16 Rev2b NGA Opinion Supplementary doc - IRG

ERG (07) 16rev2b NGA Opinion Supplementary Doc 19 / 69
ad 4.3.2 Wholesale Products in the access/backhaul infrastructure: possible modifications
with regard to Market 11 and Market 12
Consultation Comments
A competitor considers the adequate regulatory framework to consist of subloop unbundling,
co-location within the street cabinet, access to ducts, access to dark fibre and WDM (Arcor).
Another comment appears to agree that the definitions of Markets 11 and 12 continue to be
appropriate to NGA deployment (assuming the provision of backhaul services is considered)
(Corning). Adding to that, a geographically focused tiered set of remedies which link both
Markets 11 and 12 is advocated.
A competitors expresses the firm belief that the definition of a single wholesale access market,
grouping the actual 11, 12 and 13, would better represent the multiple technical/economical
solutions that will be deployed in the next 3 – 5 years (WIND).
An incumbent is of the opinion that the currently discussed proposal to delete the word “metallic”
in the definition of market 11 and the claim that market 12 already includes fibre technology
would in fact add new wholesale markets to the list of the (regulated) relevant markets
(DTAG). The ERG declares the incumbents’ new fibre components and its ducts as an
“ancillary service” of the sub-loop access. In so doing, it extends access obligations to new
fibre networks through the back-door. The ERG’s approach is even less comprehensible in
the case that fibre is deployed as an overlay, as the already established ULL access portfolio
is not affected. DTAG rejects an extension of the Recommendation in order to include fibre
networks.
Another comment is of the opinion that the focus of NGA regulation should be on passive
(ducts, poles) rather than on active infrastructure (Alcatel-Lucent). Regulation for sharing
dark fibre between operators can be considered in order to maximize investment in lower
density, non-competitive areas.
Ad 4.3.2.1 Unbundling of the Local Loop (Market 11)
Consultation Comments
Whereas the inclusion of fibre loops into Market 11 is supported, according to a stakeholder
association limiting the local loop up to the street cabinet is not appropriate (BREKO). It advocates
defining ULL as the line between the NTP and the MDF avoiding different end points
of the loop depending on the specific situation.
One incumbent supports a technologically neutral definition of Market 11 (BT), but:
o does not consider Layer 1 unbundling proposals for fibre, for backhaul from the cabinet,
for duct sharing, or for Layer 1 access to metallic sub-loops, required or proportionate;
o duct sharing should not be an ancillary service to Market 11 as it would result in significant
additional costs, that could delay the case for NGA deployment;
o it is not believed that there is any requirement for quality of service differentials in for
mass consumer market that need NGA Layer 1 unbundling or even a significant range of
diverse bitstream access products;
o it is noted that there may be advantages to the consumer from a common (e.g. Ethernet)
presentation to customers for each of end user connection.