Sept 09, 2008 (LBO) - Sri Lanka incumbent mobile operators say the industry has healthy competition and are denying claims by new rival, India's Airtel that anti-competitive practices in interconnection are keeping prices high.
Sri Lanka's Dialog, Hutch, Mobitel and Tigo says the country's mobile penetration reached 38 percent at the end of 2007, which was nearly double that of India's 20.5 percent due to competition and good regulation.
They say the industry has achieved 70 percent geographic coverage and 90 percent population coverage.
"Competition has been healthy and delivered not only successive reductions in pricing levels bringing mobile telephony within reach of all segments of Sri Lankan society, but additionally quality services and advanced technologies well ahead of the region," the four operators said in a statement.
Airtel, has been quoted in media reports as saying existing mobile operators have not given interconnection (rates paid by operators to each other for delivering a call from another network to its own customer) to Airtel on the same terms as practiced among themselves, the mobile operators said.
Airtel is to start operations this year.
Mobile operators say interconnection is based on a 2003 rules issued by the regulator.
A new cost study has been started by the regulator to determine new rates.
Operators say a recent study conducted by Nokia, a handset maker, in 80 emerging markets has found that the cost of owning a mobile phone in Sri Lanka is among the lowest in the world.
In Sri Lanka average revenue per user is below 4.50 US dollars compared to India's 6.00 US dollars, the operators said.
Sri Lanka's progressive regulation had helped it to be the first country in South Asia to deploy GSM (global system for mobile communications) services in 1995, GPRS (general packet radio service) in 2001, 3G (third generation) in 2006 and 3.5G in 2007.
"As strong believers in competition and the resulting dividends to consumers and market growth, Sri Lanka's mobile operators welcome additional competition," the operators said.
Tuesday, September 9, 2008
Monday, September 8, 2008
New BOI Venture to Launch Mobile Commerce Services
New venture was approved by the Board of Investment (BOI) to provide mobile commerce solutions for the local market.
The Utiba Mobile Commerce platform is the leading platform in the global mobile payment systems. Currently over 225 million subscribers use an Utiba solution on their phone.
The agreement signed with U.Generations Mobile Solutions (UGEN) is an investment of US $ 900,000 and will generate employment for 20. UGEN is a joint venture between Genesiis Software (Pvt) Limited, a fully owned subsidiary of the Finco Group of Companies and a Singapore based company, Utiba (Pte) Limited, a Singapore based firm. Utiba (Pte) Limited specialises in providing Advanced Mobile Commerce solutions and platforms.
Mr. Nilkamal Weerasooriya, Managing Director of U.Generations Mobile Solutions said he was confident that the market is now ready to accept innovative banking solutions on the mobile phones. The convergence between telecommunication networks and banks will provide cost effective, convenient banking services to all Sri Lankans, he said.
The Utiba Mobile Commerce platform is the leading platform in the global mobile payment systems. Currently over 225 million subscribers use an Utiba solution on their phone.
The agreement signed with U.Generations Mobile Solutions (UGEN) is an investment of US $ 900,000 and will generate employment for 20. UGEN is a joint venture between Genesiis Software (Pvt) Limited, a fully owned subsidiary of the Finco Group of Companies and a Singapore based company, Utiba (Pte) Limited, a Singapore based firm. Utiba (Pte) Limited specialises in providing Advanced Mobile Commerce solutions and platforms.
Mr. Nilkamal Weerasooriya, Managing Director of U.Generations Mobile Solutions said he was confident that the market is now ready to accept innovative banking solutions on the mobile phones. The convergence between telecommunication networks and banks will provide cost effective, convenient banking services to all Sri Lankans, he said.
New BOI venture to launch Mobile Commerce services
new venture to provide mobile commerce solutions for the local market was approved by the Board of Investment (BOI) on Wednesday. Hon Dr. Sarath Amunugama, Minister of Enterprise Development and Investment Promotion formally presented the BOI Certificate of Registrations, signed by Mr. Dhammika Perera, Chairman / Director General to Mr. Nilkamal Weerasooriya, Managing Director of U.Generations Mobile Solutions.
The Utiba Mobile Commerce platform is the leading platform in the global mobile payment systems. Currently over 225 million subscribers use an Utiba solution on their phone.
The agreement signed with U.Generations Mobile Solutions (UGEN) is an investment of US $ 900,000 and will generate employment for 20. UGEN is a joint venture between Genesiis Software (Pvt) Limited, a fully owned subsidiary of the Finco Group of Companies and a Singapore based company, Utiba (Pte) Limited. Utiba (Pte) Limited specialises in providing Advanced Mobile Commerce solutions and platforms.
Mr. Weerasooriya said he was confident that the market is now ready to accept innovative banking solutions on the mobile phones. The convergence between telecommunication networks and banks will provide cost effective, convenient banking services to all Sri Lankans, he said.
The Utiba Mobile Commerce platform is the leading platform in the global mobile payment systems. Currently over 225 million subscribers use an Utiba solution on their phone.
The agreement signed with U.Generations Mobile Solutions (UGEN) is an investment of US $ 900,000 and will generate employment for 20. UGEN is a joint venture between Genesiis Software (Pvt) Limited, a fully owned subsidiary of the Finco Group of Companies and a Singapore based company, Utiba (Pte) Limited. Utiba (Pte) Limited specialises in providing Advanced Mobile Commerce solutions and platforms.
Mr. Weerasooriya said he was confident that the market is now ready to accept innovative banking solutions on the mobile phones. The convergence between telecommunication networks and banks will provide cost effective, convenient banking services to all Sri Lankans, he said.
BOI Project for IT development from Saudi Arabia
An agreement signed with Direct Technologies Limited is for a project to develop and export software and provide IT related services for overseas clients. The investment is made by Saudi Arabian company, National Technology Group. The company provides Online Stock Trading Solution, "Mubasher". The project will integrate the global solution with reputable banks and brokers to trade with the solution.
Director / General Manager of the company, Arjuna Nanayakkara said "This is our second BOI project and we have been operating is Sri Lanka for over 7 years. We looked at investment opportunities in other Asian countries but decided on Sri Lanka because we have a good base in Sri Lanka for expansion". He also commended the fast service offered by the BOI.
The venture is an initial investment of US $ 300,000 and will generate around 100 employment opportunities. Mr. Arjuna Nanayakkara (Director / General Manager) signed the agreement on behalf of the company.
Director / General Manager of the company, Arjuna Nanayakkara said "This is our second BOI project and we have been operating is Sri Lanka for over 7 years. We looked at investment opportunities in other Asian countries but decided on Sri Lanka because we have a good base in Sri Lanka for expansion". He also commended the fast service offered by the BOI.
The venture is an initial investment of US $ 300,000 and will generate around 100 employment opportunities. Mr. Arjuna Nanayakkara (Director / General Manager) signed the agreement on behalf of the company.
Inter-Registrar Transfer Policy – Part A – New IRTP Issues
Public Comment: Inter-Registrar Transfer Policy – Part A ‘New IRTP Issues’
8 September 2008
Background
The Inter-Registrar Transfer Policy (IRTP) aims to provide a straightforward procedure for domain name holders to transfer their names from one ICANN-accredited registrar to another. As part of a broader review of this policy, a Policy Development Process (PDP) is currently ongoing on new Inter-Registrar Transfer Policy issues. These new Inter-Registrar Transfer Policy issues include questions relating to registrar exchange of registrant e-mail information, the potential need for including new forms of electronic authentication and potential provisions for “partial bulk transfers.”
Input requested
The Working Group that was launched following the adoption of its charter by the GNSO Council on 17 July 2008 is requesting your input for its deliberations to answer the following questions (found in Section 1.3 of the issues report):
Issue I – Is there a way for registrars to make Registrant E-mail Address data available to one another? Currently there is no way of automating approval from the Registrant, as the Registrant Email Address is not a required field in the registrar Whois. This slows down and/or complicates the process for registrants, especially since the Registrant can overrule the Admin Contact .
*If you believe policy change is needed, what options could be explored for registrars to make Registrant E-mail address data available? For each option, please identify how this would benefit automating approval, and, if any, what potential problems might be associated with this option.
*Please identify examples or best practices of email address use to facilitate and/or automate approval from a Registrant for a transfer.
*Although it is not the purpose of this Policy Development Process (PDP) to recommend changes to WHOIS policy, it conceivably could be an option to require registrant email addresses in WHOIS. The Working Group is interested in your views on that potential option, without regard to the broader WHOIS issues of availability and accuracy of WHOIS data. The Working Group is more particularly interested in your views about any other options not involving WHOIS.
Issue II – Whether there is need for other options for electronic authentication (e.g., security token in the Form of Authorization (FOA)) due to security concerns on use of email addresses (potential for hacking or spoofing) .
*What security concerns can you identify related to current ways of authenticating registrants. Note, the Security and Stability Advisory Committee (SSAC) has identified a risk of email spoofing for purposes of domain name hijacking, see link. We are interested in your views on this and any other concerns.
*Do you think there is a need for other options for electronic authentication? Please state the reasons for your answer.
*Do you know of any Registrars using additional means for electronic authorization (e.g. security token, digital signatures, etc.)? If so, what are they and who offers them?
*If a need would be identified for other options of electronic authentication, what other options could be explored?
*Of those other options to be explored, please identify the potential benefits but also any potential problems.
*Do you have or know of any data in relation to the impact of the Extensible Provisioning Protocol (EPP) deployment on security in relation to authentication? If so, please describe the source and type of data.
*Do you know of any further examples, apart from those mentioned in the issues report (.uk registry and .se registry), of electronic authentication methods? If so, what are they and who offers them?
Issue III – Whether the policy should incorporate provisions for handling “partial bulk transfers” between registrars – that is, transfers involving a number of names but not the entire group of names held by the losing registrar .
*Should the policy incorporate provisions for handling “partial bulk transfers” between registrars? Please state the reasons and use-cases for your answer.
*Are you aware of any voluntary provisions to facilitate partial bulk transfers? If so, could you please provide further details on those provisions (apart from those already identified in the issues paper – NeuLevel (.biz), Nominet (.uk)).
Background documents / links
*GNSO Issues Report Inter-Registrar Transfer Policy: Set A; “New IRTP Issues” (http://gnso.icann.org/issues/transfers/transfer-issues-report-set-a-23may08.pdf)
*Charter Inter-Registrar Transfer Policy – Part A PDP Working Group (http://gnso.icann.org/issues/transfers/irtp-working-group-charter-jun08.htm http://gnso.icann.org/issues/transfers/irtp-working-group-charter-jun08.htm)
*IRTP Part A PDP Working Group Workspace (irtp part a pdp wg pdp jun08 (https://st.icann.org/irtp_jun08_pdp-wg/index.cgi?irtp_part_a_pdp_wg_pdp_jun08)
*IRTP Part A PDP Working Group E-mail archives (http://forum.icann.org/lists/gnso-irtp-pdp-jun08/)
Deadline and how to submit comments
Comments are welcome via e-mail to tbc until 29 September 2008.
Access to the public comment forum from which comments can be posted can be found at new-irtp-issues@icann.org.
An archive of all comments received will be publicly posted at http://forum.icann.org/lists/new-irtp-issues/.
8 September 2008
Background
The Inter-Registrar Transfer Policy (IRTP) aims to provide a straightforward procedure for domain name holders to transfer their names from one ICANN-accredited registrar to another. As part of a broader review of this policy, a Policy Development Process (PDP) is currently ongoing on new Inter-Registrar Transfer Policy issues. These new Inter-Registrar Transfer Policy issues include questions relating to registrar exchange of registrant e-mail information, the potential need for including new forms of electronic authentication and potential provisions for “partial bulk transfers.”
Input requested
The Working Group that was launched following the adoption of its charter by the GNSO Council on 17 July 2008 is requesting your input for its deliberations to answer the following questions (found in Section 1.3 of the issues report):
Issue I – Is there a way for registrars to make Registrant E-mail Address data available to one another? Currently there is no way of automating approval from the Registrant, as the Registrant Email Address is not a required field in the registrar Whois. This slows down and/or complicates the process for registrants, especially since the Registrant can overrule the Admin Contact .
*If you believe policy change is needed, what options could be explored for registrars to make Registrant E-mail address data available? For each option, please identify how this would benefit automating approval, and, if any, what potential problems might be associated with this option.
*Please identify examples or best practices of email address use to facilitate and/or automate approval from a Registrant for a transfer.
*Although it is not the purpose of this Policy Development Process (PDP) to recommend changes to WHOIS policy, it conceivably could be an option to require registrant email addresses in WHOIS. The Working Group is interested in your views on that potential option, without regard to the broader WHOIS issues of availability and accuracy of WHOIS data. The Working Group is more particularly interested in your views about any other options not involving WHOIS.
Issue II – Whether there is need for other options for electronic authentication (e.g., security token in the Form of Authorization (FOA)) due to security concerns on use of email addresses (potential for hacking or spoofing) .
*What security concerns can you identify related to current ways of authenticating registrants. Note, the Security and Stability Advisory Committee (SSAC) has identified a risk of email spoofing for purposes of domain name hijacking, see link. We are interested in your views on this and any other concerns.
*Do you think there is a need for other options for electronic authentication? Please state the reasons for your answer.
*Do you know of any Registrars using additional means for electronic authorization (e.g. security token, digital signatures, etc.)? If so, what are they and who offers them?
*If a need would be identified for other options of electronic authentication, what other options could be explored?
*Of those other options to be explored, please identify the potential benefits but also any potential problems.
*Do you have or know of any data in relation to the impact of the Extensible Provisioning Protocol (EPP) deployment on security in relation to authentication? If so, please describe the source and type of data.
*Do you know of any further examples, apart from those mentioned in the issues report (.uk registry and .se registry), of electronic authentication methods? If so, what are they and who offers them?
Issue III – Whether the policy should incorporate provisions for handling “partial bulk transfers” between registrars – that is, transfers involving a number of names but not the entire group of names held by the losing registrar .
*Should the policy incorporate provisions for handling “partial bulk transfers” between registrars? Please state the reasons and use-cases for your answer.
*Are you aware of any voluntary provisions to facilitate partial bulk transfers? If so, could you please provide further details on those provisions (apart from those already identified in the issues paper – NeuLevel (.biz), Nominet (.uk)).
Background documents / links
*GNSO Issues Report Inter-Registrar Transfer Policy: Set A; “New IRTP Issues” (http://gnso.icann.org/issues/transfers/transfer-issues-report-set-a-23may08.pdf)
*Charter Inter-Registrar Transfer Policy – Part A PDP Working Group (http://gnso.icann.org/issues/transfers/irtp-working-group-charter-jun08.htm http://gnso.icann.org/issues/transfers/irtp-working-group-charter-jun08.htm)
*IRTP Part A PDP Working Group Workspace (irtp part a pdp wg pdp jun08 (https://st.icann.org/irtp_jun08_pdp-wg/index.cgi?irtp_part_a_pdp_wg_pdp_jun08)
*IRTP Part A PDP Working Group E-mail archives (http://forum.icann.org/lists/gnso-irtp-pdp-jun08/)
Deadline and how to submit comments
Comments are welcome via e-mail to tbc until 29 September 2008.
Access to the public comment forum from which comments can be posted can be found at new-irtp-issues@icann.org.
An archive of all comments received will be publicly posted at http://forum.icann.org/lists/new-irtp-issues/.
Sri Lanka Plans Optical Fibre Backbone
Sept 08, 2008 (LBO) - Sri Lanka is planning an optical fibre backbone to take broadband internet access to rural areas of the island, with the infrastructure to be built as a public private partnership, an official said.
Dharmasiri de Alwis, network chief of the Telecommunications Regulatory Commission says Sri Lanka Railways and the Ceylon Electricity Board (CEB) would be partners in the project which is backed by the island's ICT Agency.
A 15 million dollar funding package from World Bank is also in the offing he said.
The World Bank has been pumping money to Sri Lanka's ICT Agency to develop rural internet access under an initiative known as e-Sri Lanka.
De Alwis says the high tension transmission network of the CEB would allow fibre optic cables to be drawn deep into rural Sri Lanka at minimal cost.
Since optical fibre uses light to transmit data, there would not be electromagnetic interference from power lines, he said.
The state tailways also has a track network stretching to far corners of the island.
De Alwis says railways tracks have wide reservations of empty land on either side which would allow cables to be easily buried unlike going along narrow public roads.
Sri Lanka Telecom, the island's largest fixed access firm has been laying fibre optic ring around the capital and parts of the island, but Dharmasiri says the planned backbone would stretch wider into rural areas.
Dharmasiri de Alwis, network chief of the Telecommunications Regulatory Commission says Sri Lanka Railways and the Ceylon Electricity Board (CEB) would be partners in the project which is backed by the island's ICT Agency.
A 15 million dollar funding package from World Bank is also in the offing he said.
The World Bank has been pumping money to Sri Lanka's ICT Agency to develop rural internet access under an initiative known as e-Sri Lanka.
De Alwis says the high tension transmission network of the CEB would allow fibre optic cables to be drawn deep into rural Sri Lanka at minimal cost.
Since optical fibre uses light to transmit data, there would not be electromagnetic interference from power lines, he said.
The state tailways also has a track network stretching to far corners of the island.
De Alwis says railways tracks have wide reservations of empty land on either side which would allow cables to be easily buried unlike going along narrow public roads.
Sri Lanka Telecom, the island's largest fixed access firm has been laying fibre optic ring around the capital and parts of the island, but Dharmasiri says the planned backbone would stretch wider into rural areas.
Sri Lanka Mobitel Seeks Cheaper International Bandwidth
Sept 08, 2008 (LBO) - Sri Lanka cellco Mobitel, a unit of fixed access carrier Sri Lanka Telecom is readying to call proposals to buy international bandwidth from cheaper suppliers, because its parent was too expensive, an official said."We are not happy with the prices they extend to us," Mobitel chief executive Suren Amarasekera told a regional GSM (global system for mobile communications) Association conference in Colombo.
"We have received approval form our board to call for international RFPs (requests for proposals) to US, UK and Asia Pacific."
Amarasekera said international bandwidth and device costs were the two biggest cost items in providing broadband connections, which was outside the control of the operator.
SLT is a shareholder of the SEA-ME-WE cable consortium and was the sole supplier of submarine capacity to the island for decades, when it was the incumbent operator with an international monopoly.
Amarasekera said proposals may be called as early as this month and Mobitel's new broadband tariffs were announced in expectations of cheaper international connectivity.
"In order to sustain our margins in the broadband market we need to connect to major internet hubs at better rates," Amarasekera said.
He said Mobitel already had about 4,000 customers and hoped to end the year with 15,000 broadband customers.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
