Aha the TNO debate begins First I would like to go on record to applaud UCC for a good job and commendable review process. Though they have been a few flows in terms of timing and announcements all in all the process was fair.
Granted the first session was not well explained and we all had different expectations. Ucc expected us to stand up and say all we wanted and we expected them to come and tell us what they were planning to do. Once this confusion was cleared as Paul stated earlier we all submitted our responses. The one2net response is available for all if you mail me or I can plan and have it posted for download on our website. All ISP's then also submitted their individual submissions both to me and to ucc we then had a final statement from the ISP's which was submitted to UCC. Reading the final document presented in January we believe our comments were taken on board. As usual we did not expect 100% acceptance of the comments but all in all we believe at least 60-70% of the comments were addressed. (this is obviously subjective and you need to read the documents and make your judgment.) Now the issue of the TNO. I read the story and the comments. If you read the UCC policy document which by the way I recommend anybody serious about the industry to take time and read, we have a long way to go as a country to achieve anything near universal access. All the RCDF objectives and moneys will not even help us achieve 20% of what the population wants/needs. So how do we try and achieve this connectivity. The plan is to make infrastructure provision a business separated from service provision. Once that is achieved you then look at the current providers and ask whether in a controlled market environment they can achieve our national objectives. Not forgetting that our national objectives have to first fit into their business and strategic objectives. Now to make value for the infrastructure a market has to be created thus the vision of two types of license. Infrastructure and service. The service provider would then offer service to it's clients over the infrastructure provided by the national operator (infrastructure provider). The service provider is further protected by the "self Provision" clause which says if you can prove that non of the operators can deliver the infrastructure at the market price that would enable you to do business then you can self provide. A service provider would not be restricted in what service he or she provides as longer as certain guidelines to protect the industry and consumer are adhered to. (even VOIP will be open) I hope this shines a bit of light on the reasoning. As much as we all want deregulation our market is not yet mature enough to fully open. At the end it will be the consumers and ultimately the country who surfers and then the same voices will be saying UCC allowed all these cowboys to come in build a patchwork network rip us all off and then leave taking their money away. Then when you look at other fully developed markets, there is still a level of regulation in terms of number of players. I honesty cannot do this topic justice over the list so I believe we need an open forum where we can start looking and planning a post regulation industry what is in for the consumer and small business ?. We are in the final stages of setting up our ISP association and I think this will be the first topic on our public sensitization process. Lets however keep the dialogue. Over the years I have heard too many voices, and I was disappointed that when the time came they all went silent. Thanks Mark for waking the topic, do not put it back to sleep. Guys this is your industry and you have a chance to shape it, as they say speak now or forever keep your peace. _______________________________________________ LUG mailing list [email protected] http://kym.net/mailman/listinfo/lug %LUG is generously hosted by INFOCOM http://www.infocom.co.ug/
