mong the other telecom operators (with better QoS provisioning) to take over the market share (for the given services) from the oper- ator that is sanctioned. Such measures may not be applicable to many operators at the same time because that can degrade the whole telecom/ICT market in the country or limit competition (which is essential for healthy telecom/ICT market development). QoS enforcement mechanisms require expertise in various aspects (i.e. technical, reg- ulatory, and business aspects) in different processes whenever telecom operators report QoS measurements. In developed telecom/ICT markets, the main regulatory approach is a "light-touch" one, which refers to monitoring the QoS and imposing certain recom- mendations, and when QoS degradations are detected and operators are not willing to comply with recommendations, the NRA may move toward stricter obligations when they are important and practical for improving the QoS. As already stated before, the NRA can start from "naming and shaming" strategies and move on to stricter regulation. So, when all other measures do not give the desired effect in improving QoS, the regulator may proceed toward financial penalties, and finally use more drastic legal enforcements (e.g. license withdrawal). In general, in QoS regula- tion, encouragements and enforcements should be graduated and proportional [1], and targeted at the overall benefit of customers and society with better QoS. 9.9 Discussion Common QoS standards are constantly being developed and updated. Typically, such standards can be regional (e.g. the QoS standard from ETSI) [11, 12]) or global (e.g. the QoS standards, guidelines [2], and manuals [1], from the ITU). The main services which are subject to regulation from the QoS point of view are IAS (i.e. data) and carrier-grade VoIP services (i.e. VoIP as a PSTN/ISDN replacement), although SMS (in mobile networks) and TV/IPTV services (in fixed broadband net- works) are also possible target services for QoS monitoring and regulation. At the end of the se