4 ms·

Actually found a pretty good source on what the Korean rules are (hint - it is about paid peering). This is somewhat biased (it's from a Spanish telecom - actu

Actually found a pretty good source on what the Korean rules are (hint - it is about paid peering). This is somewhat biased (it's from a Spanish telecom - actually editing this again, the style choice + date formatting makes me think it is from a Korean trade group/telecom but the only source I can find for this is Telefonica. Likely from the Korean telecom industry itself...). Just haven't really seen a comment linking to anything substantial about the actual plans/rules/etc in Korea. https://www.telefonica.com/en/wp-content/uploads/sites/5/2023/06/Myths-and-truths-about-Korean-IP-Interconnection-in-overseas-reports.pdf https://www.telefonica.com/en/wp-content/uploads/sites/5/202...

resolutebat 3y ago
The accompanying blog post makes it clear that this is from the Korean Telecommunications Operators Association, and has the explicit goal of "debunking" "myths" (read: inconvenient truths) about Korean telcos. https://www.telefonica.com/en/communication-room/blog/myths-and-truths-setting-the-record-straight-on-the-south-korea-case/ https://www.telefonica.com/en/communication-room/blog/myths-... Here's the Internet Society brief they appear to be responding to: https://www.internetsociety.org/blog/2022/05/old-rules-in-new-regulations-why-sender-pays-is-a-direct-threat-to-the-internet/ https://www.internetsociety.org/blog/2022/05/old-rules-in-ne... (summary) https://www.internetsociety.org/resources/doc/2022/internet-impact-brief-south-koreas-interconnection-rules/ https://www.internetsociety.org/resources/doc/2022/internet-... (full doc)
rsingel 3y ago
Telefonica's blog is amazing. They come out and say the outrageous things giant telecoms believe: that internet service should be 1) people pay them and then they get to connect to 2) the select group of websites and services that also pay telefonica. There's a very good reason that the U.S. net neutrality orders banned these kinds of fees starting in 2010, and again in 2015. California's net neutrality law also bans access fees
Joking_Phantom 3y ago
A corrupt Spanish organization, trying to support a corrupt Korean organization, only brings more credence to the argument that SPNP was a bad idea.

resolutebat 3y ago

The accompanying blog post makes it clear that this is from the Korean Telecommunications Operators Association, and has the explicit goal of "debunking" "myths" (read: inconvenient truths) about Korean telcos. https://www.telefonica.com/en/communication-room/blog/myths-and-truths-setting-the-record-straight-on-the-south-korea-case/ https://www.telefonica.com/en/communication-room/blog/myths-... Here's the Internet Society brief they appear to be responding to: https://www.internetsociety.org/blog/2022/05/old-rules-in-new-regulations-why-sender-pays-is-a-direct-threat-to-the-internet/ https://www.internetsociety.org/blog/2022/05/old-rules-in-ne... (summary) https://www.internetsociety.org/resources/doc/2022/internet-impact-brief-south-koreas-interconnection-rules/ https://www.internetsociety.org/resources/doc/2022/internet-... (full doc)

rsingel 3y ago

Telefonica's blog is amazing. They come out and say the outrageous things giant telecoms believe: that internet service should be 1) people pay them and then they get to connect to 2) the select group of websites and services that also pay telefonica. There's a very good reason that the U.S. net neutrality orders banned these kinds of fees starting in 2010, and again in 2015. California's net neutrality law also bans access fees

Joking_Phantom 3y ago

A corrupt Spanish organization, trying to support a corrupt Korean organization, only brings more credence to the argument that SPNP was a bad idea.