Hi, Frank - It wouldn't be issues like these, evoking your reponse, would it? >g<
(With thanks to the Pulver Report)
ITU Rallies the Old Guard
This past week, the ITU staff began circulating a draft Report for the Policy Forum that it will hold March 7-9, 2001 in Geneva.
(The text is supposed to be posted on the ITU's website at itu.int , but as of today it is still only
available by email.)
The draft Report shows that the ITU just doesn't get it.
It continues to think that convergence means that the old regulations should be imposed on new technologies, without any serious thought given to whether there is any legitimate need for such regulations. From here, it looks like the only purpose these regulations would serve is to protect big incumbent telecom carriers that are afraid of competition and afraid about stranded investment in their circuit-switched networks.
The Report focuses on concern about VoIP being used to bypass international accounting rate regimes that are based on the national monopolies that have been typical of the PSTN world.
For years now, these regimes have hurt consumers and business development, while unregulated data networks have been home to tremendous growth and innovation. Sometimes, these accounting rate regimes masquerade as promoting universal service, but all they really do is protect incumbents. If governments want to promote universal service, they should promote competition and
infrastructure development, particularly of IP-based networks, something VoIP does in spades. These networks don't need old-fashioned telecom regulation, thank you very much.
What can we do to keep the ITU from rallying the Old Guard to regulate VoIP and the Internet? We need to stand up and oppose it.
Contact your government representatives, your ISP, your VoIP provider, or anyone else that should be interested in this issue and tell them to oppose the ITU's pro-regulatory efforts.
Copy me if you'd like (jeff@pulver.com). If your company has a stake in this, it should send a representative to the Policy Forum in March. The VON Coalition (www.von.org) also will be working on this issue on behalf of the VoIP industry. The Coalition's counsel can be contacted at bruce.jacobs@shawpittman.com.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Watch out for the ITU/IETF ENUM Alliance
When I learned that the ITU and IETF conspired together with respect to ENUM and "e164.arpa", I decided to include my name in a proposal to ICANN for the ".tel" Top Level Domain ("TLD").
I believe the best interests of the IP Communications Industry will be served if a competitive alternative to "e164.arpa" exists. I appreciate the fact the ITU has every right to push for the "e164.arpa" implementation of ENUM services. The "e164.arpa" implementation clearly delegates control over ENUM services to 240+ national PSTN regulatory entities. Each country is being given the
power to define if, how and when ENUM services will be deployed within their given country-code under the "e164.arpa" model.
The "e164.arpa" model of delegating control to the existing PSTN regulatory structure is clearly in the best interests of incumbent PTT's and the ITU. This said, I don't believe it is clearly in the best interests of the entire emerging IP Communications industry.
Delegation of control of ENUM services to 240+ national PSTN
regulatory entities under "e164.arpa" in fact may slow down the deployment of IP Communications services on a global basis.
The emerging IP Communications industry and the IETF will both benefit from a competitive alternative to the "e164.arpa" implementation of the ENUM standard. The emerging industry needs effective competition in this space.
In order to create competition, validation of an alternative TLD is required. ICANN is the only authority with the power to create effective competition.
pulver.com |
