COMM570/802.11/Notes

From Driscollwiki

Jump to: navigation, search

Contents

TODO

Benkler, Y. (2002). Some Economics of Wireless Communications. Harvard Journal of Law & Technology 16(25). http://jolt.law.harvard.edu/articles/pdf/v16/16HarvJLTech025.pdf Alessandro Ovi Water lillies Sandvig, C. (2003). Assessing cooperative action in 802.11 networks, presented to the 31st Telecommunication Policy Research Conference, Washington D.C. Lehr, W. & McKnight, L. (2003). "Wireless internet access: 3G vs. Wifi?". Telecommunications Policy, 27(5-6), 351-370. Bar F., J. Richards, Sandvig The jeffersonian syndrom Bar, Riis (2002) Tapping User Driven Innov The Info Society Bar Sandvig (2000) Rules from Truth might be a PDF online Cherry, S. M. (2002). What went wrong at Ricochet? IEEE Spectrum, 39(3), 60-61. O'Neil, D. (2002). Assessing community informatics: A review of methodological approachs for evaluating community networks and community technology centers. Internet Research, 12(1), 76-102.

  • PicoPeer.net
  • Global Internet Service (see Sabor y Cultura)


Intro

"The dream of wireless networks bathing U.S. cities in free and pervasive internet access has come to an end, at least for now." (Gardiner, 2007)

Meta-analysis

Intentionally broad scope: commercial, non-commercial, semi-commercial, and anti-commercial actvities.

Conclusion

  • Ubiquitous network access achieved in many parts of the U.S. for consumers who can afford device and subscription costs.
  • Municipal projects did not occur as expected
  • WISP opportunities left to be explored
  • New opportunities emerge with the widespread implementation of 802.11 in non-obvious devices (mp3 players, portable gaming, low-cost mobile phones, etc.)
  • New questions to address regarding services with limited economies of scale

Assumptions:

  • Desired outcome is assumed to be always-on
    • Open wi-fi networks, once discovered, "who cares where it comes from? i want to check my email!" (Sandvig, 2002)
    • This is effectively achieved now through combo of 3G mobile and cordless ethernet-style wi-fi
  • But 3G/ Wi-fi dual experience has disentangled certain services from networks
  • "Wi-fi" implies internet access -- but it might be access to another kind of network service, communication to a single other machine.
    • By removing the always-on Internet access assumption, we eliminate major cost without eliminating all possible services

Bracket

  • U.S.-centric analysis, there are projects in India and China, etc.
  • Primarily urban and suburban, less discussion of rural

Metaphors

  • Blanket
  • Bathing (Stirland, 2007)
  • Water lily (Alessandro Ovi)
  • Islands (SYM, 2004)
  • Archipelago (Bar & Galperin)
  • Ocean
  • Flowers blossoming (B&G)

802.11

802.11abgn

"Ubiquitous" mobile access from two directions:(Bar & Galperin, 2004)

  • Top-down via corporate systems GSM, EDGE, EVDO, 3G
    • Licensed
  • Bottom-up via consumer systems 802.11 "wi-fi"
    • Unlicensed
    • Primarily used to extend the reach of a broadband subscription
    • Given enough density could self-managed networks peer and replace broadband?

In 2004, Bar & Galperin speculate about the future of Wi-fi. We can now answer one of their primary questions:

  • In most cases, neither grassroots nor municipal wi-fi provide a replacement for home broadband service (DSL or cable) but may exist as a "convenient complement" (Bar & Galperin, 2004, 46)
  • The critical juncture in which an "ocean" of wi-fi might compete with 3G is over
    • This doesn't discount approaching competition from WiMax or "White Space" wireless technologies on newly freed spectrum

What constitutes a "Wi-Fi system"? (Sandvig, 2004, 584)

  • Network discovery
  • Authentication may not be very important)
  • Provision of network connection

Wi-fi continues to be succesful for the reasons cited in (Bar & Galperin, 2004, 53)

  • High speed, low cost
  • Industry-wide standardization
  • Uses unlicensed spectrum

Wi-fi in use

3 broad uses outlined by (Bar & Galperin, 2004)

  • Network externalities, wi-fi at home, cafe, work, etc. drives up value of owning devices that interoperate using 802.11 wireless

Note: Emphasize the blurry spaces that have arisen

  • Cordless home ethernet that is also hotspot
  • Cordless biz ethernet that is also a hotspot
  • How might we carry this forward?

"Cordless extension of wired internet" (Bar & Galperin, 2004, 48)

Much less expensive than wiring up a building (Sandvig, 2002)

Comparison to the cordless telephone (apt because of the Part 15 unlicensed spectrum allocation)

  • Evident in design of consumer products: Airport, Wireless routers (Linksys), and all-in-one AP/router/cable modems
  • Enabled development of many devices beyond general-purpose computers, e.g. printer, TV, media player, home automation, weather/traffic devices, Chumby, etc.
  • Security of less concern among isolate home users, somewhat more in densely settled areas (apartment bldgs), significantly more on college/corporate campuses

"Mesh" (Bar & Galperin, 2004, 48)

  • Lots of tech hurdles
  • No tech diff between AP and clients: transceivers
  • Car-based mesh is possible

"Public hotspots" (Bar & Galperin, 2004, 48)

  • "Connectivity as a service to passing users" (48)
  • Not cordless because internet access was not previously available in these spaces
  • Originally envision in cafes, bookstores, transit terminals
    • Also internet cafe, LAN house
    • Not all private, also libraries, public parks, highway rest stops
    • Also in places where people are asked not to linger: McDonalds (15-30min max)
    • Now found in transit: on subways (MBTA), airplanes (AirTran, JetBlue, Virgin America), trains (Amtrak Acela), buses (Bolt, Greyhound, Megabus, Chinatown)

Hotspots provision has changed somewhat since 2004:

  • Public agencies - city government
  • Grassroots co-operatives
    • Not-for-profit, providing free access
    • In 2004, not much evidence of usage beyond members, has this changed? TODO
  • Large commercial providers, sometimes linked to bigger telecomm (T-Mobile, AT&T)
    • Some uncertainty in 2004 because they didn't want to compete with 3G
    • The availability of 3G cards (Sprint, Verizon) and tethering suggests that they opted to keep people on the (slower) 3G network than engage in multiple arrangements with wi-fi providers
  • Others by smaller commercial arrangements: WISPs (to be discussed in detail later)
    • Two-sided platform, entice people with free internet to purchase another service/product (coffee, books, hotel room) (55)
    • Surf n Sip, Wayport
  • "Consolidators" seem to have died off -- iPass, Boingo, GRIC, NetNearU
    • Starbucks ditched T-Mobile
  • Individually owned+operated
    • e.g., a cafe gets broadband for its business needs and provides a router for its customers
    • Halfway between cordless/ hotspot; not exactly grassroots
    • Might be violating their TOS
    • Especially important in cafes and other commercial spaces in which customers have come to expect internet
  • Note: backlash
    • Blue Note doesn't have wi-fi, signs in Stories saying they reserve the right to turn it off, Coffee Table: no wi-fi on the weekends

Blurry space provided by an open AP in an dense area

  • Effectively a hotspot for neighbors
  • When voluntary, it's generosity but also violation of contract
    • Sandvig compares to telephone party lines (2002)
    • Bleecker documents using the ESSID as a thin channel for communication (TODO cite)
  • WISPs operated now primarily "small entrepeneurs" (Sandvig, 2007, 10)

Economic factors

  • Vertical integration
  • Bundling
  • Devices guide uses:
    • Easy-to-use all-in-one integrated cable modem, router, wifi
    • 802.11 in many devices
  • WISPs


Path dependence

"The accumulation of sunk investments steers evolution along one trajectory over time and thus forecloses others" (Bar & Galperin, 2004, 50)

  • In 2004, significant investment in 3G wireless data via mobile telephone providers
    • Wi-fi considered a short-range connection
    • They never became competitors though one could imagine VoIP over wi-fi

Learning effects (Rosenberg, 1982)

Network externalities (Katz & Shapiro, 1985)

  • Investment (commercial + non-commercial) in hardware and software limited by numbers of users

Lock-in effects (Arthur, 1989)

  • Long-term contracts with telecomm + broadband providers
    • Bundling with TV, home telephone, video-on-demand
  • Note that many new entrants to the market advertise no contracts (Clear WiMax, pay as you go 3G)
    • Cafe/Library internet is inherently no contract

Tech

See wi-fi timeline: http://wifinetnews.com/archives/001315.html

  • Unlicensed radio operation via wireless internet devices implementing IEEE 802.11 "wi-fi" (Sandvig, Young, & Meinrath, 2004, 1)
    • Nearly all laptops include 802.11 equipment
    • All major operating systems include wi-fi internet support to some extent
    • Many mobile phones
    • Increasing numbers of other consumer electronics: music players, portable gaming devices, GPS maps, tablets, palmtops personal organizers, etc.
  • "Interface secrecy" (Sandvig, Young, & Meinrath, 2004, 1)
  • Possibility for user-driven voluntary mesh networking
    • Slowed because of manufacturers who won't cooperate and share "information about the control interfaces" (Sandvig, Young, & Meinrath, 2004, 1)
  • Many hundreds of wi-fi products but nearly all of them used one of two chipsets (SYM, 10)
    • Highly competitive from a market perspective, but nearly identical in a technical sense
    • No documentation available (SYM, 11)
    • Except for gear that was old, no longer sold (SYM, 14) Is this an opportunity?

Spectrum

Proliferation of devices produces a "variegated new spectrum topography of low-powered consumer devices" (Sandvig, 2007)

  • Unlicensed spectrum seems like a pathway forward because it is unregulated, "consonant with the neoliberal enthusiasm for deregulation" (Sandvig, 2007, 1)
  • Large media+comm corporations already own significant swaths of spectrum
    • And are the only ones able to bid for licenses to newly freed spectrum

Enlarging the unlicensed space is tricky for regulators

  • They exist to support licensing, this undermines their authority
  • At the same time, they stand to bear the brunt of criticism for rising noise, interference, abuse (Sandvig, 2007, 1-2)
  • Sandvig finds that the use of unlicensed spectrum is predictable according to Rogers diffusion of innovations supported by a model they developed
    • This model uses sampling of electromagnetic spectrum rather than self-reported survey data, known to be unreliable

In 1985, spectrum was freed up as an experiment

  • The frequencies were chosen because of poor penetration
    • Used for cordless phones, garage door openers, RC toys, etc.
  • Wi-fi or IEEE 802.11 fits into this space
  • In 2002, Wi-fi was used as proof that deregulated spectrum promoted innovation, competition, and benefits for users

Power limits

  • Regulatory power, located in the manufacturing of devices (Sandvig, 2007, 5)
  • Limits the amount of noise, interference to a (hopefully) tolerable level
  • Part 15 wi-fi devices are limited in range
    • But this limit might be overcome through mutually beneficial mesh networking, advanced routing (Sandvig 2007 cites Benkler 1998, 2002)

Commercial interests are stymied by interference and power limits

  • "no company would invest in a system that was so "high-risk"" (Sandvig, 2007, 5)

Mesh

  • Goals "alternative to" nearly all existing telecomm including AM/FM/VHF/UHF (SYM, 6)
    • Neighbor-to-neighbor "roofnets" (SYM, 8)
  • Tech challenges are "compartmentalized" and thus appropriate for FOSS developement (SYM, 7 referring to Weber)
    • "Ad hoc" routing protocols
  • User-driven innovation around community/co-op mesh slowed by "interface secrecy" (Sandvig, Young, & Meinrath, 2004, 1)
  • Unlikely to be built by commercial interests
  • Islands, Centralized, Meshed, Dynamic (SYM, 6)
    • Meshed w static routing is typical municipal arrangement deployed by commercial groups (SYM, 6)
    • Weakness of static routing, difficult to maintain

Ad hoc Routing

  • CUWiN was dissatisfied with Ad Hock On-Demand Vector routing (AODV) because of known scaling issues (SYM, 8)
    • Decided to try implementing the Hazy-Sighted Link State (HSLS)

User innovation

  • Rather than simply buy-in or not, User dissatisfaction can manifest in re-shaping the development of new tech (Sandvig, Young, & Meinrath, 2004, 2)
    • Can be driven by frustration (see: CUWiN)
  • "Users are an important source of new technological innovation (Von Hippel, 1995)" (SYM, 2004, 2)
    • TODO who is Von Hippel
  • User driven innovation esp. crucial in networks built on programmable components like PCs, SDR
  • CUWiN could afford to purchase but not necessarily modify (SYM, 9)
  • "the openness required for innovation is at odds with the mechanism of spectrum regulation and the culture of manufacturers" (SYM, 17)

Infrastructure

  • Roads, telephone, etc. seem to require monopoly power granted by govt
  • But historically, infrastructure has also been provided by coops, amateurs, hobbyists (Sandvig, 2004, 580)
    • Tendency to innovate in "early stages" but not long-term alternatives
    • Predicting the slow-down of hobbyist mesh?

"Learning by doing" (Bar & Galperin, 2004)

  • Users develop greater expertise than producers

DIY / Hacks

Warchalking

  • As documented in (Sandvig, 2004)
  • Created a community of expertise, engagement
  • Not so much a useful / used directory

Software development

  • OpenWRT FOSS firmware for routers with 802.11 radio
    • Nathan True's Mobile Access Point (3G GPRS + OpenWRT)
  • NoCat, NoCatAuth, NoCatSplash
    • Authentication for WISPs
    • NoCat originates in a Sonoma County wi-fi coop

Bleecker projects:

Exploits

Homebrew WISP

Motivation?

Social benefits + entrepreneurship accompany UI

  • User innovations of the kind imagined by CUWiN might spawn new commercial projects, firms, enable new municipal tech, improve/correct market failure (SYM 18)

"Social informatics" tradition suggests that co-ops may survive/exist beyond initial experimentation stages:

  • "strong" democracy
  • social capital
  • individual empowerment
  • sense of community
  • opportunity for economic development
  • See also: O'Neil, 2002

Despite altruistic exhortations, the practical "blanketing" provided by 3G + WISPs took the wind out the sails

  • Perhaps the motivation came from individual desire first + foremost, providing service to "the rich" as (Sandvig, 2004) puts it
  • "these co-ops were not particularly sensitive to public-interest concerns in practice, although in their stated goals they often claimed to be" (Sandvig, 2004, 597)

Policy

"New technologies, however innovative, do not emerge in an open legal environment" (Bar & Galperin, 51)

  • Part 15, unlicensed spectrum
    • Initiated by FCC in 1985, opening up the "Industrial, Scientific, and Medical" (ISM) bands
  • Spectrum auctions
    • Esp ~700MHz bands "freed" by digital TV

(Sandvig, Young, & Meinrath, 2004, 1) argue that regulators should shift attention to manufacturers of equipment because a voluntary mesh network is effectively "ownerless"

  • They didn't make this shift -- what effect did this have on the possibility for ownerless networks?
  • "50 years of wireline interface regulation" suggests that FCC should be able to compel radio manufacturers to open the interfaces to their SDR gear (SYM, 21)

"Typically, regulatory regimes evolve much more slowly than technology" (Bar & Galperin, 51)

  • In the time it takes for a regulatory change to occur, the window of a "critical juncture" might open AND close.

Terms of service prohibit (and may penalize) sharing among broadband customers

  • In France, policy intended to protect the interests of copyright-holders makes operators of wireless equipment liable for the activities of users connected -- essentially requiring that all operators lockdown their APs with passwords (TODO cite)
  • Contrast to TLGnet
  • Which broadband ISPs (if any) permit sharing (TODO cite)

Looking forward, Sandvig finds that policy action regarding spectrum is not based on empirical data regarding use (2007)


Universal service

  • Policy tool for correcting failure of private marketplace to provide service to needy populations (SYM, 2004, 3)
  • Might also be understood as policy that diversifies the user population, providing potential for future innovations (SYM, 2004, 3) -- citing (Bar & Riis, 2000)

Biz

Hardware

  • Lots of wi-fi products, few distinctions under the hood
  • Reluctance to share information with hackers despite no rational reason (SYM 14-17)
  • "Culture of secrecy" among manufacturers leading to a "culture of fear" among hackers, FOSS devs (SYM, 16)

WISPs

Becoming a WISP

Municipal

Digital divide

"Like water and heat, internet is a clear necessity in the modern world, opening doors to education, employment and engagement." (Stirland, 2007)

Special needs of students

  • Profs expect students to have access to email (Stirland, 2007)

Jupiter research, 2005

Some of the key findings of this Jupiter Research report are as follows:
  • Government effectiveness and efficiency are the top priorities and justifications for build out.
  • Governments must work with commercial entities to share the costs and risks of municipal networks. Such partnerships offer ISP’s stable anchor tenants, lowered build
out costs, and customer acquisition opportunities, while governments gain a new way to improve business operations, offer City amenities, and improve public safety.
  • Building, running, and maintaining a citywide or countywide network to support a large number of users is complex. Although city and county authorities have departments of information technology, they are not resourced as commercial service providers and do not have the necessary institutional knowledge to take on this role.
  • Municipal networks face substantial operational and technological hurdles going forward - this will lead to a variety of failures. Jupiter cites some of these hurdles as: setting pricing, estimating benefits, unproven scalability, and technology change.
(2006b, 3)

Co-ops

  • In 2003, 52 groups in 6 countries (Sandvig, 2004, 584)

Non-commercial ISPs

UUNET started as a non-profit:

Bay Area Wireless Users Group

NYC Wireless

Special note about Amateur Radio

  • Amateurs may operate at higher power on 2.4 GHz but they are bound by Part 71 requirements
    • Identify ones station regularly
    • No commercial activity (fuzzy)
  • ARRL assembled in 1914 to coordinate radio amateurs across the U.S.
    • Enabled technically a coast-to-coast communications network
    • Also established a shared discourse, created spaces for dialogue, produced an entity to represent the needs of radio hobbyists
  • No such organization exists for personal computer users, never might wi-fi
  • Amateurs have built large-scale digital packet-radio communication (PSK)
    • "Hinternet" controversial see: open letter

Costs

  • Initial network build-out
    • "wireless grid can grow without large capital outlays" (Bar & Galperin, 2004, 63)
  • Maintenance
  • Upgrades
  • Customer service
  • Leasing public property
  • Modifying public property (light poles)
  • Leasing private property

Selected stakeholders and projects from 2000-2010

Industry, non-profit groups

Consume

  • Profiled in Sandvig, 2004
  • Essentially desire to build an alternate network
    • Individual/voluntary build-out in places where most people already have an internet connection, low need/demand

MIT Roofnet

Champaign-Urbana Community Wireless Network (CUWiN)

  • Same off the shelf (ots) components used on "rooftops" (SYM, 2004, 4)
  • Motivated by user frustration (ibid)


Bay Area Research Wireless Network (BARWN)

  • Požar leading

SoCal Free Net

Zerodivide

ZeroDivide increases technology adoption among underserved communities by providing financial support, capacity building and technical assistance to nonprofit organizations that benefit low-income, minority, immigrant, non-English speaking, LGBT, seniors, and disability communities.


PublicNet SF

  • Bruce Wolfe, member
  • http://public.freemuni.net/
  • No activity since 2007
  • Concerned about a "give away" to private industry (Google, Earthlink)
    • Believed that the network should be publicly build + owned + operated

Community Technology Foundation of California (CTFC)

  • Westside Project
"We had a specific interest in funding community wireless projects because we saw wireless technology as a much cheaper technology that would provide access in communities where people couldn't afford their own DSL or cable connections," says Laura Efurd, chief community investment officer at CTFC." (Stirland, 2007)

Personal Broadband Industry Association (PBIA)

Bay Area Wireless User Group

SFLAN

Internet Archive

NYC Wireless

Personal Telco Project

Seattle Wireless

Wireless Communications Alliance

Founded in 1993, the Wireless Communications Alliance (aka "WCA") is a Silicon Valley-based, non-profit corporation dedicated to providing opportunities for education, connection, and community in the wireless industry. The WCA accomplishes these goals by hosting seminars/panels; providing networking opportunities; encouraging and supporting start-ups and entrepreneurs; and helping to build and maintain bridges between business and academia. WCA audience consists of nearly 4,000 professionals including entrepreneurs, leadership of major corporations, researchers, business and government leaders. The WCA accomplishes these goals via a team of volunteer professionals who lend their expertise to produce world-class events relevant to current trends in the industry. These volunteers are in turn led and empowered to success by an all-volunteer Board of Directors.


"A Northern California Initiative for Wireless Connectivity"


Cities, Neighborhoods

  • 415 U.S. cities and counties building or planning to build municipal Wi-Fi networks (Kharif, 2007)
    • Jump from 247 in mid-2006
    • Number came from Esme Vos of MuniWireless.com

Cerritos, CA

  • No broadband
  • Muni plan to partner with Aiirmesh ISP to provide municipal wireless
    • Announced in 2003 San Jose Mercury news
  • TODO still running?

Mountain View

Criticism: http://www.saschameinrath.com/node/489

Seattle

Laguna Beach

Los Angeles

  • Villaraigosa's goal: 498 sq mi of LA wireless by 2009
  • "increase in the odd sort of public, shared alienation already on display in cafes everywhere" (Hawthorne, 2007)
  • borders of City of LA are porous and not recognized in everyday life, this would make them more sense-able (Hawthorne, 2007)

Tony Cardenas

  • City councilman
  • Champion of the wireless project

Link roundup from announcement:

Pershing Square
  • Community Redevelopment Agency
  • Free online service
  • "Electronic version of the public-safety and trash-collection crews that patrol parts of downtown ... more about image than access" (Hawthorne, 2007)
Little Tokyo

Cleveland

Minneapolis

City:

  • 58.4 sq mi
  • 385,378 ppl
  • Census via WP: "Annual Estimates of the Resident Population for Incorporated Places over 100,000, Ranked by July 1, 2009 Population: April 1, 2000 to July 1, 2009 (SUB-EST2009-01)" (XLS). United States Census Bureau, Population Division. September 2010. http://www.census.gov/popest/cities/tables/SUB-EST2009-01.xls. Retrieved October 15, 2010.

Existing orgs:

"The reason it works is the business model, with the city providing some money up front and being the anchor tenant," said Beth Cousins, interim chief information officer for the city of Minneapolis. "No other city the size of Minneapolis -- 59 square miles -- has a network like this. It's huge. USI Wireless is a trailblazer." (Alexander & Brandt, 2010)

History of this project:

  • Started thinking about it in 2004, http://www.minneapolismn.gov/wirelessminneapolis/nextsteps.asp
  • 90 vendors expressed interest, 9 submitted proposals, 2 selected as finalists
    • USI selected after eval of construction approach + service delivery
  • August 28, 2006 Request to approve 10 year contract with USI
    • Explicity goal: "bridging the digital divide", "universal access", plans for developing "relevant content" and "innovative applications" that "support the work of community based organizations focused on promoting equity" ("Request for City Council Committee Action", 2006)

Public/Private Partnership model

"Wireless Minneapolis":

City Relationship

  • First city to "compel business to provide a service to everyone" (2006)
    • "public-private partnership"
  • $12.5m 10-year contract with City of M.
    • 2.2m in advance (to be spread across ten years), minimum 1.25m annually (less the 2.2) (2006), unused capacity is paid forward
    • 2 five year renewals
    • City as "anchor tenant"

Tech (see: Beck, 2006)

  • "Turnkey wireless broadband IP data access network"
  • Minimum 1-3 M/s in all sq mi
    • 95% outdoor coverage with "no prejudice to demographic area"
    • 90% indoor coverage per SLA
    • 99.9% uptime wi-fi, 99.99% uptime fixed wireless, excepting power outages + maintenance
  • 4.9Ghz for public safety
  • USIW to upgrade within 5 years if feasible (802.11e, n, r, s)
  • USIW will arrange for completion of city-owned fiber
  • Free service to parks + plazas
  • Net-neutrality requirement except for "maximizing the speed and efficiency ... and for the purpose of providing the highest standard of services to the largest number of customers"
  • Implement 911 prioritization

Non-tech requirements (Beck, 2006)

  • USIW 24x7 customer support (in English, Spanish, Hmong, Somali)
  • USIW provides wholesale offering to competitive providers, Layer 2 access
  • Contribute $500k upfront to Digital Inclusion Fund + 5% of net pretax income
  • 90 community sites
  • Mandated pricing:
    • Res: 19.95$ + taxes + fees for 1 Mb/s
    • Biz: 29.95$ + t/f
    • City: 12.00$ 1Mb/s
  • USIW agrees to "escalation limitations on prices for City services other than guaranteed 1 Mg"

Usage

  • Problem: 1/3 of the city depts don't use the network (Alexander & Brandt, 2010)
    • Difficult to justify continued expense.
  • Public works uses it to sync up 35 street signs and 30 sec cams (Alexander & Brandt, 2010)
  • Plans for fire/police, wi-fi parking meters, tracking garbage/salt/sand trucks for data analysis (A & B)
  • 2011 plan to upgrade fire + police + public safety to Wi-fi, 225k$ ($800-1k per vehicle) (A & B)
  • City spends $1.25m/year. Currently not hitting that but looking for services to fill it up.
  • It was used as part of the emergency relief effort in 2007 when the I-35W bridge collapse
  • Civic Garden, "walled garden", http://www.wirelessminneapolis.org/
"This year the city will use only about 6 percent of the $1.25 million worth of the network capacity it's paying for, said David Roth, project manager in the city's information technology department. The city projects its Wi-Fi usage will grow to $175,000 next year, or 14 percent of its bill." (Alexander & Brandt, 2010)

Non-city relationship

  • $1.2m annual profit (Alexander & Brandt, 2010)
  • 20k customers (Alexander & Brandt, 2010)
"That success compares to San Francisco, which had to fend for itself amid political squabbling after EarthLink dropped out of the Wi-Fi business three years ago. Philadelphia, also an EarthLink client, skimped on its network, so few customers signed up. Chicago decided that it couldn't afford one." (Alexander & Brandt, 2010)

Public benefit

  • Free access to 44 community centers (Alexander & Brandt, 2010)
  • Pays into a fund that supports "digital divide" services, courses, tech in libraries (Alexander & Brandt, 2010)
  • Orgs that provide free computer access to the public can apply for free "Wireless Community" accounts
  • Certain places around the city offer no-cost full-access

Subscription model

  • Differentiated based on speed and payment plan
  • (Fasted speed / longest-term payment: 22$/mo)

Public comment

  • Roughly 50/50 split on comments
  • Some people angry about perceived wasteful spending, govt intervention in mktplc
  • Others happy with service
  • Service out during storms
  • Some anticipate Clearwire / WiMax as being faster, not "costing taxpayers"
  • Customers happy to support local business, strong emphasis that they are pleased with local customer service (by phone and irl)
Civic Garden

Houston

  • Earthlink
  • Mayor Bill White hoped it would bridge digital divide and help raise education
  • "May cost as much as $21.95 per month (with possible discounts for low-income residents)" (Hawthorne, 2007)

Gwinette County, GA

  • No biters in Oct 2006
  • County offered 750,000$ as anchor tenant and got 2 bids (Kharif, 2007)


Lompoc, CA

  • 11.3 sq mi network build in Sept 2006
  • 42000 population
    • Needs 4000 paying customers to cover costs
    • 442 users by July 2007 (Kharif, 2007)
  • City is absorbing the cost "for several years" because it's a "public good" (Kharif, 2007)

Ashland, Oregon

  • Referred to in (Požar & Holub, 2005)
  • Using city/co-op model
  • Did it survive?

San Francisco

  • Dead as of 2007 (Gardiner, 2007)
  • SF declined to become an anchor tenant (Gardiner, 2007)
  • Was supposed to be Google / Earthlink (Stirland, 2007)
  • Supposed to be advertising based
What happened to the wireless initiative and proposed public private partnership with Earthlink? A tentative agreement with EarthLink was signed by the Mayor in January 2007, and by the Public Utilities Commission and Planning Department in April 2007, but the proposal ultimately was withdrawn in August 2007 after EarthLink underwent a corporate reorganization and informed the City that it no longer had an interest in building the network under the terms of the original agreement. EarthLink has not participated in further discussions with the City, and the company's CEO, Rolla Huff, has stated publicly that the company will construct no new municipal networks without a substantial financial contribution from the municipality." -- http://sfgov3.org/index.aspx?page=1440

Tech Connect

Comments

(Požar & Holub, 2005)

Emphasis on public benefits

  • Digital divide
    • 4% of the City had no broadband option
  • Limited opportunity for new entrants to the marketplace
  • Increasing competition (two broadband providers)
  • Correcting asymmetrical connections (Comcast was 1.5Mbps down/ 128Kbps up)
    • Challenges with VoIP, gaming, etc.

Vision

  • City provides fiber backbone (Physical Layer 1)
    • Gov't management like another utility
    • Infrastructure == underground fiber (lit/dark)
  • City encourages public/private use
    • Non-profit, co-op management
    • Competitive ISPs running on (Data Link Layer 2)
    • Infrastructure: switches/hardware/software interconnecting nets
  • Volunteer co-op resells access (Network ISO-OSI Layer 3)
    • IP, VPNs, etc.
    • Various municipal services run here

City already has to dig for other tasks

  • Why not add fiber while they're down there?
Earthlink wireless plan SF
  • Agreement written up 5 Jan 2007; Amended 19 April 2007
  • Earthlink "design, construct, install, test, operate, maintain, and upgrade ... at its sole cost" (11)
  • Much attention to not interfering with the appearance of SF, e.g. "inconspicuous" backhaul equip (10)
  • Non-exclusive agreement: City can hire other entities to work on the network (10)

Earthlink to pay

  • 5% of Gross Access Revenue for Right-of-Way (ROW fee)
    • Prepayment of $600,000 (non-refundable)
  • Earthlink must report annual revenue from advertising via basic, non-subscription service
  • Earthlink obligated to keep upgrading the tech

Network management

  • Net neutrality clause 9.2 (21)
  • Earthlink required to offer wholesale access on "nondiscriminatory terms and conditions" (21)
    • Required to give written notice to the City about these

Customer service

  • 24x7x365 Tier 1+2 service
  • Telephone / email support in English, Spanish

Network Services

  • May provide Premium Services in addition to Basic (1 Mbps)
  • Earthlink will enable "roaming"
  • Capture Portal will present users with options to purchase other services

Basic Service:

  • Minimum average symmetric throuput of 300 kbps "(best effort)" (26)
  • To be upgraded in the future

Premium Service:

  • Subscription
  • Occasional Use

"City Hyperlinks"

  • Up to 6 hyperlinks for "announcements, community notices, and municipal purposes" (28)
  • Available to users that have not logged in or signed up for an Access Service

Digital inclusion

  • Basic service of minimum 1 Mbps
    • $12.95/mo.
    • 3,200

Future products

  • "Fixed wireless", 3 Mbps point-to-point

Disaster Planning

  • 11.10 (29) but no details


Westside Wi-Fi Project
  • Wireless in SF's Western Addition neighborhood
  • Funded by Community Technology Foundation of California
    • $50,000 from CTFC and $45,000 from City of SF (Stirland, 2007)
  • "a sophisticated mesh network of Wi-Fi access points fed by a pair of 6-Mbps DSL lines and a 4-Mbps cable connection" (Stirland, 2007)
  • Radios are located in private apartments, not city utility poles
    • Custom firmware ? TODO
    • Can be moved to a new location with out manual reconfig
  • Refurbished machines are available for people without one (Stirland, 2007)
  • 8 residents installed repeaters in their apartments

Michael McCarthy

  • nonprofit wireless consultant
  • Bought 10 wi-fi repeaters for $924, Meraki donated 15 more
  • "he spends much of his day troubleshooting problems, and he can tell from a central control panel which residents have left their repeaters unplugged. McCarthy hopes to use a portion of the grant money to train teens at the housing projects to be paid tech-support staff earning $9 an hour." (Stirland, 2007)

Tim Požar cites problems with noise

  • Suggests low-income communities best served by fiber roll-out (Stirland, 2007)

Today?


Chicago

Why did they drop wi-fi plans?

  • WiMax?

Dead as of 2007 (Gardiner, 2007)

  • Both Earthlink + AT&T asked to be anchor tenants (Gardiner, 2007b)
  • Declined to be an anchor tenant (2007b)

"Chicago, one of the most recent cities to curtail its citywide Wi-Fi project, was unable to eke out a viable business plan with either AT&T or troubled internet service provider Earthlink." (Gardiner, 2007)

Chicago declined to become an anchor tenant (Gardiner, 2007)

"Chicago became the first big city to abandon its plans for a city-wide network." (2007b)

Tempe

"America's biggest network" (2007b)

  • Aiming for 32,000 subscribers, ended up with 600 in April 2006

St. Louis

Dead as of 2007 (Gardiner, 2007)

Corpus Christi, TX

  • Anchor tenant paying $200,000
  • 146 sq mi network
  • City built out 6-7m$ worth of network and sold it to Earthlink for 5.5b$ -- TODO wha happen?
  • City uses network to "collect data on gas and water usage, saving on labor costs" (Kharif, 2007)

Portland

  • Started out no anchor
    • In 2007, MetroFi pushed for anchor tenancy
    • Network was only 20% complete (mostly downtown) (Kharif, 2007)
  • Anchor tenant

Pomona

Philadelphia

  • Earthlink
  • Announced in 2004

Anaheim

Milwaukee

  • Delayed the plan in 2007 (Kharif, 2007)


Long Beach

  • Free wi-fi in downtown, airport, and convention center (Bar & Galperin, 58)

Oakland

New Orleans

  • Earthlink built a wi-fi system for public safety that interacts with the existing licensed radio network?
    • Two transmitters in one box (2007b)


St. Louis Park

Tried solar power, didn't work out

Riverside, CA

  • AT&T and started on July 9, 2007 (Kharif, 2007)
    • 3 sq mi Wi-Fi
    • But was getting cold feet within 2 months (Kharif, 2007)
  • USI Wireless took over an existing muni network (Alexander & Brandt, 2010)

New York City

Companies

  • "When companies like MetroFi and Earthlink started bidding for contracts in 2004, they often agreed to some spectacularly generous terms." (Gardiner, 2007)

Trustive

Boingo

  • Incentivize customers to "federate" existing APs

iPass

  • Incentivize customers to "federate" existing APs

Wayport

Surf and Sip

T-Mobile

LocustWorld

  • MeshBox, turnkey mesh

4G

  • MeshCube, turnkey mesh

Ubiquiti Networks

Spectrum Bridge

  • Florida
  • White space "blanket" (2010e)


Starbucks

Starbucks Digital Network (2010c)

2008, switched from T-Mobile to AT&T (2010c)

  • Tried to do local news in 2001 w Microsoft but it never panned out (2010c)
"Giving such surfers free content with enticements to purchase subscriptions and media items could turn into a constant drip of incremental revenue." (2010c)

Meraki Networks

  • Based in Mountain View
  • Founded by MIT grad students
  • http://meraki.net/
  • Goal is to provide for "next billion people"
  • "Meraki's relatively low-cost wireless solution is designed to be a self-organizing, and self-sustaining turnkey system for people who are not technologists." (Stirland, 2007)
  • Google is a financial backer (Stirland, 2007)

Repeaters

  • Coordinate channel selection
  • Self-organizing, routing
  • "Dynamically reconfigure" (Stirland, 2007)

SF giveaway

  • March, 2007
  • Did this happen?


Metricom

  • Craig Settles
  • Ricochet network filed for bankruptcy in 2001
  • Settles: "[Metricom] tried to sell to consumers a service they perceived as too slow and too expensive, while ignoring the business community." (Gardiner, 2007)
  • Settles: "Consumers are a weak play for muni wireless -- they're expensive to get, and more expensive to keep." (Gardiner, 2007)
  • Defunct by 2002, see: Cherry, S. M. (2002). What went wrong at Ricochet? IEEE Spectrum, 39(3), 60-61.

MetroFi

Earthlink

  • Was part of Chicago and San Francisco plans (Gardiner, 2007)
  • Head of municipal networking, Don Berryman, laid off in 2007 (Gardiner, 2007; Gardiner, 2007c)
  • New CEO Rolla Huff promised to delay/halt/scale back muni Wi-Fi on July 26, 2007 (Kharif, 2007)

AT&T

  • Bid on Chicago plan at some point (Gardiner, 2007)
  • Asked for city to be anchor tenant (2007b)
  • Wireless provider for all-free service at McDonald's and Starbucks

USI Wireless

Tetherless Access Ltd. (DEFUNCT)

"Dewayne was formerly co-founder and CEO of Tetherless Access Ltd., one of the first companies to develop and deploy Part 15 unlicensed wireless metropolitan area data networks using TCP/IP protocols. He has participated in the installation of such networks throughout the world, including Kenya, Tonga, Mexico, Canada and Mongolia." -- http://cyberlaw.stanford.edu/spectrum/speakers/
Tetherless Access Limited Tel. 408-523-8000 Fax:408-523-8001

Towerstream

"Towerstream signed on to use Ruckus Wireless wireless equipment this fall, and is building out a 200-access-point, outdoor Wi-Fi network in New York City, with repeaters and antennas on key buildings around the Big Apple." (Singel, 2010)

General takeaways?

Gardiner, 2007:

  • Wi-fi tech inadequate?
    • Short range
    • "most networks deployed in the past several years have required between 20 and 100 percent more access points than budgeted, according to journalist Glenn Fleishman who publishes Wi-Fi Net News." (Gardiner, 2007)
  • Demand too low
    • "Although cities and telecoms expected 10-25 percent of an area's population to sign up for muni Wi-Fi, what they got, in many cases, was closer to 1 or 2 percent, Fleishman says." (Gardiner, 2007)
    • "15% to 30% of an area's population was expected to sign up for muni Wi-Fi. But only 1% to 2% have signed up so far figures Glenn Fleishman, editor of an industry blog called Wifinetnews.com." (Kharif, 2007)

Advertising + Subscription = Paradox (SF + Earthlink + Google)

  • Higher subscription revenue attracts fewer eyeballs, lower advertising revenue
  • Lower subscription revenue attracts more eyeballs, higher advertising revenue

Pricing

  • Muni wifi drives down price of private networks (Kharif, 2007)
  • Customers get a better deal from bundles

2007, Reality bites:

  • "mounting costs, poor coverage and weak demand"


"“It was poor design decisions,” says Arthur Giftakis, VP of engineering for Towerstream, a wireless provider that serves New York City businesses using line-of-sight antennas on skyscrapers like the Empire State and MetLife buildings. Municipalities chronically underestimate the number of antennas needed and overestimate how far signals travel. They also depend on thin connections to the internet backbone, according to Giftakis." (Singel, 2010)
  • Local investment is key:
    • Valuable to customers, users
    • Less likely to run away (Earthlink)
  • Large companies unlikely to provide universal access without government incentive
    • Presently enjoying monopoly advantages without government regulation
    • Contrast cable network with telephone network
  • FCC seems unlikely to recategorize cable as Title II
    • Don't hold your breath

Other examples

Farallon Islands

50km wireless from SF to Farallon Islands

  • Tim Pozar, Matt Peterson

TODO Cite the ppt from TP's site?

"Stakeholders"

  • Point Reyes Bird Observatory
  • U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
  • California Academy of Sciences
  • City of San Francisco
  • Internet Archive

Tech challenges

  • Affordable
  • Resistant to elements
  • Reliable, easy to fix
  • Low power (only 100w in the lighthouse)
  • Limited space to mount antenna
  • Internet transit donated from Internet Archive
  • Have to use unlicensed band despite noise because licensed gear is "limited, expensive, [requires] coordination"

Resources

  • Non-intrusive sniffing: KisMAC, netstumbler
  • 365 staffing
  • VHF marine radio voice
  • iDEN (Nextel) data
  • "legacy" 2.4 GHz 802.11b (not usually working)
  • Radio Mobile, free, http://www.cplus.org/rmw/english1.html

Bandwidth upgrade needed

  • Generating a lot of data
    • Tends to be on paper, hoping to move to digital
  • Hoping to set up webcam 1 Mbps

More links:

Next steps

Commercial

Small biz WISPs

BroadNet CLEAR

Trains, planes, buses, etc., places where ppl are captive

Tikona Digital Networks, India

  • 30,000 Ruckus mesh antennas in Bombay, Kolkata, Hyderabad (Singel, 2010)
  • http://www.tikona.in/
  • TODO bracket off region

Working model, +/-

Public/Private

Criticism:

""Why, whenever we want to create a new public service, or build out infrastructure, must we give it away to the large external corporate arena, or privatize it through franchise agreements?" asks Bruce Wolfe, a member of the wireless advocacy group PublicNet SF." (Stirland, 2007)

Anchor tenant

Anchor tenancy was the plan from the get in cities that are working: Minneapolis, Portland

  • In 2006/7, Earthlink, AT&T, MetroFi started asking cities to become anchor tenants - changing the terms of earlier agreements (2007b)
  • Cities don't seem to know what to do with muni wi-fi
    • Minneapolis for public safety
    • Others talk about wi-fi parking meters, inspectors with hand-helds, etc but they underestimate the cost of deploying these, training, upgrading existing infra

Limited locations

Services

Biggest weakness of previous muni efforts: no planned services.

Coffee News

Non-profit, non-comm, co-op

DIY

On Rick Adams and UUNET: "He gave the net "dial tone."" http://linuxdevcenter.com/pub/a/linux/2000/05/09/lessons.html

Wireless Minneapolis, "Civic Garden", http://www.wirelessminneapolis.org/

WISPs 

small

Wifi BBS

  • StatusNet

Models:

  • Ham repeater
  • BBS
  • Fidonet
  • USENET / UUCP

Tech

WiMax

C-block "Open Access"

unlike the other swathes of the 700-megahertz spectrum being made available when the television networks switch to all-digital broadcasting next February, the C-block carries with it special “open access” provisions. Carriers using the C-block of frequencies will have to open up their networks so users can buy phones and services from whomever they choose. -- http://www.economist.com/node/10927854

(2008b)



White space

New unlicensed spectrum (2010e)

  • 54 MHz to 700 Mhz
    • Freed up by analog-digital conversion
    • Note: 700-850Mhz was auctioned for 19.6b$ in March 2008 (9.4b$ VZN, 6.6b$ ATT) (2008)
  • Microsoft "White-Fi" (2010e)
  • "Third pipe" to challenge broadband + mobile (2008)
  • Much farther propagation than 850Mhz(cell), 2.4GHz (802.11bgn)
  • FCC motivation: inspire wave of innovation

Tech challenges

  • Interference w TV and wireless mics (2010e)
    • Mics to be limited to two channels
  • Need dynamic routing, adjustment
  • Solution: geolocation w/ central servers; or detect nearby transmitters
    • Sensing/detecting no longer required (Sept 23 FCC meeting)
    • Privacy issues involved with these devices (Google, MS building the DBs)
  • Doesn't overcome the issues of capacity in dense areas but might be helpful in less dense + rural zones?

Critics

  • Television "lost" this spectrum
  • Data is more easily surveilled

Cisco

Aruba

Ruckus

How could this make the part 16 routers we have now break?

"Ruckus is after bigger and more lucrative game: public Wi-Fi networks that actually work." (Singel, 2010)
  • Used by PCCW, 802.11n
  • Allen Wong imagines wi-fi as a "complement to 3G"
  • 3G: low bandwidth, long reach; 802.11n: high bandwidth, short reach

Conclusion

Success of 3G/Wifi can be deceptive

  • Many locations still offline (rural)
  • Even in blanketed places, many people still offline
  • Security issues, Firesheep, lack of literacies
  • Market is growing less competitive

To counter-act these effects

  • Explore services, arrangements that do not rely on DSL/Cable providers
  • Public/private and co-op partnerships in rural areas?

References

(2006). "Request for City Council Committee Action". City of Minneapolis, August 28. Retrieved from: http://www.ci.minneapolis.mn.us/council/2006-meetings/20060901/Docs/BroadbandWirelessInitiative_CR.pdf

(2006b). "Municipal Broadband Initiative: Business Case". Wireless Minneapolis. Retrieved from: http://www.usiwireless.com/pdf/Wireless-Minneapolis-Business-Case.pdf

(2007). "Amended Wireless Broadband Internet Access Network Agreement Between the City and County of San Francisco and Earthlink, Inc.". Retrieved from: http://sfgov3.org/ftp/uploadedfiles/dtis/tech_connect/process/FinalAmendedNetworkAgreement.pdf

(2007b). "Municipal Wi-Fi: Reality bites." The Economist, August 30. Retrieved from: http://www.economist.com/node/9726651?story_id=9726651

(2008). "Wireless at warp speed". The Economist, November 7. Retrieved from: http://www.economist.com/node/12581204

(2008b). "Going, going, gone". The Economist, March 28. Retrieved from: http://www.economist.com/node/10927854

(2010). "Wireless Minneapolis". Official Web Site of the City of Minneapolis, Minnesota, May 19. Retrieved from: http://www.minneapolismn.gov/wirelessminneapolis/

(2010b). "Frequently Asked Questions". City & County of San Francisco Department of Technology. Retrieved from: http://sfgov3.org/index.aspx?page=1440

(2010c). "A new revenue drip for Starbucks". The Economist, October 20th. Retrieved from: http://www.economist.com/blogs/babbage/2010/10/coffee_and_wi-fi

(2010d). "Designed to Connect, Inform and Entertain, the Starbucks Digital Network, in partnership with Yahoo!, Debuts at Starbucks". Starbucks Newsroom, October 20. Retrieved from: http://news.starbucks.com/article_display.cfm?article_id=450

(2010e). "The Difference Engine: Bigger than Wi-Fi". The Economist, September 23. Retrieved from: http://www.economist.com/blogs/babbage/2010/09/white-space_wireless

Alexander, S. and Brandt, S. (2010). "Minneapolis moves ahead with wireless". Star Tribune, December 5. Retrieved from: http://www.startribune.com/business/111286134.html?page=1&c=y

Bar, F. and Galperin, H. (2004). "Building the Wireless Internet Infrastructure: From Cordless Ethernet Archipelagos to Wireless Grids". Communications & Strategies, 54, 2nd quarter, pp. 45.

Beck, B. (2006). "Re: Wireless Broadband IP Data Access Network-Term Sheet". Memorandum to City Council, August 24. Retrieved from: http://www.ci.minneapolis.mn.us/council/2006-meetings/20060901/Docs/WirelessBroadbandTermSheet.pdf

Gardiner, B. (2007). "What's Behind the Epidemic of Municipal Wi-Fi Failures?". Wired.com, September 4. Retrieved from: http://www.wired.com/techbiz/it/news/2007/09/muni_wifi#seealso9560adf566d28a7d7f049717014c862d

Gardiner, B. (2007b). "Chicago: The Latest Muni Wi-Fi Casualty". Wired.com, August 30. Retrieved from: http://www.wired.com/epicenter/2007/08/chicago-the-lat/

Gardiner, B. (2007c). "With Berryman Out, Is Earthlink's San Francisco Municipal Wi-Fi Project Officially Done?". Wired.com, August 29. Retrieved from: http://www.wired.com/epicenter/2007/08/with-berryman-o/

Hawthorne, C. (2007). "Blanketing the city in Wi-Fi could prove to be a disconnect, leaving the poor and public spirit behind." LA Times, March 11. Retrieved from: http://public.freemuni.net/sf-news/a-wireless-l.a.-but-with-strings-attached

Jupiter Research. (2005). "Municipal Wireless: Partner to Spread Risks and Costs While Maximizing Benefit Opportunities". Jupiter Research, June 14. Retrieved from: http://www.ci.minneapolis.mn.us/council/2006-meetings/20060224/docs/Jupiter_Municipal_Wireless.pdf

Kharif, O. (2007). "Why Wi-Fi Networks Are Floundering". Bloomberg Businessweek, August 15. Retrieved from: http://www.businessweek.com/technology/content/aug2007/tc20070814_929868.htm

Požar, T. and Holub, D. S. (2005). "Comments to the County and City of San Francisco's Request for Information and Comment". San Francisco TechConnect - Community Wireless Broadband Initiative, August 16. Retrieved from:

Sandvig, C. (2002). "Disorderly Infrastructure: Wi-Fi in the Shadow of the Rural Telecom Co-op". Remarks as prepared for: Structures of Living and Working, at: "Casting a Wider Net: Integrating Research and Policy on the Social Impacts of the Internet", Oxford Internet Institute, Oxford University, United Kingdom, September 27.

Sandvig, C. (2004). "An initial assessment of cooperative action in Wi-Fi networking". Telecommunications Policy, 28, 579-602. doi:10:1016/j.telpol.2004.05.006

Sandvig, C., Young, D., and Meinrath, S. (2004). "Hidden Interfaces to "Ownerless" Networks". Presented to the 32nd Conference on Communication, Information, and Internet Policy, Washington, DC, USA, September 2004. Retrieved from: TODO

Sandvig, C. (2007). "Bad Neighborhoods of the Electromagnetic Spectrum: A Method for Predicting the Deployment of Unlicensed Devices". Submitted to the 35th Research Conference on Communication, Information, and Internet Policy, Arlington, Virginia, USA, August.

Singel, R. (2010). "Ruckus Smart Antennas May Be Key to Nationwide Wi-Fi". Wired.com, Dec. 1. Retrieved from: http://www.wired.com/epicenter/2010/12/ruckus-wifi-3g/

Stirland, S. L. (2007). "Muni Wi-Fi Powers Hope at San Francisco Housing Project". Wired.com, April 4. Retrieved from: http://www.wired.com/politics/onlinerights/news/2007/04/wifiproject_0403

True, N. (2005). "The Mobile Wi-Fi Access Point". http://devices.natetrue.com/mobileap/

True, N. (2005). "Wi-viz: Wireless Network Visualization". http://devices.natetrue.com/wiviz/

O'Reilly, T. (2000). "Lessons from the Layoffs at Linuxcare". Linuxdeccenter.com, May 9. Retrieved from: http://linuxdevcenter.com/pub/a/linux/2000/05/09/lessons.html

Jump offs

News + updates

Directories

Consultants


To read

  • "Social constructivist history of the internet": Abbate, J. (1999). Inventing the Internet. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
  • Bardini, T. (2000). Bootstrapping: Douglas Engelbart, Coevolution, and the Origins of Personal Computing. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
  • David, P. (2001). The evolving accidental information super-highway. Oxford review of Economic Policy 17: 159-187.
  • Von Hippel, E. (1995). The Sources of Innovation. New York: Oxford University Press.
  • Williams, S. (2002). Free as in Freedom: Richard Stallman's Crusade for Free Software. Sebastopol, CA: O'Reilly.
  • Nall, D. A. (1993). Cable Television Subscriber Equipment: Lessons from the Common Carrier Experience. Federal Communications Law Journal 46(1).
  • Flickenger, R. (2003). Building wireless community networks (2nd ed). Sebastopol, CA: O'Reilly.
  • Joerges, B. (1988). "Large technical systems: Concepts and issues", in R. Mayntz and T. P. Hughes (eds.), The development of large technical systems, Boulder: Westview Press, pp. 9-36.
  • Douglas, S. (1987). Inventing American broadcasting, 1899-1922. Baltimore: John Hopkins Press.
  • Fischer, C. S. (1987). The Revolution in Rural Telephony, 1900-1920. Journal of Social History, 21(fall), 5-26.
  • Fischer, C. S. (1987). Technology's Retreat: The Decline of Rural Telephony, 1920-1940. Social Science History, 11(fall), 295-327.
  • Fischer, C. (1992). America calling: A social history of the telephone to 1940. Berkeley: University of California Press.
  • Hampton (2010) The social life of wireless urban spaces. J o C
  • Hazlett, T. (1998). Assigning property rights to radio spectrum users: Why did FCC license auctions take 67 years? in Journal of Law and Economics, 41(2), 529-575.
  • Johnston, J. & Snider, J. H. (2003). Breaking the chains: Unlicensed spectrum as a last-mile broadband solution. Spectrum Series Working Paper #7, New America Foundation.
  • Lipartito, K. (1989). The bell system and regional business: The telephone in the South, 1877-1920. Baltimore: John Hopkins Press.
  • McChesney, R. (1993). Telecommunications, mass media, and democracy: The battle for the control of U.S. broadcasting, 1928-1935. New York: Oxford University Press.
  • Werbach, K. (2002). Open spectrum: The new wireless paradigm. Spectrum Series Working Paper #6, New America Foundation.
  • Peha, J. M. (1998). Spectrum Management Policy Options. IEEE Communications Surveys 1(1): 1-8.
  • Peha, J. M. (2000). The Path Toward Efficient Coexistence in Unlicensed Spectrum. Contributed to The IEEE 802.16 WirelessHUMAN Study GRoup (802.16hc-00/03). http://www.ieee802.org/16/human/contrib/80216hc-00_03.pdf
  • Peha, J. M. (2005). Approaches to Spectrum Sharing. IEEE Communications Magazine 43(2). http://www.comsoc.org/ci1/Public/2005/Feb/cireg.html
  • Pool, I. de Sola. (1983). Technologies of freedom. Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press.
  • Lehr, W. The Economic Case for Dedicated Unlicensed Spectrum Below 3 GHz. Paper presented to the New America Foundation Conference on Unlicensed Spectrum. Washington, D.C., USA. http://itc.mit.edu/itel/docs/2004/wlehr_unlicensed_doc.pdf
  • Benkler, Y. (1998). Overcoming Agoraphobia: Building the Commons of the Digitally Networked Environment. Harvard Journal of Law and Technology, 287.
  • Streeter, T. (1996). Selling the air: A critique of the policy of commercial broadcasting in the United States. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
  • Straubhaar, J. LaPastina, A., Lentz, B., Main, S., & Taylor, J. (2000). Structuring Access: The Role of Public Access Centers in the "Digital Divide" (Report of the Telecommunications and Information Policy Institue). Austin, TX: The University of Texas.
  • Hampton, K. N. (1999, 2000, 2003) Netville
  • Harrison, T.M. & Stephen, T. (1999). Researching and Creating Community Networks. In S. Jones (Ed.), Doing Internet Research: Critical Issues and Methods for Examining the Next (pp. 221-241). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
  • Kling, R. & Iacono, C.S. (1995). Computerization Movements and the Mobilization of Support for Computerization. In S. L. Star (Ed.), Ecologies of Knowledge: Work and Politics in Science and Technology (pp. 119-153). Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.

Dead sites

Retrieved from "http://www.kevindriscoll.org/wiki/COMM570/802.11/Notes"
Personal tools