On 19/12/2012 14:25, Tony Finch wrote: > Do you have any citations for that? I thought they had given up on trying > to interfere with Internet peering and settlement.
http://www.itu.int/net/ITU-T/lists/questions.aspx?Group=03&Period=15 ETNO is very keen on introducing sending-party-pays, and recently brought out an opinion piece on their intentions to bring this idea forward at the ITU: http://www.etno.eu/datas/itu-matters/etno-ip-interconnection.pdf > ETNO has introduced its views in Contribution C 109 submitted to the > last meeting of the ITU Council Working Group to prepare for 2012 WCIT. > ETNO’s proposal concerns: [...] > ‐ the economic background, advocating for an adequate return on > investment based, where appropriate, on the principle of sending party > network pays; The Body of European Regulators for Electronic Communications (i.e. the representative body of all the EU national comms regulators) came out with the following statement: > http://berec.europa.eu/files/document_register_store/2012/11/BoR(12)120rev.1_BEREC_Statement_on_ITR_2012.11.14.pdf ... where they noted among other things: "ETNO’s proposed end-to-end SPNP approach to data transmission is totally antagonistic to the decentralised efficient routing approach to data transmission of the Internet." It's pretty unusual to get language this strong from a regulatory body. Nick