Throughout Asia, Internet Service Providers, Backbone & Regional Networks, Web Hosting Facilities, Firewalls, and Private Intranets, are being installed at a staggering pace. The organizations responsible are under tremendous pressure to master the skills and policies necessary to operate & maintain these increasingly complex systems.

APRICOT's mission is to satisfy this need for information. The week long summit consists of seminars, workshops, tutorials, conference sessions, birds-of-a-feather (BOFs), and other forums with the goal of spreading and sharing the knowledge required to operate the increasingly complex Asia Pacific Internet topology. APRICOT week is also the week the Asia Pacific Network Information Center (APNIC) and the Asia & Pacific Internet Association (APIA) annual membership meetings.

? The First APRICOT was held in Singapore January 1996. It was attended by over 280 people from 18 different countries, all involved in delivering Internet Services.

? The Second APRICOT was held in Hong Kong in January 1997 and included 630 people from 25 countries.

? APRICOT's mission is to address the critical need to develop and advance the skills and understanding necessary to grow a robust Internet infrastructure in the Asia-Pacific region.

? APRICOT is not just another 'pure-promotional' Internet conference; APRICOT brings networking experts together with those who can benefit most from their expertise.

? The people who attend APRICOT are the real people building the Internet in the Asia & Pacific region. Many of best Internet engineers attend APRICOT either to teach, present, or do their own "networking."

For More Information
--------------------

Watch http://www.apricot.net for upcoming final program and registration information OR send a message to apricot-info@apricot.net OR call APNIC +81 3 5500-0480 OR Fax APNIC at +81 3 5500-0481

Want to Sponsor APRICOT?
------------------------

If your organization would like to sponsor APRICOT, please send a note to: apricot-info@apricot.net. --

Barry Raveendran Greene APRICOT Organization Committee

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Date: Tue, 25 Nov 1997 23:49:33 +0800
To: aisg-news@anr.org
From: Izumi Aizu
Subject: [aisg-news 28] Leo Moggie 大臣インタビュー　［要約］

すこし日時がたってしまったのですが、マレーシアのエネルギー、通信、郵政大臣のレオ・モギー氏に 10月に単独インタビューしたものの要約版です。

英文原文も、続けてお送りします。こちらは、私の質問・意見もすべて入れてあります。

なお、英文は、大臣秘書のチェック済みのものです。

Datuk Leo Moggie
Minister, Energy, Telecommunications and Post, Malaysia

Oct. 10. 1997

by Izumi Aizu,
(c) 1997 Asia Network Research Sdn. Bhd.

MSCは順調に進展してきた。マハティール首相の米国、日本、欧州など、海外での説明・誘致活動も、とても好評だった。私もオランダ、スェーデン、カナダに行った。当初の予想より、かなり評判はよかった。

　国内の反応もとても良い。かなり広範な業界に受けているといえる。

　いまの課題は、実行だ。ここまでは、説明してコンセプトを理解してもらえばよかった。これからは、本当に約束通りに実現できるのかを、みんなが見守っている。物理的にできるかの勝負だ。サイバージャヤも、まだ問題もあるが、すでにMDCのオフィスを移した程で、我々は真剣に取り組んでいる。年内に移転する企業もいくつかある。今年はじめにはまだ一面油ヤシのプランテーションだったところだ。

　最近の経済情勢の影響は、MSCについては心配ない。もともとMSCは民間分野の投資が主体のプロジェクトで、政府の予算削減の影響は受ける余地がない。海外投資という面でいえば、リンギットの通貨安はむしろプラスの影響さえあるといえる。
　フラグシップ・アプリケーションにしても、政府主導というのは誤解で、政府は、民間投資のための環境を整備するというのが趣旨だ。スマートスクールでも、テレメディシンでもそうだ。民間の研究開発の成果の実用実験のための場を提供するというのが目的なのだ。　電子政府は、われわれ自身が利用する。そうして自ら実験材料となるのだ。
　だから、官民の協力がとても重要となる。そのためのマルチメディア・権利章典だ。BOTなどの公共事業ではない。自由な環境を提供するのだ。

　残念ながら、日本からの参加が遅れ気味なのは事実だ。だが、NTTなどにはとても期待している。来年中には研究開発で進出するという先日のNTT MSCの設立パーティーでの宮津社長の発表はたいへん喜ばしかった。

　MSCの通信インフラをテレコムマレーシア(TM)が独占して構築・運用するという決定は、ずいぶん議論した結果のものだ。ATM交換機より上のレベルは競争にオープンにする。TMも、ネットワークのアーキテクチャーはオープンで様々な技術に対応するものにすると説明している。

　同時に、様々な実験を、MSC外でも進めることも重要と考えている。海外の技術の高い、先進ベンチャー企業の参加も期待している。
　放送、通信、コンピューターの融合法案は、できれば12月に国会に上程したい。どの国にも前例がないので苦労している。技術変化の速度に対応できるプロセス重視のものにしたいと考えている。既存の利害が錯綜して難しいのだが。
　MSCを推進するMDCの機能強化の必要性は認める。海外の人材も起用したい。
　通信料金の「リバランシング」は、本当にすべての利用者のメリットになるかどうかが大事だ。
　インターネットの混雑状況も承知している。現在2社のプロバイダーでは不十分かもしれないと考えている。

【以上】


* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Date: Tue, 25 Nov 1997 23:59:00 +0800
To: aisg-news@anr.org
From: Izumi Aizu
Subject: [aisg-news 29] Interview on MSC with Datuk Leo Moggie

Interview on MSC with Datuk Leo Moggie
Minister, Energy, Telecommunications and Post, Malaysia

Oct. 10. 1997

by Izumi Aizu,
(C) 1997, Asia Network Research Sdn. Bhd.

IA: Since we first met one year ago at Multimedia Asia '96's panel discussion, I would like to hear your straight opinion in retrospect of how progress made for the MSC?

LM: We have made very good progress. The Prime Minister had a meeting with members of International Advisory Panel and visited California, met businesses leaders in Europe and made presentations on the MSC in London.I myself held dialogues in Holland, Sweden and Canada. The Prime Minister has also been to Japan and Hungary to meet with representatives from the I.T. industry in both countries. The response and feedback we received from all these international dialogues have been very encouraging indeed.

IA: Was it better than expected originally?

LM: Yes. The response we received from the international I.T. industry was was very very encouraging and was in fact much more than we had anticipated.

IA: To be frank, compared with when we met last year and when I heard your presentation at INET 97 in Kuala Lumpur this year, I think you recognize and grasp the bigger picture in much more confident way. I am sure that these are all supported and encouraged by international and domestic response.

LM: Yes, domestic response has also been very very positive.

IA: Which part of program or project of MSC made more progress than the others? If you can compare, some may made more progress than others?.

LM There are quite a number of industries which have made more progress than others, such as telecommunication's software and content-based industries. The profile of applications for MSC status and the companies which have already been give MSC status showed quite a good spread of industries within the multi-media sector. We are quite comfortable with the nature of the spread so far.

IA : How about your major challenge or concern?:

LM We have done the selling. We have explained and talked about the concept and the things to be done. People are beginning to understand more and more about MSC. Now they are watching to see whether we can delivery and get the physical implementations of the project off the ground. Therefore, we must be able to prove that things are actually happening on the ground. In fact, we have made considerable progress on the development of the cyber city or Cyberjaya. The MDC Office will soon be located there. It should be sufficiently comfortable for people to work there.

IA: I've been there 4 times already since September. There are cobras, wild dogs, but the day time is OK.

LM: It is not fully ready yet, of course. The work is on-going. However temporary accommodations are ready for MSC companies that wish to start operating from Cyberjaya before the end of 1997.

IA: You cannot use the cellular phone, that is a problem In some sweet points are ok, some others are not. It may cause some problem to the visitors. Fibers are not buried in the ground, but on the poles and telephone system has had some problems..

On the one hand, I think it's a good idea to move MDC, because MDC can experience most of what client would experience later.

LM: It is important for us to show the seriousness in implementing the project.

Timing is also important As to the development of the telecommunications infrastructure, they are being put in place. Meanwhile, the MDC is identifying the companies that will locate in Cyberjaya by the end of the year. The speed of the physical development of the site is actually very impressive, considering that earlier this year, the area was still plantation land with oil palms and other vegetation. As to coverage of cellular phones in the MSC, at the moment the TM Touch (PCN) system provides full coverage within the area. Other systems are in the process of extending their coverage and network for use in the Corridor. Cables will also be laid underground.

IA: Now the challenge is implementation. Another typical question is: How does recent economic turmoil affected MSC?

LM: We don't anticipate the current economic turmoil having any direct or serious effect on the MSC project, for 2 reasons. Firstly, the MSC Project is largely sponsored by the private sector, and not dependent on government expenditure. Therefore, our policy of reviewing and cutting on public expenditure will not affect the MSC project, for example, in the development of its physical infrastructure such as telecommunications facilities, roads and buildings.

Secondly, a major part of the MSC is really private sector investment. by both foreign and local companies. In fact, we think that the current weak position of the Ringgit can be advantageous and have some positive impact on investment in the MSC.

IA: I myself don't buy that much concern, but there are concerns among foreign investors, and I heard some rumor that some flagship applications are reduced in scale. For example, the number of smart schools might be slightly reduced?

LM: Initially, there were some misunderstandings on how people perceived the concept. Some may have thought it is a government project, when it is actually private sector driven. What we mean by the smart school concept or what constitutes the smart school project is similar to what we mean, when we talk about the application of telemedicine.

In the case of telemedicine, for example, our intention was for private hospitals to use and implement telemedicine activities. People however misinterpret this as reducing medical expenditures. This has to be clarified.

IA: That leads to the often-asked questions for the 7 Flagship Applications, whether BOT(Build, Operate and Transfer) or even BOO (Build, Operate and Own) - what is the financial scheme to support these flagship applications is still not clear.

LM: Well, part of the reason for the RFCP(Request for Concept Proposal) is to get ideas on what the private sector wished to do in the MSC. The main point to recognize here is that even on the flagship applications, what we want to do is to basically encourage the private sector to be creative and do their own thing, rather than marketing their products for government use. The idea is to locate your R&D, software design and so on for marketing globally. Use the MSC to test your technology and to improve on it for the world market.

IA: But that is sometimes hard to sell or hard to understand, because people will naturally expect that?

LM: Of course it is difficult, but we have to explain the facts. In so far as Electronic Government is concerned, which is an actual government function, we will certainly utilize and make use of the application. But essentially we are offering ourselves as a live sample for firms to try systems that can be used for electronic government.

IA: When it come to say telecom- like in Thailand BOT model didn't work. So, whether these private companies actually can execute in sound financial way is not only up to them, but up to both sides, right? So both the government AND the private sector should work very closely together, right?

LM: Yes that's correct. That is why the Malaysian Government's basic role is to facilitate and ensure that incentive arrangements and procedures are in place. These are meant to make the private sector investment in the MSC attractive. Through the introduction of our Bill of Guarantees, we also present investors very open and liberal ways of encouraging them to do their business within the MSC. It is not BOT. This point is essential to understand. We are offering the MSC as a test-bed for industries to try their inventiveness.

IA: The irony is, especially for the Japanese companies, they are slow in making decisions, in nature, and it's happening now that only 5% has got MSC status. And I am sure Malaysian side might be looking more. Japanese private companies are much accustomed to have government funding even for IT. While the irony I meant is, for most American companies, although IT budget for procurement from the government is very high, their mind is that it's business, not political. So while Malaysian government is taking a little bit liberal approach to have private sector initiatives, I think some Japanese company's management people may have difficulty in accepting that, they may in theory understand, but they still expect the government money. Don't you think so?

LM: If this is so. is unfortunate. When we proposed the MSC project, it is not purely intended to create industries that produce for the Malaysian market. One of the most important aspects of MSC is to allow companies to do a lot of experimenting and produce products and services which they can market locally and internationally. In a nutshell, it is the total support, incentive package and facilities we provide that we hope will induce investors to locate in the MSC. If they are thinking purely of marketing for the Malaysian market (Private or the government sector), I have to say ours is small. But what we are offering to you through your participation in the MSC is the opportunity to create and experiment. The advantage is that you don't have to be big in this respect.

IA: Do you also personally feel that the Japanese response is a little bit slow? So far only 5% of the companies granted for the MSC status are from Japan.

LM: We hope for a little bit more than the 5% which your mentioned. Nevertheless, we are encouraged by the interests of some of the bigger companies. NTT's role, for example, is very important. We were please d when NTT President Mr.Miyazu announced at the launching of NTT MSC, that the company's R&D activities will start from Cyberjaya by late next year. This is a real encouragement. Now that NTT is with us, we are confident that more Japanese companies will be interested to come and do their business here.

IA: NTT or Toyota is OK, they have deep pockets. But these are the medium or smaller sized companies, who don't have too much money to invest, they need to understand more of the basic concept of MSC.

Let me move on to the network infrastructure to MSC. To be honest I am bit concerned about the monopoly in real infrastructure side by TM, I would rather have more competition even to the local loop access. So far the base infrastructure is done by TM.

LM: We debated this at great length. The reason for this is that we think the development of the backbone infrastructure involves substantial capital investment. Also. if there are too many companies or people competing, there will be duplication and wastage. Therefore, it should be done by a single group, and Telekom Malaysia is still very much the dominant single group in telecommunications business.

We also decided that the level of monopoly on the backbone has to be defined. What That is up to the ATM switch level that will be considered as the "backbone". The application and utilization above that level,will be totally open to others.

IA: Between July and august I did a serious survey on Singapore One. Originally it was up to ATM backbone, but 1-Net has added IP router. They had to buy the router.

It's a collection of different people- it is not competition model, but more "coopetition". You have to talk to many players - if that backbone company makes wrong or inappropriate decision - that will affect the serious users. This is my concern.

LM: OK.

IA: Somehow if you could have more open technology side of the discussion by various parties, then TM can make a better decision. Because now TM is mostly, I spoke same thing with Taib Hassan (Head of Mega Project at TM), the answer was that yes they get a lot of presentations from vendors everyday, and then they talk to their customers. This is fine, but if it makes a little bit larger, or more open, then it might be much more productive. That is sort of my idea.

LM: Yes, of course. I believe Telekom Malaysia is quite open to discussing ideas to unsure that they have access to the latest trend in technology development.

IA: Behind that, to be frank, ATM technology is a sort of interim solution - although people say this is the final solution. Whereas other technologies are coming up, and it's so rapid. If MSC can even some experiment on backbone technology in some degree before making the full 15 by 50 kilometer single structure that might be safer for you and better for the rest of the world to see.

LM: I would not be able to react to you on technology issue. We chose TM because we are confident that being the dominant telecommunications company in Malaysia, they will be in a position to manage the implementation of a state-of-the-art backbone..

IA: We personally have the experience with NTT, we tried to promote OCN (Open Computer Network), now it is dubbed here in Malaysia as OMN (Open Multimedia Network). GLOCOM held 5-year joint research started in 1991, and in 1992 we proposed that they should seriously look into Internet. And they said No! That's not a good technology we don't buy, they said. In one year they changed their mind. Then we proposed ODN (Open Data Network). It was originally proposed in US, by a committee on Network Renaissance. So the architecture should be much more open. They finally accepted and converted into OCN, as one version of ODN. So how much open is really a crucial question and what is open as a definition is another...

LM: Our concept is that of a communications network that is based on an open architecture. Based on that guideline, their explanation to us on the technical level is that the network will be an open configuration, and with inter-operability with different technologies,

IA: Even with NTT after 3 years, in implementation sometimes they tend to try to close it, they want to dominate. So it's a constant kind of argument or debate, bringing in the users or high-end users, latest advancement in US, these are very much needed and not sufficient in MSC yet in my opinion. I might try to talk to the people in constructive way.

I heard that Interactive Multimedia Network(IMN) outside MSC in Subanjaya, as an experiment that TM is planning. But somehow it's slow to me. But is it going to happen?

LM: Maybe, it is a bit slow, but it is important and it will happen.

IA: Is it sort of pre test bed for the real test bed, am I correct?

LM: Yes. A lot of experimentation is necessary to ensure its successful implementation.

IA: There can be more open call for that. I know that there is a closed auction for vendors only. So that for those who are not in don't know about it, yet. Say, like small vendors in Silicon Valley don't know. I hope that there can be more channel, under certain conditions, of course, then you can bring in the very latest technology. Because most of the big vendors such as Fujitsu, NEC, or even Alcatel actually often don't know the latest technology - that's what I am afraid.

LM: Your point is quite valid. Actually these start-up companies are really the ones leading the new phase. Our people should take note of this point. And in your meeting with them, you should raise this question with them as well.

IA: They are competing with Cisco, they are the next Cisco!

How about Cyberlaw? - you often mention about the convergence law, but the content of it is still not very clear yet.

LM: It is still very much in the drafting stage. Our target is to table it in the current parliament session, perhaps in early December. The concept is to see what the future of the multimedia industry going to be like? We now understand that with convergence, the likely trend will be that telecommunications, computing and broadcasting, which used to be separate industries, will be utilizing the same infrastructures and facilities.

So how do we deal with the legislative consequence of this emerging trend? The traditional and conventional approach will be to look at the present legislation governing telecommunication and broadcasting, and make the necessary amendments to repackage them.

Another approach is to assume that at the moment we have no related rules and legislation in place to facilitate the growth of this new industry in the future. This seems to be a more attractive approach. So perhaps the practical way is to focus more on the process, rather than the content. Technology changes so fast that content gets outdated very quickly.

IA: That is very radical.

LM: Yes, it is. But that's what we have been saying all along. We wanted to try a legislation which is forward-looking rather than backward looking. Of course, there will be a lot of unknown factors.

IA: So existing stake-holders might be..

LM: Yes, existing stake holders might have organizational worries about that. We have had a lot of discussions on this. But again, the legislation will not only be applied within the MSC, but nationwide. That's part of the reason why it is very difficult. It would be simpler if it is applied specifically for the MSC, but that is not possible.

I also agree with your that it is not easy to draft such legislation. It takes time. Also, as far as I know, no other country has existing legislation that covers the sort of matters we are talking about. So we do not have the advantage of using experience of other.

IA: Usually, the draft of these laws are not made public, before decided right?

LM: Different countries have different ways of going about this. In Malaysia, the actual preparation and drafting of a legislation is very much a governmental function, and this has remained the traditional approach and practice taken in the country. However, we do seek feedback from interested parties.

IA: I have already spoken to several people around MSC and I found it concerned that quite a number of people expressed that the capacity of MDC is not sufficient. I know they are too busy, but sometimes they don't give return calls, or communication problem. It may sounds like a surface matter, but it can be more serious because of implementation stage. So do you have any plan to increase MDC capacity or any other agencies to work together or something like that?

LM: There is certainly a need to increase MDC's capacity. It has just been created, and of course, it will take time for us to build up its capacity. It is not easy to recruit the right people for this particular industry. This shortage of manpower is in fact a worldwide phenomenon. MDC may need to get people from outside the country, because our own people here are fully committed.

IA: Again I have some suggestion that instead of only increasing MDC per se, if they can organize to utilize more outside people who want to be part of the project. I explained that to one of the members of MDC already and he took it seriously. So these are the areas they have to work.

LM: Yes, they need to increase their capacity.

IA: They are terribly busy, especially for flagship applications and MSC status approval. It's taking too much time, but it's good to have fair and good decision.

Last but not least, the Internet situation here in Malaysia. I often experience some congestion these days and it's sort of headache. I will speak about that to MIMOS people. I said that to Telekom.

LM: Yes I am concerned about the quality of the service, which is slow and congested.

IA: Also I doubt about the technical capacity of the people. It's been expressed. Compared with Singapore's technicians or Japan, sorry to say but TM people have very little experience. Some of the early guys like Tommi Chen has left to support it.

LM: Yes I know him.

IA: I don't know why, politically or whatever. He is a good friend of mine. Or even in Jaring there is not enough people to handle. Because the foreign companies are coming now for the MSC, and they are experiencing already on the Internet status today, it is very discouraging. It is quite serious. So the pace of Internet usage growth is not as fast as it can be although you made the significant record of number of host computers growth this year, but that is causing this congestion. So it's a positive game I would say.

They did not plan the network configuration enough to meet the expected demand with the result: they increased the subscribers base, but that capacity is not enough to handle. I raised this.

Although this is a sort of delicate question, but in Japan the number of ISPs are already 2000 and when they reached 600, we talked about shake-ups. Somehow it never happened. For some ISP business, you can count relatively well to sustain business, especially if you have leased line subscribers, then it is more stable. And here the price of leased line is relatively more expensive than the cost. Although the Telekom is saying, no the demand is pretty high, so that means that the customers can still buy. The same argument I did personally in 1993, and I have some papers here, to NTT and MPT.

Because NTT was making about one quarter of profit out of leased line service, although the revenue was only half of that - it is highly profitable business. And so if they talk about are-balancing, you should seriously think about that of leased line pricing. That's why NTT has offered OCN, leased line type of OCN, with almost one tenth of conventional price with lesser quality. It's best effort not guaranteed. And then they offered digital Economy line, for both 64k and 128k. Both are increasing a lot. I said to them it's a win-win game. The mentality of telecom people, especially those who are in charge of tariffs, are usually accounting people and they don't see the new market.

LM Yes. You may have read some comments in the newspapers about the telephone tariffs. Our idea of "re-balancing", is one that means prospect for everybody to have access to the basic facilities. If "re-balancing" means as increase somewhere, then it will be difficult for us to consider it at this time.

IA: I read the yesterday's paper about your remarks to stand on the consumers' side. The problem is, here still the consumer voice is not too strong for the Internet, very small number of people, it's not in the main stream. The corporate users for COINS or for potential users, they usually don't speak-up against monopoly. In Japan if you say something against NTT, it's a problem. For the banks or for big companies, because, NTT is the biggest client. So, likewise, I am not too sure about Malaysian situation and I don't want to be involved too much about that, but if you cultivate the end-users benefit, then the discussions become more appropriate. It's not big stakes versus other big stakes.

These are the kinds of areas we have worked out.

LM: We will be looking at the ISPs situation, because possibly having two ISPs are not enough.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Date: Thu, 4 Dec 1997 22:29:22 +0800
To: aisg-news@anr.org
From: Izumi Aizu
Subject: [aisg-news 30] シンガポールONEについて
一昨日、昨日とシンガポールに行き、シンガポールONEの最新状況をフォローで調べて来ました。
（以下は、原則オフレコでお願いします）。

まず、シンガポールONEのバックボーン回線の基幹会社である1-NET 社の、Mock Pack-Lum 社長と、Bart Bowten　Chief TechnologyOfficerを訪問しました。

Mock Pack-Lum 社長は、9月にシンガポールで開かれた毎日新聞主催のシンポジウムで、私がかなり辛口のコメントをしたのに対して、会場で聞いていて（面識まったくないのに）、一週間後に「とても面白かった、ぜひ会いたい」とメールが来て、その後10月に直接会ったのです。もともとは HPの技術者、その後、展示会サービスの会社に務めたという、ちょっと変わった経歴の持ち主。電話会社中心の発想にはたいへん批判的で、かなりエンドユーザー寄りの人物です。12月17日のNTTの国際シンポジウムに来日します。

Boweten 氏 はベルギー人、アルカテルにいた技術者で、シンガポール大学のInstitute for Information Technology(IIT)　で高速ネットワーク実験を担当していたようです。基本的にはATMスイッチの人間ですが、インターネットの技術について、謙虚に学ぶ姿勢はもっています。

一つの問題点は、ADSLモデムで、最近シンガポールテレコムがmagicsというサービスを開始して、拡大をめざしているようですが、まだイーサネットのインタフェース採用にはテレコムはとても消極的なようです。この間までは、技術的な理由のようだったのが、最近は、ビジネス上の理由で後ろ向き、だそうです。

つまり、1回線=1モデム=1PC=1ユーザー　で利用されるのなら文句はないのだが、1回線=1モデム=複数PC=複数ユーザー　で利用されると、これまでの回線料金からは大幅値下げ＝減収になると心配しているのです。

電話会社としては、電話1回線=1端末=1ユーザーがビジネスの基本なわけですから、イーサネットで数メガ回線を低料金にし、それをLAN複数の人にシェアされると、他の料金体系とのバランスがとれなくなると恐怖のようです。ユーザー感覚とは正反対、です。

なお、現在まで、シンガポールONEのユーザーは2000名ほどで、これを年内（あと25日！）で5000名という目標達成は可能だと、二人は言うのですが、ちょっと信じられないですね。いくらなんでも。

現在、155Mのお客が24社。ISP3社、政府組織以外の民間では、NECとオラクルの名前が伝わってきました。
こうした会社は、ホテルを結ぶネットワーク、観光ネットワーク、自動車の販売店のネットワークなどのアプリケーションを考えているようです。
これまでは、B-TO-C (Business to Consumer)　の志向性が強かったのが、最近になって、B-TO-B (Business to Business)　をやろうという決定が出たようです。

私からみれば当然ですが、最初のコンセプトは、あくまで大衆にサービスを提供してあげる、というキャプテン以来の謝りが続いていたのです。ずいぶん早めに軌道修正できたな、というのが実感です。

　　　　　　　　　　　　**　**　**　**
で、実際の高速ネットワークのデモをしてもらったのですが、ニュース番組はサーバーが遅く、アクセスできず。FIRST 100 DAYS　という軍隊体験入隊のホームページは、ショックウェーブの画像で、ライフルの実写シーンもありましたが、そうたいした印象は受けませんでした。キーボードのチャットはあるようですが、ボイス、画像のリアルタイムチャットはないということです。もしあれば、800番PARTTLINE的な商売が可能なのですが、まじめなシンガポールではとても無理でしょう。

ということで、人気サイトというのはあまりなさそうでした。
アプリケーションで圧倒的に人気があるのは、「高速インターネット」そのもので、「画像」ではないのです。
なお、シンガポールONEは、シンガポール・ケーブルビジョンのビルの1フロアにオフィスをもっていて、まだ閑散としているのですが、そこに、シンガポール大学の、高速インターネットプロジェクト、SINGARENの事務局が移ってきました。これは大変象徴的なことです。
しかも、その隣には、アジア地域のインターネット・コミュニティのゆるやかな集まりであるAPNG (Asia Pacific Networking Group)のオフィスまで新設されました。私も、そのAPNGの副会長の一人、なのです。（前会長が、東大教授だった石田晴久さん）。

いずれも、Dr. Tan Tin Wee という、シンガポール大学のインターネット研究開発部門のヘッドのリーダーシップによるもので、今後シンガポール ONEが、ますます高速インターネット系のサービスへと質を変えていく可能性が強いと思われます。

1-NETの後、TAS（シンガポール電気通信庁）を訪ね、さらに日本大使館にも行きました。TASは Tan Chin Kuan (Deputy Director, Infrastrucutre)　大使館は郵政省からの富麻氏にお会いしました。
これらの関係者の話は全部つながっていて、今後、SINGARENは、 APAN(Asia Pacific Advanced Network)と連携して実験を進めるようです。アメリカの次世代インターネット計画とも連携するでしょう。
日本の郵政省とシンガポールの通信エネルギー省が協力協定を結んで、実験を支えるようで、1月に東京に大臣が来て調印式が予定されています。

SINGARENは、研究プロジェクトですが、いずれ商用ネット利用が併存することが想定されています。民営化も十分考えられるようです。

シンガポールのインターネットは、もともと研究教育ネットだった、 TECNETがプロバイダーになった前歴もあるのですから。

SINGARENの若手エンジニアは、1-NETが、基本アーキテクチャーに依然問題を抱えていること、とくにルーティングの問題で、AS（自律）ネット）になっていないので、ダイナミック・ルーティングができず、したがって、スケールしない（トラフィックの増加に対応できない）、と指摘していました。「彼らは全然インターネットの技術をわかっていない。でも、勉強はしようとしているから手伝ってあげるつもりだ」と。このあたりは、 9月にお送りしたレポートの本筋通りです。

また、マレーシアのMDCから、アリフ・ヌン氏がシンガポールに二週間ほど前に来て、ぜひマレーシアに来て発表をしてほしいと依頼していったようです。残念ながら、実現は、政治的にそう簡単ではないようですが。長くなり失礼しました。では、またご報告します。

ご質問、調べるべきリクエストなどあれば、どうぞ遠慮なくお伝えください）。1月に日本に出張する際に、2回目の報告会を開催したいと思っていますので、どうぞよろしく。

　　　　　　　　　　　　　　アジアネットワーク研究所　　会津　泉


* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Date: Sat, 6 Dec 1997 12:51:11 +0800
To: aisg-news@anr.org
From: Izumi Aizu
Subject: [aisg-news 31] Telekom Malaysia CEO remains

9月頃から、テレコム・マレーシアのCEOのモハメド・サイードが辞めるという噂がずっと流れていました。
COOのラヒムが後任だと。
その背後には、パワー・ストラグルがあったようです。
しかし、昨日入ったある信頼できる筋からの情報では、モハメド・サイードが後２年CEOを続けることが確定した、とのことです。
来週もしくは、さ来週に発表されるはずだということです。
サイード社長はマハティール首相のバックアップで留任し、ラヒム氏は、アンワール副首相の後押しがあったとの噂もありますが、もちろん確認はできません。
これがMSCにどういう影響があるかは、まだわかりませんが、一応、マイナスにはならないと思われます。

　　　　　　　　　アジアネットワーク研究所　　会津　泉


* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Date: Sat, 6 Dec 1997 12:58:53 +0800
To: aisg-news@anr.org
From: Izumi Aizu
Subject: [aisg-news 32] 韓国の国家インフラプロジェクト延期

韓国の情報通信省は、4日、情報スーパーハイウェイプロジェクトを中止したと発表。アジアの経済危機のなか、国家の情報化プロジェクトが取りやめになったのは、おそらく初めてと思われます。

最近の経済危機の影響で、企業の積極参加が見込めなくなったのがその理由のようです。

当初ケーブル敷設を予定していた現代グループが、最近の状況下で利益を見込めないとして、プロジェクト推進を取りやめたのがきっかけ。

ただし、情報通信省は、新地域電話会社であるハナロ・テレコムにマルチメディアケーブルの敷設を委せたい意向だとも言われている。また、ケーブルモデムも考えられているようです。

(Maeil Business Newspaper, Korea)


* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Date: Mon, 15 Dec 1997 02:30:35 +0800
To: aisg-news@anr.org
From: Izumi Aizu
Subject: [aisg-news 33] MSCステータス取得状況（1997年11月末現在）


MDCのホームページ　

http://www.mdc.com.my/status/list/index.html
からです。

１．MSCステータス取得企業：78社

　MSCステータスの取得企業は、「パイオニア」4社を含めて、 11月末で計78社に到達した。その内訳は以下の通りである。

なお、申請は170社以上に上っている。

パイオニア企業 4社
　Telecom Malaysia （マレーシア）
　Sun Microsystems （米国）
　NTT （日本）
　Mimos （マレーシア）

一般ステータス取得企業　74社
・マレーシア企業　46社
（内　訳）

　マレーシア企業単独　27社
　Netcard、Alam、Leepfrog、Astro、Mesiniaga、MEASAT、Pintar Media、IOI、CSA、
　Iris、Sapura Card、Sime NET、Binariang Satellite　他

　外国企業との合弁　19社

　合弁相手先：
　シンガポール 4　KNSB、Mass Media、Mediahomes　他
　英　国　　 4　TL Technology、PTRG　他
　日　本　　 3　Infortech、Collaborative Technology、Fujitsu
Telecommnication
　米　国　　 2　PDS 他
　カナダ 2　Demi Maju-Phoeniｘ
　その他 4　（豪州、スウエーデン、スリランカ、伊・豪、各１）


・外国企業　28社
　米　国 5　Oracle、Intel、Motorola、DHL　他
　英　国 4　IBS、Rebus、Analysisなど
　日　本 3　富士通、ジャストシステム、キャディックス
　スウエーデン 3　Ericsson／Hewlett-Packard、Icon、Mercur
　オランダ 3　Baan、Prolin、HCL Perot
　インド 3　HCL、NIIT
　シンガポール 2　Ednovation、Advanced Risk Management Solution
　その他 5　（ドイツ、スイス、カナダ、フランス・スイス合弁、香港、各1）

２.　日系企業7社の内訳

�@NTT　パイオニアステータス

ローカル企業との合弁

・Infortech
　主に日本市場向け製造業関係ソフトウエア開発、顧客仕様ソフト開発など。
　親会社はセル・インフォルテック、実質100％の子会社。
　マレーシアでの業務経験18年以上。システム・エンジニア40名。
　現地での日常経営は中国系社長に任せている。

富士通関係 ３社

・Collaborative Technology Sdn Bhd
　現地企業との合弁、コンピュータシステム周辺業務ソスト開発他
・Fujitsu Telecommnicationｓ Asia Sdn Bhd
　現地企業との合弁
　通信インフラの設計、開発、コンサルティング他
・Fujitsu （Malaysia) Sdn Bhd
　富士通単独　システムインテグレーション、ネットワーク開発など。

単独進出
・ジャストシステム
　ネットワーク周辺ソフト開発、一般業務ソフト開発など
・キャディックス
　デジダル署名技術開発、CAD開発など。
　94年11月にマレーシアに現地法人を設立。外資比率規制、外国人就労枠の問題 　を解決する為にMSC申請したもの。


* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Date: Sat, 27 Dec 1997 15:35:13 +0800
To: aisg-news@anr.org
From: Izumi Aizu
Subject: [aisg-news 34] Leo Moggie Interview

マレーシアのエネルギー、通信・郵政大臣のレオ・モギー氏 10月にインタビューしたものの、日本語版です。

テキストファイルで添付いたします。
万一、開けない方がいらっしゃれば、ご連絡ください。

年内に、MSC全体の報告書をまとめて皆様に発送するつもりで頑張ってきたのですが、どうしても間に合いません。
こちらの経済情勢は、12月に入って厳しさを増しているようです。新年度国家予算の一律18%カット、大臣の給与も10%カットが発表され、昨日の日経に大きく報道されていたと思いますが、外貨準備高が輸入の3カ月分というボーダーライン間近となっています。国王のクリスマスのお祝いのメッセージでも、「お祝いだからと無駄使いはしないように」と、一言入りました。マハティール首相のメッセージも同様です。彼は、義理の妹さんが亡くなられたこともあって、ここ数日公式行事の場にぱったり姿を見せていません。何もないのであればいいのですが。

正月休み開けには到着するよう、年末年始も作業する予定でいますので、どうぞお楽しみにお待ちください。

会津　泉

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

aisg-newsメニューへもどる

	[ ホーム ]　[ 電子メール]　[ アウト・プット ]　[ 研究会 ]　[ ANR リンク集 ]
Copyright(C) 1998　アジアネットワーク研究所