We're all familiar with international roaming aren't we? When we travel abroad and step off the plane, our mobile phone begins a frantic search for a network to camp onto.

The airports are strewn with posters encouraging users to manually configure their phone so that it will select a particular operator. This roaming has been the killer application for GSM networks, and it's no coincidence that this was developed initially in Europe.

So what then is national roaming and why is it needed?

National roaming is applicable in two main scenarios. Firstly where there's a part of the country where one operator is not in a position or doesn't have the resources or business model to cover as yet.

In this case, the operator can enter into a strategic alliance with another operator to provide coverage to its subscribers in this area. The second, and more common, application is where a new network operator is issued a license for 3G, but they do not have a GSM network in that country.

For example, a new network operator wants to give their customers national coverage even where they don't have any equipment or coverage and an existing operator opens up areas of its network to subscribers from the other operator.

It's relatively easy for each network to implement this solution, since the model is the same as for international roaming, except it is domestic. In addition all the 3G devices on the market are dual mode, working with GSM also but the business case must exist for both operators to see this as a win-win scenario, and this is usually accompanied by a gentle nudge from the regulator.

Where does this apply in Malaysia? Let's consider the case of MiTV and Time. Both of them have recently been awarded 3G licenses by the regulator (MCMC) but they do not have any GSM network infrastructure.

It's going to take them quite some time for them to roll out their 3G networks across the whole country, during which time they'll need to earn back revenues by having subscribers on the network.

If they start this roll out in Klang Valley and Johor, for example, what happens when a subscriber is outside their coverage area? Can they make or receive calls? Who do they call if there is a problem?

Well there needs to be some network to connect to, so they will likely need an agreement with Maxis, Digi or Celcom to use their infrastructure.

Naturally as a mobile subscriber, we expect to get the benefits of full coverage nationally and global roaming.

So, MiTV recently signed a memorandum of understanding to do this with Celcom, which for the end user means that even though MiTV may have limited infrastructure implemented initially, subscribers can use their mobile device anywhere there's Celcom coverage in Malaysia.
Of course, to comply with the regulatory terms of their license they will likely eventually roll out a network of their own nationally, perhaps with some site and infrastructure sharing thus this agreement may only be short term.

The customer should expect to be offered a seamless package in terms of pricing and service availability. To ensure this, the two operators will need a comprehensive agreement between them that addresses all of these areas.

As examples, how are voice and data services covered? For data, is the user able to connect to their home portfolio of services transparently? Connectivity for MMS and Internet access may not be so difficult to implement but other more complex value-added services such as VPN access to corporate networks also needs to be addressed.

It may also be the case that the new player will have to subsidise service costs in the case of roaming, since internally they may be paying their national roaming partner more for the service than they wish to pass on to their users.

There are a myriad of other technical and business issues to be ironed out that inevitably, as in any new relationship, will result in some teething troubles, particularly in the early days of the relationship.

This national roaming concept for 3G may be a new model for Malaysia; however it is ongoing with varying degrees of success in other parts of the world. Perhaps the biggest example of national roaming is that of Hutchison 3G, marketed globally under the brand name�. Hutchison are a relatively new international player in the telecoms arena, and hence have little to no GSM presence outside of its native Hong Kong., yet they are a major international player in 3G, holding licences in 11 countries.

Therefore they have had to work with existing national providers to provide service across the entire country. In the UK, for example, use Orange as their GSM roaming partner since the beginning of this year, having made a switch from O2 after  auctioned the national roaming contract.have recently also announced a new service called. Like Home which abolishes roaming charges between networks in any country.

How far should the role of the regulator go? In some countries, the regulator has required that national roaming should be supported, as is the case here in Malaysia. Other countries have not enforced it but rather left it up to market demand.

In the past, National Roaming in Malaysia has been recommended to support shared coverage in either new or rapidly growing areas or for highway coverage.Regardless, the regulator generally does not dictate the financial terms of such agreements, so it's up to the operators themselves to arrive at an agreeable price point for such services. This should work reasonably well for domestic markets, where competition keeps the cost manageable.

However, it does not offer us much to relieve the still high international roaming charges. This would require more collaboration regionally and internationally between regulators to prevent users ending up with hugely excessive international roaming charges. Then, there's the case of the Mobile Virtual Network Operator (MVNO) who needs to piggyback on to a current provider, where