October 2009 - KICTANet

The future of the IGF
by alice 26 Oct '09

26 Oct '09

http://blog.nominet.org.uk/ukigf/2009/09/the-future-of-the-igf/ The future of the IGF Posted by: Nick Thorne <http://blog.nominet.org.uk/ukigf/category/uncategorized/> *The UN Internet Governance Forum will meet in November at Sharm El Sheikh. The IGF has matured into a useful tool. But it is under threat. Stakeholders should speak up!* ** **It’s IGF season again. Representatives of key stakeholders are meeting again in Geneva to prepare the ground for the forthcoming fourth meeting of a body that has turned out to be considerably more useful than those of us involved in its invention expected. But despite its success, the future of this, the only multi-stakeholder forum available to consider Internet Governance, is under threat. If we want it to continue then we all, we /multi-stakeholders/, must speak up and demonstrate how and why we find it useful. These issues were highlighted last week at the excellent East African Internet Governance Forum. Very well run, with solid participation from regional governments, CCTLD’s, Civil Society and Industry. A novelty was a special session for Parliamentarians. I argued that Members of Parliament had a vital role to play and should consider themselves internationally as another /stakeholder/ group. They knew what their constituents needed, and were best placed to put pressure on governments and resist unnecessarily restrictive legislation, which might stifle the benefits of the Internet as we have come to know it. All this was taking place in Nairobi, against the background of the remarkable progress being made in Broad Band connectivity in Kenya. No less than four undersea fibre-optic cables will be coming on shore in the coming two years. One has already landed and will be coupled to links reaching beyond the immediate East African region and north to Ethiopia and South Sudan. We talked about various different methods for distributing links beyond the cable proper. Wi-Max systems will link up the smallest municipalities with all the attendant benefits. Exciting stuff. It will be fascinating to see how these cables will spread their invaluable tentacles throughout the region. Can there be a more effective multiplier for economic and social development? In Nairobi we also discussed the proposal for a Commonwealth IGF, designed to take advantage of that unique coalition of like-minded countries of all sizes, shapes and stages of development. The Commonwealth Secretariat is active in support of this initiative and side-events are planned for Sharm El Sheikh. Something else which will be raised in Geneva this week where representatives from Commonwealth countries will consider how best to share experiences and best practice across the broadest possible range of ideas. But governments are only one element of the unique /multi stakeholder/ approach to which many of us attribute the phenomenal success of the Internet. And not all the influences are positive. At WSIS, when we created the IGF, we also agreed that there should be a programme of “enhanced cooperation” among all the actors involved in Internet Governance. The UN Secretary General was asked to produce a report on how matters might be improved, possibly with recommendations. I think this report was supposed to be produced after about a year, but it eventually appeared a couple of months ago in the form of a compilation of the views of interested parties which had been called upon to contribute. It included submissions from e.g. the Internet Society, ICANN, and also from the International Telecommunications Union (ITU). In each case the views and ambitions of the authors were made very clear. I would recommend that all those interested in the continuation of liberal internet governance look at this report, and in particular the views of the ITU Secretariat. [http://unpan1.un.org/intradoc/groups/public/documents/un-dpadm/unpan035383.… I say Secretariat because I understand the contribution was not necessarily cleared in advance with its membership. Nevertheless it would appear to be a clear statement, as it were, of intent, and should serve to encourage us to work harder to ensure that the IGF mechanism will continue to give all parties, all /stakeholders/, an opportunity to express their views. This should of course include developing countries whose interests are I believe much better served by this liberal approach rather than by the repetition of the sort of government driven bureaucratic rules previously deemed appropriate for the old telecoms system. I think our experience in Kenya last week amply demonstrated this. And so I was delighted when the Kenyan Government formally announced its intention to host the IGF in the year 2011. (Next years event is already fixed for Vilnius, Lithuania). This guarantee of continuity is very important as we face the five-year review process built in to the WSIS decisions. I am a great believer in such reviews. Too often we create mechanisms which trundle along, impelled only by their own bureaucratic existence. Not so with the IGF which has demonstrated a real vitality as all the previous meetings, and in particular Rio (2007) and last year Hyderabad have shown. And all with only the most limited bureaucratic support. “Secretariat-lite!” Well done Markus Kummer! Nevertheless there are still those who for a variety of reasons seek either to supplant or suppress this useful mechanism. If we are to maintain this admirable energy we must all, all we /multi-stakeholders/, redouble our efforts to renew the mandate of the IGF. Some governments are doing their best, but I would like to hear more from Industry, and from Civil Society, particularly among developing countries where most of the next billion Internet users reside. We should all speak up to announce that we all still have much to learn from each other, through Sharm El Sheikh, then Vilnius and on to Nairobi in 2011. Nick Thorne Les Augers. September 2009 (Nick Thorne CMG was UK Ambassador to the UN in Geneva from 2003to 2008 and led the UK and the EU at the Tunis WSIS Summit. He now consults on Internet Governance issues and is International Relations Adviser to the President and CEO of ICANN. ) Tags: Commonwealth IGF <http://blog.nominet.org.uk/ukigf/tag/commonwealth-igf/>, East African IGF <http://blog.nominet.org.uk/ukigf/tag/east-african-igf/>, IGF <http://blog.nominet.org.uk/ukigf/tag/igf/>, Internet Governance Forum <http://blog.nominet.org.uk/ukigf/tag/internet-governance-forum/>, Sharm El Sheikh <http://blog.nominet.org.uk/ukigf/tag/sharm-el-sheikh/>

6 5

Coffee or Code?
by S.Murigi Muraya 26 Oct '09

26 Oct '09

Dear All, There are those who meet at cocktails to make policies or cut deals and those who live on coffee to convert these policies or deals into (software) code = information systems. It must be said that www.information.go.ke, www.ict.go.ke and other government departments have come a long way in opening up to us but ... Bureaucracy and political intrigues still keep many of our government departments from building even simple information and transactional systems to increase transparency and efficiency. Who in government can join us the morning of November 7, 2009 to enlighten us more on how we can help the government personnel or IT companies required to build these systems? Kenya ICT Board CEO? The PS (Dr. Ndemo)? This will not be an anti Microsoft meet but we need an informed Kenyan FOSS luminary to provide balance that day. Alex Gakuru? Location: We have not decided yet. Maybe Silver Springs Hotel, Panafric or Jacaranda! Kind regards SMM

3 3

IPv6 addresses: North American ISPs are now grabbing for them over IPv4
by alice＠apc.org 25 Oct '09

25 Oct '09

IPv6 addresses: North American ISPs are now grabbing for them over IPv4 By Carolyn Duffy Marsan Created 2009-10-19 02:29PM U.S. ISPs are requesting more IPv6 [1] addresses and fewer IPv4 addresses than ever before -- a sign that carriers are investing in the future amidst one of the deepest recessions[2] in modern history. The shift in IP address requests shows that North American carriers are getting ready for the long-anticipated upgrade [3] of the Internet's main communications protocol from IPv4, the current standard, to the next-generation IPv6. [ What U.S. businesses are missing [4] in their slow move to IPv6. | Despite businesses' faint interest, the shift to IPv6 [5] is seen as an inevitable | Keep up on the latest networking news with our Technology: Networking newsletter [6]. ] IPv4 uses 32-bit addresses and can support 4.3 billion individually addressed devices on the Internet. IPv6 uses 128-bit addresses and supports an inconceivably huge amount of devices: 2 to the 128th power. IPv6 also offers built-in security and enhanced network management features when compared to IPv4, which is expected to run out [7] of address space by 2012. In the first nine months of 2009, the American Registry for Internet Numbers (ARIN [8]) received 300 requests from carriers for blocks of IPv6 address space. This compares to 250 requests received in all of 2008 and 2007. "We're seeing an uptick in IPv6 address space requests; it's a very significant growth rate," says John Curran, president and CEO of ARIN. "We've seen a slight slowdown in IPv4 address space requestsIt's probably dropped off 10 percent or 20 percent year over year." Curran says ARIN is beginning to see ISPs such as Comcast [9] and Verizon Wireless [10] put a great deal of effort into migrating from IPv4-based networks to those built using IPv6. "ISPs are asking for IPv6 addresses so they can make their networks IPv6-enabled so they are ready [for the future]," Curran says. "We give each ISP enough IPv6 addresses to support 4 billion networks, and each network can contain trillions and trillions of hosts." Curran says the recession is not hampering carriers' interest in IPv6. "IPv6 solves a problem that hasn't happened yet. So seeing any demand is surprising, and it means that organizations are planning ahead," Curran says. "The current weakness in the economyis not dampening down IPv6 demand significantly because IPv6 is right around the corner for ISPs. We may be two years away from the IPv4 free pool of addresses running out, but two years if you're an ISP is enough time to get one network deployed. Two years is within everyone's planning horizon." ARIN will detail the latest statistics about IPv6 address demand in North America at a policy meeting [2] that will be held this week in Dearborn, Mich. ARIN also will discuss several proposed policy changes related to IPv4 depletion and the push towards IPv6 adoption. These include: * Allowing ARIN to https://www.arin.net/policy/proposals/2009_8.html [11] ">reduce the size of IPv4 address space allocations to carriers as the industry gets closer to IPv4 address depletion. * Increasing access to IPv6 [12] address space by removing the requirement for carriers to first demonstrate that they have hundreds of customers. * Allowing carriers to run multiple, discrete IPv6 networks [13] that don't have to be connected to each other, such as community networks. * Reconsideration of a current policy that requires the regional registries including ARIN to evenly divide up any IPv4 space [14] they are able to recover. ARIN will hold elections at this meeting for several open board of trustees and advisory council openings. * Networking * IPv6 * Internet

1 0

How does corruption affect women?
by alice 23 Oct '09

23 Oct '09

How does Corruption Impact Women? Although some may assume that corruption is gender-neutral in terms of its lack of ethics and resource-depleting impact, corruption compounds the discrimination women already experience on large and small scales. By Masum Momaya Read more<http://rs6.net/tn.jsp?et=1102781086510&s=999&e=001grAt-vpz26lxjvSkK-hX9 rzTyimpf9LxRv_n6x-zB2aI-q5iXJSsx139tOs6-L2zxZaT9AkbG3UMunYMj2qeG3mewq7RA61wc wpquj2oq02ENRmewB-n7TyMkbCJik72YtVahcO6dSx2RnEQ68G1mQ9GHQro4ZgMGoVmzj_C7pIyo VH0sQ4pGMOrq9drjA8ZLdu4YM9XsIMBu5thtIK0Yw==>

1 0

Fwd: Brazil Government's official position on the "Affirmation of Commitments"
by waudo siganga 23 Oct '09

23 Oct '09

Sorry for any cross-posting of this. Dear people, below is the official declaration of the Brazilian government regarding the post-JPA "Affirmation of Commitments" ICANN-USA. fraternal regards --c.a. ===================================================== The Brazilian Government’s Position on the Affirmation of Commitments between the U.S. Government and ICANN On September 30, 2009, the U.S. Department of Commerce (DoC) and the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) released a new agreement entitled Affirmation of Commitments, which completes the transition of management of the Internet domain name and addressing system (DNS) from the U.S. government to the private sector by granting greater autonomy to ICANN and increasing international participation in the oversight of its activities. The Brazilian Government welcomes the approval of the Affirmation of Commitments, which provides for a set of important advances in the management and decision making processes of ICANN, consistent with the demands presented by Brazil, either at the ICANN itself or at relevant United Nations forums. Among the positive aspects included in the new agreement, it is worth highlighting the following: (1) increasing participation of other governments in the process of assessing and reviewing ICANN activities, with a greater role for the Government Advisory Committee (GAC), along with the ICANN Board; (2) ending the requirement to submit periodical reports exclusively to the U.S. government, requiring ICANN to release annual reports on its activities to all stakeholders; (3) reaffirming the principles of transparency, multistakeholder participation, public interest, interoperability and end-to-end innovation; preserving the DNS security and stability and maintaining one single global Internet; (4) introducing the notion of an enhanced decision-making process, through cross-community deliberations. Notwithstanding these positive aspects, the Brazilian government believes that there is still room for further improvements to be made to the global governance of the Internet, in light of the results of the World Summit on the Information Society (WSIS). The Affirmation of Commitments does not advance on the issue of ICANN’s institutional framework and the need to grant it international legal status. The DNS root zone continues to be managed under the supervision of the U.S. Department of Commerce. The Affirmation of Commitments may be revoked at any time by either the Department of Commerce or ICANN, which may generate insecurity vis‑à‑vis ICANN’s relationships with other governments, international organizations and non-governmental organizations that are not subject to the U.S. jurisdiction. The Brazilian government will continue to contribute to further improving the global governance of the Internet, towards full observance of the principles of multilateralism, transparency and democracy adopted at WSIS. -- Carlos A. Afonso CGI.br (www.cgi.br) Nupef (www.nupef.org.br) ==================================== new/nuevo/novo e-mail: ca(a)cafonso.ca ====================================

3 2

(no subject)
by meshack emakunat 22 Oct '09

22 Oct '09

dear kictanet why cann't i send or post an item to the listers yet i receive a lot of items

2 1

The East Africa Internet Governance Forum: Advancing the Internet Governance Debate for meaningful participation.
by alice 21 Oct '09

21 Oct '09

The East Africa Internet Governance Forum: Advancing the Internet Governance Debate for meaningful participation. * * * *An East African broadband policy framework was the topic of discussion at the second East Africa Internet Governance Forum held in Nairobi in September 7-9^th 2009. Over 200 participants and observers from 15 countries representing private sector, civil society, Internet community, media, government, parliamentarians, regulatory authorities, development partners, United Nations agencies, consumer networks and academia came together to discuss local and regional Internet Governance (IG) issues. The main themes of the meeting were cybercrime, policy regulatory requirements, consumer issues, critical Internet resources, and access to broadband. In each thematic session, representatives of the five East Africa countries provided a national perspective, identifying key issues, progress and challenges, followed by discussion among all EA-IGF 2009 participants around developing recommendations and a way forward. A new addition to the EA-IGF was a session organised for East African members of parliament. The EA-IGF, first convened in 2008, aims to create a community of practice that will, in the long term, become a sustaining foundation for the meaningful participation of East African stakeholders in Internet public policy debates at the national, regional and international level. The EA-IGF model allows for informed participation, contribution and engagement of community members through research, sharing of experiences and skills, solving common problems, identifying challenges, and creation of new knowledge. The Forum follows a bottom up multi-stakeholder approach, which begins at the national level with mailing list discussions in each country, followed by national face-to-face IGFs, to continue discussions and debate, which go further to validate the issues identified and begin to explore recommendations and solutions. The national IGFs then form the building block for the regional East Africa IGF. During the 2009 EA-IGF, consensus emerged that access continues to be one of the most important issues for the region, with the most fundamental access issue being universal affordable access to broadband. Forum participants recommended the development of a regional broadband policy framework to enhance affordable universal access. Other essential issues included strengthening country code top-level domains (ccTLDs), developing national and regional policy and regulatory frameworks for spectrum management, cybercrime, and consumer protection, among others. The proposal to create an enabling environment for universal affordable access was supported by Kenya’s Permanent Secretary Ministry for Information and Communication Dr. Bitange Ndemo, who noted in his welcome speech that “the next billion Internet users would come from Africa. The Internet is about enabling access to the world's information and knowledge in all of its languages. We must therefore ensure that we localise the Internet to preserve our cultures and knowledge, and share our knowledge and cultures with the rest of the world.” He further added that African governments needed to develop Intellectual Property frameworks that would protect Africa’s rich heritage and resources from theft. *The 2009 EA-IGF recommendations:* On Policy and Regulation, there was consensus around the need to complete and approve an East African Communication policy, as well as development of additional policy frameworks covering broadband, spectrum management, cybercrime, consumer protection and intellectual property. The need for increased civil society advocacy for better quality of service, universal affordable access, and a legal framework for consumer issues including codes of conduct was also agreed upon. The provision of transparent and accessible complaint resolution channels and promotion of informed consumer choice by providing publication of statistics and information to empower consumer choice was also recommended. The session on critical Internet resources recommended strengthening country code top-level domains (ccTLDs), the creation of national and regional data centres, strengthening and protecting national and regional internet Exchange Points (IXP), and awareness raising on IPv6- transition. * * Discussing cybercrime, there was agreement on the need to establish national and regional* *Computer Emergency Response Teams (CERTs) to coordinate and respond to issues of cyber security in the region. Participants also agreed on the urgent need to begin to address the specific needs of vulnerable groups like women and children and how they are affected by cybercrime. While adopting these recommendations, Forum participants acknowledged the need for sustainable means of following up on the issues with various activities, including encouraging further discussions, advocacy efforts, as well as development of necessary policy frameworks at national and regional levels. Participants also agreed that these issues needed to be presented at the global IGF, and discussions begun to explore ways in which they could be included and integrated within the IGF in future years. The EA-IGF will seek to contribute on how the IGF could achieve more practical and useful outcomes drawing on the local and regional lessons with greater consideration given to capacity building and other Internet governance needs the East African countries identified. The, Executive Coordinator for the United Nations Internet Governance Forum, Mr. Markus Kummer noted that while “much of the IGF discussions tended to focus on international factors the development of National and regional IGFs now have an even more important role of informing the global IGF". "The international level", he added, "Cannot work without national agreements and involvement as well as effective participation and commitment of all the stake-holders". *The Parliamentarian IGF session* The inclusion of members of parliament as a key stakeholder group in the meeting was unique to the 2009 EA-IGF. Recognising that parliamentarians have an important role to play in the Internet governance dialogue, the aim of the session was to begin to encourage essential contributions of members of parliament to the IG debate. The session hosted by Kenya’s Member of Parliament and Minister for Information and Communication, Hon. Samuel Porgishio and the Speaker of the Kenya National Assembly Hon. Kenneth Marende and was attended by members of parliament from Uganda, Tanzania, Burundi, Kenya and United Kingdom. In his welcome speech, Hon. Kenneth Marende, noted, “The Internet governance process and debate is very important for the region, particularly now with the increase of access to broadband, which will result in greater benefits and opportunities as well as Internet governance related challenges.” On introducing Internet governance, Adam Peake, from the Centre for Global Communications (GLOCOM) noted that “the architectural principles of the Internet provides an open platform and network on which anyone, who has the skills, and will can provide services, content, and applications. This principle of openness is what makes the Internet so unique and provides the opportunities for social, economic, cultural and political benefits as well as innovation and entrepreneurship.” He therefore encouraged parliamentarians to engage in the Internet governance process in order to encourage their constituents to make use of the social economic development benefits offered by access to the Internet. ** Hon. Samuel Porgishio formally announced Kenya’s intention to host the 2011 IGF. The IGF mandate set by WSIS decisions will be reviewed after the fifth meeting in Vilnius, Lithuania, in 2010. While the EA-IGF does not attempt to mirror the global IGF, consensus emerged that the IGF is a very important and useful mechanism for continuing discussions and debate on Internet governance. As the only multi-stakeholder forum that discusses IG issues, it is important that stakeholders seek assurances of the global forum’s continuity. Acknowledging the importance of the process, Ugandan Member of Parliament, Hon. Nathan Nabeta Igeme announced Uganda’s commitment to host the 2010 East Africa Internet Governance Forum (EA-IGF 2010). Ambassador Nick Thorne noted that “Members of Parliament had a vital role to play in Internet governance processes and must consider themselves as a key stakeholder group in the national, regional and global processes. Representing their various constituents, parliamentarians are needed, and are best placed to put pressure on governments and resist unnecessarily restrictive legislation, which might stifle the benefits of the Internet as we have come to know it.” Applauding the EA-IGF, UK Member of Parliament Rt. Hon. Alun Michal encouraged all parliamentarians to engage and understand the process, from national, regional and international levels. "The EA-IGF is a success story", he said, "not because you are doing it right, but because you have set the pace for the rest of the world” The Parliamentarian session approved a declaration, which sought to support the development of regional policy frameworks on broadband access and cybercrime, among others. *Commonwealth Internet Governance Forum (CIGF)* Mark Carvell, from the UK Department for Business Innovation and Skills introduced the Commonwealth Internet Governance Forum (CIGF), which “seeks to encourage greater participation from Commonwealth member states on policy issues and discussions related to Internet governance with a view to coming up with informed solutions to address their needs.” He announced that the CIGF has launched a travel bursary for Commonwealth participants to attend the forth IGF meeting taking place in Egypt in November 2009. Kenya is a member of this initiative and the Kenya ICT Action Network (KICTANet) is partner of the CIGF. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- The 2009 EA-IGF was supported by the Canadian International Development Research Centre (IDRC), the Japanese International Cooperation Agency (JICA), Kenya’s Ministry for Information and Communication, the Communications Commission of Kenya (CCK), Kenyan Network information Centre (KENIC), AT&T, the Telecommunication Service Providers Association of Kenya (TESPOK), Kenya Internet Exchange Point (KIXP), Africa Network Information Centre (AfrINic), Kenya ICT Board, and the Centre for Global Communications (GLOCOM), International University of Japan, East African ICT for Development network and the Kenya ICT Action Network (KICTANet). For more information about the EA-IGF Visit: www.eaigf.or.ke <http://www.eaigf.or.ke>

1 0

Dropping the ties that bind how Africa can help itself to get lower bandwidth pric es
by emko＠internetresearch.com.gh 21 Oct '09

21 Oct '09

Dropping the ties that bind how Africa can help itself to get lower bandwidth prices In Kenya two international cables Seacom and TEAMS have arrived but a fierce row has broken out over pricing. On the Government-backed TEAMS cable, Permanent Secretary Bitange Ndemo has said loudly and publicly that rates should come down to nearer US$200 per mbps. The cables owners say they have to recoup their money and that there will plenty of time later for prices to come down. Russell Southwood looks at some of the blockages to the benefits the international cables might bring and how they might be overcome. By 2011, Africa will have eight international fibre cables connecting it to the rest of the world. New infrastructure is already delivering an eight to ten fold reduction in the prices formerly charged by the satellite companies. But the old African mindset of selling shortage at the highest price is not changing quickly enough to keep up with the new future of plentiful bandwidth. A number of blockages are emerging that need to be overcome if Africa is to take full advantage of its new fibre assets: * Holding bandwidth prices up We have sat in rooms with bandwidth providers in at least two countries where they have argued that the new international fibre will not make that much difference to the prices charged to their customers. Indeed, the first move of many of the providers was to simply increase (rather modestly) the bandwidth their customers were receiving, whilst keeping the price the same. So the new cable owners find themselves arguing what might be called the SAT position. When the cable is being built, all the rhetoric is about lowering prices but the moment the cable is implemented, it suddenly becomes about getting back the money as quickly as possible for their investment, despite the long-term nature of cable investment. Telkom SA claimed to have recouped its investment on SAT3 in eighteen months but it is unlikely with the new lower rates that cable investors will see a full return for a much longer period. Apparently CCK is so cross with this switchover from promising lowered bandwidth costs to trying to keep the price high that it will be investigating price levels on the TEAMS cable. However, all this price-hiking is short-term as with the arrival of EASSy and its WIOCC consortium, prices will fall sharply again. If that has not occurred WIOCC has a price-fall mechanism that will see bandwidth in the market fall to US$100 per mbps. In East Africa, there has been a lively debate over pricing but expect the same price-hiking tactics in West Africa where media coverage may not be as intense. * Not granting international landing station licences One of the major issues in West Africa has been the granting, or perhaps we should say the failure, to grant international landing station rights to those building the new international fibre cables. How can this be occurring when everyone at every level has been arguing for cheaper bandwidth? Well, its the old self-interests being more powerful than the forces for change and everyone behaving according to the old model of behaviour and protecting the incumbent. The most extreme example is Senegal where the regulator has delayed granting landing stations to the cables most likely to be first in the race to complete: Glo One and Main One. In more competitive East Africa, the independently-owned Seacom cable was able to either partner with another independent (KDN) or land using a licence in its own name in Tanzania. But life has not been made that easy in Senegal where Main One is seeking to partner with the only possible alternative to France Telecom-owned Sonatel, Expresso. There is no opportunity to have an independent licence because this might make it too easy to compete with the de-facto monopoly of Sonatel, which is involved in the France Telecom cable initiative ACE. But why blame the regulator when the real delay is coming from Government that takes all the decisions? The cynic might conclude that these delays will help Sonatel get ACE in place and keep out other cables for as long as possible. Of course, the speedy licensing of Glo One and Main One would prove the cynics wrong but dont hold your breath. * Rates between landlocked countries Once the new cheap bandwidth is at the landing stations, the trouble really begins. Operators do much teeth-sucking and say of course, you know thats not the real price. We have to charge for transit. In countries without a landing station, this leaves them in the hands of those accustomed to the old way of doing things. When incumbents dealt only with incumbents for cross-border transit, they both had an informal agreement that they would charge the same high price for each end of the transit. The net result is that prices for cross-border transit remain high. One country we visited recently, it was paying more for the transit to the landing station in a neighbouring country than it was for the onward transmission to Europe. In East Africa, this is less of a problem as some thought was devoted to the issue and solutions are on the table. With World Bank prompting, the EASSy partners came up with the East African Backbone System that delivers inland bandwidth at more or less the same priceas at the landing station. Seacom has also delivered on its promise of the same price inland as at the landing station for those countries where it has inland partner (Rwanda and Uganda). But the problem will be much harder to solve in West Africa as the main independent cable Main One has taken the view that its capacity will be delivered by the operators themselves, who will doubtless turn every trick in the book to ensure that prices remain high for the transit portion. What regulators should be encouraging is regional carriers carriers who can compete with the existing telcos who might seek to keep prices high. The West African and Southern African Power Pools have ample fibre capacity to make a reality of this ambition working with independent partners. * The high cost of national transit to reach the POP or the landing station If cross-border transit rates are a form of highway robbery, then national transit rates show many of the same symptoms. It is cheaper to go from Lagos to Sessimbra in Portugal than it is to go from Lagos to Abajua. If rates are based on distance, then the new international fibre cables have exposed the high rates charged for national backbone delivery. Not surprisingly, these national transit rates remain high where there are legal or de-facto monopolies. Without competition, it is hardly surprising that the old pattern of charging what you can get away with is maintained. But you cannot have competition at the international level, without it having knock-on consequences at the national level. National backbone operators will need to improve their efficiency levels or risk others building out their own backbones (where this is allowed). All operators know that in this circumstance they can cut between a third to a half off of the current rates being charged. The choice is a stark one: either you have a price-controlled monopoly with lower prices or you allow operators to compete and get lower prices. The sceptics will say But who wants all this new bandwidth? There arent the customers. (appropriate shrug of shoulders) This is Africa. The alternative to this old way of thinking is to have a low price, high volume strategy that is about creating volume markets at yes, you guessed it, commodity prices. Then you sell the new customers services and applications on top. In the mobile field, MPesa is the best example of how an Africa-targeted service can take off. Its not about relying on the same old, same old corporates but about addressing the residential middle classes with Internet in places like Nigeria and Kenya who will provide the critical mass for reaching out more widely. Its about bringing the small-scale companies and NGOs to the party and persuading them of the virtues of using the Internet to get things done more quickly. In short, it needs a strong dose of corporate vision rather than seeing the future through the rear-view mirror of history. nb: sorry for crossposting....

3 3

Re: [kictanet] significance of the internet to business world?
by meshack emakunat 20 Oct '09

20 Oct '09

dear all who can share some of the significance of the internet to the world today? anyone!

1 0

Reminder: The Amy Mahan Research Fellowship Program
by alice 20 Oct '09

20 Oct '09

Apologies for cross posting ------------------------------------------- Dear All This really is a great opportunity for an emerging researcher to get some valuable support (each fellowship may be awarded up to €22,000 and will have additional support through mentors) and either pursue an on-going research program or kick-start a new research agenda. The website for the Fellowship is very detailed - http://www.upf.edu/amymahan/ - and provides a lot of useful material to help candidates prepare their application. These include information on: 1. Eligibility - http://www.upf.edu/amymahan/criteria/ 2. *Sample research topics* - http://www.upf.edu/amymahan/topics/ that provide a sense of what types of research would be suitable for the fellowship; and very importantly 3. A facility to submit a topic query - http://www.upf.edu/amymahan/topic-query/topic-query_instructions.html; which enables the candidate to check that their proposed research topic falls within the scope of the fellowship. It is however worth noting that the option of submitting a topic query is only available until *30 November 2009*. Another reason for potential candidates to begin to explore the opportunities/benefits of the program as soon as possible. The deadline for submitting applications is Midnight Eastern Standard Time, *31 December 2009*. Please do not hesitate to contact me if you have any questions regarding the program. Regards Abi Jagun Regional Partner for the Africa and Middle East Region Research Associate, LINK Center, University of Witwatersrand -------------------------------------------------------------- > The Amy Mahan Research Fellowship Program is an eighteen-months project sponsored by Canada's International Development Research Center (IDRC) and managed by Universitat Pompeu Fabra, Barcelona, Spain, in collaboration with scholars from Universidad de San Andrés, Argentina and the University of the Philippines. The Program is the capacity building component of the Global Impact Study. It is named in honor of Amy Mahan, a distinguished colleague and dear friend who was a member of the Research Working Group of the Global Impact Study until her passing on 5 March 2009. > > The Program's objectives are to deepen and strengthen the capacity of emerging scholars in developing countries to carry out rigorous research in the area of public access to ICT, while simultaneously increasing the availability of high-quality research in the subject area coming from the developing regions of the world. The Program will award up to 12 Research Fellowships to emerging scholars from developing countries in Africa and the Middle East, the Asia Pacific region and Latin America and the Caribbean. Fellowships will provide research grant funding and specialized "mentoring" guidance to enable emerging researchers to carry out a new and original research study that addresses one or more critical research questions regarding the impact of public access to ICTs. Qualified researchers from developing countries in Africa and the Middle East, the Asia Pacific region and Latin America and the Caribbean are encouraged to submit their application in English, French, Portuguese or Spanish, no later than Midnight Eastern Standard Time, 31 December 2009. For more details follow this link - http://www.upf.edu/amymahan/ > -- >

1 0