--H0IimWZIeVLTjTRThCC4VFvtG7oIqlIq
Content-type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Please see attached - from the Tech-Nomads Mailing list.
Graz
--H0IimWZIeVLTjTRThCC4VFvtG7oIqlIq
Content-type: message/rfc822
Delivery-Date: Tue, 29 Aug 1995 02:43:09 +0100
X400-Content-Type: P2-1984 (2)
X400-Originator: owner-technomads@UCSD.EDU
Original-Encoded-Information-Types: ia5 text (2)
X400-Recipients: g.a.hoose@ste0418.wins.icl.co.uk
Date: Tue, 29 Aug 1995 02:43:58 +0100
From: Lyno Sullivan <lynosull@maroon.tc.umn.edu>
Message-ID: <81336.lynosull@maroon.tc.umn.edu>
To: technomads@UCSD.EDU
Subject: Community-wide Wireless Networks
X-Minuet-Version: Minuet1.0_Beta_16
X-POPMail-Charset: English
I am trying to figure out the truth about what the FCC is doing about
dedicating frequency spectrum for the use of community-wide wireless
networks. If anyone knows the story I would appreciate hearing it.
I first became aware of the technology potential of community-wide wireless
LANs when I found out about Metricom's Richochet product. The facts about
this technology, as I understand them, are that it operates in the 902-928
Mhz. range at a 100 kbps data rate per client. My quick analysis shows
that it would be possible to deliver such a network, including the
switching costs, for $5 per person per month. My anaylsis further
indicates that the next generation should deliver around 1 Mbps data rate
within about 6 months and that the costs should be about the same $5 per
person per month in about a year. My estimates are that 24 Mhz. (suitable
for video on demand) will be available in about 2 years.
On top of this monthly connect cost, each person must purchase a wireless
modem for about $400. Still, this cost picture is a couple orders of
magnitude less expensive that the current, land based digital network
alternatives. I consider $5 per month for unlimited connectivity, an
e-mail account, and 1MB storage of personal web pages to be affordable by
almost every person.
Armed with my cost analysis, I tried to figure out where we were in terms
of delivering the wireless services. Here is waht I found out. This is my
understanding of the situation. I am angry at the FCC and am getting
prepared to start a letter writing campaign but I want to make sure that I
have a correct understanding of the facts. BTW I am in no way affiliated
with Metricom or Apple Computer in case anyone might start to wonder.
Metricom (a Webcrawler search on "Metricom" finds the pages) created their
technology to operate in the 902-928 Mhz. range. Recently the FCC issues a
ruling that permitted a usage of this band by Location and Monitoring
Service ("LMS") that has the potential for driving out the other users of
the spectrum, including Metricom's technology. There are petitions to the
FCC asking that the ruling be reconsidered. See
http://policy.net/wireless/part-15.html for details. If the FCC does not
reverse its ruling there is a probable outcome that the community-wide
wireless networks will become unusable in this frequency spectrum.
Meanwhile, Apple Computer petitioned the FCC to have the 5150-5300 MHz and
5725-5875 MHz bands reserved for unlicensed wireless data. This would be
suitable for the 24 Mhz. (video on demand) in a 10 mile radius. This is
sufficient for community wide wireless networks. See
http://www.apple.com/documents/fcc.html
Here's where the story gets interesting and where I really need to get my
facts straight. It appears that the Clinton Administration laid the
groundwork for the National Information Infrastructure ("NII") which has
been subsequently gutted by Congress. This does not make sense for me
because I cannot see why a Congress, intent of giving government back to
the grassroots, would undermine a clear effort of the NII to establish
affordable, community-wide networks. It is vital to the future that
community-wide networks be established and managed from a grassroots
perspective. I go so far in my thinking as to believe that the FCC should
grant to local communities the right of emminent domain over several large
bands of frequency spectrum.
I have been told that the real players in this battle are actually the big
telcos and cable companies who want the FCC to stipluate that community
wide networks are forbidden. I can certainly believe this because the
notion of community-wide, unlimited use of interactive video for $5 per
month must make them afraid for their livelihood. However, I believe
(probably naively) that the FCC holds a public trust and that they will
resist the lobbying and will rule in favor of community-wide networks.
Even though I have this belief, once I get the facts, I still plan on
sending a letter to:
Case #RM8653
Secretary, Federal Communications Commission
1919 M Street NW
Washington, DC 20554
I will also contact the Minnesota delegation and ask them to make
sure that the FCC rules in favor of community-wide networks. Any help that
any of you can give me in getting the facts will be greatly appreciated. I
will share what I find out with the group. I would also appreciate any
guidance on other newsgroups where I should post this item.
-- lynosull@maroon.tc.umn.edu Lyno Sullivan--H0IimWZIeVLTjTRThCC4VFvtG7oIqlIq Content-type: message/rfc822
Delivery-Date: Tue, 29 Aug 1995 05:04:45 +0100 X400-Content-Type: P2-1984 (2) X400-Originator: owner-technomads@UCSD.EDU Original-Encoded-Information-Types: ia5 text (2) X400-Recipients: g.a.hoose@ste0418.wins.icl.co.uk Date: Tue, 29 Aug 1995 04:05:38 +0100 From: Michael Sattler <msattler@jungle.com> Message-ID: <v03002e02ac6831a5419c@[204.94.141.8]> To: technomads@UCSD.EDU Subject: Re: Community-wide Wireless Networks Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Sender: Digital Jungle Consulting (in San Francisco, California) X-Pgp-Key-Fingerprint: E4A76B99 - BF569C4F26B3461BAF61AB545002F78E X-Pgp-Public-Keys: http://martigny.ai.mit.edu/~bal/pks-toplev.html
I can only comment on part of your message, that portion having to do Metricom.
About a year ago, I spear-headed an effort to cooperate with Metricom in wiring the Haight-Ashbury district of San Francisco (where I live). I was using a pair of Ricochets to do point to point between the cafe where I write to a modem at home, which was connected to the net. (I haven't tried to hook it to my new ISDN.) In spite of lots of technical heavies, including folks like John Gilmore, Metricom dealt with us in fits and starts. The bottom-line reason is that they aren't interested in selling the modems, nor in other proof-of-concepts, but rather in nickel-and-dimeing users for US$40/month for net access.
Once that was determined, most of us immediately switched to other wireless providers (but that's another story).
In a completely unrelated vein, I'm going on a three-month road trip and I'm looking for the loan of a digital still camera (like an Apple QuickTake 100) and any hand-held GPS (Trimble, Sony Pixis, etc.). Any help would be most appreciated (and will result in a nice paragraph in my next book).
-----------------------------------------------------------------------+ Michael Sattler <msattler@jungle.com> http://www.jungle.com/msattler/ | | I'll be writing my next book on the islands of Ibiza and Gran Canaria | from from 4 Sept to 9 Dec 1995. I'll get and respond to email, albeit | with some lag time. My home page will have an ongoing trip report, | complete with images, sounds, and perhaps movies. Check it out. |
--H0IimWZIeVLTjTRThCC4VFvtG7oIqlIq--