CrazyEngineers
CrazyEngineers
  • The net-neutrality debate in India is more important today than ever. This debate tries to explore the arguments from parties on either side of the table: Us Netizens and the Telecom Services Providers. I think it's VERY important that we understand the points made by both because otherwise we'd have a very biased opinion. Let's also aim to find out a win-win situation and I'm expecting a very healthy debate here.

    Net is meant to be open and there should NOT preferential treatment to anything on the Internet. That's how the Internet's been so far and should be in the future. However, the telcos have already provided a ton of money to the government for the licenses and must recover all that money to continue sustained operations. The current argument put forth by the telcos is that with the loss of revenues through people adopting internet telephony and internet based messengers, it'll be impossible for them to sustain the operations in future.

    We can quickly blame the telcos that they did NOT innovate and figure out ways to bring down their operations cost to keep up with the innovation on the software side. But the breakthrough in telecom technology isn't so straightforward and telcos have to rely on the existing technology. This has become classic race between who innovates faster!

    Going forward, the telcos say that in order to keep the operations running the data charges will have to be 6 times of what they are now - and if that happens, Internet will become unaffordable to majority; which goes against net neutrality as well.

    So - what's your take?
    Replies
Howdy guest!
Dear guest, you must be logged-in to participate on CrazyEngineers. We would love to have you as a member of our community. Consider creating an account or login.
Replies

  • Prasad Ajinkya

    Member • Apr 24, 2015

    • Why in the blazes did they quote so much for the bandwidth licenses? We had not stopped them during that time. The profitability issue is unfair, if you cannot afford to provide the service, do not bid for it.
    • Access to internet is almost a public good (Obama did declare this in the US).
    • Increase data prices, however these are regulated a bit by TRAI and more importantly there are national players who will compete as market forces to keep the data prices in check. I just wish Google Fibre kicks off in India 😀
    [Shameless Self Promotion]
    Surprising to see your post on this Biggie, I had just published
    <a href="https://kidakaka.com/blog/2015/04/25/net-neutrality-or-why-i-have-picked-up-tor/" target="_blank" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer">Net Neutrality or Why I have picked up Tor</a>

    on my blog
    [/Shameless Self Promotion]
    Are you sure? This action cannot be undone.
    Cancel

  • Kaustubh Katdare

    Administrator • Apr 24, 2015

    #-Link-Snipped-# - The motivation to start this debate was a result of questions asked to me by a local newspaper reporter who wanted my opinion. I do support net neutrality; but there are arguments being made by the telcos. The point of this discussion / debate is to explore arguments made by both the sides and see if there can be a win-win situation.

    I'm wondering if the net neutrality issue is limited to the wireless data (2G/3G/4G). I personally use wired-line connection 10x more than I use wireless data.
    Are you sure? This action cannot be undone.
    Cancel

  • rahul69

    Member • Apr 25, 2015

    In my opinion, service providers are just trying to fill the gap of profits which has occurred as people switched to VOIP and IM services instead of traditionally provided by them.
    Take an analogy, water is scarce, still we pay water bill, and it does not include separate charges for water that you drink, water with which you wash clothes etc, would you like that change, or would such a change be justified?

    Now let's come to facts, the facility of VOIP is being provided by players like Whatsapp, so if anyone have rights to charge for VOIP, it's online app companies like Whatsapp, skype etc. Will it be right to give money (that ideally belong to these companies) to service providers?
    Moreover what if later these companies (eg Whatsapp) decides to charge us heavily (since they must also make profits to survive), so you will end up paying twice for same set of service, once to service provider, and once to app provider (who is actual provider of that service).
    Are you sure? This action cannot be undone.
    Cancel

  • Kaustubh Katdare

    Administrator • Apr 26, 2015

    #-Link-Snipped-# - good argument. The question is not about WhatsApp asking for money. I think they'll eventually figure out how to make money through advertisements or yearly subscription fee. The trouble is with the telcos who did not see the future coming. I doubt they'd have ever thought that IM services and VoIP will hit right where it hurts the most.

    Can someone talk about how can telcos keep operating while keeping the data rates at current level and bringing them down in future?
    Are you sure? This action cannot be undone.
    Cancel

  • Prasad Ajinkya

    Member • Apr 29, 2015

    Kaustubh Katdare
    #-Link-Snipped-# - I'm wondering if the net neutrality issue is limited to the wireless data (2G/3G/4G). I personally use wired-line connection 10x more than I use wireless data.
    It's not limited to the wireless data. The issue has caught media attention and the attention of common folk is because of the wireless bit.
    Are you sure? This action cannot be undone.
    Cancel

  • Ramesh RR

    Member • May 1, 2015

    The "value" of each Byte of data has gone up multifold since internet services were started. All communication including voice is migrating to IP based networking.
    No telecom service provider (except BSNL) has taken any action to migrate to IP networking.
    Telecom companies want to raise the cost of internet services on this ground. But in a competitive market, who will take the first step?
    The Net Neutrality is a debate that will finally justify the price rise or segmentation.
    Are you sure? This action cannot be undone.
    Cancel

  • Ashraf HZ

    Member • May 1, 2015

    Having worked in the Telco industry, technically it's actually not that of a problem to change to change to an IP architecture and roll out these IP based services. Sure, ARPU may be diluted away from your legacy voice/sms streams, but you still can provide a significant amount of the last mile infra for the end users for IP and become an ISP.

    Any telco generally want's to deploy the latest tech (HSPA+, LTE, WiMAX, etc), but if your local regulator is slow to open these licences, or slow to get these equipment certified by the local regulatory lab, then you are stuck with older tech. That is your obstacle right there.
    Are you sure? This action cannot be undone.
    Cancel

  • Ramesh RR

    Member • May 1, 2015

    ash
    Any telco generally want's to deploy the latest tech (HSPA+, LTE, WiMAX, etc), but if your local regulator is slow to open these licences, or slow to get these equipment certified by the local regulatory lab, then you are stuck with older tech. That is your obstacle right there.
    This is the repeated argument of the telcos. HSPA+, WiMAX only change the internet access technology, not the core network.

    ash
    Sure, ARPU may be diluted away from your legacy voice/sms streams
    This is significant in this country. The revenues from SMS and International calls have reduced significantly. Voice and Text chats have migrated to IP. International calls have taken the VOIP route, even resulting in one operator wanting to charge more for voip services.
    Are you sure? This action cannot be undone.
    Cancel

  • Ashraf HZ

    Member • May 3, 2015

    RameshR
    This is the repeated argument of the telcos. HSPA+, WiMAX only change the internet access technology, not the core network.
    Within HSPA+ & WiMAX architectures, you have both access & core networks before it connects to the IP network for packet flow. The core network (with your GSNs & AGWs) are relatively easy to deploy in your DCs but they are tied to the specific architecture you are deploying. It is the access networks that face regulatory and deployment issues. You'd need to integrate thousands of sites and take months to optimize the radio performance. If your local regulatory opens up LTE licences now, then that's the best bet to go for a higher packet optimized network and divest from circuit switching.

    If LTE is slow to be released, then the best way is to deploy your 3G NodeB that are upgradable to LTE, then swap out the cards & antenna once LTE licences are approved (and plug in your EPC). Though, during the wait you will be suffering from higher opex with maintaining the circuit switch networks.

    Telco vendors are anxious to sell their latest tech to operators. Operators are eager to showcase the latest tech with test beds to stakeholders. But if they don't have licence to deploy the tech, then they'd have to make do with what is allowed.
    Are you sure? This action cannot be undone.
    Cancel

  • Kaustubh Katdare

    Administrator • Oct 9, 2015

    Just happened to read a counter view:

    I've been reading views on the Internet that are against the commonly accepted definition of net neutrality. The argument goes like this: How do you justify that those who do not have enough money not getting access to the Internet? If the initiatives like Free Basics (Internet.org) by Facebook allows people to access the Internet for free; then what's wrong with it?

    Would love to get people's views on this side of the argument 😀
    Are you sure? This action cannot be undone.
    Cancel

  • Anoop Kumar

    Member • Oct 9, 2015

    Added this answer in another thread. But I guess valid for this one too.

    Anoop Kumar
    Everyone bragging about net neutrality ... blah blah.
    What if telecom giants start giving govt online services for free (tax, weather, educational websites, farming related websites), do you still feel these should not be free and should be charged !
    Do you have any idea how it much benefit to farthest corner of country?

    I think govt. should tie-up with Facebook and start giving free access to at least IRCTC, ISRO weather and online courses from various institutes like IIT Lectures.

    Anyway, if two companies ties up to give something completely free, nothing wrong with that. That is the concept of toll free numbers and customer cares. If a person using only whatsapp and if a company providing it for free let it be.
    But yes, Internet data is data. There should not exclusive extra charging for something particular websites or service like charging voice data.
    Other argument is these free giving companies using customer data and taking over market. They will use in either way and this will happen in "Net-Neutrality" too.
    Are you sure? This action cannot be undone.
    Cancel

  • Anoop Kumar

    Member • Feb 8, 2016

    Finally, Facebook free has been denied.
    but isn't this true??
    Are you sure? This action cannot be undone.
    Cancel

  • Kaustubh Katdare

    Administrator • Feb 8, 2016

    #-Link-Snipped-# - That's *not* the main point of net-neutrality. If Facebook wants to offer free Internet; then why don't they just pay for people's data charges? Why be so 'selective' about what sites are included under the free scheme?
    Are you sure? This action cannot be undone.
    Cancel
Home Channels Search Login Register