[Chapter-delegates] Proposed law to ban Skype in Russia?

[Grigori Saghyan]

In Armenia there is no any difference between SDH based and IP based 
voice services from regulator point of view.
Main problem for operators is that IP based voice service is very cheap 
- 1 Mbyte volume is equal to 5 minute voice conversation.
In  3G network 1 Mbyte transmission cost in Armenia is 5 cents (5 minute 
conversation, 1 cent per minute,
of course, you have to have smartphone with any VoIP software).
 From the other hand you  have to pay 10 cents per minute  if you will 
call directly via  GSM handset. 
The difference is 10 times, and local operators do not have any strategy 
how to keep their 10 cents per minute.
It is very logical to close SIP (and similar like Skype) traffic in 
their network, but here we have  a strategic decision  -
traffic neutrality, network  must be neutral, user can use any standard 
protocol for data transfer.
In that case there is only one possible solution for operators - to 
invite national security  authority, which will describe,
that there is no any possibility for hearing  VoIP traffic, softswitches 
are not designed for that.
In Russia main argument was hearing problem, and Russian operators 
trying  to use that argument for Skype limitation.
Looks after migration on IP based voice transport all operators in the 
world will use same argument :(
As an option possible to expect flat fee for telephone traffic.

Grigori
VP ISOC.AM


Narelle.Clark at csiro.au wrote:
> In Australia the telephony regulation requires that if a provider sells a "standard telephony service" it must comply with a range of performance standards.
>
> In the case of Internet telephony, there are a number of services which arguably do not comply, yet as far as I know there haven't been any, or if any then not many publicised, prosecutions.
>
> It is also my understanding that most of the telcos are migrating their core telephony systems away from classical telephone switches to IP based call servers, and these will more than likely comply with the regulation.
>
> I realise this is a vastly different issue to outright banning, but the essential differences go to what consumers are paying for, and what they care about. There is clearly a flourishing market for IP and Internet based telephony, and people don't necessarily realise what they are giving up: it isn't just sound quality. It's call completion times, automatic originating party location notification to emergency services, life line, and a lot of the information about metering and calling party for law enforcement.
>
> The issue about availability of services doesn't just run to freedom of use, but to the nature and type of services available.
>
> Deregulation, levels of competition etc are all related to this as well...
>
> All the best
>
>
>
> Narelle
> VP ISOC-AU
>
>  
>   
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Carlos Vera Quintana
>> Sent: Monday, 17 August 2009 12:23 AM
>>
>> In Ecuador IP telephony is banned also, not for private use 
>> but for provide services that require a license
>>     
> _______________________________________________
> Chapter-delegates mailing list
> Chapter-delegates at elists.isoc.org
> http://elists.isoc.org/mailman/listinfo/chapter-delegates
>
>