ITV

Tag: Virtual Network Operators

  • TRAI issues new consultation paper on VNO

    NEW DELHI: The Telecom Regulatory Authority of India, which had in May 2015 recommended that Virtual Network Operators (VNO) in the telecom sector should be permitted for all segments of voice, data and video as well as for all services notified in the unified license (UL) for a period of ten years, is now working on providing recommendations for Access Service authorization for category B license with districts of a State as a service area.

    The Department of Telecom had issued guidelines on 5 July 2016 for authorization for Access service in a Secondary Switching Areas (SSAs) as service area is in addition to the TRAI recommendations of May 2015. These guidelines are meant to introduce UL (VNO) Cat-B with Access Service authorization in a District of a State/UT. DoT further clarified vide their letter dated 12 September 2016 that there shall be no category of Direct Inward Dialing (DID) franchisee License in future.  At present, there are 259 franchisees operating in the country.

    TRAI says that it appears that the objective of the guidelines/licenses issued by DoT is to streamline DID franchisee regime and provide them a better and broader business umbrella through proper licensing. It is evident that the guidelines/license conditions were not a part of TRAI’s recommendations on the subject and DoT has first issued these guidelines/ licenses and then sent the reference for the recommendations of the Authority on the matter

    Resultantly, the regulator has issued a new consultation paper with ten questions for stakeholders. Stakeholders are to respond on 17 April with counter comments if any on 24 April 2017.

    The regulator had in its recommendations said VNO should be introduced through proper “licensing framework” in the Indian telecom sector. For introduction of VNO in the sector, there should be a separate category of license namely UL (VNO). Like UL authorization, only pan-India or service area-wise authorizations may be granted under a UL (VNO) license.

    TRAI said that VNOs are service delivery operators, who do not own the underlying core network but rely on the network and support of the infrastructure providers for providing telecom services to end users and customers.

    VNOs can provide any or all telecom services, which are being provided by the existing telecom service providers.

    VNO should be introduced in the network based on the basis of mutually accepted  terms and conditions between NSO and the VNO. The terms and conditions of sharing the infrastructure between the NSO and VNO are left to the market to determine.

    VNOs should be permitted to set up their own   network equipment where there is no requirement of interconnection with other NSO.  However, they should not be allowed to own/install equipment where interconnection is required with another NSO.

    Local Cable Operators (LCOs) and Multi Service Operators (MSOs) can become VNO and are permitted to share infrastructure with VNOs.

    TRAI had said that there should not be a restriction on the number of VNO licensees per service area and there should be no restriction on the number of VNOs parented by an NSO.

    The paper is available on

     

  • Initial licence should be for 10 years as VNO is new concept: TRAI

    Initial licence should be for 10 years as VNO is new concept: TRAI

    NEW DELHI: Virtual Network Operators (VNO) in the telecom sector should be permitted for all segments of voice, data and video as well as for all services notified in the unified license (UL) for a period of ten years, extendable by ten years at a time. 

     

    The Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI) in its recommendations has said VNO should be introduced through proper “licensing framework” in the Indian telecom sector.

     

    For introduction of VNO in the sector, there should be a separate category of license namely UL (VNO). Like UL authorization, only pan-India or service area-wise authorizations may be granted under a UL (VNO) license.

     

    The recommendations were given after the Department of Telecommunications (DoT) through its reference of 7 July last year had sought recommendations of TRAI on the subject.

     

    TRAI said that VNOs are service delivery operators, who do not own the underlying core network but rely on the network and support of the infrastructure providers for providing telecom services to end users and customers. 

     

    VNOs can provide any or all telecom services, which are being provided by the existing telecom service providers.

     

    VNO should be introduced in the network based on the basis of mutually accepted  terms and conditions between NSO and the VNO. The terms and conditions of sharing the infrastructure between the NSO and VNO are left to the market to determine.

     

    VNOs should be permitted to set up their own   network equipment where there is no requirement of interconnection with other NSO.  However, they should not be allowed to own/install equipment where interconnection is required with another NSO.

     

    Local Cable Operators (LCOs) and Multi Service Operators (MSOs) can become VNO and are permitted to share infrastructure with VNOs.

     

    There should not be a restriction on the number of VNO licensees per service area and there should be no restriction on the number of VNOs parented by an NSO.

     

    Customer verification and number activation shall be the responsibility of a VNO for its own customers.

     

    VNOs that enter the network would do so based on arriving at a mutual agreement between an NSO and a VNO.

     

    The Authority recommended that VNOs should be permitted for all services notified in the UL.                                            

     

    TRAI recommended that the terms and conditions of sharing of infrastructure between the NSO and VNO should be left to the market i.e. on the basis of mutually accepted terms and conditions between the NSO and the VNO.       

     

    The Authority recommended VNOs be permitted to set up their own network equipment viz. BTS, BSC, MSC, RSU, DSLAMs, LAN switches, where there is no requirement of interconnection with other NSO(s). Therefore, they should not be allowed to own/install equipment viz. GMSCs, Soft-switches and TAX.

     

    Equipment permitted to be owned/installed by VNOs should conform to the technical standards prescribed by standardization bodies like TEC and ITU.

     

    VNOs may also be allowed to create their own service delivery platforms in respect of customer service, billing and VAS. MSOs and LCOs who want to provide broadband services through their cable network may do so by obtaining a VNO license. MSOs/LCOs may also share their cable infrastructure with VNOs, after the MSO/LCO register themselves as an IP-I service provider.

     

    There should be a separate category of license namely UL (VNO). This UL (VNO) will contain similar authorizations for services and service areas as provided in the existing UL.

     

    An operator who wishes to provide telecom services to its customers utilizing the underlying network and/or access spectrum of an existing NSO will have to obtain UL (VNO) license. 

     

    The Authority recommended that resale of IPLC presently under the UL shall be shifted from the existing UL to UL (VNO) licensing in order to make a clear distinction among the class of operators.

     

    A VNO should be a company registered under the Indian Companies Act 1956 (as amended). The entry fee for UL (VNO) with a given authorisation will be 50 per cent of the entry fee prescribed for the UL. Financial Bank Guarantee will be equal to the amount of two quarter license fee. Minimum equity and minimum networth may be kept at 40 per cent of the amount prescribed under UL. 

     

    The Authority recommended that under UL(VNO) the provision for restriction of 10 per cent or more equity cross holding to be applicable between (i) a VNO and another NSO (other than VNO’s parent NSO) and (ii) between a VNO and another VNO authorized to provide access services using the access  spectrum of different NSO in the same service area.                                                                         

    A VNO shall be liable to pay LF as a percentage of AGR at the same rate as that of the parent NSO.

     

    VNO shall also be liable to pay the SUC for the wireless service(s) it offers to the customers. The SUC rate will be same as that of the parent NSO.

     

    Since Quality of Service is in the exclusive domain of TRAI, the Authority will put in place comprehensive regulations on QoS parameters to be complied separately by NSOs and VNOs.

  • TRAI extends date for comments on delinking of license for networks by way of VNO

    TRAI extends date for comments on delinking of license for networks by way of VNO

    MUMBAI: The   Telecom  Regulatory  Authority  of India  (TRAI) which had issued  a  consultation paper  on   ‘Delinking  of   the  license  for networks from delivery of service by  way  of virtual network operators (VNO)’ on 5 December 2014 inviting comments by 5 January 2015, has today given some relief to the stakeholders.

     

    The decision was taken after the stakeholders requested for extension of the date for sending their inputs/comments so as to give a comprehensive response to the paper.  The Authority has considered their request and has extended the last date for submission of written comments to 15 January 2015.  TRAI has also said that there will be no further extension of date for submission of comments.

     

    The Authority has asked all stakeholders to submit their inputs/comments on or before the revised date i.e. 15 January 2015 and counter comments, if any, by 22 January 2015.    

     

    TRAI had issued the consultation paper to know if there was any need to introduce more competition in service delivery by the way of introduction of VNO and whether this will pose any threat to Network Service Operators (NSO).

     

     In its consultation paper, the Authority had also asked how Mergers & Acquisitions should be dealt with in the VNO/NSO licensing model and should the recently announced M&A guidelines issued by the Government for existing players be extended to cover VNOs.

     

    Prior to the consultation paper, TRAI had released a pre-consultation paper on “Delinking of the license for  networks from delivery of  services by  way of  Virtual Network Operators” on 3 September 2014 highlighting some of the issues associated with the proposed licensing framework by the DoT and had solicited inputs and comments of the  stakeholders on these issues or any other issues involved in the proposed  framework.

  • TRAI asks if LCOs, MSOs be permitted to share infrastructure with VNOs

    TRAI asks if LCOs, MSOs be permitted to share infrastructure with VNOs

    NEW DELHI: The Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI) wants to know if there is any need to introduce more competition in service delivery by the way of introduction of Virtual Network Operators (VNO) and whether this will pose any threat to Network Service Operators (NSO).
     
    In a Consultation Paper on “Delinking of  the license for networks from delivery  of services by way  of Virtual Network Operators,” TRAI has also asked how Mergers & Acquisitions should be dealt with in the VNO/NSO licensing model and should the recently announced M&A guidelines issued by the Government for existing players be extended to cover VNOs.

    It has asked the stakeholders to send in their responses by 5 January and counter-comments by 12 January. The Department of Telecommunications had on 7 July 2014 sought the  Authority’s recommendations for delinking of licensing of networks from delivery of services by way of virtual network operators etc. including associated  issues   such as Adjusted Gross Revenue, terms of sharing of passive and active infrastructure under unified licensing regime.
     
    TRAI had earlier released a pre-consultation paper on “Delinking of the license for  networks from delivery of  services by  way of  Virtual Network Operators” on 3 September 2014 highlighting some of the issues associated with the proposed licensing framework by the DoT and had solicited inputs and comments of the  stakeholders on these issues or any other issues involved in the proposed  framework.
     
    The paper issued today raises specific issues for consideration by stakeholders. A consultation paper on ‘Definition of revenue base (AGR) for the reckoning of license fee and spectrum usage charges’ has been already issued on 31 July 2014.

    Therefore, this consultation paper is   limited to the issues related to delinking of licenses for networks from the delivery of services by way of virtual network operators.
     
    TRAI also wonders if a business case exists for introduction of VNOs in all segments of Voice, Data and Videos and whether VNOs should be introduced in all or some of the services notified in the Unified licence.

    It also wants to know if there is sufficient infrastructure (active and passive including access spectrum) available with a TSP to meet its own requirements. If any TSP is able to share its infrastructure with VNOs, the regulator wants to know what the broad terms and conditions for sharing the infrastructure should be.

    Can VNOs be allowed to create their own infrastructure to reach out to niche markets, the Regulator asks, or can local Cable Operators (LCOs) or Multi System Operators (MSOs) with cable networks be permitted to share infrastructure with VNOs to provide last mile connectivity.

    The regulator wants to know if a VNO be issued a license at the National Level or for LSAs as in the case of UL or should it be based on the host NSO license areas and the duration of the licence.

    It also has questions about any cross-holding restriction between a NSO and VNOs and the financial obligations of VNOs in the form of a) Equity & Networth b)Entry Fee c)PBG and d)FBG etc.