Whatever happened to local loop unbundling?

K

Kilgore_Trout_Redux

Executive Member
Joined
Sep 20, 2006
Messages
7,498
Reaction score
347
A few years ago this used to be a hot topic of discussion in the industry, but over the last two years or so we seem to have gotten distracted by various DOC, ICASA fiascos.

Is there any way to get some dialog going again?
 
BrendanD said:
Is there any way to get some dialog going again?
Click to expand...

You in luck Brendan!! There is indeed a way!!!

First off, you need to start a political party. Make unbelievable and rather impossible promises to rich companies and entities. That way you can fund your party. Then bribe, intimidate and get into power, works well in Africa!

Once in power, fire all staff in the DoC and launch a full investigation into to usefulness of Icasa. Then move on to the terrible tyrannous telkom, sort it out quickly using your new found powers!1!1!

Then once you have established superiority and dominance, pop the question. "Hey what about local un-bundling, thats sounds like a really great idea!"
 
Like Ivy says.... it will happen sometime. Can't commit to a date though.
 
Local-loop unbundling


Local loop unbundling (LLU or LLUB) is the regulatory process of allowing multiple telecommunications operators to use connections from the telephone exchange's central office to the customer's premises. The physical wire connection between customer and company is known as a "local loop," and it is owned by the incumbent local exchange carrier (also referred to as the "ILEC," "local exchange," or in the United States either a "Baby Bell" or an Independent telephone company).


Policy background
LLU is generally opposed by the ILECs, which in most cases are either former investor-owned (North America) or state-owned monopoly enterprises forced to open themselves to competition. ILECs argue that LLU amounts to a regulatory taking, that they are forced to provide competitors with essential business inputs, that LLU stifles infrastructure-based competition and technical innovation because new entrants prefer to 'parasitise' the incumbent's network instead of building their own and that the regulatory interference required to make LLU work (e.g., to set the LLU access price) is detrimental to the market.
.
.


Unbundling developments around the world
World Trade Organisation
Some provisions of WTO telecommunications law can be read to require unbundling:

  • Sect. 5(a) of the GATS Annex on Telecommunications[1] requires WTO Members to guarantee service suppliers "access to and use of public telecommunications transport networks ... for the supply of a service". New entrants argue that without LLU they cannot supply services such as ADSL.
  • Sect. 2.2(b) of the 1998 Reference Paper,[2] to which some Members have subscribed, requires "sufficiently unbundled interconnection" with major providers. However, the Paper's definition of interconnection appears to exclude LLU.
  • Sect. 1 of the Reference Paper requires Members to maintain "appropriate measures ... for the purpose of preventing [major] suppliers ... from engaging in or continuing anti-competitive practices." New entrants argue that such practices include not giving competitors access to facilities essential to market entry, such as the local loop.

The question has not been settled before a WTO judicial body, and, at any rate, these obligations only apply where the respective WTO Member has committed itself to open its basic telecommunications market to competition. About 80 (mostly developed) Members have done so since 1998.

.
.

South Africa

On 25 May 2006 the Minister of Communications of South Africa Dr Ivy Matsepe-Casaburri established the Local Loop Unbundling Committee chaired by Professor Tshilidzi Marwala to recommend the appropriate local loop unbundling models. The Local Loop Unbundling Committee submitted a report to Minister Matsepe-Casaburri on 25 May 2007. This report recommends that models that permit customers to access both voice and data be offered by many different companies. The models recommended are Full Unbundling, Line Sharing and Bitstream Access. It is recommended that customers should exercise carrier pre-selection and thus be able to switch between service providers. It is also recommended that an organisation be created to manage the local loop and that this organisation should be under the guidance of the regulator Icasa and that Icasa be capacitated in terms of resources. The committee recommended that service providers approved by Icasa should have access to the telephone exchange infrastructure whenever necessary. The committee recommended that a regulatory guideline be established and be managed by Icasa to guarantee that strategic issues like quality of the local loop be optimised for regulation and delivery of services. Based on this report the Minister has issued policy directives to Icasa to move swiftly with the unbundling process.[12]
 
Tweak said:
South Africa

On 25 May 2006 the Minister of Communications of South Africa Dr Ivy Matsepe-Casaburri established the Local Loop Unbundling Committee chaired by Professor Tshilidzi Marwala to recommend the appropriate local loop unbundling models. The Local Loop Unbundling Committee submitted a report to Minister Matsepe-Casaburri on 25 May 2007. This report recommends that models that permit customers to access both voice and data be offered by many different companies. The models recommended are Full Unbundling, Line Sharing and Bitstream Access. It is recommended that customers should exercise carrier pre-selection and thus be able to switch between service providers. It is also recommended that an organisation be created to manage the local loop and that this organisation should be under the guidance of the regulator Icasa and that Icasa be capacitated in terms of resources. The committee recommended that service providers approved by Icasa should have access to the telephone exchange infrastructure whenever necessary. The committee recommended that a regulatory guideline be established and be managed by Icasa to guarantee that strategic issues like quality of the local loop be optimised for regulation and delivery of services. Based on this report the Minister has issued policy directives to Icasa to move swiftly with the unbundling process.[12]
Click to expand...

This is what I recall reading about, and I'm just wondering what has become of it. Is it possible for someone (I'm thinking rpm here) to get the official word on what progress has been made? We need to get senior industry players to get a dialog going again.
 
hi BrendanD
there has been a great deal happening - driven by ICASA - with a large number of meetings with access providers (telkom) and access seekers (mainly as represented by ISPA). this has been constructive, particularly in allowing access seekers better information about telkom's network
the position now is that the informal process has been taken as far as it can and we are waiting on ICASA to issue out the necessary regulations under Chapter 10 of the ECA which deals with markets and competition.
so the short answer - things are in progress and I personally believe that the people dealing with it at ICASA are superbly (even scarily) competent (although they still have to operate within the rest of ICASA)

will it be completed by 2011? doubtful given that telkom will delay by litigation - but telkom will of its own accord look to offer an "unbundled" (actually bitstream) product in the 3rd quarter 2009 (IPStream / Bitstream which will essentially be an improved version of IP Connect)
 
dominic said:
hi BrendanD
there has been a great deal happening - driven by ICASA - with a large number of meetings with access providers (telkom) and access seekers (mainly as represented by ISPA). this has been constructive, particularly in allowing access seekers better information about telkom's network
the position now is that the informal process has been taken as far as it can and we are waiting on ICASA to issue out the necessary regulations under Chapter 10 of the ECA which deals with markets and competition.
so the short answer - things are in progress and I personally believe that the people dealing with it at ICASA are superbly (even scarily) competent (although they still have to operate within the rest of ICASA)

will it be completed by 2011? doubtful given that telkom will delay by litigation - but telkom will of its own accord look to offer an "unbundled" (actually bitstream) product in the 3rd quarter 2009 (IPStream / Bitstream which will essentially be an improved version of IP Connect)
Click to expand...

Thank you for the excellent response.

It's great to see that quiet progress is being made since all we tend to hear about in the media are the "circuses".
 
Conspiracy : Teklom is creating "IP Connect", and will make it look extremely successful to increase the value of the purchase that the governmint will have to make.

Thanks for the answer though Dom. Interesting.
 
telkom's receives new converted licences this week which are valid for the next 25 and 15 years respectively. telkom's physical control over the wired local loop will continue to be a practical issue for some time.
 
dominic said:
telkom's receives new converted licences this week which are valid for the next 25 and 15 years respectively. telkom's physical control over the wired local loop will continue to be a practical issue for some time.
Click to expand...


we should place zero reliance on LLU happening.... and in fact, give the current licensing regime, we want telkom to hold on to that LL as tight as possible....

This might mean that an alternative LL takes a while to come into being - but when it gets here, we will (as consumers) be better off..

If I were a shareholder of telkom, I'd be insisting that allow as much 'access' to the LL as which prevents others from rolling their own - ie a lot
 
I'd like to revive this thread again. Hasn't been too long yeah? :p

It's good to hear from Dominic that strides are being taken within Icasa.

What I'm intereted in knowing is:
Is there a list of the companies that have now converted to the new ECNS licenses?
I also wonder if these companies would be willing to engage in conversation here?
Simply to keep us in the "loop" ;)

I reckon it would be a good way to keep the public informed and also a means of at least interacting with potential clients.
Face it.
We love positive and constructive interaction from companies and certainly the rewards can be reaped.

So I'd like to invite any of these companies to come onboard and join in.
I know I'd love to hear from you guys.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X