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

Frédéric Donck donck at isoc.org
Thu Dec 1 09:29:44 PST 2016 

Dear Patrik, Christian, and all

thanks for those insightful contributions
Just to clarify. We had the occasion to already discuss with the EU and have actually addressed the broad lines of ISOC own endeavor in this field as well as potential synergies with EC in the future
I just wanted to flag that the Commission was fully aware of our ISOC many resources in this field, read our Chapters, and was really keen for all of our Chapters to contribute directly to the consultation (link below)
So my mail was aimed at pointing you all to the opportunity to bring *your* expertise to this consultation and contribute directly online
sorry for the confusion

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>



Le 1 déc. 2016 à 17:23, Patrik Fältström <paf at frobbit.se<mailto:paf at frobbit.se>> a écrit :

I think from a pure frequency allocation policy point of view I think it is important we do get enough spectrum available so that we can (for example) stream high definition TV from our iPhone19 or Samsung Galaxy32 to our 8k TV.

Beside that, we also need to be able to handle spectrum that is licensed to individual spectrum holders. But as we do not have as much spectrum for licensing as we have interest, that licensed spectrum must be possible to get access to in a similar way as other wholesale services (like bitstream).

I.e. I do not see LLUB be possible to implement in licensed spectrum, but bitstream.

  Patrik

On 1 Dec 2016, at 16:37, Christian de Larrinaga wrote:

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> <mailto:donck at isoc.org>
   Office : eubureau at isoc.org<mailto:eubureau at isoc.org> <mailto:eubureau at isoc.org>

   www.internetsociety.org<http://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<mailto:cdel at firsthand.net>
-------------------------

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

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://elists.isoc.org/mailman/private/chapter-delegates/attachments/20161201/0f7e916b/attachment.htm>

More information about the Chapter-delegates mailing list