[MLB-WIRELESS] Applications on the melb-wireless network

[Ben Anderson]

>   >> here in australia in sufficient quality or quantity to be of any
>   >> use. we don't even have the capability to lay cable or wire
>   >> resiences like those guys could.
>
> in Wellington (NZ), a bunch of people from the uni got together and
> ran fibre around the CBD using the tram wire poles.  consequently, the
> whole inner city has cheap access to GigE and all the cool things that
> develop from basically unlimited wide-area bandwidth.

I personally think the government should finance wiring cities to provide a
UPN.  Let the telcos concentrate on doing the 'difficult bits' -- like
service provision, as in tv on demand, voice gateways, and access to high
bandwidth international links.
At one stage canada had a grand government plan to lay a massive backbone
across country and basically lay it open for all to use (they overengineered
it something chronic).  I haven't heard of it for ages now, I wonder if it
actually went anywhere...
The telco's stand to make **more profit** this way, not less.  And if they
run the numbers, I'm sure they'll stand back and let someone else worry
about laying cable (price is high, uptake is low, and therefore they don't
get the return on investment that's expected).


>   >> if you read bill gates manifesto, the first one, called "the road
>   >> ahead" way back in 1995, he planned something along the lines of
>   >> low-orbit satellites delivering voice, video and data across a
>   >> wide blanket of 2-way satellite services, entirely roaming and
>   >> mobile.
>
> it's called Teledesic, and is a joint venture between Gates, Craig
> McCaw (of cellular fame), some investors and Boeing.  see
> teledesic.com.

And if it does become ubiquitous, bandwidth pricing will be absolutly
overpriced for any sort of broadband application.  Sure, video conferencing
will work, but only for a hundred people australia wide at once, and
therefore have to cost 500 bucks a minute or something similarly stupid.
(I'm just ripping numbers out my ass here, nothing factual ;)
The limits I set I don't think are all that uneasonable for this sort of
network design though.

>   Ben> If we go guerilla fibre to the desktop, rough calculations
>   Ben> suggest we can install the network at similar cost of a years
>   Ben> cable internet access...
>
> the real issue with all of these schemes is regulatory.
>
> wireless at 2.4GHz falls into a convenient hole right now (especially
> if we don't offer Internet connectivity), but if it takes off at all
> seriously, the telcos will strongarm the government into ensuring that
> their markets are not eroded.

Passing data back and forward for someone else is considered "carriage" of
the data, and requires a carrier licence (from some of the legal info I've
read today)...  Bye bye public access points, bye bye mesh.
Of course, we could all just apply for carrier licences at once, and force
them into examining the regulations...
Or, just go pirate until it reachs critical mass, where the regulations
basically have to change to make it legal, or it just simply becomes
illegal, but effectivly impossible to police or prosecute (effectivly making
it legal ;)


> UWB introduces a possible inflection point for spectrum pricing, but
> you can be sure that those with vested interests will attempt to
> ensure that it is regulated into uselessness too.  they've already got
> a coax network and 3G cellular infrastructure to pay for -- competing
> with "free" bandwidth will fought tooth and nail.

if it's ubiquitous, and the infrastructure works, then they won't have to
compete.... they simply provide services to the network, and they no longer
have to spend big money setting up the network.  Costs go down, income stays
similar, profits go up.  I don't think they'll complain.  Or is there
something I haven't considered?

> i'm keen to play while the going is good, and remain hopeful that
> *something* will pan out giving good bandwidth at reasonable price,
> but i think we need to be realistic ...

Realistic is good for "today"  -- I kind of enjoy having my head in the sky
making cool stuff for tomorrow.  Sure, most of my ideas will never pan out,
but the ones that do just feel so good...
One of the plans I've gotten told to get my head outta my arse for is the
flying access point.  I believe the airspace restrictions stop at 50K feet
above melbourne (still checking this).  Building a weather-balloon (though
shaped like a flying saucer, or a blimp) with directional control, altitude
control (small cylinder of gas and solenoids), power collection and
management, gps for autonomous flying in the sweet zone...  Monitoring the
weather and de-activiating the node in high winds or rain will probably be
an unavoidable necessity though.  Though it'd be cool to be able to get
melbourne wide access from a single access point, even if that means the
average bandwidth per user is low...  Another consideration is the 802.11a
stuff, with good line of sight (no fresnel zones to worry about, etc) pretty
reasonable sized antennas should make 54Mbit access reasonable.  And
multiple devices (up to 13) for 13 independant 54mbit channels... 702Mbits.
That could probably scale to 2000 users with very good access, perhaps 5000
with acceptable, and nearly 13,000 with 56k+ access (though average use
would dictate the number could probably scale to about 5 or 6 times this,
and more if we could put up with congestion during peak times)

the 400dollar odd cards should hold masses back from this unless we're able
to tunnel 'net access over it cheap/free.

Would you like to comment on feasability issues you see with the balloon
idea?

Ben.


--
To unsubscribe, send mail to minordomo at wireless.org.au with a subject of 'unsubscribe melbwireless'  
Archive at: http://www.wireless.org.au/cgi-bin/minorweb.pl?A=LIST&L=melbwireless
IRC at: au.austnet.org #melb-wireless