Globe Telecom are in talks with PLDT over an IP peering arrangement and it seems like this so called arrangement will just benefit the other party than themselves. According to the proposal, it seems it doesn’t even go far enough to effectively meet the definition of peering.

“The proposal does not go far enough even to meet the definition of peering. We are hoping any bilateral arrangement with PLDT would effectively reduce latency of local intent and improve internet speed. As is, PLDT’s proposed peering agreement won’t be effective in improving the country’s internet speed as it doesn’t allow Globe customers to directly access content and applications hosted by the PLDT group without exception,” GlobeChief Operating Officer Gil Genio said.

So what is IP Peering? In computer networking terms, peering is the voluntary interconnection of Internet networks for the purpose of exchanging traffic to users of other network. In short, neither party pays the other association in exchange of traffic, and drive revenues from their own customers.

If this deal possibly pushes through, could both parties benefit from IP Peering?

We’ll that questions still remains to be unanswered.

A perfect example would be the TV networks war and their disruption of signals. Consumers of Skycable have already reported that they have been the victims of signal interruption. The latter have been alleged to disrupt GMA Network’s signal on a particular timeslot to boost ABS-CBN’s program. Ironically, Skycable is owned by ABS-CBN which brings us to the fact they are doing this to “steal” or “interrupt” their competition. Clearly, a foul play.

Which brings us back to PLDT and their IP Peering. It is no different to what IP Peering. If somebody already controls a big portion of the pie, then they have total control of it.  As stated by Gil Genio, if this IP peering pushes through and some services are restricted by PLDT, then it is still remains a monopoly – a service monopoly.

Image source: