[LINK] Australian ISP Peering

[Tom Koltai]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Geoff Huston [mailto:gih at apnic.net] 
> Sent: Wednesday, 18 March 2009 8:02 AM
> To: Tom Koltai
> Cc: stephen at melbpc.org.au; link at anu.edu.au
> Subject: Re: [LINK] Australian ISP Peering
> 
> I ceased employment with Telstra some years ago. I would not pretend  
> to speak for them in any way and I am sure that they would 
> not have me  
> do so!
> 
> That said, my _personal speculation_ is that Telstra would not  
> undertake measures that it perceives are not in its commercial  
> interests.  

Thank-you Geoff.

<Like any private corporate entity Telstra is bound to  
> operate in the interests of its shareholders and that equates to  
> operating along principles of maximizing beneficial outcomes to its  
> shareholders, 

>If you would rather Telstra adopted a different 
> position then I would speculate that it would be incumbent on you to 
> challenge this assumption 

Did that - several times - on B Party Charging, Telstra ISDN 1 second
charging, Telstra Billing Practices - and won - consequently, had my
head figuratively chopped off.
And besides - taking Telstra to Federal court repeatedly on S52 grounds
cost quite a few shekels and those shekels could always be used for an
extra bit of pipe, or a new Alteon switch or some coders.
Litigation is always a lose lose proposition. Even if you win in court -
financially its always a phyrric victory.  
Unfortunately when the big end of town use anti-competitive practices to
ruin your business, there is no choice but obtain an injunction and go
back to court for every breach of that injunction.

> and convince them as to how its commercial interests  
> would be improved by a change in their stance, 

Geoff, I am sure that was you thinking out loud. Because I can think of
nothing that would convince Telstra to create a level peering playing
field - except direct Government legislative interdiction.
Telstra's long term vision can be a little restricted sometimes to the
period relating only to the next bonus cheque/Annual Report period.
Example: in 1993 I asked Paul Twomey to offer every Australian their
phone nunber at australia.com as an automatic listing in the white
pages. His response ? "Mr. Koltai, we sell copper, not internet email."
Had he acceeded my request, Australia would now be the most e-commerce
enriched country in the world.

>or it would be  
> incumbent on your to call in the market regulators and make the case  
> to the regulatory authorities that Telstra's actions fall 
> foul of the relevant regulatory conditions.

Unfortunately:

1.	The regulators don't actually seem all that interested
Or:
2.	No-one in Government - regulatory or otherwise actually
understands the loss to Australia in terms of Economic benefits
resulting from Telstra not peering with all comers on a local only basis
And:
3.	Governments are not in a position to pay the money required to
hire the best of the best to actually understand routing.

Essentially, this is why most Government policies re Internet are
basically flawed. They are based on lobbyists statements paid for by
commercial interests. 

> > Surely the
> > five year old Unwired Experiment has proven that the BLPA (Bilateral
> > Peering) agreements that Tesltra offer at a price are more 
> expensive 
> > than bandwidth to the USA. (This is not only extraordinary, but
> > possibly
> > could even be considered extortionistically opportunistic 
> designed to
> > sell E1's across the pond.)
> >
> 
> You seem to be illustrating the position that corporate 
> entities tend  
> to behave in a manner that is consistent with maximizing the  
> beneficial outcome of their commercial interests. And a common  
> characteristic of very large corporate interests is that they 
> tend to  
> have commercial interests in many activities simultaneously.
> 
> 
> > Not withstanding your comments about stability and 
> infrastructure -  
> > lets
> > discount the AUIX/SAIX/WAIX/VIX models and use Pipe Networks as our
> > example....
> >
> > If everyone in Australia was available via Pipe 
> Networks..... (Stable,
> > secure infrastructure) - what possible motive could Telstra 
> have in  
> > not
> > peering at a local level with everyone - apart from 
> actively ensuring
> > that local E-commerce is at a disadvantage.
> 
> If "everyone was available..." then surely this would imply that the  
> market share of any other entity would be zero
> 
> I personaly think your initial premise is somewhat flawed 
> here in this hypothetical situation.
> <snip>

Actually I meant that if all ISP's were at a single peering location -
and it was a stable secure well funded environment - then is there any
other reason that you could proffer as to why Telstra wouldnt peer with
all ISP's.

(An interesting concept. A truly level playing field for Australian
content suppliers and e-commerce.)

> I ceased employment with Telstra some years ago. I would not pretend  
> to speak for them in any way and I am sure that they would 
> not have me  
> do so!

I know Geoff, that's why I posed the question. I've been waiting 15
years to ask that question. Thank-you for your detailed reply.

Tom


_______________________________________
No viruses found in this outgoing message
Scanned by iolo AntiVirus 1.5.6.4
http://www.iolo.com