http://www.brecorder.com/index.php?id=603608&currPageNo=1&query=&search=&term=&supDate=
Following is the summary of the PTA decisions about PTCL anti-
competitive practices with my comments on them.
>"Moreover, the regulator has directed the PTCL to open its Optic Fiber Access Network >(Ofan) to DSL operators as the latter had complained that it was not being allowed access >to the Ofan network."
An awfully good and important decision for the viability and
prevailing of the ADSL concentration in Pakistan. The PTA
responsibility just doesn't stop here it has to make sure this
decision is being implemented and should monitor closely.
>"The PTCL was directed to offer Ethernet connectivity to DSL operators in case the PTCL >launches such technology. The PTCL is also encouraged to work along with ISPs by >considering deployment of this technology for the benefit of the industry."
I don't understand what this Ethernet technology means, I thought that
PTCL has already moved its core to MPLS and using the GigE interfaces
at the Edge and Core for providing DSL Any one comments on that ?
>"The PTCL was also directed to evolve a procedure in consultation with ISPs for switching >over DSL customers of other operators to its network. Ispak, upon launching of PTCL DSL >services, had approached the Authority calling to hold back the operator from offering DSL >services because of anti-competitive prices."
I don't know what the current process is but A solution could be to
give ISPs limited config. Access to PTCL BRAS or a creation of
centralised database that pick up the Rapid Churn Order and the
automation of the whole process through the usage of Stored procedures
and Control M jobs will reduce the manual intervention and definitely
reduce the setup time.
>The Authority after analysing views of the industry and the PTCL decided that at this stage >retail broadband tariffs could not be regulated but complaints regarding anti-competitive >practices to be duly reviewed and investigated in accordance with the current legislative and >regulatory provisions.
Not just decisions but needed some examples of real implementation
>It approved the PTCL's reduction in wholesale DSL line rent from Rs
217 per month per >loop (exclusive taxes) to Rs 150 per month per loop
(exclusive taxes) directing that the >operator in future would obtain
prior approval before announcing any changes in wholesale >DSL line
rent.
With this decision a middling user should see a real drop in the DSL
prices, with this decision the ISPs should stop blaming PTCL for
everything and should come up with some real action.
>The regulator observed that the PTCL may continue to charge its bandwidth for metro rings >on actual ring distance. However, the PTCL shall provide comprehensive Service Level >Agreements (SLAs) to the Authority, within 60 days from the date of this decision. The >SLAs shall at least cover the quality of service of bandwidth facilities for data and voice >services, along with penalties for not complying with the given quality parameters.
Not just PTCL but the other stakeholders should be involved in the
formation of such type of SLA's
>Telecom operators are encouraged to build their own collocation space or rent an alternative >space from any third party. In case, ISPs establish their own PoPs near PTCL exchanges, >the PTCL shall allow them to bring their copper cables inside PTCL's MDF for interconnect >to PTCL's copper loop for delivering DSL services.
Another landmark decision, ISPAK stop whinging and it's the time for
some genuine actions from your side.
Overall the decisions are fantastic (at least by the read) and if
implemented fistfully it will have a appealing impact on the overall
DSL concentration and affordability in Pakistan. With the
implementation a real competitive campaign should emerge on the
Pakistani DSL arena.
>"The PTCL was directed to offer Ethernet connectivity to DSL operators in case the PTCL launches such technology. The PTCL is also encouraged to work along with ISPs by considering deployment of this technology for the benefit of the industry."
I don't understand what this Ethernet technology means, I thought that
PTCL has already moved its core to MPLS and using the GigE interfaces
at the Edge and Core for providing DSL Any one comments on that ?
>"The PTCL was also directed to evolve a procedure in consultation with ISPs for switching >over DSL customers of other operators to its network. Ispak, upon launching of PTCL DSL >services, had approached the Authority calling to hold back the operator from offering DSL >services because of anti-competitive prices."
I don't know what the current process is but A solution could be to
give ISPs limited config. Access to PTCL BRAS or a creation of
centralised database that pick up the Rapid Churn Order and the
automation of the whole process through the usage of Stored procedures
and Control M jobs will reduce the manual intervention and definitely
reduce the setup time.
>It approved the PTCL's reduction in wholesale DSL line rent from Rs
217 per month per loop (exclusive taxes) to Rs 150 per month per loop
(exclusive taxes) directing that the operator in future would obtain
prior approval before announcing any changes in wholesale DSL line
rent.
With this decision a middling user should see a real drop in the DSL
prices, with this decision the ISPs should stop blaming PTCL for
everything and should come up with some real action.
The regulator observed that the PTCL may continue to charge its bandwidth for metro rings on actual ring distance. However, the PTCL shall provide comprehensive Service Level Agreements (SLAs) to the Authority, within 60 days from the date of this decision. The SLAs shall at least cover the quality of service of bandwidth facilities for data and voice services, along with penalties for not complying with the given quality parameters.
Not just PTCL but the other stakeholders should be involved in the
formation of such type of SLA's
>Telecom operators are encouraged to build their own collocation space or rent an alternative >space from any third party. In case, ISPs establish their own PoPs near PTCL exchanges, >the PTCL shall allow them to bring their copper cables inside PTCL's MDF for interconnect >to PTCL's copper loop for delivering DSL services.
Another landmark decision, ISPAK stop whinging and it's the time for
some genuine actions from your side.
"2.3.5 It was also observed that as per provisions of the Policy
(clause 5.2.5), PTCL is
only obliged to offer shared access to its last mile copper and not
the OFAN. Therefore,
for PTCL to make further investment in OFAN, it would be appropriate
that unbundling
obligation should not be placed for initial few years."
These initial few years can start from "5" to an undefined number.
For Ethernet (in actual providing Ethernet connectivity between PTCL
exchanges to operator instead of E1/E3/DS3):
"2.5.3 Authority's Findings: The Authority noted that PTCL is allowing
connectivity between its exchanges as per the available network
resources. However, in
order to provide Ethernet connectivity by PTCL, it primarily needs to
place Ethernet
routers / interfaces in the exchanges. The Authority considers that it
is not appropriate to
enforce PTCL to deploy a technology, it has not implemented for its own network.
However, in future if such technology is launched by PTCL then other
operators should
have access to such facility."
--
Shiraz Anjum Malik
Cell: +92-300-8541239
--
Shiraz Anjum Malik
Cell: +92-300-8541239
The ISP can get DS3, 10mbps,100mbps and Ether channel to the ISP data
center / centers. Each DSLAM was bridged on VLAN to the ISP. Then they
provided following service
1. PPPoE Based DSL service
2. VLAN based DSL service
3. Transparent LAN services (T1, 10mpbs , 100 mbps)
The PPPoE based service was designed pretty good acutally. The PPPoE
normally ran between the client and the BAS and from the BAS they had
a L2TP tunnel all the way back to ISP router. So it is PPPoE over
L2TP. On ISP end you would see a L2TP tunnel on the router and then
L2TP sessions for each customer who logs in/
The VLAN based DSL service was bridged Layer2 VLAN across the core
network to ISP router/switch. There was no PPPoE or L2TP involved.
TLAN services were setup exactly the same way we just getting a VLAN
id from Bell while on the customer side no configuration was needed.
The setup was very stable and the easy of provisioning a new service
area aka DSLAM was amazing. The only issue we normally ran into was
MTU oversize which was not reported by other ISP's who were not on
Ethernet connection but were using ATM as lat mile.
Not sure where PTCL stand on this but It would be intresting what this
new CEO does has he looks very passionate on data comm side of PTCL...
/Majid
> On 8/10/07, Amir <amir.raj...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > A summary of the news clipping appear on Today's Business.Full news
> > can be viewed at
>
> >http://www.brecorder.com/index.php?id=603608&currPageNo=1&query=&sear...