[Bp_ipv6] Latest ver of Background Paper

Patrik Fältström paf at frobbit.se
Tue Aug 25 01:06:41 EDT 2015

On 24 Aug 2015, at 17:27, Susan Chalmers wrote:

> Nathalie, I hear you on using rhetoric like "bitstream." I also think that Patrik's example is very important. I've tried to re-word that section in terms of wholesaler and retailer, the former not enabling the latter to provide IPv6 svc. Please let me know if it translates accurately.

Actually, bitstream, just like local look unbundling are terms used (for example in the EU) and I think if they are confusing they then should be explained (not replaced by other terms).

See for example:


And COM(2007) 401 final:


> Wholesale broadband markets (bitstream access and local loop unbundling)
> Efficient regulation of the markets for wholesale broadband access ("bitstream access") and for unbundled access is a key factor for the competitive development of retail broadband markets and for the development of triple play services provided over broadband infrastructure. Bitstream access enables new entrants to provide retail broadband access services to end users. It is therefore an important step for new entrants towards investment in a more comprehensive roll out of their own network, leading towards local loop unbundling. After a certain time, competitors tend to rely on a combination of both forms of access, investing in their own infrastructure up to the incumbent's local loop where economically possible, i.e. normally in more densely populated regions, whereas they depend on bitstream access in rural areas.


I have updated the text to what I think makes sense and hopefully it is possible to understand.

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 203 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://intgovforum.org/pipermail/bp_ipv6_intgovforum.org/attachments/20150825/d2ce8bf3/attachment.sig>

More information about the Bp_ipv6 mailing list