Desarrollo de Servicios NGN en Portugal


Published on

Presentación de José Amado da Silva durante la VII Cumbre de reguladores de telecomunicaciones de Europa y América latina. Lima 2 de octubre de 2008

Published in: Business, Technology
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Desarrollo de Servicios NGN en Portugal

  2. 2. INDEX <ul><li>The Critical Issues; </li></ul><ul><li>The Present Solutions; </li></ul><ul><li>The Next Future. </li></ul>
  3. 3. <ul><li>1. The Critical Issues </li></ul>Considered together, the “horizontal barriers” and the “vertical barriers” account for around 2/3 of the NGN implementation costs.
  4. 4. <ul><li>A. The Horizontal Barriers </li></ul>
  5. 5. The Horizontal Barriers The horizontal barriers have to do with the construction of new ducts, as well as with the difficulties concerning passing fibre in existing ducts or in ensuring alternatives to take to the buildings the technology supporting NGN.
  6. 6. <ul><li>B. The Vertical Barriers </li></ul>
  7. 7. The Vertical Barriers <ul><li>The vertical barriers refer to the obstacles that operators find in entering and in extending the fibre to the clients premises, namely regarding: </li></ul><ul><li>The negotiation with the landlords; </li></ul><ul><li>The existing infrastructure required to pass the cables; </li></ul><ul><li>The building of new infrastructure, in the building, to take fibre to the door; </li></ul><ul><li>The internal distribution of fibre in the clients’ premises. </li></ul>
  8. 8. <ul><li>2. The Present Solutions </li></ul>
  9. 9. <ul><li>A. The Horizontal Barriers </li></ul>
  10. 10. ORAC Background <ul><li>Taking into account a series of outstanding issues related with horizontal barriers, namely: </li></ul><ul><li>Difficulties of alternative operators in building ducts in certain geographic areas within cost and time efficiency parameters; </li></ul><ul><li>b. The need to avoid inefficient duplication of infrastructures and to contribute to the global increment of efficient investment; </li></ul><ul><li>c. Allegations of alternative operators related with restricted access to the infrastructure of the historic operator (in what regards ducts, inner ducts, pipes and visit chambers) as well as discriminatory conditions and excessive prices; </li></ul><ul><li>d. The need to promote transparency in what concerns access conditions to ducts and related infrastructure, </li></ul><ul><li>ANACOM has determined, in 17/10/2004, that the historic operator must publish a reference offer for access to ducts and related infrastructure (ORAC). </li></ul>
  11. 11. Guiding Principles for the ORAC <ul><ul><li>PRINCIPLES: </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Efficiency </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Cost Orientation </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Non Discrimination </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Transparency </li></ul></ul><ul><li>AREAS OF INTERVENTION: </li></ul><ul><li>Prices </li></ul><ul><li>QS Parameters </li></ul><ul><li>Planning </li></ul><ul><li>Procedures </li></ul>
  12. 12. ORAC General Access Conditions <ul><li>Access to ducts and associated infrastructure of PTC, for installation, intervention or withdrawal of cables, or any service governed by the ORAC, is carried out by workers of the beneficiary or subcontracting companies (who must be duly identified and accredited by PTC). </li></ul><ul><li>PTC informs beneficiaries of the construction of new ducts two months in advance of notification to the municipality. </li></ul><ul><li>PTC had to (a) establish an accreditation system and to (b) publish and keep updated, a list of bodies who have been accredited, in order to promote transparency. </li></ul>
  13. 13. PRESENT STATUS <ul><li>Addressed issues: </li></ul><ul><li>Access to critical infrastructure and guarantee of network integrity; </li></ul><ul><li>Establishment of the correct price; </li></ul><ul><li>Planning specifications; </li></ul><ul><li>Technical and procedural issues (installation, retrieval, replacement and maintenance of ducts and cables); </li></ul><ul><li>Room reservation; </li></ul><ul><li>Establishment of proper QS levels. </li></ul><ul><li>2. The litigation between historic operator and alternative operators has decreased. </li></ul>
  14. 14. 3. The first ORAC “orders” were placed in mid-2006 and interest of operators has been growing since then.
  15. 15. <ul><li>B. Vertical Barriers </li></ul>
  16. 16. ITED (1) <ul><li>ITED is the regime governing the planning and installation of telecommunications infrastructure in buildings and their links to the public telecommunications networks, as well as the activity of installation certification. It is regulated by Decree Law no. 59/2000 of 19 April and supported technically by the ITED Manual and associated procedures. </li></ul><ul><li>Facilitating broadband in new buildings, the ITED promotes competition and the technological upgrade of the communications sector. </li></ul><ul><li>When planning the construction of a building, the property developer/owner must hire an ANACOM registered ITED designer, to develop the telecommunications plan. </li></ul><ul><li>The project must be submitted to the Municipal Council accompanied by designer's disclaimer, which waives prior appraisal by the municipal services. No later than three days after the issuance of the disclaimer, the designer should send a copy to ANACOM. </li></ul>
  17. 17. ITED (2) <ul><li>Once the construction license is obtained and the implementation started, the developer should manage contact between the designer, installer and certification. </li></ul><ul><li>During the works, the installer will use equipment and materials that comply with the requirements contained in the ITED Manual. Following installation, the installer produces the report on the functioning tests, in which he/she may be aided by the certification authority. </li></ul><ul><li>Upon completion of the installation, the certification authority conducts the appropriate tests, prepares the inspection report and issues the respective certificate of conformity. </li></ul><ul><li>No later than 3 days after its issue, the certification authority must send a copy of the certificate of conformity to ANACOM. The original is given to the property developer/owner and a copy to the installer. </li></ul><ul><li>The issuance by the Municipal Councils of the license to use the buildings is subject to the display of the ITED certificate of conformity. </li></ul>
  18. 18. <ul><li>3. The Future </li></ul>
  19. 19. <ul><li>Taking into account namely: </li></ul><ul><li>ANACOM’s monitoring activities; </li></ul><ul><li>A study on the implementation conditions of the NGN in Portugal Commissioned to Ovum ( ) </li></ul><ul><li>A public consultation on Next Generation Access Networks ( ), </li></ul><ul><li>It was possible to identify some relevant action points for the next future. </li></ul>
  20. 20. <ul><li>A. Improvement of the ORAC </li></ul>
  21. 21. <ul><li>ANACOM is analysing the fulfilment by the historic operator: </li></ul><ul><li>a. Of an obligation related with availability in an Extranet (and the prices of the access to it) of duct occupation related information; </li></ul><ul><li>b. Of its deadline associated with replying to information requests on duct availability. </li></ul>ANACOM is also studying: a. The simplification of the process to access ducts, which presently involves making available information on duct occupation, a request on duct occupation feasibility analysis, a request to schedule an intervention; b. The actual reasonability of the invoice to the historic operators by its competitors of forecasts of ORAC orders.
  22. 22. <ul><li>B. Generalisation of ORAC-like conditions to other owners of infrastructures </li></ul>
  23. 23. <ul><ul><li>The Government set in 2005 a new legal regime, establishing rules for construction, management and access to infrastructures installed in the public domain of the State, namely over road, rail, airport, inland waterways and port infrastructure, water supply and sanitation infrastructures, gas-transmission and electricity transmission infrastructures. </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>The administration of those infrastructure is governed by the principle of healthy competition, ensuring free access, under equal conditions, in a transparent and non-discriminatory manner, to all interested operators. </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>A limited number of owners of infrastructure in the public domain have already conformed to this new legal regime (for instance the institute that manages highways, 3E3272C6F008&grupo=5&Ln=1&id_pasta=D2F58F26-46C0-4152-93BA-974259DED99D&id_bloco=&escondepasta=0 ) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>A survey developed by ANACOM to highlight the state of the art of the application of these general rules, shows that there is room for improvements in making them clearer and more enforceable. </li></ul></ul>
  24. 24. <ul><li>C. Improvement of the ITED </li></ul>
  25. 25. <ul><li>ITED may be updated to support rules and technical specifications related with the passing of cables of several operators in different FTTH scenarios and to extend to complete urbanisations, for the moment what’s mandatory is to provide copper and cable accesses. </li></ul><ul><li>Simplified rules inspired in the renewed ITED may be applicable to buildings constructed before the enforcement of the ITED. </li></ul><ul><li>Other issues under study cover must address the following issues: </li></ul><ul><li>The right to install shared fibre in a building; </li></ul><ul><li>Clearer and uniform rules to negotiate with landlord’s; </li></ul><ul><li>Clearer rules to own and use cable in a building; </li></ul><ul><li>Possibility of delegation to a single operator of the responsibility to maintain and operate shared cables; </li></ul><ul><li>Ensure points of flexibility inside or in front of buildings, allowing operators to connect their fibres to the fibre which “lands” in the clients premises. </li></ul>
  26. 26. <ul><li>Overall, ANACOM is concerned with an approach that, while promoting efficient investment in the different regions of the country ensures: </li></ul><ul><li>● Open networks; </li></ul><ul><li>● Non discriminatory treatment between operators;; </li></ul><ul><li>● Adequate QS levels . </li></ul><ul><li>To that extent we should consider the following issues: </li></ul><ul><li>● the need to address the consequences on the actual business models based on ULL and bit stream </li></ul><ul><li>● the need to finish and reassess relevant market analysis </li></ul><ul><li>● the availability of vertical functional separation as a potential new regulatory tool </li></ul><ul><li>► There is a need to review the regime of rights of way fees , regarding its nature, its basis of incidence and of calculation and the billing and collection procedures. </li></ul>