[Chapter-delegates] Next Generation Internet initiative/European Commission

[Christian de Larrinaga]

I'm with you on your points.  Although my question was aimed at
evaluating the argument for increasing open spectrum availability in all
the base application frequencies in the sense of having space that is
not "owned". I'm not sure that White Space is sufficient to cover the
very rich mixture of applications and transport needed between very low
volume IoT, interactive device to device (meshes), and backhaul comms.
Should higher bands that are currently open be "snaffled" in other words?

You mention zigbee which has earlier this year exposed another issue.
That closing down device / application connectivity even when using an
open standard by copyright claims is a potential hazard.  A case I am
thinking of was Philips quietly shifted its Hue compatibility for
Philips only devices via an update - on copyright grounds. They backed
down this time but ...

C


Patrik Fältström wrote:
> On 1 Dec 2016, at 13:35, Christian de Larrinaga wrote:
>
>> I agree.
>>
>> Patrik would you also consider a comment for increasing availability of
>> open spectrum is an equivalent to your fibre availability in terms of
>> wireless? I am thinking mainly of pressures to regulate higher Ghz
>> frequencies in c 45-90 Ghz but not necessarily limiting to that range
>> depending on what 5G turns out to mean?
>
> Sort of...
>
> Regarding spectrum I have the view that:
>
> - There must be enough spectrum allocated for anyone to use (within specific energy levels etc) to enable evolution (2.4GHz, 5GHz bands etc, WiFi, Zigbee, BlueTooth, ...).
>
> - Allocation policy within the same frequency spectrum must be harmonised across Europe (look at 700MHz that did look good for a while but now...).
>
> - Allocation must be made in a technology neutral manner.
>
> - Spectrum allocation must be such so that the spectrum owners provide excellent wholesale services.
>
> - Providers of services on the market might not be the spectrum owners.
>
> For the two last rules, think about providers of services as MVNOs (across Europe) providing services by rending space in networks owned by frequency owners that have built good networks, and that if the provider of services is also the network owner should be viewed as a special case (when rules for spectrum owners and providers of services to consumers hit the same organisation).
>
>    Patrik
>
>> Christian
>>
>> Patrik Fältström wrote:
>>> Frédéric,
>>>
>>> FWIW, as long as dark fibre is not available on non-discriminatory
>>> terms, i.e. that LLUB exists for fibre as for copper, and (as
>>> arguments for that) the Investment Ladder is not recognised as an
>>> important enabler for well functioning and robust Internet
>>> Infrastructure, it does not matter how much "digitalisation" and smart
>>> services are developed.
>>>
>>> Because of this, and the fact the gap between the robustness and
>>> functionality of Internet access that is delivered from what
>>> expectations there is, please include text about these issues as one
>>> very important thing.
>>>
>>> Patrik
>>>
>>> On 1 Dec 2016, at 12:12, Frédéric Donck wrote:
>>>
>>>     Dear All
>>>
>>>     This mail to let you know that the EU Bureau has been approached
>>>     by the European Commission(DG Communications Network, Content and
>>>     Technology (DG CONNECT), to contribute to an initiative called
>>>     'the Next Generation Internet initiative", whose aim is, I quote,
>>>     "to shape a more open and inclusive Internet for European citizens”.
>>>     You can find more details about this initiative
>>>     here: _https://ec.europa.eu/digital-single-market/en/next-generation-internet-initiative_
>>>
>>>     EC plans to come up with first results in the course of Q1 2017.
>>>     The purpose as they explained to us, is to feed their Research
>>>     Framework Program (2018-2020) but of course we should anticipate
>>>     that some of the conclusions will be shared with their Policy arms.
>>>
>>>     As you know it, ISOC is in the process to finalise its own
>>>     research and consultation on the future of the Internet which
>>>     should turn into premliminary findings and recommendations in the
>>>     course of next year
>>>
>>>     We believe that our contribution to this EC consultation would
>>>     offer ISOC a very useful way of conveying our own messages and
>>>     concerns to EU policymakers at this juncture, before the Internet
>>>     Society comes up with its own recommendations in 2017.
>>>     Hence, we thought you may find it interesting to contribute as
>>>     well to this exercise.
>>>
>>>     Best Regards
>>>     Best Regards
>>>
>>>     Frédéric
>>>
>>>     Frédéric Donck
>>>     Director, European Regional Bureau
>>>     Internet Society
>>>
>>>     Office:
>>>     Avenue du Dirigeable 17
>>>     1170 Brussels
>>>     Belgium
>>>
>>>     Direct Mail: donck at isoc.org <mailto:donck at isoc.org>
>>>     Office : eubureau at isoc.org <mailto:eubureau at isoc.org>
>>>
>>>     www.internetsociety.org <http://www.internetsociety.org>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> As an Internet Society Chapter Officer you are automatically subscribed
>>> to this list, which is regularly synchronized with the Internet Society
>>> Chapter Portal (AMS): https://portal.isoc.org
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> As an Internet Society Chapter Officer you are automatically subscribed
>>> to this list, which is regularly synchronized with the Internet Society
>>> Chapter Portal (AMS): https://portal.isoc.org
>> -- 
>> Christian de Larrinaga  FBCS, CITP,
>> -------------------------
>> @ FirstHand
>> -------------------------
>> +44 7989 386778
>> cdel at firsthand.net
>> -------------------------

-- 
Christian de Larrinaga  FBCS, CITP,
-------------------------
@ FirstHand
-------------------------
+44 7989 386778
cdel at firsthand.net
-------------------------