Tag Archive for 'WiFi'

WiFi on Steroids Approved in U.S.

November 4th was truly a good news day in the United States.  Not only did the American people elect a leader who will hopefully begin to heal the damage done by 8 years of the Bush regime but, on the same day, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) approved the use of new wireless devices that will operate in the television broadcast spectrum utilising open so-called white spaces in that spectrum.

The decision has been bitterly opposed by broadcast companies who claim that the devices will degrade television signals.  However, the FCC has carried out extensive testing and has determined that the devices can operate without affecting television broadcast services.  The FCC’s decision to approve this spectrum use was unanimous.

All “white space” devices will be subject to approval by the FCC.  This new generation of wireless devices will use a combination of technologies to operate within the television spectrum.  Most devices will have geo-location technology and will access a database of the incumbent services via the Internet, which will let them know what spectrum is available for use.  The devices will also have spectrum-sensing technology which will alert them to spectrum in use.  Some devices will be approved without the geo-location technology i.e. with just spectrum-sensing but they will be subject to a more rigorous approval process.

To date only prototype devices have been tested.  It is estimated that commercial products are about 18 months away from market.  How remarkable would it be if South Africa (and developing countries in general) were to approve the use of “white space” spectrum in time for those products to come to market?

So what makes these devices so much more amazing than WiFi?  It is more the spectrum than the technology itself that will allow “white space” devices to offer dramatically improved performance over WiFi.  Television spectrum has much better propagation characteristics than the 2.4GHz and 5MHz bands that WiFi uses.  This means that radio signals can travel further and move through obstacles more easily, making it both easier and less expensive to set up wireless networks.

This was an important decision in terms of delivering broadband access to underserviced areas in the United States but think how much more impact this technology might have in developing countries where underserviced and overpriced is the norm for access.

Opening Spectrum in South Africa

It’s time to get down to business and start developing a civil society position on spectrum management in South Africa.  The key purpose of spectrum management is to maximise the value that society gains from the radio spectrum.  That has traditionally been done in a command-and-control manner treating spectrum as a completely finite, scarce resource.  But things are changing.

The recent ruling in South Africa which effectively opened up the telecoms market to full competition, now sadly being appealed by the Department of Communications (DoC), got me thinking about “what next”. Suppose that the DoC come to its senses and abandons the appeal or perhaps a sensible judge throws the appeal out, what next? The regulator (ICASA) have a huge number of issues to address ranging from interconnection to local loop unbundling. But for me, one issue stands out after the Altech ruling and that is spectrum management. For many service providers, having an i-ECNS license will not be very meaningful if they are unable to get access to spectrum.

Given that ICASA seem unlikely to address spectrum management for at least another year, thanks to other pressing priorities, now seems like the perfect time to mobilise debate within civil society on what principles we would like to see enshrined in spectrum regulation. Certainly, there are a few issues that come to mind.

Transparency

Given the level of cronyism that has characterised the SA telecoms market in the last 15 years, embedding transparency mechanisms into spectrum regulation is a highly attractive proposition but not one that is by any means a given. Building on Paul Collier’s premise that Open Standards might lead to better practice, it would be worth exploring what sorts of standards might be proposed to ICASA to ensure a fully transparent process in the allocation of spectrum.

Readiness for a Different World

As radio and computing technology continue to rapidly evolve, our ability to make more and more efficient use of spectrum increases.  Policy and regulation need to be developed so as to allow as many of the highest value users access as possible.  As technology will continually move this goalpost, regulation needs reflect this shifting environment.

Open Spectrum and Innovation

Unlicensed spectrum, in particular the 2.4 and 5Mhz bands have proven to be magnets for innovation.  Initially declared unlicensed because they were ‘garbage’ spectrum unsuitable for broadcast, they have been instrumental in enabling powerful and most importantly unpredictable innovations.  The ubiquity of WiFi in computing devices could not have happened were in not for the fact that everyone is permitted to experiment in this bandwidth.  Creating more open spectrum can only stimulate further innovation.  The Wireless Innovation Alliance championed by Google and Microsoft in the United States is an attempt to have more bandwidth set aside as open.  The debate in this area has been heated.  Now is the time to start looking at such issues in South Africa before they get captured by vested interests.

For those of you new to the “White Spaces” debate, here is a link that I picked up from Sascha Meinrath’s blog to a video produced by the People Production House in New York.  It’s a lovely introduction to the pro side of the white spaces debate.

If you’re interested in getting involved in such a debate in South Africa, I’d love to hear from you.

Village Telco Workshop

Hardware testing team At the Shuttleworth Foundation, the geek factor runs pretty high for a charitable foundation.  However, my colleague Jason and I felt like lightweights at the the Village Telco workshop that we hosted here at the Foundation two weeks ago.

You can see the full list of participants here or click here to put a face to all the names but topping out the geek factor at the workshop were David Rowe, Open Hardware pioneer and developer of the Free Telephony Project; Elektra, author of the B.A.T.M.A.N. mesh networking protocol; Jeff Wishnie, Chief Technology Officer for Inveneo; and, Alberto Escudero-Pascual of IT46.

Group work The intent of the workshop was to bring together the right people to be able to prototype a Village Telco, with the intention of getting some configurations and code up on to the website so that interested parties would have something to hack on.    As you can see from the picture at left, we had no shortage of wireless hardware to experiment with and four servers lined up to start assembling Village Telco software on.  Well, as they say in the U.S. Army, “no plan ever survives contact with the enemy”.  We never did build a prototype but we did something better, we brainstormed a new, low-cost startup model for a Village Telco.

Low-cost wireless networking a powerful concept with a thousand potential applications.  Unfortunatley, this strength is also its weakness in helping people get started with low-cost WiFi and VoIP.  Because you can do just about anything, the endless configurability is an intimidating prospect for even the above-average geek.  Our challenge was to create something simple enough to use that an entrepreneur with only modest technical skills could see how to implement and scale up a village telco.

In order to keep the discussion honest, we agreed to use Dabba as the use case against which we would design a solution.  Right now Dabba is operating in South African townships which are typically low-income, high-density and most of which have existing, but arguably expensive or inconvenient, telecoms services from the mobile operators and the incumbent, Telkom.  But even this was not enough to ground the discussion.  We needed to constrain the discussion to something as specific as possible.  At first we talked about what would be required to cover a fixed area, say nine square kilometres, but after some time that seemed too ambitious for a bootstrapping startup.  In the end, we decided to ask the question, “What could be achieved with USD 5000?” and given that investment “Could you break even within six months?”

One early leap forward in the workshop was to recognise the superiority of the Ubiquiti Nanostation as an external access point.  While there is no question that the Linksys WRT54Gx series of wireless routers have played a seminal role in the Open Source movement around wireless networking, there is no getting around the fact that they are designed for indoors and there is a significant cost increase associated with ruggedizing them for outdoors.  The Nanostations cost the same as the WRT54GLs but come pre-built in a ruggedized outdoor housing with mounting brackets.  The Nanostation is also more powerful than the Linksys routers.

Having established a preference, discussion revolved around how open the Ubiquiti Nanostation is.  The Nanostations can run OpenWRT and Inveneo had already had some success compiling the quagga routing protocol to run on it.  Unfortunately, some of the tunable antenna functionality is lost with the OpenWRT software but this is not really a significant factor in the context of the Village Telco.  The amazing thing about having Jeff and Elektra there was that they were able to test on the spot whether B.A.T.M.A.N. could be compiled for OpenWRT on the Nanostation.  A couple of hours of quiet conspiring later and presto, the mesh protocol was running on the Nanostation!

While the idea of a mesh network is to have each node extend the mesh, a good first step for a Village Telco would be to start with a “Super Node” which would help the Village Telco Entrepreneur (VTE).  A Super Node might be three Ubiquiti Nanostations mounted on a single pole above the premises of the VTE.  This would offer a 2 kilometre radius of coverage to the Village Telco.

However, the Super Node reaching 2 kilometres is not the same as a VoIP handset reaching back that same distance.  We had been thinking of typical wireless VoIP handsets such as the one by UT Starcom pictured at right.  While this kind of device offers signficant advantages such as mobility and a built-in battery, it is also true that the range of such a phone is only about a 100 metres.  Using this kind of phone would mean a dramatic increase in the number of wireless access points required to give service to a particular area.  We either needed to think of a way of driving down the cost of an access point or increasing the power of the customer’s equipment.

As an aside, the two key cost factors that emerged in the scale-up of the Village Telco concept were a) the cost of the customer’s phone or Customer Premises Equipment (CPE) as I believe it is called in the trade; and, b) the cost of power supply to the wireless mesh access points.  We made the assumption that it was critical for the network to have guaranteed power but that it was a nice-to-have rather than a must-have for the CPE.

As we brainstormed how to drive down the cost of the CPE, we discussed the potential of small mini-APs such as the Accton Mini-router sold by OpenMesh.  These tiny APs are capable of running an adapted version of B.A.T.M.A.N. called, yes you guessed it, Robin.  The combination of an OpenMesh router and a SIP phone would provide the CPE needed for a Village Telco.  However, SIP phones are stMesh Potatoill not that cheap.  We decided that what would be ideal would be a combination of a simple Analogue Telephony Adaptor (ATA) combined with something like an Open Mesh mini-router.  There is something to be said for having equipment right in front of you because the idea of actually gaffer-taping an ATA to an Open Mesh router actually struck a chord with the workshop.

With a less amazing group, the conversation might have stopped there but as it turned out we brainstormed the existence of a device which we decided to call a Mesh Potato which would combine the functionality of an ATA and a mesh AP, and would be low-power, Open Source, Open Hardware, pre-ruggedized for outdoors and be easy-to-install and manage.  Target cost of such a device would be sub USD 60 per device.  In quantity, should we pull this off, the cost should be much lower.

So, with that we came to our 5000 dollar recipe for a Village Telco startup.  USD 5000 should get you a server and printer (for pay-as-you-go coupons) running Asterisk and A2billing (modified into simple management framework), an Ubiquiti Nanostation-based Super Node and about 40 Mesh Potatoes or in other words something like this:

In my next post, I’ll talk more about scope of work involved in bringing these ideas to fruition. In the mean time, you can read the raw outputs of the workshop at http://wiki.villagetelco.org.  If you are interested in getting involved as a developer, please sign up to the Village Telco development list at http://groups.google.com/group/village-telco-dev.

Kenya: Door opens for new non-profit telecom firms

Business Day Africa profiles the Communications Commission of Kenya’s decision to offer ISM-band spectrum to non-profits:

“Licence-free band spectrum, courtesy of the airwaves’ regulator, could allow non-profit organisations to own and operate telecom companies.

The Communication Commission of Kenya’s offer of the ISM Band 2.4 and 5.8 spectrum to registered community groups is on a first-come-first-served basis, and already organisations from Mukurweini, Khwisero, Limuru and Rangwe have expressed interest. Countries like Tanzania, Namibia, Bangladesh and India have used the concept of free frequencies in efforts to bridge the ‘digital divide’ with the West.”

This paves the way for the creation of VillageTelcos in Kenya. Comparisons may be odious but it is hard to resist comparing the forward-looking approach of the CCK to the foot-dragging, bureaucratic style of ICASA, who it appears will miss their deadline for converting telecommunications operators and VANs licensees to the new electronic communications network services (ECNS) licenses.

Why does everyone want to kill WiFi?

Reading the tech news in South Africa, you get the impression that WiMax is going to very shortly solve all of the country’s broadband issues. Articles like this one give the impression that WiMax will shortly be available in every major city in South Africa. Municipal WiMax enthusiasts argue that this is “no business case for WiFi”

And today, Mike Jensen pointed out to me that in Europe, Ericsson’s Chief Marketing Officer has predicted the demise of WiFi hotspots because of the growth of mobile broadband. It is worth reading the Slashdot comments on this article for the dripping irony that the article provoked.

One cannot help but wonder why everyone is so keen to see the demise of WiFi. Is there a whiff of desperation in the air? While the wireless vendors have been squabbling over the WiMax standard and telecom companies have been pricing themselves out of the 3G market, WiFi has quietly gotten to thirty times its original bandwidth strength while dropping so low in price as to be almost a giveaway. At the same time, the Open Source community has been developing software for cheap WiFi devices that allow them to offer connectivity previously only available in devices costing thousands if not 10s of thousands of dollars? The telecom industry thrives on expensive equipment and service contracts. Perhaps WiFi is the emperor’s new clothes of connectivity.

Certainly Bill Gates seems to get it. In a recent submission to the U.S. communications regulator, he says:

“We’re hopeful that that [spectrum] will be made available so that Wi-Fi can explode in terms of its usage, even out into some of these less dense areas (of the United States) where distance has been a big problem for Wi-Fi,”

Obviously this is not an industry in which he has an entrenched interest. Just as well. For more background reading on WiFi versus Wimax, here are some links worth reading. Judge for yourself.

Wifi or Wimax (or both)?
comments from Evert Bopp in his Wimaxxed blog
17 Oct 07

WiMAX vs. WiFi
comments from Tom Evslin at CircleID
20 Feb 08

WiMax versus WiFi
comments by David Jarvis in MyBroadband article
25 Oct 07

The Truth About WiMax
Robert Berger quoted in Bill St. Arnaud’s blog
11 Oct 06