do not see any reason why the same cannot happen with LLU. Telkom has an excellent network, and by passing marketing and customer support to an ISP must surely make financial sense.

The only risk I see is high end customers (enterprise market) in areas like Sandton. Maybe a way around that with proper regulation?
 
In before MickeyD saying something about why aren't the ISPs building their own networks :p
 
This...

The provisions of the draft LLU Regulations issued by ICASA are quite clear as to compensation payable to Telkom by those seeking access to the Local Loop” ISPA said.
Click to expand...

And this...

shift from a ‘threat’ to an ‘opportunity’ mind-set regarding LLU
Click to expand...

Perhaps what I have been trying to say all along but never quite articulated it, and from my past reference to BT/Open Reach model.An opportunity Telkom!!!!
 
AlmightyBender said:
In before MickeyD saying something about why aren't the ISPs building their own networks :p
Click to expand...
hehehe, sharp!

I only use that line when folks start with "free because the taxpayer paid for it" type of arguments.

I've stated it before that I am pro-LLU but am wary of the lack of short term benefits to me (a residential customer).
 
What a joke.

They deal with the citizens of this country so unfairly yet they believe they still have the right. I guess life is not fair, but eventually people will walk straight over them. Once another company starts getting to the point where they can compete on size of network with them - Telkom will simply not be able to compete on value. It may take time but right now their obstinacy is jeopardizing the future value of the company. I would suggest they get ready for that - Not fight progress tooth and claw every step of the way. They must adapt.

I find it laughable that they do not see this. It reminds me very much of the likes of Blackberry and Nokia which have lost their leadership in vast markets just because they could not realistically anticipate the future. To me it was blindingly obvious what was happening and would eventually happen. And now those brands are years behind the current kings. It will be a mean feat if either of them ever raises itself to dominance again.
 
Last edited:
My only major gripe with LLU is how will the management of the network work? How will cable pair changes be recorded? How will LLU service providers identify "worker" pairs and record their records on a Telkoms network system? Who will ultimately be responsible for upkeep of the cable system with every Tom, Dick and Harry having access to it? Who would be responsible for cable replacement should overselling of faults occur?

I remember at one point Telkom allowed contractors to help out with access provision in the late 90's. It was an absolute nightmare as it was all target based. It wasn't about maintaining network integrity but more about providing the new services, irrespective of whether existing services were disconnected in the process. These contractors rarely consulted the Telkom Network Operations to verify or correct/maintain network integrity. "Tap outs" and rewiring of Telkoms SDC's was a regular and costly operation.

I am sure this is one of the main reasons that Telkom is reluctant to simply hand over their network as it means putting their existing services at risk though allowing anyone to tamper with potentially corporate services with tight corporate service levels.

Can you just imagine a scenario where a provider hooks up onto a pair of "dead" wires only to find out later that he has just killed the TX or RX of a corporate Primary rate ISDN. It would be disastrous for Telkom especially if the cable is now maxed out. Imagine is some lightly working for a VANS operator disconnected your ADSL line in favour or providing someone else VAN services. I know I would be pissed off to say the least especially as it would probably be very difficult to know exactly which operator was responsible.

So therein lies my concerns about LLU unbundling. I just have an image of Thailands telecoms reticulation in my head......Just Eish!
 
Leftfoot said:
My only major gripe with LLU is how will the management of the network work? How will cable pair changes be recorded? How will LLU service providers identify "worker" pairs and record their records on a Telkoms network system? Who will ultimately be responsible for upkeep of the cable system with every Tom, Dick and Harry having access to it? Who would be responsible for cable replacement should overselling of faults occur?

I remember at one point Telkom allowed contractors to help out with access provision in the late 90's. It was an absolute nightmare as it was all target based. It wasn't about maintaining network integrity but more about providing the new services, irrespective of whether existing services were disconnected in the process. These contractors rarely consulted the Telkom Network Operations to verify or correct/maintain network integrity. "Tap outs" and rewiring of Telkoms SDC's was a regular and costly operation.

I am sure this is one of the main reasons that Telkom is reluctant to simply hand over their network as it means putting their existing services at risk though allowing anyone to tamper with potentially corporate services with tight corporate service levels.

Can you just imagine a scenario where a provider hooks up onto a pair of "dead" wires only to find out later that he has just killed the TX or RX of a corporate Primary rate ISDN. It would be disastrous for Telkom especially if the cable is now maxed out. Imagine is some lightly working for a VANS operator disconnected your ADSL line in favour or providing someone else VAN services. I know I would be pissed off to say the least especially as it would probably be very difficult to know exactly which operator was responsible.

So therein lies my concerns about LLU unbundling. I just have an image of Thailands telecoms reticulation in my head......Just Eish!
Click to expand...
I think these concerns have been covered in the draft LLU proposals. Effectively only Telkom employees will "touch" Telkom's network. Nobody else will have access to the SDCs, which you correctly recall as being a disaster the last time it happened!
 
I think Telkom has always been terrified of cannibalism of their high-end services, and by giving up control of the services and the quality of the services available on the lines, there is a real risk for them. They certainly have (at least in the past) made the ADSL network deliberately unattractive for customers who need a higher level of service, be it through not offering options of better contention ratios to the ISP, high SDSL prices, and a "best effort" approach to any number of issues experienced by customers on their portion of the network. And they've not been shy when calling about issues to tell you to buy a premium service, even when it's issues not caused by any kind of fundamental limitation of ADSL technology.
 
MickeyD said:
I think these concerns have been covered in the draft LLU proposals. Effectively only Telkom employees will "touch" Telkom's network. Nobody else will have access to the SDCs, which you correctly recall as being a disaster the last time it happened!
Click to expand...

Well if the regulations cover that as you said then I have no real objection, just that VANS providers will still be at the whim of Telkom to provide the access links. I imagine too that historically speaking the majority of Telkoms residential cable planning has been based upon one pair per household with 20-30% redundancy. With all these potentially unknown new services coming on board Telkom would constantly need to increase capacity as they have been through MSAN's etc....but at whose cost, and which technologies from which service providers should be catered for. Would these costs be transferred to the consumer. Lots of questions I know, just seems like a lot for Telkom to manage.
 
Leftfoot said:
Well if the regulations cover that as you said then I have no real objection, just that VANS providers will still be at the whim of Telkom to provide the access links. I imagine too that historically speaking the majority of Telkoms residential cable planning has been based upon one pair per household with 20-30% redundancy. With all these potentially unknown new services coming on board Telkom would constantly need to increase capacity as they have been through MSAN's etc....but at whose cost, and which technologies from which service providers should be catered for. Would these costs be transferred to the consumer. Lots of questions I know, just seems like a lot for Telkom to manage.
Click to expand...
Regarding technologies - the draft proposals only make reference to Telkom providing the same services that they use to requesting network operators and at the same price and quality of service.

Capacity - if there is a need to expand it would mean more services being connected and more "LLU rental revenue" for Telkom. This will offset the Capex required to provide the capacity, remembering that the new/upgraded assets will be depreciated over 10-20 years.
 
Last edited:
km2 said:
I think Telkom has always been terrified of cannibalism of their high-end services, and by giving up control of the services and the quality of the services available on the lines, there is a real risk for them. They certainly have (at least in the past) made the ADSL network deliberately unattractive for customers who need a higher level of service, be it through not offering options of better contention ratios to the ISP, high SDSL prices, and a "best effort" approach to any number of issues experienced by customers on their portion of the network. And they've not been shy when calling about issues to tell you to buy a premium service, even when it's issues not caused by any kind of fundamental limitation of ADSL technology.
Click to expand...

I dont think Telkom were trying to make it unattractive. I think Telkom have been notorious for never taking big risks. The initial 3Gb cap story was a Telkom thing......at the time we only had SAT3 and there was some justification in it. Over the years the slow mover has watched what others were doing and slowly made the upgrades. I started on a 3Gb CAP 512K cap many years ago and now for almost the same cost I have a nice fast 10Meg 40gb Cap line. I think the bottom line has been that the "average" client must be happy and the high end users are not allowed to stress the network more than the "average". Perhaps that mindset in changing seeing that speed has been increasing and prices have been falling.

LLU is just another of those "big risk" decisions
 
Field engineers install and maintain the physical network wiring from the telephone exchange into end users' premises. This is regardless of which telecoms provider is actually selling the service to the end-user. Openreach installs, services, supports and maintains the wiring, fibres and connections which link tens of millions of homes and businesses in Britain to their Communications Providers' networks. Openreach works on behalf of 400+ service providers in the UK. These companies use Openreach to install/repair PSTN ADSL& VDSL & service's to anywhere within the UK.
Click to expand...

That from wikipedia and can't see why a split Telkom through it's newly created wholesale division(South African Open Reach?) can't provide said service(s) especially when being "fairly" compensated.
 
siraman said:
That from wikipedia and can't see why a split Telkom through it's newly created wholesale division(South African Open Reach?) can't provide said service(s) especially when being "fairly" compensated.
Click to expand...

I think thats where my initial concerns stem from. My brother-in-law gave me a tour of some telecoms operations and reticulations near Bury St Edmunds in the UK. I had noticed a major difference in network integrity from the BT owned/managed days to the subcontracted managed days. It may have been isolated but to see a birds nest of Telephone/data lines was scary.

Thankfully MickeyD mentioned that Telkom still maintain the network which imo is a positive point.
 
Leftfoot said:
I dont think Telkom were trying to make it unattractive. I think Telkom have been notorious for never taking big risks. The initial 3Gb cap story was a Telkom thing......at the time we only had SAT3 and there was some justification in it. Over the years the slow mover has watched what others were doing and slowly made the upgrades. I started on a 3Gb CAP 512K cap many years ago and now for almost the same cost I have a nice fast 10Meg 40gb Cap line. I think the bottom line has been that the "average" client must be happy and the high end users are not allowed to stress the network more than the "average". Perhaps that mindset in changing seeing that speed has been increasing and prices have been falling.

LLU is just another of those "big risk" decisions
Click to expand...

What I wrote was my experience from using ADSL for business connectivity when you need reliability and support, and as soon as you were an ADSL customer Telkom's commitment to great support came with a resounding "meh". It wasn't problems with the 900m of copper that ran from the office to the DSLAM, but with the rest of their network. If you had issues they kept telling to move to a way more expensive service. There was a clear incentive for them to not make the ADSL network too good. It's not even like they offered more expensive profiles or anything where you could pay more for your ADSL line rental and have higher priority to your ISP than the rest of the riff-raff, their constant refrain was to get off ADSL.
 
km2 said:
What I wrote was my experience from using ADSL for business connectivity when you need reliability and support, and as soon as you were an ADSL customer Telkom's commitment to great support came with a resounding "meh". It wasn't problems with the 900m of copper that ran from the office to the DSLAM, but with the rest of their network. If you had issues they kept telling to move to a way more expensive service. There was a clear incentive for them to not make the ADSL network too good. It's not even like they offered more expensive profiles or anything where you could pay more for your ADSL line rental and have higher priority to your ISP than the rest of the riff-raff, their constant refrain was to get off ADSL.
Click to expand...

Haha, agreed! They probably wanted you on their Diginet money spinners.
 
km2 said:
It's not even like they offered more expensive profiles or anything where you could pay more for your ADSL line rental and have higher priority to your ISP than the rest of the riff-raff
Click to expand...

[video=youtube;CX6PID8vOkY]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CX6PID8vOkY[/video]

... oh well, at least Telkom likes me :D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X