ISP Association on the Risks of Brexit, DoH and UK Full Fibre Targets

Andrew Glover, Chair of the UK ISPA, has told ISPreview in a new interview that a no-deal Brexit could harm both the industry’s supply chain and access to a skilled workforce. Glover also warns that DNS over HTTPS (DoH) raises a “host of security concerns” and says “considerable regulatory change” is needed to hit full fibre targets.

The Internet Service Providers Association (ISPA), which was first formed all the way back in 1994, is the industry’s main trade association for providers of broadband, mobile, web hosting and other internet services in the United Kingdom. As part of that it not only promotes constructive collaboration between some 200+ members but also holds them to a code of practice and engages with Government and Ofcom to help shape future policy.

Andrew Glover is the current Chair of the ISPA and was also instrumental in founding both the EuroISPA and the Internet Watch Foundation (IWF). On top of that he runs three smaller ISPs – Bridge Fibre, Air Broadband and Connect Fibre – so has plenty of hands-on experience of both business and residential delivery, as well as infrastructure building.

Suffice to say that we were keen to get Andrew’s opinions on some of the industry’s most pressing challenges and right at the top of our list was everybody’s favourite topic – Brexit. On this Andrew doesn’t mince his words and warns that a no-deal outcome would be a problem for the industry, not least in terms of “maintaining access to a skilled workforce and the impact on supply chains.”

“If Boris Johnson wants to live up to his commitment of rolling out full-fibre broadband nationwide by 2025, then a no-deal Brexit will inevitably make this harder,” said Andrew. Speaking of full fibre (FTTP), Andrew added that the current targets cannot be delivered by the industry alone and require the Government’s “full commitment … [and] considerable regulatory change, to wayleave legislation, fibre taxes and planning laws” etc.

However Brexit isn’t the only contentious area for the ISPA to be dealing with and lately one of their most controversial stances has been toward the rising adoption of DNS-over-HTTPS (DoH), which is a technology that encrypts DNS requests (i.e. turning IP addresses into human readable domain names like ISPreview.co.uk and back again).

Many people across the internet see DoH as a way of reducing their ISPs (and Governments) ability to snoop on and censor (filter) their online activity. On the flip side third-party DoH solutions can also break other systems deployed by ISPs. Suffice to say that the ISPA’s initial decision to label Mozilla an “Internet Villain” for their pro-DoH stance was negatively received by all except a fair few ISPs and politicians (here).

Nevertheless Andrew remains unapologetic. “[The] privacy improvements offered by DoH are often overstated and the protocol presents a whole host of security concerns,” said Andrew. “The UK Internet industry upholds high standards of safety and security and DoH must not subvert this … ISPA are adamant that DoH must not be introduced by default.”

The full interview covers various other subjects and adds more detail to the above topics. See below.

The Interview

1. I’m just going to jump right in at the deep end here and ask, in your understanding, what sort of measures or changes have ISPs had to make as part of preparations for an as yet uncertain agreement around Brexit? In keeping with that, would “no deal” be a bad outcome from the perspective of ISPs?

ANSWER:

Our biggest concerns regarding a no-deal Brexit have always been about maintaining access to a skilled workforce and the impact on supply chains. The Government’s commitment to maintain the rights of EU nationals in the UK even in the event of no-deal are welcomed. But in reality no one really knows what a no-deal Brexit will look like, and it could potentially disrupt this agreement and cause a huge amount of uncertainty.

We want to make sure that there is clarity from Government that our members will continue to have access to high-skilled workers from the EU, and that the rights of existing EU workers in the UK are protected. In addition, there is the potential that a no-deal Brexit which is damaging to the UK economy means that there will be less public funding to commit to big technological infrastructure projects.

If Boris Johnson wants to live up to his commitment of rolling out full-fibre broadband nationwide by 2025, then a no-deal Brexit will inevitably make this harder.

2. Consumer internet provision is a very low margins business and lately we’ve been getting the impression that smaller ISPs are finding it increasingly difficult (i.e. cost and technical challenge) to adapt to some of Ofcom’s new regulations (e.g. the new system of automatic compensation for broadband faults/delays and the latest broadband speed code of practice).

As a result very few smaller providers have joined the regulator’s voluntary schemes. Are you aware of any concerns around those systems from smaller providers and, if so, what do you think needs to change in order to bring them on-board?

ANSWER:

ISPA has a large and broad membership and we see ourselves as having an important role in representing the interests of smaller ISPs when talking to policymakers and regulators. We help smaller members understand compliance requirements by providing initial information and guidance on certain areas but keeping abreast of the increasing demands from Government and regulators is a challenge.

We have long called for a proportionate approach to enforcement and this has led us to the situation today where some rules and regulations tend not to fall on smaller ISPs, this includes data retention obligations and age verification blocking.

Smaller ISPs can struggle to adopt some voluntary or regulatory initiatives as you highlight, with some of the biggest challenges being cost (such as speeds code of practice) and resources. We are working on “best practice” guides in a number of areas that should enable our members to aspire to join these voluntary schemes.

3. At present it’s often still a slow and tricky process for people to switch their telephone number away from a fixed line phone service and on to a VoIP / SIP platform. Indeed sometimes doing this can even result in an active broadband line being ceased.

Going forward the rise in full fibre and broadband-only services is likely to drive a more aggressive shift away from traditional phone services. We’ve heard that Ofcom, the OTA and ISPs are working to come up with a better solution.

Can you tell us how much progress has been made on this and how long we might have to wait before it’s ready?

ANSWER:

We are still in the early stages of this process. People from across the industry have recognised that it will be important to solve this now as we need to make switching across infrastructure as easy possible. The upcoming European Electronic Communications somewhat sets a deadline for this but the complexities of getting switching right shouldn’t be underestimated.

4. The recently approved and highly controversial new EU Copyright Directive, which was supported by the UK Government, looks set to bring about a worrying culture of automated internet content filtering and restrictions upon the sharing of news.

Despite Brexit it looks likely that this or a similar form of the same policy may eventually find its way into UK law. If that happens then what position will the ISPA be taking and how should the UK Gov approach adoption of the arguably more controversial elements?

ANSWER:

Ultimately, UK providers need to comply with UK laws. That doesn’t mean that ISPA is in favour of extending blocking and filtering regimes, but we do need to recognise that the UK Parliament and Government have set the UK on a path that is somewhat different to some other Western Democracies.

We are not the only country going down that route and Germany, for example, has a similar discussion, and we are actively trying to make any attempts to block or filter the internet as proportionate as possible, not just for our members but crucially internet users.

As a minimum, we believe that any such process should be standardised and be founded on Parliamentary approval or a court order. Our members don’t want to be judge and jury and having an independent authority would help to ensure new blocking regimes would be proportionate, subject to legal requirements, follow due process and would avoid situations where ISPs are asked to block websites on a voluntary basis.

Flick over to page 2 for more..