Kelvin, Thanks for your alert.. This requires the technical inputs from a highly specialized resources pool, whose views will be further critically analysed before we draw our official position. Kelvin & Charles - Please cast our nets wider into the existing pool of members (policy design experts & futuristic thinkers) and  request individuals opinions, then gather them & consolidate a draft report for our executive team to discuss next week Tuesday 22nd January then we can forward our official submission by next Thursday 24th January 2013. This is a very crucial forum and our industrial opinion really counts.. Thanks   Martin Obuya CEO & Founder African Technology Options Matrix (ATOM) Pan African ICT Think Tank PO Box 11445-00100 GPO Nairobi, Kenya, East Africa Cell:+254725519870  Cell:+254733519870 Email: ceoatom@ovi.com Skype: martinkingobuya Twitter: @ObuyaKingMartin ________________________________ From: kelvin githira <kgithira@gmail.com> To: isoc@orion.my.co.ke Cc: Martin Obuya <ceoatom@ovi.com>; Liz orembo <lizorembo@gmail.com>; WANGARI KABIRU <wangarikabiru@yahoo.co.uk>; Greg Wizmaster <greg.wizmaster@gmail.com>; Barrack Otieno <otieno.barrack@gmail.com>; dottocomp@yahoo.com; Grace Luice N. Mutung'u <nmutungu@gmail.com> Sent: Saturday, January 12, 2013 3:13 PM Subject: Fwd: [ISOC_KE] Input towards National Broadband Strategy Are we in receipt of this ? make note of the deadline date Regards  kelvin. Hi folk, Are we as ISOC-KE going to be making any submissions during the public consultation period for Kenya's National Broadband Strategy? As per advertorials in the local dailies the deadlines for submissions in 25th January. The draft is available online at the CCK website: http://www.cck.go.ke/links/consultations/current_consultations/The_National_... Best regards, Brian #**** TRON LIVES ****# _______________________________________________ isoc mailing list isoc@lists.my.co.ke http://orion.my.co.ke/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/isoc

Hi folk, Here are some of my initial comments after going through the National Broadband Strategy: Is it right to explicitly name a particular technology within the context of such a high level strategy? Pg 6 the immediate plan to further deploy broadband through a nationwide LTE system The language in principle 2 (pg 8) and principle 7 (pg 9) seem to be contradictory. While principle 2 emphasizes technology neutrality (a good thing), principle 7 in elaborating competitive use of technologies explicitly names fiber optic and wireless broadband. It is proposed that the language here be changed to distinguish between fixed and non-fixed media as alternatives for infrastructure Pg 21 - the relationship between a pacemaker (for heart conditions) and content & applications is not immediately obvious - could this be the wrong kind of example to use in this section? Pg 22 (Table 4) on the problem of an unstructured innovation chain; wouldn't it be better to aim at developing a National Innovation System - rather than simply seeking to "institutionalize the innovation value chain"? The current recommendations fall far short of *really* tackling the underlying issues and proposing sufficient interventions to address the problem in the medium to long term. Pg 23 the figures related to mobile penetration should be updated with latest market estimates and not figures from 2011. Current estimates are at 100% mobile penetration. Also the percentage of *youth* is questionable as it is based on a 2005 study. Should statistics that are 8 years old be used in such an important document? pg 26-32 Section 3.4 Policy, Legal & Regulatory Environment While CCK has over the past 13 years of it's existence facilitated massive transformation with the information and communication technology sector in the country and the region as a whole. It could be argued that the Commission's mandate has become bloated over the years, leading to a "too many eggs in one basket" problem. It could be recommended that specialized agencies be established to deal with essential issue that do not strictly fall under the regulatory mandate of CCK and may, in some cases create opportunity for conflict of interest. These include but are not limited to: Operation and Administration of the Universal Service Fund, Operation and Administration of cyber-security related units, consumer protection etc... While it is evident and obvious that CCK has served and may continue to serve as an ideal "incubator" for these types of services/agencies. It is true that they encompass a potentially vast amount of work, especially within a national context and could be better served by specialized agencies that can focus time and resources and deal with issues in a focused and timely manner. pg 33 Section 3.5.2 by specifically referring to a particular technology (in this case LTE) as a means to accomplishing the objectives of this strategy - it might appear that the strategy is biased towards particular vendors or operators and may not necessarily be taking the best interests of the marketplace and the greatest stakeholder - the citizen - into consideration. It is recommended that the language in this section be reworked to eliminate the mention of specific technologies. The section on Financing and Investment should include recommendations on various incentives to promote activity in the area. Tax breaks, concessions, PPP proposals, allocations from various existing (and new) funds etc... Section 4 Implementation once again, specific reference to LTE may not be in the best interests of leaving the strategy open enought to allow for competing and maybe more affordable technologies that can achieve stated objectives. Best regards, Brian On Sat, Jan 12, 2013 at 3:58 PM, Barrack Otieno <otieno.barrack@gmail.com>wrote:

Thanks Brian, yes we will.

Best Regards

On Fri, Jan 11, 2013 at 11:55 PM, Brian Munyao Longwe <blongwe@gmail.com> wrote:

...

Hi folk,

Are we as ISOC-KE going to be making any submissions during the public consultation period for Kenya's National Broadband Strategy? As per advertorials in the local dailies the deadlines for submissions in 25th January.

The draft is available online at the CCK website:

http://www.cck.go.ke/links/consultations/current_consultations/The_National_...

...

Best regards,

Brian

#**** TRON LIVES ****#

_______________________________________________ isoc mailing list isoc@lists.my.co.ke http://lists.my.co.ke/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/isoc

-- Barrack O. Otieno +254721325277 +254-20-2498789 Skype: barrack.otieno http://www.otienobarrack.me.ke/

@ Grace I think Brian has set the tempo, we will try and have a discussion on the list regarding the same but in the meantime let's follow the example he has set and contribute. Sent from my BlackBerry® -----Original Message----- From: "Grace Mutung'u (Bomu)" <nmutungu@gmail.com> Date: Sun, 13 Jan 2013 11:37:43 To: Brian Munyao Longwe<blongwe@gmail.com> Cc: Barrack Otieno<otieno.barrack@gmail.com>; <isoc@orion.my.co.ke> Subject: Re: [ISOC_KE] Input towards National Broadband Strategy Brian, thanks for the call to action and initial points. this it seems is a technical topic and many of us may need help to appreciate the issues. are there resources that could help more people grasp the issues? also, as a more experienced practitioner in the field, which broad principles are the main ones we should be advocating for vis-a-vis our mission, vision... sorry to wekelea you, but we could really benefit from your knowledge :) 2013/1/13, Brian Munyao Longwe <blongwe@gmail.com>:

Hi folk,

Here are some of my initial comments after going through the National Broadband Strategy:

Is it right to explicitly name a particular technology within the context of such a high level strategy? Pg 6 the immediate plan to further deploy broadband through a nationwide LTE system

The language in principle 2 (pg 8) and principle 7 (pg 9) seem to be contradictory. While principle 2 emphasizes technology neutrality (a good thing), principle 7 in elaborating competitive use of technologies explicitly names fiber optic and wireless broadband. It is proposed that the language here be changed to distinguish between fixed and non-fixed media as alternatives for infrastructure

Pg 21 - the relationship between a pacemaker (for heart conditions) and content & applications is not immediately obvious - could this be the wrong kind of example to use in this section?

Pg 22 (Table 4) on the problem of an unstructured innovation chain; wouldn't it be better to aim at developing a National Innovation System - rather than simply seeking to "institutionalize the innovation value chain"? The current recommendations fall far short of *really* tackling the underlying issues and proposing sufficient interventions to address the problem in the medium to long term.

Pg 23 the figures related to mobile penetration should be updated with latest market estimates and not figures from 2011. Current estimates are at 100% mobile penetration. Also the percentage of *youth* is questionable as it is based on a 2005 study. Should statistics that are 8 years old be used in such an important document?

pg 26-32 Section 3.4 Policy, Legal & Regulatory Environment

While CCK has over the past 13 years of it's existence facilitated massive transformation with the information and communication technology sector in the country and the region as a whole. It could be argued that the Commission's mandate has become bloated over the years, leading to a "too many eggs in one basket" problem.

It could be recommended that specialized agencies be established to deal with essential issue that do not strictly fall under the regulatory mandate of CCK and may, in some cases create opportunity for conflict of interest. These include but are not limited to: Operation and Administration of the Universal Service Fund, Operation and Administration of cyber-security related units, consumer protection etc...

While it is evident and obvious that CCK has served and may continue to serve as an ideal "incubator" for these types of services/agencies. It is true that they encompass a potentially vast amount of work, especially within a national context and could be better served by specialized agencies that can focus time and resources and deal with issues in a focused and timely manner.

pg 33 Section 3.5.2

by specifically referring to a particular technology (in this case LTE) as a means to accomplishing the objectives of this strategy - it might appear that the strategy is biased towards particular vendors or operators and may not necessarily be taking the best interests of the marketplace and the greatest stakeholder - the citizen - into consideration. It is recommended that the language in this section be reworked to eliminate the mention of specific technologies.

The section on Financing and Investment should include recommendations on various incentives to promote activity in the area. Tax breaks, concessions, PPP proposals, allocations from various existing (and new) funds etc...

Section 4 Implementation

once again, specific reference to LTE may not be in the best interests of leaving the strategy open enought to allow for competing and maybe more affordable technologies that can achieve stated objectives.

Best regards,

Brian

On Sat, Jan 12, 2013 at 3:58 PM, Barrack Otieno <otieno.barrack@gmail.com>wrote:

...

Thanks Brian, yes we will.

Best Regards

On Fri, Jan 11, 2013 at 11:55 PM, Brian Munyao Longwe <blongwe@gmail.com> wrote:

...

Hi folk,

Are we as ISOC-KE going to be making any submissions during the public consultation period for Kenya's National Broadband Strategy? As per advertorials in the local dailies the deadlines for submissions in 25th January.

The draft is available online at the CCK website:

http://www.cck.go.ke/links/consultations/current_consultations/The_National_...

...

Best regards,

Brian

#**** TRON LIVES ****#

_______________________________________________ isoc mailing list isoc@orion.my.co.ke http://orion.my.co.ke/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/isoc

-- Barrack O. Otieno +254721325277 +254-20-2498789 Skype: barrack.otieno http://www.otienobarrack.me.ke/

-- Grace L.N. Mutung'u (Bomu) Kenya Skype: gracebomu Twitter: @Bomu Website: http://www.diplointernetgovernance.org/profile/GraceMutungu