ecom operators be motivated to provide services with satisfactory QoS at prices that reflect the service provisioning costs? Would it be possible that certain NRA interventions would make QoS worse for customers? If not, the next question is, what kind of applied policies interventions can be beneficial for higher QoS? In general, different countries may approach such issues in different ways, for different reasons (does the broadband infrastructure need to be built or does it already exist, current national and regional broadband targets, etc.). Simply put, there is no single best way to approach QoS regulation. One possibility is to impose own QoS standards. However, such cases should be sup- ported by market forces that should be sufficient to ensure appropriate QoS. So, impos- ing QoS standards is directly connected to the degree of competition in the ICT/telecom market. Thus there are different approaches for QoS regulation between countries with levelopedICT/telecom markets and those countries whose markets are developing. The main characteristic in regard to QoS in countries with developing markets is the level of competition and diversity of organization of the market. These questions (regarding QoS regulation) are relevant to both traditional networks and IP-based networks. In general, the scope of QoS regulation in all countries worldwide includes the following [2]: to help ICT/telecom providers' customers to make informed choices; to check claims by telecom operators; to understand the state of the ICT/telecom market; to maintain or improve QoS in presence of competition; to maintain or improve QoS in absence of competition; to help telecom operators to achieve fair competition; to make interconnected networks work well together for end-to-end QoS provisioning. What are the final results of QoS regulation? Well, the result is having better QoS for targeted services, either mass or critical services (e.g. different QoS targets may be imposed for different types of services, such as open Internet access 