Riporto un post di Tim del Fibre Ring che commenta il discorso (qui integrale) di Vivianne Reding all'evento di KPN a Bruxelles
- "(...) by summer in the mid-term review of the i2010 strategy, I will publish a new indicator of broadband take-up in Europe that compares national performance, not only on broadband penetration but also geographic coverage, speed, competition and price." E' importante perche' guardare solo alla penetrazione e' insufficiente. Confronta il OECD Broadband Portal.
- "Further
service development is likely to result in the need for significantly
higher broadband speeds of up to 100 megabit per second or more." Questo e' discutibile, ma va bene come punto di riferimento- "I
found a widely held view that the European regulatory framework and its
emphasis on access obligations to open up competition is not at all the
impediment to investment and innovation that some market players claim,
(...)." Brava.- "How we treat next generation access is therefore the single most important policy question in the telecoms sector today."
- "(...)
one of the potential attractions of functionally separating access
networks is to make this incentive structure clearer and more
operational." Separazione funzionale- "Let
me be very direct: except where the structure of the market has
non-discrimination built into it such as in a well designed system of
functional or structural separation the incentive of the telecom
company is to design new infrastructures in a way that controls or
chokes off competition."Poi esamina 3 modelli di sviluppo della rete:
- FTTC + VDSL. "In terms of open competition however there are serious concerns that VDSL could be attractive to incumbent telecom operators, because they require competitive market entrants to substantially scale up their investment in switching capacity." MA "(...) unbundling requirements at street cabinet would have to continue to allow competitive access operators to stay in business."
- FTTB + PON. "But
the flexibility in the medium term may be more limited, not least
because the end user equipment and the equipment in the network have to
be compatible. Unbundling these passive fibre networks is therefore
more difficult and the incumbent increases control." (...) "It
is unclear that passive optical networks can be unbundled in the way
that we see today on copper networks. This requires close attention and
probably experimentation with novel architectures, using wave division
technology to offer virtual unbundling as a more flexible alternative
to bitstream access."- FTTH. "The difficulty here is
cost: existing ducts are often too small to allow multiple fibres to
pass through and therefore major construction spending is required.
This is by far the most expensive option." (...) "Point-to-point
fibre deployment, meanwhile is rarely being deployed by private market
investors. Certainly, this is due to its high cost, but it is also
probably due to its openness. Where we do see it being used is in open
access schemes initiated by municipalities, in cities such as Stockholm
and Amsterdam. These schemes are local partnerships that take a pure
'infrastructure utility' approach by building ducts and end to end dark
fibre and then leasing access to service providers. Clearly by so doing
these cities have created for their business and citizens a future
proof network infrastructure and for the investors in the networks a
very long term stable return on their investment given that ducts and
dark fibre have a potential operating life of several decades. Under
these conditions of guaranteed open access circumstances, perhaps,
infrastructural competition is less important than an open and high
performance platform.
