asean study for apis - unescap.org · 5 2016-03-31 the asean ict masterplan 2020-15th asean...
TRANSCRIPT
2
Introduction
2016-03-31
2016-03-313
“Countries’ commitment to utilize ICT as an essential tool for achieving the new Sustainable Development Goals at a high-level meeting of the UN General Assembly”
- UNITED NATIONS, 16 Dec.2015 -
� “Today, more than 80% of households in developed countries have internet access. Meanwhile, two out of three households in developing countries do not”
� “Strengthened policy environments and international cooperation are needed to improve affordability, access, capacity-building, investment and appropriate financing”
Why APIS ?
*A study for ASEAN sub-region seems to be a litmus to conjecture overall status of other sub-regions
*The methodology and outcome of ASEAN Study can be referenced to other sub-regions
*Priority areas, action items derived from the ASEAN Study will be applicable to other sub-regions
*Harmonized Integration of all the Sub-regional level initiatives will be the reality of APIS
2016-03-314
Why ASEAN Study ?
2016-03-315
The ASEAN ICT Masterplan 2020- 15th ASEAN Telmin Meeting, November 2015-
2.1.1 Create Initiatives to Address Emerging or Growing Digital Divides in ASEAN
Initiative 2.1 Strengthen Digital Inclusion in ASEAN
Initiative 4.1 Fostering Broadband Access and Connectivity
4.1.1 Reduce developmentDisparities in Access and Affordability to Broadband Access and Improving ICTInteroperability
Establish an ASEAN Broadband Corridor
Identify and develop locations in each AMS which offer quality broadband connectivity
Enable seamless usage of broadband services and applications across ASEAN to further connect and enhance the development of ICT and other sectors
Promote the diversity of international connectivity among AMS
Establish an ASEAN Internet Exchange Network
Establish a regulator-operator forum to develop a platform to facilitate ASEAN Internet traffic
Facilitate peering amongst ASEAN Internet access providers to improve latency and speeds as well as lower costs
On-going Efforts from AIM 2015
Develop a Framework to Facilitate Transparent and Harmonised ICT Regulations
Harmonise regulatory practices and ICT standards
New Initiatives
6
Topics on ICT Common Key Words
� Diversity of international connectivity
� Seamless Infrastructure Networks and Backbone, Reliable Network
� Well balanced Network
� Fully integrated and coherent mesh configuration;
� Uniform construction the use of Asian Highway, Trans-Asian railway and
power transmission
� Single uniform network that offers quality-of-service guarantees
� Missing Links, Cross Border Connectivity
� Judicious mix of land and sea based fiber optic cables
� Geo-spatially Balanced Connectivity
� Regional Internet(IP) Connectivity
� Low Cost and Broadband Affordability
� Open Access and Network Neutrality, Policy Universality
� ASEAN Internet Exchange Network, ASEAN IXPs
� diversity of international connectivity
� IP Transit /Peering
� Cost of Transport back to the primary exchange
� Heavy Reliance on IXP in advanced countries
� International Back haul cost
� Emergency Communications and Resiliency
� Making Broadband Affordable(Less Than 5% of Average monthly Income)
� Connecting Homes to Broadband
� Getting People online
� Bridge the digital divide within ASEAN
� Improve Affordability
� Universal Service Achieve/Universal Access
� Increase Penetration
� Open access and non-discriminatory pricing
� Network neutrality and scalability that allows participation by all
stakeholders
� Single Telecom Market
� ASEAN Single Telecommunications Market
� Making Broadband Policy Universal(ITU)
� Enabling Environment, Capacity building
Common Topics
2016-03-31
Conceptual Image of APIS
Contents and
Delivery Service
Policy and
Regulation Registry
Open/Neutral IXPs(ITEC)
AState
BState
Broadband
Backbone Network (TBBC + Submarine)
Neutral IXPs
Content Servers IDC
CDNIndependent CP
Submarine Cable(Sea Based)
Terrestrial Fiber(Land Based)
Policy Portal
Potential Focal Area
e-resilience Open Access
Policy Harmonization
Internet Traffic
Exchange Connectivity
(ITEC)
Terrestrial Broadband
Backbone Connectivity
(TBBC)
� Open/Neutral Access to IXPs
� Establishing More Regional IXPs and Local IXPs
� Local Traffic Exchanged Locally Regional Traffic Exchanged Regionally
� Filling the Missing Links identified
� Regional TerrestrialBroadband Backbone
� Seamless Cross Border Connectivity
8
9
Cross Border IP Traffics and Quality
2016-03-31
10
Indonesia(AS18007)
Malaysia(AS24514)
Philippines(AS9821)
Thailand(AS24475)
Phnom Penh, Cambodia, ( MekongNet )
Vientiane, Lao PDR, ( Lao Telecom )
Jakarta, Indonesia(Telekomunikasi Indo, Biznet, CBN, Qiandra Information )
Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, ( U-Mobile, Maxis )
Hanoi, Vietnam(Viettel)
Manila, Philippines, ( SKY Broadband, Dunham Bush International
Bangkok,Thailand(Shama Thunder, Internet Thailand PCL,PEA, CS LOX INFO)
Yangon Myanmar, ( Redlink Communications )
Target Nodes ; Ookla servers Source Nodes on TEIN
Commercial Network)
Systems for Traffic and Quality Test
Between a source and a target node, speed and latency tests were performed 10 times using ‘Ookla’ Test System, hop counts and routing distances using ‘NetinfoTrace’, an open source software
2016-03-31
Singapore (Singtel, Viewqwest Pte, SGIX)
Brunei (DST Comm )
a b c d e f g h i j
TH 25.8 14.6 50.1 40.4 13.9 18.5 24 15.5 10 34.3
PH 24.8 23.7 7 24.7 4.5 0.15 6.5 12.5 2.7 6.9
MA 33.7 24.4 0.4 32.2 19.6 2 0.3 3.9 16 29.8
IN 2.2 4.6 1.4 2.1 1 1.7 1.5 1.5 2.3 4
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
Mbps
Key Findings – Down Load Speed
Average 25Mbps Line
Big Gap in Down Load Speed was observed among ASEAN countries ; Average Down Load Speed was less than 25Mbps.
12
a b c d e f g h i j
TH 31.5 22 43.1 42.2 39.2 4.3 20.8 35.1 6.2 31
PH 42.9 46.6 20.8 55.1 7.6 0.02 5.4 39.1 2.6 2.4
MA 39.8 27.4 4.9 52.8 2.2 6.6 3.8 31.4 48.1 50.3
IN 5.9 15.1 6.3 7 2.6 3 3.6 3.6 5.8 14.9
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
Mbps
Key Findings – Up Load Speed
Average 25Mbps Line
2016-03-31
a b c d e f g h i j
TH 101.8 226.3 15.9 40.1 74.4 89.1 80 82.9 143.8 49.7
PH 112.1 129.6 123.5 66.8 145.1 156.6 106.7 93.5 136.1 71.3
MA 53.6 158.4 120.1 7.5 79.7 63.3 228.4 79.1 31 46.3
IN 77.5 7.6 56.9 63.6 130 77.1 116 98.6 74.4 18.4
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
msec
Key Findings – Latency
Gap in Average Internet Latency or Number of Hops was also observed ; more than 100msec in 3 countries, less than 50msec in 2 countries
Average 100msec
Line
a b c d e f g h i j
TH 11.5 2.3 1.7 2 15.8 1.5 3.7 3.8 1.6 21
PH 13.6 2.1 13.6 1.5 11.8 35 2 2.4 20.9 11.1
MA 2.2 33.9 15.5 2.1 1.5 19 1.8 14 9.8 30.7
IN 1.2 1.5 1 1 15.2 4.3 1.1 1 1.8 28
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Su
m o
f T
rom
bo
nin
gIn
de
x
Key Findings – Routing Distance
Higher than 5 times more traffic travelling distance than actual Straight Line Distance was observed in 7 of 10 countries
Average 5 Line
Routing Map
TH
MM
KH
MY
SG
ID
BN
PH
HK
US
VN
LA
Indonesia
Malaysia
Vietnam
Cambodia
Myanmar
Laos
Philippines
Singapore
Brunei
[ID]
[MY]
[VN]
[KH]
[MM]
[LA]
[PH]
[SG]
[BN]
Key Findings – Traffic Routes
The traffic routes among ASEAN countries seem to be unnecessarily long. In some countries, even domestic traffic has to travel long way..
EU
EU
16
Desk Survey
2016-03-31
Cost
USD
($)
• Year 2012 / Lowest options/ equipment &
installation fee excluded
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
Monthly Internet Prices
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
Regional Transit Prices
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
Numbers of IXPs
High Routes Price, High Transit Price, Lack of regional traffic exchange may
result in high monthly service price
* Source : Terabit Consulting, 2013, www.telegeography.com
http://www.submarinenetworks.com/news/global-bandwidth-pricing-trends
17
Inter-regional Transit Prices10G Routes Prices
2016-03-3118
10 GigE IP Transit Prices & Price Declines. For example, inSão Paulo, where most Internet traffic is ultimatelyexchanged remotely in Miami, the median 10 GigE portprice fell only five percent compounded annually between2012 and 2015 to $16 per Mbps per month. Service inSydney, for which a significant amount of Internet trafficis exchanged in Los Angeles, also remains costly, at $18per Mbps per month for a 10 GigE port in Q2 2015.
“While IP transit prices have reached extremely low levelsin principal markets, they scale considerably higheroutside of these core hubs,” said TeleGeography analystErik Kreifeldt.
“Transport costs remain a primary factor inthis price disparity. As carriers expand IPnetworks and distributors push content closerto end-users, ISPs in remote markets willbecome less exposed to those costs.”
Source: TeleGeography, September,2015https://www.telegeography.com/press/press-releases/2015/09/09/ip-transit-prices-continue-falling-major-discrepancies-remain/index.html
IP Transit Prices continue rapid falling, but relatively high discrepancies remain
2016-03-3119
YearInternet Transit Prices(in Mbps, min commit)
% Decline
2006 $50 per Mbps 33%
2007 $25 per Mbps 50%
2008 $12 per Mbps 52%
2009 $9.00 per Mbps 25%
2010 $5.00 per Mbps 44%
2011 $3.25 per Mbps 35%
2012 $2.34 per Mbps 28%
2013 $1.57 per Mbps 33%
2014 $0.94 per Mbps 40%
2015 $0.63 per Mbps 33%
[Ref.] Internet Transit Prices in competition market- U.S. Internet Region -
Source: DrPeering.net http://drpeering.net/white-papers/Internet-Transit-Pricing-Historical-And-Projected.php
Came to below US$ 1.0
20
Percentage of Households with Internet
0
20
40
60
80
100
BB Home Penetration
2014
Internet User
Penetration 2014
33.8
29.1
5.23.0
Pen
etr
ati
on
(%
)
Source : The State of Broadband 2015: broadband for all, ITU, September 2015
88
65.5
26.9
18.6
7.0
Still High disparity among countries
21
Active Mobile-Broadband Subscriptions
per 100 inhabitants, 2014
0
50
100
150
200
Penetration
156.1
79.9
34.7
Penetration (%
)
Source : The State of Broadband 2015: broadband for all, ITU, September 2015
58.3
3128 14.9 14
4.6
Improved than 2013, but still
disparity among countries
2016-03-3122
Terrestrial Cross-Border Fiber Connectivity has been undergone by country to country basis or sub-regional programs. Still some missing fiber-optic links and insufficient capacity are identified in the member countries
Missing Links in Terrestrial Fiber Optics
Even though fast state level ICT Infra buildup, still high link cost, high transitcost, traffic tromboning(hairpin), high dependency on submarine cable, andlow broadband penetration all influence each other in a cycle, which meansimproving one segment of the cycle will lead to betterment of the rest
23
Summary of Desk Survey
2016-03-31
24
Direction toward 2025
2016-03-31
2016-03-3125
Vision and Goals
Broadband Commission’sTarget 2015
� Below 5 % of monthly GNI pc
APIS Goals 2025
� ICT Infra(Fiber) Goal – TBBC
� Traffic Management Goal – ITEC
� Quantity/Quality Target – Max. Transit Price, Min. Speed, Max. Tromboning Index, Max. Latency
� Periodical Evaluation Mechanism - Inter-Governmental Agreement
Quantified Goals - Korea’s Case(1990’)
- Fiber Network ex> Network Plan, Gov ICT- Traffic Management ex> Neutral, local IXP- Speed per Home ex> 100Mbps- Price Level ex> U$30/month- Evaluation Mechanism ex>ICT Act, NIPC
Collaboration/Dedicated Advocacy/Overall
Source : The State of Broadband, September 2015,ITU & UNESCO
Mostly LLDC and LDC
Category As-Is To-Be
Infrastructure
&
ICT
Connectivity
TBBC
� Most countries are
interconnected with fiber
� Some weak or insufficient
capacity observed
� At least one direct land based fiber link to each
neighboring country
� Regional Terrestrial Backbone Network, hybrid
mesh and ring
� Center Node establishment for low cost and
reliable delivery of traffics
ITEC
� Dependent on global transit
providers
� Poor direct peering
� Some countries no peering
among domestic ISPs
� Direct bilateral peering/transit between
neighboring states
� Intra/Inter Regional Transit Nodes
� Domestic Traffic exchanged domestically
Transit Price
and
Quality
Monthly Internet
Transit Cost (US
$/Mbps)
� Min 10 US$ (2012)
� Max 100 US$ (2012)
less than 2 US$
* re-adjustable year by year considering
the fair market price; in 2015, Min < 2
US$ in US, Europe Market
Average
Speed
Down � 0.2~43 Mbps More than 25 Mbps
Up � 0.3~57 Mbps More than 25 Mbps
Latency (msec) � 13~363 msec less than 100 msec
Tromboning
Index� 1~34 less than 5 2016-03-31
Seamless Terrestrial Fiber Optic Connectivity and Regional Internet Exchange Network should be considered as key parts of Investment
As Is and To-Be
Hybrid Ring and Mesh type of Backbone can be considered.. To select regional hubor center nodes for stability and efficiency, geographical location, domesticinfrastructure, traffic production amount and easiness of international connectivityare the important factors
[ Action Item 1] Highly Integrated Regional Transport Backbone
27
Regional Center Nodes Illustration of Transmission
Network(Hybrid ring and mesh)
2016-03-31
28
Intra-regional IXPs Inter-Regional IXPs
[Action Item 2] Internet Exchange Points
To Establish Neutral IXP centers that are connected by dual ring,aggregated sub regional (South, East, West) traffic volume, links toGlobal Transit Points. IXP Governing organization for IXP operationshould be required
2016-03-31
* Concept of Network Operating Center
� Feasibility study and Infra Design for the Asia Pacific Region
- In-depth study for Establishing Asian Regional IXPs in 2016
� Inter-Governmental Study (or Steering) Group for the in-depth survey on APIS
- Integrating TACIM, SASEC, ABC, GMS projects
- Overall Pictures of APIS and Rough Amount of Investment
� Developing APIS Master Plan - Mile stone and collaborative Action Items
- Preparing Draft of Inter-Governmental Agreement
2016-03-3130
The Next Works ..
2016-03-3132
Direct Internet interconnection through The IXPs between neighboring countries and diversification of interconnection regions
The goal is set to reduce the traveling distance of traffic from source to destination to less than five times the straight-line distance
Rationale of Goal Setting