Fierce Wireless and Motorola are offering a free ebook Broadband Revolution on strategy for Rural Wireless Internet Service Providers.
Contents:
* How Wireless ISPs Play a Vital Role in Bringing Broadband to Underserved Markets
* Thinking Outside of the Traditional Broadband Revenue Model
* Spectrum: The Lifeblood of the National Broadband Plan
* Local WISPs Outmaneuver Telecome Giants
Geoff Huston’s latest Internet Society ISP Column examines the Australian scenario where, in the recent election, the vying parties plumped down on either side of the wired vs wireless question. He concludes that, just like the election, there is no outright winner.
He notes the reality that while wireless IP service often actually costs less to provide, users are prepared to pay more for it, giving providers little incentive to invest in wire. But wireless bandwidth scalability is, ultimately, limited. What’s more its inherent unreliability is TCP hostile. However ubiquitous wireless service would be a lot cheaper to implement: $6B (AUS) vs $43B (AUS) for wired.
He then gets to the big question, which all countries including the USA are having to address, namely how much of the taxpayer’s money is worth expending, and to what effect:
Where should public funds be spent? On a comprehensive revamp of the wired access network, replacing the aged copper pair telephone network with a highly capable fibre optic network? Or on improving access in those areas where the copper pair network simply cannot support high speed access by public investment in wireless infrastructure?
In trying to answer this question, we return to a persistent theme in the area of public communications infrastructure. What’s the role of public capital investment and how is that balanced against the role of private capital investment? Is it possible for private investment to fulfill the entirety of a public agenda? Given that a capable, cost efficient and effective public communications infrastructure that encompasses an entire national constituency is seen as a core deliverable of any national communications policy regime, then how is this best achieved today?
To move back from generalities to the specifics of this broadband investment choice, is it realistic to expect that we have further decades of useful life from an already ageing copper pair infrastructure? As a consequence, should current public investment focus on current gaps in the national infrastructure, using a relatively cost effective approach of plugging these gaps using wireless infrastructure where the copper network is simply inadequate, and leave the remainder of the network in situ, as being adequate for the moment Or should we leave such wireless infrastructure investment to private enterprise, given that this technology is enjoying strong consumer attention and there is a continuing investment in wireless infrastructure by the industry actors. Instead, should a public investment program focus on a longer term national program of replacing the copper loop with a comprehensive fibre optic network? From such a longer term perspective perhaps the NBN is the better approach, as we need to concede that the level of investment required for a national very high speed access infrastructure in a fibre access network is probably well beyond the scope of private capital works investment. So far all that the industry has achieved in this space has been the rewiring of the CBDs in the major cities, while the upgrading of remainder of the network has been effectively ignored. It appears that this is, like many major infrastructure projects in the past, one that properly sits in the realm of a public investment program, in the same way that we’ve made investments in national road, rail and shipping infrastructure in the past.
The Obama administration has announced the recipients of the second round of Broadband Technology Opportunities Program (BTOP) funding. $1.8 billion from the American Recovery and Investment Act will fund broadband expansion in 37 states, including New York and New Jersey.
Local projects receiving funds include:
* White House Press Release
* Complete list of supported projects in current round
[Source: NYConvergence]
The Oppenheimer 2010 Annual Technology, Media & Telecommunications Conference took place August 10-11, 2010 at the Four Seasons Hotel in Boston. A webcast is available of audio of the Fiber Infra Panel (free login required).
The panel included Hunter Newby of Allied Fiber and an extended slideset of his recent ISOC-NY presentation is provided as an adjunct to the audio. Other panelists are Dan Caruso of Zayo, Bill LaPerch of Abovenet,
NiQ Lay of HKBN and Frank Mambuca of US Metrotel.
The FCC has issued its 7th Notice of Inquiry on Broadband.
The 2010 Sixth Broadband Deployment Report defined broadband as “a transmission service that actually enables an end user to download content at speeds of at least 4 megabits per second (Mbps) and to upload content at speeds of at least 1 Mbps ”. Under this definition somewhere between 14 million and 24 million Americans are unserved .
Among other details, the 7th NOI asks:
* Is the current definition of broadband service the correct one?
* Should “broadband” and the statutory term “advanced telecommunications capacity” be treated synonymously?
* How should the Commission interpret the word “available” for purposes of broadband service? Is affordability a component of broadband availability?
* Should broadband data be analyzed on a census tract or county basis?
* Should the Commission’s analysis of broadband availability take into account other ways in which it is available, such as through schools and Wi-Fi hotspots?
Comments are due September 7, 2010, and reply comments on October 5 2010
[Source: CommLawBlog]
The NY Times reports County Executives of America, a national group of elected officials, has proposed a plan to provide free broadband wireless service to more than 400,000 households in the Bronx. The borough was selected along with 11 other counties across the country for the project, a proof of concept for nationwide plan.
The project is to be built by M2Z Networks – a company that was in the news in 2007 when the FCC denied its application for a healthy swath of spectrum (2155-2175MHz) in return for building a nationwide wireless network. The FCC revived the idea in 2008 with an open bidding process, upping the speed from 368kbps to 768kbps and including an – eventually dropped – controversial requirement that content be filtered. Other companies were not in favor of giving any one company such dominance over such a service, and another company NetFreeUS proposed a much more open scenario involving devolution to local providers and a certain amount of spectrum set aside as ‘commons’. With the change of the guard at the FCC the plan stalled but now M2Z have got together with the Counties to try and kickstart it back into action. The only holdup? The FCC has to approve the spectrum deal and the NTIA has to kick in $122m of stimulus funds.
A new study Understanding Broadband Speed Measurements by MIT researchers disputes the FCC’s claim that Internet data rates in the US are only half as high as those advertised to consumers. Methods typically used for measuring Internet data rates, the researchers say, underestimate the speed of the ISP-controlled access network and various other factors – including the location of test servers – can affect data results. The researchers say the government needs better data to establish policy. The MIT Internet Traffic Analysis Study (MITAS) has been presented to both the FCC and the US Federal Trade Commission; the research team will present a portion of its findings in October to the Telecommunications, Policy, and Research Conference in Arlington, Virginia.
* MIT story
* RedOrbit story
NY Times Story Broadband Availability to Expand
Selected quotes:
WASHINGTON — The Obama administration is seeking to nearly double the wireless communications spectrum available for commercial use over the next 10 years, an effort that could greatly enhance the ability of consumers to send and receive video and data with smartphones and other hand-held devices.
President Obama will sign a presidential memorandum on Monday that aims to make available for auction some 500 megahertz of spectrum that is now controlled by the federal government and private companies, administration officials said Sunday.
Specifically, the presidential memorandum will direct the National Telecommunications and Information Administration to identify federally controlled communications bands that can be made available within five years for exclusive or shared use by commercial companies.
Roughly 45 percent of the spectrum to be auctioned would come from federal government agencies that will be asked to give up allocations that they are not using or could share, according to administration officials who spoke on the condition of anonymity so as not to upstage the announcement.
The remainder would come from unused spectrum already scheduled for auction or from broadcasters and other spectrum licensees who would be offered incentives to give up or share parts of their communications airwaves. Currently, the spectrum for wireless communications is about 547 megahertz.
Lawrence H. Summers, the director of the National Economic Council and assistant to the president for economic policy, is expected to detail the broadband effort in a lunchtime speech in Washington to the New America Foundation, a public policy institute
Some spectrum also would be made available for free, unlicensed use by start-up companies and others, administration officials said. Such unlicensed spectrum has previously helped in the development of cordless phones, Wi-Fi and Bluetooth applications.
Harold Feld, legal director of Public Knowledge, a consumer-oriented policy group, said the interest of consumers will be most helped by auctions that help to promote competition between wireless companies rather than entrenching the dominant providers in the market.
As part of the preparation for the National Broadband Plan the Social Science Research Council was asked by the FCC to prepare a report – Broadband Adoption in Low-Income Communities which was issued in March 2010.
Conclusions:
(1) Broadband access is increasingly a prerequisite of social and economic inclusion, and low-income communities know it. Demand for broadband in these communities is consequently growing, even as the economic crisis undermines family and community resources to support Internet use.
(2) Price is only one factor shaping the fragile equilibrium of home broadband adoption, and price pressures go beyond the obvious challenge of high monthly fees. Limited availability, poor quality of service, hardware costs, hidden fees, and billing transparency are major issues for low-income communities.
(3) Libraries and other intermediaries fill the gap between low home adoption and high community demand, and providing Internet access and related support is increasingly part of the core missions of these institutions. Even as home broadband becomes more prevalent, third spaces have a crucial role to play as safety nets for access, and as providers of training and task-based assistance for their communities. Often this helps users gain the skills that lead to confident, sustainable home broadband adoption.
Further notes:
* Of those who have ever had broadband at home, 22% are now un-adopters, mainly due to financial concerns.
* Bad service by ISPs was a constant factor in non-adoption.
* Business increasingly benefits through training and job-seeking activity at community access centers, without bearing the cost.
* Investments in Internet proficiency remain critically important in low-income communities
* Investments in promoting or justifying Internet use to low-adoption communities, in contrast, would appear to be a waste of money.
* There is a continuing need for efficient, resilient ways of accessing essential social services in person, via telephone, and via paper correspondence.
* Social service providers need to re-evaluate eligibility criteria to include Internet access.
* Expensive triple-play plans are an unaffordable luxury that can exacerbate poverty of access.
The report’s appendix includes an exhaustive directory of community access organizations across the nation.
Susan Crawford spoke at the Personal Democracy Forum conference on Jun 4 2010. Her topic “Rethinking Broadband”