Yes , Thank you, we could nominate a team .
Please give me one or two days for approval from EC members.
Best wishes.
Bhutta
----- Original Message -----
From: salman ansari <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: A.R. Nasir Qureshi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Naeem Haq
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: ISPAK <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, September 06, 2001 8:58 PM
Subject: RE: ISPAK: Re: Peering to Exchange Local Emails Among ISPs
> Can ISPAK nominate a small team. I would like to go to PTA with them on
this
> issue.
> Salman
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of A.R. Nasir Qureshi
> Sent: Wednesday, September 05, 2001 2:24 AM
> To: Naeem Haq
> Cc: ISPAK
> Subject: RE: ISPAK: Re: Peering to Exchange Local Emails Among ISPs
>
>
>
> I think what PTA and PTCL are doing to us is all we deserve. PTCL
> came in the IP business, and we all rushed to get bandwidth from them,
> where as no body ventured to make or support a private company selling IP
> bandwidth. Several proposals and several times were placed before ISPAK to
> make a consortium, and to distribute bandwidth among ourselves, but no one
> came forward.
>
> In Pakistan, we business people have a tendancy to make our own Mosques,
> instead of sharing. We all are willing to risk our business by buying
> bandwidth from the faulty STM-1, but no one is willing to support
> any private concern or even make a consortium.
>
> Now as we all have strengthened PTCL's IP network and business model, PTCL
> will move forward to take our corporate and individual clients from us.
> PTCL will make the PIE and we all will be forced to take bandwidth
> from it, and live with what ever they do in terms of filtering etc.,
> because no one thought and made a private NAP, and if some one did think,
> we never supported him, but we supported our Big Brother PTCL, and now we
> all will face the consequences.
>
> We ourselves have given the power to PTCL to rule us and ruin us.
>
> Regards,
>
> Nasir.
>
>
> On Wed, 5 Sep 2001, Naeem Haq wrote:
>
> > Dear All ,
> >
> > I really dont know why PTA makes rules which are downright against the
> > national interest . I recall several meetings / presensations on this
> topic
> > and as far as I am concerned , PTA should encourage inter-ISP links and
> not
> > discourage them . Please kinldy note that in my mind the "National
> Interest"
> > is more supreme than PTA making money from ISPs . Its a shame that ,
> unlike
> > India we have been bestowed with a body which not only ignores the
> national
> > interest but is more interested in making money and retarding the growth
> of
> > the Internet Industry . I think its time that someone shoule make an
> effort
> > to make this understand to PTA that Private Peering is in Pakistan's
> favour
> > and should be encouraged . Not only does peering exchange local
> information
> > locally ( thereby saving foreign exchange ) but also creates a meshed
> > network which is more fault resilient .
> >
> > Secondly , PTCL's PIE is a name change for the NAP .... mind you NAP was
> > shelved by the Minister but PTCL in the garb of delivery mechanism for
> STM-1
> > has been able to justify the PIE . All I can say here is that , there
is
> no
> > level playing field in this country ( despite all claims ) and PTCL will
> > continue to bully us all and try to take our livelihoods away .Over the
> last
> > year or so , I have lost all of my corporate ( router port ) clients to
> PTCL
> > due to predatory policies , but PTA has not done anything . I wonder if
> > someone has done a study of models used in other countries , for example
> in
> > Israel to protect the ISPs the PTT cannot sell direct via dialup and can
> > only sell to ISPs / DNOPs . NO effort has been made here to actually
come
> up
> > with a model which will survive these troubled times . Please note that
> PTA
> > is supposed to regulate the market in a manner that the consumer
interest
> > and the investor interest is protected .... but PTA is carelessly
issuing
> > licences , without planning anything ; the results are inevitable a
> handful
> > may survive , the rest will be wiped off . I think its time for PTA to
> > wakeup from this deep slumber and start working for the purpose they
were
> > established .
> >
> > Recent rumors have suggested that PTA is contemplating issuing voice
> > licenses for $100M+.. good luck as in the post deregulated period PTA
will
> > surely be endorcing monopolies ( something which is definitely against
the
> > consumer interest ) .
> >
> > All I can say is it time to wake up .
> >
> > Naeem Haq
> > NEXLINX
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Jamal Nasir Khan
> > Sent: Wednesday, September 05, 2001 10:20 AM
> > To: Wasim Tauqir
> > Cc: SBHUTTA; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Subject: ISPAK: Re: Peering to Exchange Local Emails Among ISPs
> >
> >
> > Wasim sb:
> > Peering is an interconnect to route traffic meant for interconnected
> > parties. I agree with Bhutta sb that the demand raised by you can be
> > investigated from the point of view of knowledge base from the Web.
> Details
> > regarding peering are available on Web.
> >
> > Bhutta sb,
> >
> > As far as I know there is no regulatry issue in the peering
arrangement
> > and it is only meant to efficiently manage the traffic by ISPs without
> > puting unnecessary load on International circuits. I dont know why did
you
> > applied in the first case to PTA and secondly if there is a reglatory
> issue
> > then how come PTCL was able to implement the project of PIE.
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > Jamal
> >
> >
> > SBHUTTA wrote:
> >
> > Mr.Wasim Tauqir,Director S&S PTA. Dear Sir, It is very simple
demand
> > that connectivity through DXXamong ISPs be allowed if ISPsalready have
> > international bandwidth from PTCL. Details demanded by are not
concerned.
> > However your mail is being is being forwarded to ChairmanTechnical
> Committee
> > of ISPAK Mr.Jamal Nasir Khan for more information. Best regards.
Sanaullah
> > Bhutta,President ISPAK.
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: Wasim Tauqir
> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Sent: Tuesday, September 04, 2001 12:12 AM
> > Subject: Fw: Peering to Exchange Local Emails Among ISPs
> > original message forwarded owing to email address error.WT.
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: Wasim Tauqir
> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ; [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] ; [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Sunday,
September
> > 02, 2001 9:07 PMSubject: Peering to Exchange Local Emails Among ISPs
> > In order to understand the above subject clearly, please provide
a
> > detailed network plan i.e. network connectivity and network access plan
> and
> > routing. Also indicate end-to-end call connection and routing in the
form
> of
> > a detailed logical/ functional block diagram highlighting the
differences
> in
> > the current configuration versus the desired one.
> > Best regards.
> >
> > Wasim Tauqir,
> >
> > Dir S&S, PTA
> >
> >
>
>
>
> ------------------------- ISPAK --------------------------
> ISPAK Discussion List. Members are limited to officials of
> ISPs and ESPs of Pakistan and select media representatives.
> -------------- http://ispak.net.pk -----------------------
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------- ISPAK --------------------------
> ISPAK Discussion List. Members are limited to officials of
> ISPs and ESPs of Pakistan and select media representatives.
> -------------- http://ispak.net.pk -----------------------
>
------------------------- ISPAK --------------------------
ISPAK Discussion List. Members are limited to officials of
ISPs and ESPs of Pakistan and select media representatives.
-------------- http://ispak.net.pk -----------------------
