Re: [nznog] Indian government plans Internet exchanges
Others wrote:
Someone with some spare hands on their time needs to lobby the government to make peering in NZ legislation.
Although TNZ and TCNZ will be wearing a lot of the network costs in terms of trunking traffic up and down the country, they also have most of the customers - so I think that's fair and justified.
Yes it is good idea.
So why not also make the Govt responsible for the trunking between peering sites as well? ISPs could still organise private peering for priority traffic in this scenario.
Is this an issue that nznog feels InternetNZ should pick up on? Keith Davidson President - InternetNZ
On 28 May 2004, at 15:53, Juha Saarinen wrote:
Joe Abley wrote:
I can't help but think that regulation on peering will only result in bad things.
Even as an alternative to handing lots of money to the telcos?
There are alternatives to handing money to telcos which don't involve regulation. Routing around damage promotes innovation. Wrapping everything up in regulation stifles it.
Joe Abley wrote:
There are alternatives to handing money to telcos which don't involve regulation. Routing around damage promotes innovation. Wrapping everything up in regulation stifles it.
True. Imagine if the ComCom had a go at peering. Not sure how you'd route around two providers that "own" the vast majority of NZ's Internet connectivity though. -- Juha
On 28 May 2004, at 16:01, Juha Saarinen wrote:
Joe Abley wrote:
There are alternatives to handing money to telcos which don't involve regulation. Routing around damage promotes innovation. Wrapping everything up in regulation stifles it.
True. Imagine if the ComCom had a go at peering.
Not sure how you'd route around two providers that "own" the vast majority of NZ's Internet connectivity though.
If it was obvious, it wouldn't be called "innovation" :-)
On Sat, 2004-05-29 at 11:05, Joe Abley wrote:
On 28 May 2004, at 16:01, Juha Saarinen wrote:
Joe Abley wrote:
There are alternatives to handing money to telcos which don't involve regulation. Routing around damage promotes innovation. Wrapping everything up in regulation stifles it.
True. Imagine if the ComCom had a go at peering.
Not sure how you'd route around two providers that "own" the vast majority of NZ's Internet connectivity though.
If it was obvious, it wouldn't be called "innovation" :-)
So an act of faith is your best suggestion. :-) Something a bit more determinative might be called for. A "please explain" from the telco commissioner would be a good start...followed up by more intrusive scrutiny from the relevant Minister into the precise requirements claimed in the response to the request for explanation. Telcos may back off rather than have their internals laid out in public to justify the unacceptable. Steve
Steve Withers wrote:
So an act of faith is your best suggestion. :-)
Something a bit more determinative might be called for.
A "please explain" from the telco commissioner would be a good start...followed up by more intrusive scrutiny from the relevant Minister into the precise requirements claimed in the response to the request for explanation.
Telcos may back off rather than have their internals laid out in public to justify the unacceptable.
No, that's trusting the seized-up wheels of government machinery too much. We allowed for "due process" in the unbundling saga, but only got bungling as a result. Joe's right in that there's no point in giving bureaucrats and junket-junkies yet another meal-ticket. -- Juha
participants (4)
-
Joe Abley -
Juha Saarinen -
Keith Davidson -
Steve Withers