When it comes to broadband access, there is a “fever for fiber” that has been overwhelming all other types of Internet access. Lately it seems that fiber networks make headline news for providing 1 Gigabit or even 10 Gigabit speed services to customers inside of their footprint. Near Ceresco, Nebraska, a farmer paid over $40,000 just to get a fiber connection to his farm – a perceived bargain compared to the $380,000+ that another phone company was going to charge him. What is the drive behind all of this?

There is no doubt that fiber optic networks have a tremendous amount of capacity and are the logical choice when it comes to delivering broadband in densely populated areas. But the story changes considerably when it comes to sparsely populated and rural areas. In a densely populated area, it typically costs $2000 to $3000 per location to install fiber. In rural areas, the average cost jumps to $6000 per location and can even jump into the hundreds of thousands of dollars, as the example near Ceresco illustrates. Even with the fiber installed, the cost of service and speeds offered are comparable to those available through wireless and cable networks that cost as little as $300 per location to bring online. Why spend 20 times as much money on a fiber network when other alternatives can provide the same utility?

Some of the biggest drivers behind fiber networks are companies such as Google, Microsoft and Facebook that sell services that work better with higher speed connections. Many new applications are “moving to the cloud” – which means that your files no longer live on your home computer or devices, they are in data centers and server farms. When your files live in the cloud, the only way to access them is through a high speed connection, and the higher the speed the better. Having high capacity, bidirectional network connectivity is critical for the operation of cloud based computing, and that is part of the motivation Google has for implementing Google Fiber and prodding service providers to deliver more fiber and higher speeds to end users.

Another reason for the focus on fiber is because it plays into the strengths of many of the established network providers, especially in rural areas. Fiber is expensive, so companies that install fiber in rural areas are heavily subsidized through government programs, and those subsidies are designed to only support one recipient in a service area. Subsidization and very high take rates among potential customers are needed to keep rural fiber networks sustainable, and leads to a monopoly on Internet service for the local phone company in many rural areas. Many alternative providers are able to maintain sustainable business models in rural areas without subsidies or high take rates and provide badly needed competition but they are typically not using fiber.

Where fiber really shines is in the delivery of high capacity connections that can be used as the backbone for other networks. A gigabit of Internet connectivity can support hundreds or thousands of end users and tens of thousands of small data collection devices. The proliferation of agricultural devices that will need constant connectivity will grow exponentially over the next few years, but nearly all of these devices will connect wirelessly – not through a fiber network. Right now, the best use of fiber in rural areas is as backbone for wireless networks that deliver the blanket of connectivity needed for remote data collection and delivery to rural homes.

Fiber and wireless networks will provide connectivity for many years to come. The “fever for fiber” is raging hot right now, but the prescription calls for fiber in core areas, and utilization with fixed and mobile wireless networks to deliver the ubiquitous connectivity rural areas need now.

Hi all,

A few years ago, I was invited to serve on BITAG – the Broadband Infrastructure Technology Advisory Group. BITAG (www.bitag.org) is a group of engineers from multiple technology companies, carriers, public interest groups and educational institutions. The primary purpose of BITAG is to produce very detailed documents about complex issues in broadband that can then be used to educate policy makers about technical considerations.

BITAG released its latest report on “Differentiated Treatment of Internet Traffic”, which goes into intense detail on how network traffic differentiation works and what its impacts are on network performance and management. Here is a link to the report:

http://www.bitag.org/report-differentiated-treatment-of-internet-traffic.php

Pages 20 and 21 focus on Fixed Wireless Network Architecture, and as I am the only WISP in the group, it was the portion I was asked to focus on. It is short, but I think it does a good job of describing how WISP networks are put together and the impact differentiation can have on their performance. Members of this list are intimately familiar with how our networks are built, but our methods of deployment are far outside what is considered to be the common practice. This is the first time that a BITAG paper has had a section referring to WISPs, and I am very happy that we were able to get equal billing with all of the other forms of broadband access.

There is a lot of good material in here. To be honest, a lot of it is over my head, but I learned in the process of putting this document together and you will too if you take some time to read it.

BTW, special thanks go to WISPA for helping sponsor my participation in BITAG.

(Note:  I am writing a column for a local newsletter about technology, and decided to share what I write on the blog.   This is one of the first columns. – Matt)

The Internet of Things (IOT) is one of the fastest growing trends in technology right now. Put simply, IOT is connectivity for nearly device imaginable and the giant collection of data gathered from all of these devices. Two things have combined to make the Internet of Things possible – inexpensive devices with wifi capability and sensors built into them and widespread Internet connectivity.

One of the common examples of an IOT devices is a programmable thermostat like the Nest, that enables the user to put together a program that optimizes the temperature within their house, turn it up and down remotely and also track those temperatures over time. I have a home scale that is connected to the wireless access point in my house. Every time I step on it, it collects my weight and BMI and uploads it to a server on the Internet. Using an app on my smartphone, I can track those two numbers over time to determine the ineffectiveness of my diet and exercise plan and try to motivate myself to do better.

Smartphones are another example of IOT. Smartphones are constantly collecting data about location, apps used and websites visited, then uploading it to your service provider, phone manufacturer, operating system provider (Google for Android phones and Apple for iPhones) or the app vendor. Location tracking of phones was originally intended for 911 location of phones in emergencies, but it is now used by applications like Google Maps to determine traffic congestion and in many other programs to feed advertising to the phone user based on the user’s location and travel patterns. This data is also collected and sold to companies that use it for market analysis or research. Collection of this data is embedded in smartphones, and the only way to prevent it from being collected is to turn the phone off.

When it comes to agriculture, the Internet of Things holds tremendous potential. Farm equipment is using this type of functionality to notify owners about system problems, service intervals and recalls or upgrades available. GPS enabled “smart” tractors combine geolocation and soil data to optimize planting and fertilizer application. Connected security systems and cameras can be used to monitor remote locations and check crop progress. Small, connected sensors gathering information about rainfall, soil temperatures, humidity, ph and many other data points can be utilized to put together optimal growing profiles for fertilizer application, irrigation planning and determining the best time to plant or harvest. Agriculture is primed for an information overhaul, helping farmers and ranchers optimize their productivity and be more efficient with their resources.

The capabilities of IOT are also enabling more efficient use and tracking of natural resources. My company, Vistabeam, is working on a project with the North Platte Natural Resources District to collect information on water consumption in Western Nebraska. Currently, NPNRD collects water consumption data once a year by sending employees into the field to read water meters. It takes a considerable amount of time and manpower to read over 2000 meters and this only provides one data point over 12 months. Under the new project, smart meters are installed at the wells and upload several times a day to servers through the Vistabeam network. This allows the NRD to track water consumption data on a daily basis and they are developing apps that will allow producers to track this same data to use for irrigation planning. Tracking this data will enable the NRD and agricultural users to be more efficient users of water and can serve as the basis for improved agricultural practices in the future.

Internet of Things is just beginning to gain popularity, and it has a tremendous amount of potential to impact how we live and work, even in our rural, agricultural areas.

A recent article by Bruce Schneier outlined many of the issues that have been bothering me about the relationships that we have with the companies that build and develop our smartphones, tablets, online applications and operating systems.

I don’t have any Apple devices, but I spend much of my day using Google/Android, Windows and Facebook systems and Amazon makes regular deliveries to my office.   The relationships between these entities probably look magical to some people, but scare the heck out of me.   I changed my Facebook profile/background picture the other day, and was greeted the next morning with those pictures staring out at me from three different Windows 8 computers when I went to login.   A Google search for recommended modifications for my crapcan Acura racecar that was bought at an impound auction turned into a barrage of car ads for the new Acura TLX on nearly every website I went to for the next ten days.   Facebook has become nearly useless for anything beyond filling leftover time, as it pumps out the “optimal” news stories and ads to appeal to my demographic profile while the updates and news from my thoughtful friends gets crowded out by wingnuttery and hysterical evangelical propaganda.

My least favorite relationship is the one between my smartphone, my tablet and Google/app developers.  I tried to fight with Android over user permissions but finally just gave up.   Two different apps that let me establish at least partial control over what apps had access to hardware on the phone (location, cameras, microphones and such) just quit working and caused my tablet to randomly reboot until I finally deinstalled them.  If a nutjob employee at Facebook, Twitter, Google or one of many other app developers that asked for access to camera/microphone/contact list/location information/etc during app installation wanted to listen to my conversations, watch me through my cameras, download my contact lists or track my comings and goings through the location features, they can do it and I don’t have any control over it!    No one is interested in me, but I would be scared if I were a celebrity.  I finally resorted to putting a piece of tape over the camera and shutting off location services manually on a regular basis, until some app asks for them again and the dance starts all over.   The lack of granular user control over data sharing and access to hardware features, combined with the insidious way that apps request access and then refuse to work if you don’t grant everything they ask for is disturbing to me at the most basic level.    It might be time for the same kind of warning labels for smartphones that you see on cigarettes:

Attorney General’s Warning:   By using this Android device, you agree to let all installed apps, Google and your service provider access your cameras, microphones, location information, passwords, pictures, documents, text messages and anything else that they feel like any time they want without your knowledge.

In the interest of fairness, Apple and Microsoft are not much better – they might even be worse in some ways – I just have a lot more direct experience with Android.

The thing that worries me the most is the loss of independence and resiliency that these feudal systems are encouraging.   Many small ISPs, enterprises, school systems and government entities have outsourced their IT needs to Google or Microsoft.   Data that used to be on a hard drive in the back room, tended to by a local employee is now out there “in the cloud” somewhere.    It is the WalMart-ization of data – one job at the corporate headquarters killed off a hundred sysadmin jobs and the gravity of the cloud continues to draw power, capacity and influence inward from the edges toward a monolithic center under the guise of efficiency and cost savings.   All it cost was local self-determinism and independence.

All hail our feudal masters!

There will be more to come from me on this subject, a lot more.

For right now, here a link to today’s ISP Radio show where I appeared with Jack Unger to talk about the potential impact of LTE-Unlicensed on WISPs and a new spectrum policy concept called Harm Claim Thresholds that could change the way WISPs utilize spectrum.

http://www.ispradio.com/

(Just click on the archive link and download the December 11, 2014 show link.)

Enjoy!