ARMENTEL MISLEADS PUBLIC, VICE CHAIRMAN OF INTERNET UNION STATES
YEREVAN, AUGUST 19, NOYAN TAPAN. Vice Chairman of the Internet
Union of Armenia Grigor Saghian told NT correspondent that the
August 11 statement of ArmenTel contained some provisions that do
not correspond to the reality. According to the statement, Iran does
not provide any transit channels. However, as G. Saghian noted, Iran
is a country providing transit connections – the channels servicing
Australia, Singapore, India, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates,
Turkey and some other countries are running through its territory.
Besides, the term “Internet channel” was used in the statement,
whereas in reality, according to G. Saghian, no “Internet channels”
exist. Simply there are channels used to transmit electric signals,
including signals characteristic of the Internet. Nevertheless,
the public was not informed about how long it would take to launch
the second channel connecting with the Internet along the already
operating Iran-Armenia highway. According to G. Saghian, the provision
that Armenia’s geographical position does not allow to provide cheaper
Internet access services is not true either. “Today it is possible
to rent a satellite channel that secures Internet access at a price
three times lower than ArmenTel’s tariff. However, ArmenTel that
holds the monopoly of data transmission, declines to provide this
service,” G. Saghian said. According to G. Saghian, the RA Ministry of
Transport and Communication proposed that ArmenTel and the Information
Technologies Development Assisting Council develop a formula of the
tariff for the data transmission channel secured with the operator’s
own resources and submit it to the Ministry for approval by June 1,
2005. The Council presented its formula to ArmenTel, but the company
has not sumitted it for approval so far. The provision that the
Internet providers are not obliged to rent from ArmenTel the Internet
access service does not coorespond to the reality either. “In reality,
ArmenTel obliges the providers to rent not only the data transmission
channel but also the data receiving channel on which it does not
have a monopoly,” G. Saghian noted. Acording to him, ArmenTel also
misled the public by alleging that “in the last six months, the optic
cable’s efficiency made 99.83%.” The Internet Union’s Vice Chairman
claimed that actually the cable often failed, and ArmenTel informed
the providers about these failures only in speech, without registering
these facts in writing. Finally, according to G. Saghian, ArmenTel’s
statement did not contain any explanation about how Armenia’s Internet
network would be protected against any mass attacks, although a direct
inquiry about it was made by the Internet Union.