한국통신학회논문지 (The Journal of Korean Institute of Communications and Information Sciences)

  • 제40권4호
  • /
  • Pages.678-691
  • /
  • 2015
  • /
  • 1226-4717(pISSN)
  • /
  • 2287-3880(eISSN)
한국통신학회 (The Korean Institute of Commucations and Information Sciences)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

국내 상호접속제도 연구: 핵심이슈와 대안 발굴

A Study on Interconnection Regime: Core Issues and Alternatives

  • Kim, Il-Jung (Hanyang University Management Information Systems (MIS), Graduate School) ;
  • Shin, Minsoo (Hanyang University School of Business)
  • 투고 : 2015.02.02
  • 심사 : 2015.03.18
  • 발행 : 2015.04.30
PDF 다운로드
⟨ 이전 논문 다음 논문 ⟩

초록

최근 정보통신 생태계는 스마트 기기의 대중화와 대용량 데이터 스트리밍을 필요로 하는 다양한 인터넷 서비스들의 출현과 함께 인터넷 및 모바일 데이터 트래픽이 급속도로 증가하게 되었다. 이에 따라 원활한 인터넷 접속문제, 네트워크의 혼잡 및 정체, 그리고 통신사업자들의 지속적인 네트워크 투자 비용증대 등 다양한 문제들이 초래되었다. 이렇게 데이터 중심의 패러다임으로 변화된 통신 생태계 속에서 초기 상호접속체제들은 사업자들 간 균형 있는 혜택과 공정한 분배 그리고 차세대 네트워크 구축을 위한 경제적 유인을 형성할 수 없다는 측면에서 논란이 가중되고 있다. 따라서 더욱 복잡해진 All-IP 네트워크 환경에 부합할 수 있는 진화된 인터넷 상호접속체제의 도입이 필요한 상황이다. 이에 본 연구에서는 국내 인터넷 상호접속제도의 핵심이슈를 발굴하고 인터넷 초기에서 현재까지의 인터넷 상호접속체제를 전반적으로 분석한 후, 실증연구를 통하여 트래픽 최적화, 비용 최적화, 네트워크 투자 최적화의 세 가지 측면에 부합될 수 있는 인터넷 상호접속체제를 제시하고자 한다.

Internet and mobile traffic continues to surge exponentially in recent years due to popularization of smart devices, the appearance of various internet services carrying large amount of traffic from richer content and applications. This phenomenon leaded to various network problems such as the congestion delay, the non-balanced traffic ratio between ISPs, the continuous network investment cost and the Internet access problems. In light of changed data-driven communication ecosystem, There are growing concerns by both academia and industry that settlement-free peering and full transit regime have the limitations such as not only difficulties in maintaining mutual benefits but also difficulties in securing investment incentives for upgrading network performance and quality. Thus, it becomes more necessary for introducing the evolved internet interconnection regime which can fulfill the All-IP network environment. This study derives core issues regarding internet interconnection regime in Korea and suggest new evolved alternatives based on three point of view(traffic optimization, cost optimization, network investment optimization) through the empirical analysis.

키워드

참고문헌

  1. A. Sackl, P. Zwickl, and P. Reichl, "From quality of experience to willingness to pay for interconnection service quality," Networking 2012 Workshops, 2012.
  2. ARCEP, Report to Paliament and the Government on Net Neutrality, 2012.
  3. B. Briscoe and S. Rudkin, "Commercial models for IP quality of service interconnect," BTTJ, vol. 23, no. 2, 2005.
  4. B. Norton, Internet service providers and peering, quinix White Paper, 2001.
  5. BEREC, An assessment of IP-interconnection in the context of Net Neutrality, 2012.
  6. C. Courcoubetis, M. Dramitinos, and G. D. Stamoulis, "Connectivity in the commercial internet," FUNEMS(Berlin), 2012.
  7. C. G. Park, Y. S. Lee, and Y. D. Joo, "An implementation of smart network for high-quality media contents delivery," J. The Korea Inst. Electronic Commun. Sci., vol. 8, no. 1, pp. 85-91, 2013. https://doi.org/10.13067/JKIECS.2013.8.1.085
  8. C. S. Park, "The performance evaluation of bank branches using ANP and DEA hybrid model," J. Korea Safety Management & Sci., vol. 5, no. 4, pp. 267-278, 2003.
  9. C. Y. Jung, "A study on settlements in internet interconnection under internet congestion," The Korea Database Soc., vol. 14, no. 2, pp. 97-115, 2007.
  10. C. Shin and J. Cho, "An ANP-based resource management scheme in heterogeneous wireless networks considering multiple criteria," J. KICS, vol. 36, no. 8, pp. 910-920, 2011.
  11. CISCO, Cisco Visual Networking Index: Global Mobile Data Traffic Forecast Update, 2010-2015, 2011.
  12. D. Cremer, P. Rey, and J. Tirole, "Connectivity in the commercial internet," J. Ind. Econ., vol. 48, no. 4, pp. 433-472, 2000. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-6451.00132
  13. D. Kim, "Evolution of internet interconnections and system architecture design for telecom bandwidth trading," Korean Soc. IT Services, vol. 7, no. 1, pp. 131-149, 2008.
  14. D. Weller, "The internet market for quality," Commun. & Strategies, vol. 84, no. 4, pp. 35- 53, 2011.
  15. E. Choi and D. Tcha, "An interconnection model of ISP networks," J. Korean Operations Research and Management Sci., vol. 30, no. 4, pp. 151-161, 2005.
  16. E. Giovannetti, "Interconnection, differentiation and bottlenecks in the internet," Inf. Econ. Policy, vol. 14, pp. 385-404, 2002. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0167-6245(02)00048-3
  17. E. J. Cho and J. H. Byeon, "Analysis of internet ecosystem and evolutionary direction regarding interconnection system," ETRI, 2011.
  18. E. Jahn and J. Prufer, "Interconnection and competition among asymmetric networks in the internet backbone market," Inf. Econ. Policy, vol. 20, pp. 243-256, 2008. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.infoecopol.2008.03.002
  19. EC, EC on access to, and interconnection of, electronic communications networks and associated facilities: the Access Directive, 2002.
  20. ETNO, ITRs Proposal to Address New Internet Ecosystem, 2012.
  21. G. H. Lee, "A study on internet interconnection," The Korean J. Inf. Soc., vol. 01, no. 1, 2001.
  22. G. H. Yun, "Bargaining Power in Internet Interconnection," The Korea Academic Soc. Ind. Org., vol. 11, no. 1, 2003.
  23. G. Huston, "Interconnection, peering and settlements-Part II," Internet Protocol J., 1999.
  24. G. S. Kim, "A study on internet interconnection: Peering and the investment of network capacity," J. Econ. Theory and Econometrics, vol. 15, no. 4, pp. 55-89, 2004.
  25. H. C. Shin and H. S. Jang, "Connection/ Bearer-Path Routing Technology," Convergence security J., vol. 2, no. 2, pp. 89-97, 2002.
  26. H. Jeong, IP Interconnection and Access Charge System, KISDI, 2013.
  27. H. S. Kim, Fair competition issues and policy options, KISDI Issue Report, vol. 3, no. 10, 2003.
  28. J. H. Kwak, J. Y. Cho, Y. Lee, and B. G. Lee, "Remaking mobile ecosystem policies for new mobile market," Korean Soc. Internet Inf., vol. 12, no. 4, pp. 93-106, 2011.
  29. J. S. Moon and S. H. Kim, "A study on policy priorities for the promotion of information & communication construction work," J. KNIT, vol. 11, no. 6, pp. 97-109, 2013.
  30. J. Huigen and M. Cave, "Regulation and the promotion of investment in next generation networks - A European dilemma," Telecommun. Policy, vol. 32, pp. 713-721, 2008. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.telpol.2008.08.004
  31. J. Hwang, B. H. E. Martin, and S. J. Shin, Dynamic bandwidth provisioning economy of a market-based IP QoS interconnection intServ-diffServ, White paper, School of Information Studies, Syracuse University, 2010.
  32. J. J. Laffont, M. Scott, R. Patrick, and T. Jean, "Interconnection and access in telecom and the internet," The Am. Econ. Rev., vol. 91, no. 2, pp. 287-291, 2001. https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.91.2.287
  33. J. Kil, M. Shin, and S. Kim, "A collaboration model of players in the ICT ecosystem," Telecommun. Rev., vol. 22, no. 6, pp. 922-941, 2012.
  34. J. Klein, F. Jonathan, R. Morland, and S. Revell, "Traffic management and quality of experience," in Proc. 15th Int. Conf. Intell. Next Generation Netw., 2011.
  35. J. Ko and S. Park, "An ANP-based performance model for ERP system's implementation," J. Korean Data & Inf. Sci. Soc., vol. 8, no. 1, pp. 103-111, 2008.
  36. J. S. Marcus, Global traffic exchange among internet service providers (ISPs), OECD, 2001.
  37. Korea Internet & Security Agency, The issues for Internet and Security, 2012.
  38. L. W. McKnight and B. Leida, "Internet telephony costs, pricing, and policy," Telecommun. Policy, vol. 22, no. 7, pp. 555- 569, 2008. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0308-5961(98)00035-4
  39. M. Kende, Overview of recent changes in the IP interconnection ecosystem, Analysys Mason, 2011.
  40. M. Roettgermann, I. Korthals F. T. Johansen, and H. Lonsethagen, "The sending party network pays': A first step towards end-to-end quality of service," Technologia, vol. 1, 2012.
  41. N. Semret, A. Liao, A. Campbell, and A. A. Lazar, "Peering and provisioning of differentiated internet services," IEEE Infocom 2000, Tel Aviv, Israel, 2000.
  42. O. Faros and B. Hansen, "Competition and compatibility among Internet service providers," Inf. Econ. Policy, vol. 13, pp. 411-425, Dec. 2001. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0167-6245(01)00044-0
  43. Ovum, IP Interconnect: Commercial, Technical and Regulatory Dynamics, 2002.
  44. P. Ferreira, A model for interconnection of IP networks, Qualifier Paper, Carnegie Mellon University, 2003.
  45. P. Faratin, D. Clark, P. Gilmore, S. Bauer, A. Berger, and W. Lehr, "Complexity of internet interconnections: Technology, incentives and implications for policy," in Proc. The 35th Res. Conf. Commun., Inf. Internet Policy (TPRC), Aug. 2007.
  46. P. Faratin, D. Clark, P. Gilmore, S. Bauer, A. Berger, and W. Lehr, "The growing complexity of internet interconnections," Commun. & Strategies, vol. 32, pp. 33-49, 2008.
  47. Packet Clearing House, How Big Network Can Peer Regionally, 2007.
  48. R. M. Dewan, M. L. Freimer, and P. Gundepudi, "Interconnection agreements between competing internet service providers," in Proc. Hawaii Int. Conf. Syst. Sci., 2000.
  49. S. Besen, P. Milgrom, B. Mitchell, and P. Srinagesh, "Advances in routing technologies and internet peering agreements," Am. Econ. Rev., vol. 91, no. 2, pp. 292-296, 2001. https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.91.2.292
  50. S. H. Na, J. W. Gwak, Y. R. Kang, I. K. Kang, and S. Y. Lee, A study on net neutrality and internet traffic management for the sustainable growth of the ICT ecosystem, KISDI, 2012.
  51. S. Lippert and G. Spagnolo, "Internet peering as a network of relations," Telecommun. Policy, vol. 32, no. 1, pp. 33-49, 2009. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.telpol.2007.11.004
  52. S. W. Na, Restructuring and implications of interconnection regime regarding Bill & Keep running in the united states, KISDI, 2012.
  53. T. L. Saaty, "How to make a decision: The analytic hierarchy process," Eur. J. Operation Res., vol. 48, pp. 9-26, 1990. https://doi.org/10.1016/0377-2217(90)90057-I
  54. W. Melody, "Regulation and network investment: A framework for analysis," The World Dialogue on Regulation for Network Econ.(WDR), 2003.
  55. Y. R. Gang, Case review regarding IP Interconnection dispute between France Telecom and Cogent, KISDI, 2013.
  56. Y. R. Gang, Internet Traffic Management Trends and Implications: focused on wire high-speed internet, KISDI, 2012.

피인용 문헌

  1. 인터넷 상호접속제도 개선을 위한 대안 탐색 연구: 2016년 1월 개정안을 중심으로 vol.21, pp.1, 2020, https://doi.org/10.7472/jksii.2020.21.1.1