how-to block ads
|
Uniqs:
917 |
Share Topic
 |
 |
|
|
GardenerPremium
join:2006-10-19
Burnaby, BC Reviews:
 ·TELUS
| Free the Last Mile What we need is an independent last-mile service. Separate the delivery from the content. A consumer would rent (or purchase) the last-mile service to their premises, and then have the providers of their choice feed phone, tv, whatever down the line. We would not be held hostage by wire-owners.
Remember that government plan to provide high-speed conncections to every home in Canada? Of course it didn't happen, but the idea is not without merit. | |
|   root9
join:2005-04-08
Kitchener, ON
2 edits | Re: Free the Last Mile Not a bad idea Gardener
Few things:
1- last mile is already owned by Bell and Rogers which they won't give up in any way.
2- if this would fly prices would be astronomical from wire-owners
3- new wire, setup and admin costs major. Once it's in and running properly it's close to free
The only way to circumvent this is to start high speed WIFI similar to cell tower service. Secure the crap out of it to make sure Rogers or Bell can't use it or brake it.
Also develop multi band high speed WIFI connections direct from backbone fiber for this use.
Even today users can build they own local WIFI. They can also link up to other WIFI bases and create their own network. Kind of like poor man's Internet. This can be built up to some pretty good high speeds and VPN. | |
| |  wifi4milezBig Russ, 1918 to 2008. Rest in Peace
join:2004-08-07
New York, NY | Re: Free the Last Mile said by root9:Not a bad idea Gardener Few things: 1- last mile is already owned by Bell and Rogers which they won't give up in any way. 2- if this would fly prices would be astronomical from wire-owners 3- new wire, setup and admin costs major. Once it's in and running properly it's close to free The only way to circumvent this is to start high speed WIFI similar to cell tower service. Secure the crap out of it to make sure Rogers or Bell can't use it or brake it. Also develop multi band high speed WIFI connections direct from backbone fiber for this use. Even today users can build they own local WIFI. They can also link up to other WIFI bases and create their own network. Kind of like poor man's Internet. This can be built up to some pretty good high speeds and VPN. That will/would never work. It has been shown over and over again that wifi is not a viable solution other than within a home, or in a very small (ie. hotspot) outdoor area. Your idea isnt bad however, so if you replace the word "Wifi" with "Wimax" you are on the right track. Wimax, especially the mobile flavor, is very well suited to be a last mile replacement. Given that Teksavvy already has a decent amount of infrastructure built, they might (QUICKLY) want to look at purchasing roof rights so they can be a true ISP without relying on Bell if things go south for them.
--
с новым годом | |
| | | | | Re: Free the Last Mile I have to disagree with you. Right now it is up to the last mile WiFi providers and indie providers to get service to the rural community and customers who want to use the service the way they want. WiMax is a licensed spectrum owned mostly by Bell and Rogers, let alone the millions of dollars required to deploy. You will still be in the exact same situation.....regulated by Bell.
Where is your proof that WiFi is not a viable option. I run a WiFi network with almost 30 towers covering 800 square miles successfully for 2.5 years. Let alone the 1000s of other providers doing it as well throughout North America. Also where does Teksavvy have their infrastucture? Bell owns all the copper to the house as well as all DSLAMs, at lease in Ontario.
Bell in my area has promised that they will soon be brings DSL to me. That was 5 years ago. They also stated that WiMax will be deployed 1 year ago....still nothing. Bell is a company that makes Billion of dollars a year that cannot manage their company or resources and that is why the Teachers Pension Fund is buying them. They are tired of every year loosing money before of poor performance. | |
| | | | wifi4milezBig Russ, 1918 to 2008. Rest in Peace
join:2004-08-07
New York, NY | Re: Free the Last Mile said by pcard:I have to disagree with you. Right now it is up to the last mile WiFi providers and indie providers to get service to the rural community and customers who want to use the service the way they want. WiMax is a licensed spectrum owned mostly by Bell and Rogers, let alone the millions of dollars required to deploy. You will still be in the exact same situation.....regulated by Bell. Well first of all, Wimax is a technology, NOT a licensed spectrum. Furthermore, it can used anywhere in the 2GHz to 66Ghz range, licensed OR unlicensed.
said by pcard:Where is your proof that WiFi is not a viable option. I run a WiFi network with almost 30 towers covering 800 square miles successfully for 2.5 years. Let alone the 1000s of other providers doing it as well throughout North America. Also where does Teksavvy have their infrastucture? Bell owns all the copper to the house as well as all DSLAMs, at lease in Ontario. Wifi has proved over and over to be unacceptable on a large scale. 9 out of 10 municipal or large scale wifi operations went dark before ever being completed due to issues. The biggest issue is that the 2.4GHz frequency that wifi operates on has horrendous penetration of foliage and buildings, and is affected by everything from garage doors to microwave ovens.
I would assume that your network is in a very rural area, and thus isnt as impacted by consumer electronics. Wifi can work "OK" in very rural areas with little interference, but thats exactly where Wimax is meant to shine. Wimax is designed to cover areas measured in miles, where as Wifi is meant to cover areas measured in feet. I am not knocking what you have done, I am just pointing out that wifi wasnt meant to do that, while wimax was from day 1. Right now it would be expensive for you to upgrade your network to wimax, but that is changing. I would suspect that within 2 years you will be able to operate a far more efficient network using wimax for at least a portion of it, thus saving you more money and offering a better service to your customers.
--
с новым годом | |
|
| | | |
If it is considered that it is in the national interest to have competitive, low-cost internet access for schools, residences, small businesses, non-for-profits, charitables, etc... (leave the big businesses outta this cause they already get sweetheart deals) then simply nationalize the last mile.
Give the last mile assets to an new company called the Customer Communications Corp. (CCC) and tell Bell & Rogers to piss-off as we the people are just reclaiming all our subsidies all at once.
CCC will be run as a not-for-profit, ie. a regulated utility with a regulated return on assets, and as a non-for-profit they are required by law to spend 90-95%+ per year of their income on operations. That means building out the network and replacing copper with fiber-to-the-house.
CCC would not care who wanted to provide services - each provider could connect to the last mile if they paid the regulated access fee.
CCC charges each ISP, telco, content provider a set fee for the content they deliver to each customer - maybe it's the same flat fee for each upstream company (Sympatico, BellGlobeMedia, Rogers/Shaw as agent for specialty TV channels, CBC, Teksavvy, et. al.), or maybe the fee is tiered like VoIP is the least expensive, 'data' (e-mail, surfing, torrents) are another fee, and 'traditional' video/tv is highest priced.
CCC could make a lot of money just recycling the copper these days.
CCC charges each consumer directly, or more likely the CCC fee is itemized on the monthly bill from Rogers or Sympatico or Teksavvy -- this is an important point to have this fee listed separately to make it all transparent to consumers.
Maybe the CCC is broken down into CCC Ontario, CCC Quebec, CCC Manitoba, etc... with the books being audited annually by the Federal & Provincial auditor-general for each province to set the rate of return by province based on the infrastructure build-out in each province annually, or some other impartial means of setting the rate of return -- don't think I'd let the CRTC touch it.
In this regard it's more like an oil or gas pipeline where any producer or consumer can buy capacity.
Let the Peer1's, Bell's, Shaw's, Rogers, Telus, et. al. slug it out at the wholesale level for corporate business, and if Teksavvy can deliver TV content to me cheaper than Rogers or Bell well that's fine with me, and if Telus has a better deal on VoIP I'll get that from them over my $5/month fiber into my house. Who knows - Rogers might even come up with an internet access plan I would buy into (nah, never'll happen). | |
| | | | wifi4milezBig Russ, 1918 to 2008. Rest in Peace
join:2004-08-07
New York, NY | Re: Free the Last Mile said by Maynard G Krebs :
If it is considered that it is in the national interest to have competitive, low-cost internet access for schools, residences, small businesses, non-for-profits, charitables, etc... (leave the big businesses outta this cause they already get sweetheart deals) then simply nationalize the last mile. The only problem with that "Utopian dream" is that there is no longer any competition, and therefore no diversity. While it may sound good on the surface (for those inclined towards socialism at least!). At least half, if not 75%, of business demand carrier and network diversity as a rule of day to day business. Think about financial companies, medical institutions, schools even! None of them can afford to have a "single point of failure" when it comes to internet access and telecom. By consolidating all connections to one government run nightmare, you are guaranteeing market failures on a wide scale. Its truly a doomsday scenario, and most people dont grasp that concept.
--
с новым годом | |
|
|  SnickerdoPremium
join:2001-02-28
Niagara Falls, ON | said by root9:Not a bad idea Gardener Few things: 1- last mile is already owned by Bell and Rogers which they won't give up in any way. 2- if this would fly prices would be astronomical from wire-owners 3- new wire, setup and admin costs major. Once it's in and running properly it's close to free None of this is stopping Rogers from building their own last mile in Halton Region to compete directly with Cogeco. When there's a will there's a way.
--
I swear that I will faithfully and bear true allegiance to Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth the Second, Queen of Canada, Her Heirs and Successors, and that I will faithfully observe the laws of Canada and fulfil my duties as a Canadian citizen. | |
| | | root9
join:2005-04-08
Kitchener, ON | Re: Free the Last Mile said by Snickerdo:None of this is stopping Rogers from building their own last mile in Halton Region to compete directly with Cogeco. When there's a will there's a way.
Who cares. This is a new network separate from all others. | |
| | | | SnickerdoPremium
join:2001-02-28
Niagara Falls, ON | Re: Free the Last Mile said by root9:Who cares. This is a new network separate from all others. You just said no one was willing to build their own last mile infrastructure. You were wrong. | |
| | | | wifi4milezBig Russ, 1918 to 2008. Rest in Peace
join:2004-08-07
New York, NY | said by root9:said by Snickerdo:None of this is stopping Rogers from building their own last mile in Halton Region to compete directly with Cogeco. When there's a will there's a way.
Who cares. This is a new network separate from all others. But thats the whole point. Its a new network separate from all the others (ie. Bell). That is what is needed now, and thats why he mentioned it.
--
с новым годом | |
|
| TheMGPremium
join:2007-09-04
Canada
kudos:1 Reviews:
·TekSavvy DSL
1 edit | No wireless technology will ever be able to pipe enough data to support an entire ISP network at modern broadband speeds (5mbps+), it's just not gonna happen.
Why? It's because of this thing called spectrum, which is a finite resource. Once you've used up all the spectrum you can't use any more, when that happens you've hit a limit and expansion of wireless transmissions/technologies comes to a screeching halt.
That is why we have optical fiber: pipe down ridiculous amounts of data, free of interference and spectrum restrictions.
In the end, the only thing unguided mediums (wireless) has over guided mediums (wires/fiber) is convenience and perhaps cost.
Whoever says "the future is wireless" ought to reconsider that statement. | |
| | | wifi4milezBig Russ, 1918 to 2008. Rest in Peace
join:2004-08-07
New York, NY | Re: Free the Last Mile said by TheMG:No wireless technology will ever be able to pipe enough data to support an entire ISP network at modern broadband speeds (5mbps+), it's just not gonna happen. Why? It's because of this thing called spectrum, which is a finite resource. Once you've used up all the spectrum you can't use any more, when that happens you've hit a limit and expansion of wireless transmissions/technologies comes to a screeching halt. That is why we have optical fiber: pipe down ridiculous amounts of data, free of interference and spectrum restrictions. In the end, the only thing unguided mediums (wireless) has over guided mediums (wires/fiber) is convenience and perhaps cost. Whoever says "the future is wireless" ought to reconsider that statement. HUH????? You obviously dont understand how wireless works. When you say "run out of spectrum" you are equating it to running out of copper (or fiber) capacity into a building. Thats completely wrong, and its an apples to dingle-berries comparison. The spectrum is simply a range of frequency bands that is available for use. On a given band, the equipment determines how much bandwidth you can send/receive. This can be anywhere from 28K to 1000Mbps or higher.
For what its worth, there a many, many, many Wimax (and wifi for that matter) WISP's operating today that provide service well above 5Mbps. Some companies, such as GigaBeam have their own proprietary solution for 1000Mbps, and have for years! I always get a kick out of the clueless spouting off, thanks for the laugh man!
--
с новым годом | |
|
2 edits | I was first introduced to this concept when SRNET were upgrading their systems at our university a couple of years ago. I thought this was a brilliant idea at the moment but was doubtful it would be necessary given the reasonably satisfactory level of broadband I was used to enjoy at the time. Doubtless I'm disenchanted now. I urge the users to read this and Google some of the other literature by Bill St. Arnaud on this topic:
»www.canarie.ca/canet4/library/cu···orks.pdf
PS: Arnaud, much like Geist, is a vocal proponent of net neutrality in Canada. | |
|
| |
|
