Open VDSL pilot would hinder progress: Telkom

It is probably true that opening the trials will hurt the trial process but it is equally true that to give TelkomInternet exclusivity is anti-competitive and that is the controlling issue. If the trials take an extra three months but form part of a transformation of the of the communications landscape the industry benefits more than if the trials form part of a stratagem to see Telkom entrench new monopolies.
 
You anti competitive bunch of sods!!! really ??

Cannot even streamline a testing environment - USELESS
 
First off this is a field trial FFS if there is a cock up then they have to find a solution before giving it to all and sundry.
Seems many people dont understand what a trial is .
 
Agreed. Customer have waited so many years that a few months won't hurt - especially if it means choice.

In addition, the Telkom response implies that Telkom is still willing to engage, but it was already reported that MWeb requested to be involved and was turned down, and MWeb is a member of ISPA.

The way I read this article, Telkom has indicated a willingness to engage ISPA (on the one hand) but confirmed that the trial is closed to their own ISP (on the other hand). What would the point be of ISPA engaging Telkom if no concessions were possible.

Final point - ISPs pick up their traffic at aggregation points, via their IPC's, so the speed of each adsl link is not a major technical issue.
 
FNfal said:
First off this is a field trial FFS if there is a cock up then they have to find a solution before giving it to all and sundry.
Seems many people dont understand what a trial is .
Click to expand...

simple and plain.
 
Once Telkom has finally gotten on its feet with the trials, it must introduce other ISP's other wise they are being anti-competitive.
 
^ in this particular case I don't think the Competition Act will really result in a fine. However the Facilities Leasing Regulations certainly act to question Telkom's ability to keep ISPs out.

Unfortunately the way I see this playing out Telkom is upgrading its network with MSANs and will have a 40Mbs service ready before they start moving to any form of unbundling involving facilities (bitstream being a service and a consequence of loop unbundling on a facilities approach rather than part of the facilities approach itself). In the process various technical and other measures to render access on ADSL a service will be built in - for a start the use of MSANs makes shared loop unbundling impossible.
This will lead to a situation where like the mobile operators Telkom claims that it is a service which is sought to be unbundled. This frankly is the sort of sinister state which we continue to find ourselves in - even with the proposed amendments to the ECA. This is why whilst I fully believe the ISPs must foot part of the bill the trials being structured to exclude them and Telkom's non-membership of ISPA is a disgrace.
 
Paul Hjul said:
^ in this particular case I don't think the Competition Act will really result in a fine. However the Facilities Leasing Regulations certainly act to question Telkom's ability to keep ISPs out.
Click to expand...
How can you lease something that is still being field trialled?
 
because the physical infrastructure consists of facilities - if I was MWeb who has already indicated its desire to participate in the trials I would send Telkom a comprehensive facilities request as required to conduct a trial where Telkom is not doing so (an own trial) and on their refusal follow Neotel's lead. Of course the ISPs particularly IS are not likely to do this and this is a part of the problem.

The fact is that while Telkom has sound reasons to want to trial with a single ISP (themselves) doing so is directly anti-competitive in the medium term. If Telkom was playing by the rules regarding facilities leasing then it would be completely justified - and in fact advisable - that they do their own trials by themself; but then the ISPs could do the same on their own products.
 
Thinking about it a bit more...

What would the reaction be if Telkom invited one of the smallest ISPA members to participate in the field trial? Would Mweb, IS, etc. accept it and sit quietly in their corners?
 
O now definitely not but ISPA wouldn't be able to complain. From my own viewpoint the question of whether this invitation carries bizarre strings - NDAs from hell, ludricous forms of exclusivity and so forth - but fundamentally I would take it as the best course of action open. In fact I would support the idea of Telkom making trials open to specific ISPs at specific exchange points and mandating that participation requires the ISP to appoint a competent person to be specifically responsible for the trial [So Imaginet in Grahamstown is likely to participate in Grahamstown].

Well the point is that the facilities do exist and have to before the trial can commence. Before Telkom can trial they have to have the correct grade of copper between the exchange point (whatever it may be) and the customers premises, they have to have equipment capable of providing the service at the exchange point, they need physicial infrastructure between the exchange point and the backhaul network and they need a backhaul network. Now the backhaul network is not a facility but a service.

So the fact is trials are needed by Telkom before a wholesale product can be made available to ISPs - no argument there. And making the facilities available will mean that the ISPs have a lot more legwork to do than they would like but that is their problem.
 
^
We are pretty much on the same wavelength, but I enjoy playing the devil's advocate! :twisted:

IMO you should see a slight shift in Telkom's stance in the next week or two.
 
^ I've been presuming as much. I hope you are right on the stance change. I am probably in the minority opinion that Telkom can have a future and actually TI is a good - if a little on the pricey side - ISP.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X