Nice Overview Video - Low Earth Orbit (LEO) Satellite Internet

The Wall Street Journal  recently went up to a remote area of Washington state to talk to some beta testers and take a look at SpaceX's new Starlink satellite internet service. 

This short 9 minute and 30 second video gives a nice overview of how low earth orbit satellite networks like Starlink are one piece of the puzzle in solving the global broadband divide problem.

It’s good and watching with students should generate some very interesting classroom discussion.

20 Gbps - In Your Home - In Your Car - In Your Pocket

Fixed wireless is a term used to define wireless services to the home, often used to provide residential broadband service where fixed broadband service (cable, DSL, etc) is not available. It's just a fancy term for cellular data service to a residence.

Currently LTE (download speeds between 5 and 12 Mbps [Megabits per second] and upload speeds between 2 and 5 Mbps, with peak download speeds approaching 50 Mbps) is used by providers offering fixed wireless service. Some nice bandwidth when you have a good connection...... 

Recently, Verizon announced  the launch of next-generation 5G wireless residential broadband services in three to five U.S. markets in 2018. The first commercial launch is now scheduled in Sacramento, CA, in the second half of 2018. 5G will be  a significant upgrade to LTE services, supporting a theoretical speed up to 20 Gbps with a latency of ~1 ms, enabling providers like Verizon to offer superior broadband access without running fiber-optic cables to the sides of homes. 

The days of fiber to the home (FTTH) products like FiOS are numbered. Full phase 5G rollouts by all major providers should be across the U.S. by 2020. Don't give up on fiber though. Additional backhaul capacity will require lots more fiber. That fiber won't be running directly to homes but will be running to cell towers - both large and small.

5G is coming and going to come quickly. ABI Research, a market-foresight advisory firm providing strategic guidance on the most compelling transformative technologies, forecasts that the global fixed wireless broadband market will grow 30% in 2018 and will generate US$18 billion in service revenue. As 5G fixed wireless broadband access is set to be launched in North America in 2018, it is set to expand and provide consumers with better quality service in the years to come. 

What could you do with 20Gbps in your home, your car, your pocket.....??

Image source: https://www.marketplace.org/2018/01/31/tech/marketplace-tech-blogs/could-antenna-fatigue-be-holding-5g-technology

FCC Connect America Fund Phase I Round Two

Last week, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) posted an interactive map (embedded below) showing the locations where new higher-speed broadband may be deployed as the result of the second round of Connect America Phase 1 funding.

Back in 2011, the FCC launched the Connect America Fund (CAF) and it has had limited success. Round one of funding only dispensed $115 million of $300 million in available funds. I'm not sure why the FCC has had difficulty giving this money out - currently the FCC defines broadband as 768 Kbps downstream and 200 Kbps upstream. In this next round the FCC has decided to offer two levels of subsidy in the current round - $775 per location to bring broadband into underserved locations (where broadband does not exist) and an additional $550 per location (where lower speed broadband does exist) to bring broadband speeds up to 3Mbps downstream and 768 Kbps upstream.

Coverage includes over 600,000 homes and businesses in the United States and the map shows the number of homes and businesses along with the amount of subsidy ($775 or $550) for each location.

Four rural telcos are receiving most of the funds:

CenturyLink - $54 million
Frontier Communications - $72 million
AT&T - $100 million
Windstream - $124 million

Interesting that Verizon Landline (with regional sell-offs over past few years) does not appear to be a rural player any more.

See You Later WiMAX

I've written here in the past about WiMAX and the slow but inevitable take over by LTE. Well, it's starting soon - at least with Sprint's wireless services. Here's some details from an Inside Sprint blog post yesterday:

• On 6/7, smartphone customers in markets slated for LTE will be notified via text message of the upcoming launch.
• The message states: SprintFreeMsg: Ready for some GREAT news? Sprint is rolling out an all-new network in (insert city here). Learn more at sprint.us/sat Reply End to stop.
• Sprint’s all-new network launches by mid-summer 2012 in 4 cities: Atlanta, Dallas, Houston, and Atlanta.
• More cities launch later this summer and throughout the year.
• The all-new network includes the launch of 4G LTE and improvements to Sprint’s 3G network.

Benefits include:

• More reliable connection to voice calls, emails, and apps, and the internet
• Expanded coverage in their area
• Faster downloading, surfing and streaming
• Improved indoor/outdoor signal strength
• Enhanced voice quality
• Fewer dropped calls

See you later WiMAX!

Goodbye Landlines.... Hello Fixed LTE

I've been buried with final exams and travel the past few weeks and have not had a chance to post. Lots of things have been happening though.

With all of the Facebook IPO hype and the Verizon Wireless' data cap announcement you may have missed something potentially much bigger. Back on May 2, Verizon Wireless put out a news release titled HomeFusion Broadband From Verizon Now Available Nationwide on America's HomeFusion Broadband From Verizon Now Available Nationwide on America's Largest 4G LTE Network

It's about putting an antenna on your house that will replace those copper telephone wires with 4G LTE wireless. Now, Verizon's 4G LTE network currently covers approximately two-thirds of the U.S. population and 230 markets and this new product is designed to deliver both data and voice services for these people in these markets. LTE has been pitched initially as a mobile product but works great using fixed antennas attached to a home or business.

Here's how this new fixed antenna Verizon 4G LTE product works. Verizon techs come out to your home and install a cylinder-shaped 4G LTE antenna (see picture). This antenna picks up an LTE signal and transmits it to a broadband router in the home. That broadband router can have up to 4 wired and 20 wireless WiFi connections.

Verizon is saying that, in a fully loaded real world environment, users should experience average data rates between 5 and 12 Mbps downstream and and between 2 and 5 Mbps upstream. That's some pretty good bandwidth. Pricing ranges from $60 (10 GB cap) to $120 (30 GB cap) per month. If users go over the cap, they'll pay an extra $10 per GB.

Here's where it gets really interesting. Back on April 19, Verizon announced they would stop selling DSL as an option to customers who live in FiOS territory. Today I heard (unconfirmed) Verizon will stop using DSL range extenders. These range extenders are being used to get DSL signal out long distances. DSL sure sounds like it is going away soon.

Is 4G LTE the next step? Will fixed 4G LTE replace those old copper landlines that voice and DSL run on? Two thirds of the U.S. population is covered by 4G LTE...... I've written about it in the past...... I've always thought so and right now I'm thinking it's all going to happen a lot quicker than I ever imagined.

Broadband Divide Continues

Earlier this week, the Department of Commerce's Economics and Statistics Administration (ESA) and the National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) released a study titled Exploring the Digital Nation: Computer and Internet Use at Home. The study analyzed 54,000 households using 2010 census data. Here's some details from a blog post at speedmatters.org:

• 68 % of households used broadband in 2010.

• Broadband adoption rates are slower that mobile.

• Households with lower incomes and less education, as well as Blacks, Hispanics, people with disabilities, and rural residents, were less likely to have Internet service at home.

• Seventy percent of urban households had broadband at home, compared to 57 percent of rural households.

• Less than half (43 percent) of households with annual incomes below $25,000 had broadband access at home, while 93 percent of households with incomes exceeding $100,000 had broadband.

Here's more from the study report:

• As of October 2010, more than 68 percent of households used broadband Internet access service, up from 64 percent one year earlier. Approximately 80 percent of households had at least one Internet user, either at home or elsewhere. 

•  Cable modem (32 percent) and DSL (23 percent) ranked as the most commonly used broadband technologies. Other technologies, including mobile broadband, fiber optics, and satellite services, accounted for a small, but growing, segment of households with broadband Internet access service.

• 2000s – continued to decline from five percent in October 2009 to three percent one year later.

• Over three-fourths (77 percent) of households had a computer – the principal means by which households access the Internet – compared with 62 percent in 2003. Low computer use correlates with low broadband adoption rates.

• Broadband Internet adoption, as well as computer use, varied across demographic and geographic groups. Lower income families, people with less education, those with disabilities, Blacks, Hispanics, and rural residents generally lagged the national average in both broadband adoption and computer use. For example, home broadband adoption and computer use stood at only 16 percent and 27 percent, respectively, among rural households headed by a Black householder without a high school diploma. Also, households with school-age children exhibited higher broadband adoption and computer use rates than other households.

• The differences in socio-economic attributes do not entirely explain why some groups lagged in adoption. Broadband Internet adoption disparities decrease when regression analysis holds constant certain household characteristics, such as income, education, race, ethnicity, foreign-born status, household composition, disability status, or geographic location. For example, the gap with respect to broadband Internet adoption associated with disabilities decreases from 29 to six percentage points when controlling for income, education, age, and other attributes.

• The most important reasons households without broadband Internet or dial-up service gave for not subscribing were: (1) lack of need or interest (47 percent); (2) lack of affordability (24 percent); and (3) inadequate computer (15 percent).

• Households reporting affordability as the major barrier to subscribing to broadband service cited both the fixed cost of purchasing a computer and the recurring monthly subscription costs as important factors. Our analysis of the expanded CPS data suggests that work, school, public libraries, and someone else’s house were all popular alternatives for Internet access among those with no home broadband Internet access service. Not surprisingly, individuals with no home broadband Internet access service relied on locations such as public libraries (20 percent) or other people’s houses (12 percent) more frequently than those who used broadband Internet access service at home.

The study also describes the $7 billion Recovery Act funding directed towards broadband in the U.S. Be sure to check out the complete study document linked here.

Verizon FiOS Buildout Essentially Done, Fixed LTE Coming

In a quarterly earnings conference call last Friday Verizon confirmed a couple of things I've been saying here for the past couple of years. The FiOS build out is basically done for now and Verizon Wireless will be offerring a fixed LTE option in direct competition with the landlind side of the business.

Here's an interesting Q&A from the VZ - Q3 2011 Verizon Communications Inc Earnings Conference Call held on October 21, as posted at DSL Reports:

Citigroup Analyst: Is there any thought of taking that non-FiOS bundle of presumably LTE broadband LTE voice,what about taking that more nationally and making that more of a national product for you versus just maybe an out of FiOS region but in territory Verizon product? 

Fran Shammo: Well, we are. And you're going to see that come in the fourth quarter with the -- what we now call the Cantenna which is not a commercial name obviously, but it's the antenna that we actually trialed with DIRECTV, which was extremely successful. And again, the benefit of this antenna is it operates the spectrum extremely efficiently. So if you look at a MiFi card or a dongle, this is very, very efficient, way above those two devices which is why it's critical to have that bundle with that Cantenna. So when we launch that you're going to see us go nationally with that type of an offer.

Hybrid-Terrestrial-Satellite Networks?

That's what Charlie Ergen at Dish Networks is putting together and it makes sense. Ergen's a former professional blackjack player billionaire currently transforming Dish to a wireless mobile video company. An October 17-23, 2011 Business Week Companies & Industries piece titled Charlie Ergen Wants To Beam You Everything does a nice job summarizing where Ergen is taking Dish. Here's some details.

Dish has spent over $5 billion this year on acquisitions of companies in bankruptcy. Here's three of the biggest:

• Blockbuster video chain - video content 
•  EchoStar set-top box maker - IP-based end device connectivity
• Hughes Communications  - satellite Internet service provider

Ergen moved fast with the Blockbuster acquisition, rolling out a Blockbuster branded movie streaming service to Dish customers last month. 

What's next? Ergen currently has a $1.9 billion offer on the books for Hulu which is currently owned by News Corp., Walt Disney and Comcast. Picking up Hulu would give Dish rights to more than one million paying subscribers.

Dish also has pending deals to pick up DBSD North America and TerreStar Networks. These two companies also own wireless spectrum which could be the real prize and an indication of things to come. What the company really needs is more wireless. Access to an existing broad wireless network (DBSD and TerreStar will not be enough) is coming so watch for Ergen to go after a provider (maybe Sprint?) or maybe cut a deal with one of the other providers (Verizon Wireless or AT&T?).

What about competition from companies like Netflix? Peter M. Hoffman from GHL is quoted in that Business Week piece "What Charlie's done is put together content and distribution. Netflix still has to rely on someone else's distribution to deliver its content."

Adding that wireless broadband piece (that Ergen needs for video delivery) could turn Dish into a viable broadband alternative to telcos like Verizon and cable companies like Time Warner. What really excites me is the access Dish could offer rural areas where there is currently not good broadband options.

Rural Broadband - Holland, Massachusetts

The Springfield (MA) Sunday Republican runs a Q&A piece every week titled Just Ask. this past Sunday a woman who lives in Holland, MA posted a pretty interesting question. Before we get to the question though, let's take a quick look at Holland (source Wikipedia). According to the United States Census Bureau: 

• The town has a total area of 13.1 square miles (33.9 km²), of which, 12.4 square miles (32.1 km²) of it is land and 0.7 square miles (1.8 km²) of it (5.34%) is water. 
• As of the census of 2000, there were 2,407 people, 898 households, and 668 families residing in the town. The population density was 194.2 people per square mile (75.0/km²). There were 1,317 housing units at an average density of 106.3 per square mile (41.0/km²). 
• The median income for a household in the town was $52,073, and the median income for a family was $57,024.
• Holland has it's own elementary school but is considering merging its elementary school with the town of Wales. Holland students attend Tantasqua Regional Junior High School (grades 7-8) and Tantasqua Regional High School in Sturbridge.

A typical rural New England town that can be compared to likely hundreds of other rural communities across the U.S. Now for the newspaper reader question.

Question: Is it true that Verizon Communications does not have fiberoptics in my home area, Holland, and that there are no plans to install same? What I have now is a dial-up modem with Verizon, and it is very slow. It takes 10 full minutes for me to access my checking account online, after four screen changes. I understand the need for security, but this is ridiculous. I’m a teacher and need to cover a lot of ground on the Internet in a single day. At such snail speeds, I’m limited to very few online tasks like collecting emails. Over the past three years I have made numerous calls to Verizon service to ask if I could sign-up for high-speed Internet service, and the answer was always “no.” 
In this year of speed-of-light communications, do I have any other options? 
– Kathleen McGrory, Holland 

And the answer from reporter Jim Kinney:

Answer: While it is true Verizon does not offer DSL service for people in your area of Holland, there are other options available. Cox Communications, Holland’s cable provider, does offer provide high-speed Internet in this area. Since you sent us this inquiry, we understand you signed up with Cox’s Broadband service and can now quickly access your checkbook online. Welcome to the 21st century, Kathleen. 
Verizon spokesman Philip G. Santoro said, “There just aren’t enough customers there (for Verizon) to justify the expense.” He suggested people like you contact their local cable operator.  He also pointed out that there is a third option, and that is Verizon Wireless’ 3G coverage, which would provide high-speed Internet through cell phone coverage.

Many small rural towns in the U.S. do not have any option except dial-up. It is upsetting to read the Verizon spokesman's honest answer regarding high speed landline based service in Holland. Nothing against Verizon - it's the frustrating reality of situations across our country. From a business perspective it does not make sense for a traditional telephone company to offer high-speed data service in a town like Holland. With current data caps in place from Verizon Wireless and other providers I don't see 3G (or upcoming 4G) services as a competitive alternative. 

Holland residents are fortunate they do have a cable option. Many similar communities in our country are stuck with dial-up as their only option.


9/14/11 at 7:28 PM

This comment came in from retired Cable Executive Steven Solomon via Google+.

Gordon, I would add this comment to your post. What is often invisible to the public is the real demographics of a community like Holland. I know about this first hand. I helped negotiate the cable TV franchise with the town on the part of the predecessor provider to Cox, Continental Cablevision.

As of 1994, of the 2,400 or so residents of the town, only about 600 homeowners lived in their homes all year round. The rest kept their residences as vacation or second homes. This put the full-time residents at a great disadvantage in getting broadband by landline of any sort.

Putting in broadband plant at about $20G a mile is not a reasonable business proposition for the private sector if the company is relying only on the margin earned from Internet (which now competes with phone and cable TV). Thus, I don't see any alternative to the private sector stepping in with the 21st century equivalent of rural electrification.

Massachusetts Broadband Institute Announces Grant Awards

The Massachusetts Broadband Institute (MBI) announced $335,000 in competitive grant awards today. These grants are part of  MBI's Last-Mile Broadband Solutions Program to advance last-mile solutions and expand broadband connectivity in underserved areas of Massachusetts - specifically in western and north-central parts of the state. Providers will use a combination of new technology and existing infrastructure to eventually tap into MassBroadband 123, the MBI's 1,338 mile Internet backbone network that will extend broadband access to over 120 communities in western and north central Massachusetts.

Here's more detail from the MBI website:

• The broadband planning grants were designed to fund the development of market studies, business plans, network engineering and designs, and other actions needed to develop and implement last-mile broadband solutions.
• Grant recipients were selected through an open, rigorous and highly-competitive process. 
• MBI funded broadband planning and deployment grants up to a maximum of $50,000 per provider and project, supported by a 25% funding match from the grant recipient. 

Here's details on the municipalities, broadband service providers and organizations that received grants today;

Broadband Planning Grants

• The town of Leverett, in collaboration with Crocker Communications, will receive $40,000 to plan a Fiber to the Curb network, serving all 640 homes in the community.
• The town of Royalston will receive $11,250 to design a wireless network to serve the community.
• The organization WiredWest will receive $50,000 to further develop their broadband network design and business model that will serve 47 communities in western Massachusetts.

Broadband Deployment Grants

• Mid-Hudson Cable, an Internet service provider, will receive $44,000 to deploy a wireless network to provide access to approximately 185 homes in the town of Tyringham.
• GAW High-Speed Internet will receive $40,000 to deploy a wireless network in the town of Ashfield to provide access to approximately 200 customers.
• AccessPlus will receive $50,000 to deploy a new wireless network to service 170 homes in Savoy and surrounding communities. 
• The town of Warwick will receive $50,000 to expand and upgrade its wireless network to reach 400 more unserved homes in town. 
• The town of Princeton, in collaboration with Ayatch Wireless, will receive $50,000 to expand its wireless network to reach 100 more customers.

Watch www.massbroadband.org for more information.

1 Gbps Next Generation Internet Services in Rural Britain

Fujitsu, Virgin Media, TalkTalk and Cisco have agreed to collaboratively build a fiber based network to deliver next generation internet services to 5 million homes in rural Britain. In addition to all of the benefits broadband services provide to homes and businesses (education, entertainment, remote healthcare, government services, etc), there are a number of other things I find appealing about this collaborative effort:

• It's rural - these are areas that typically suffer most, lacking any broadband services.

• The network will be Fiber To The Home (FTTH) based with initial symmetrical bandwidth of 1 Giga bit per second (Gbps).

• Because they are going to be using fiber, the network is future-proofed with  the potential to run at speeds greater than 10 Gbps. 

• The network will be open access to any ISP,  giving rural customers options. When broadband is available in rural areas, often there is only a single choice. Competition should be good because it usually drives prices down and bandwidths up to the consumer.

• The collaboration will involve local community broadband groups, enabling dynamic and flexible solutions in rural communities.

 It would be nice to see a collaboration like this in the U.S.

Verizon, Terremark and Academic ICT Programs

Over the past few days the $39 billion AT&T / T-Mobile deal has been getting a lot of press. There's another deal that happened last month for a little less money - $1.4 billion - that has the potential for significant impact over the next few years. The purchase of Terremark by Verizon.

Terremark provides collocation in the Internet cloud - basically space, power and a secure place for a company's infrastructure and value adds by offering managed services to their customers - what is commonly referred to as IaaS or Infrastructure as a Service. There are significant advantages to IaaS for a customer - no worries about redundancy, backups, updates and 24/7 support are just a few.

Verizon already has a cloud business along with AT&T and Qwest so there's been some speculation on this deal - is is a good or a bad move for Verizon? Long term I think it is a good one as the company continues to rapidly shift away from legacy landline-based voice delivery systems. It's a move for Verizon to get further "into the cloud", controlling both infrastructure and the customer connections (wireless, fiber, copper - the "pipes"!) connected to the infrastructure.

Cloud based services will continue to expand, especially as connected devices become smaller, faster, more portable, and more ubiquitous. In the education world we need to think about how this is going to impact our courses, curriculum, programs and students as we prepare people for the modern workplace.

If you are an educator, you should be taking a close look at a couple of industry programs that are relatively new (especially to the community college world) from EMC and VMWare.

The EMC Academic Alliance with a focus on storage linked here http://education.emc.com/academicalliance/faculty.aspx

The VMWare IT Academy Program with a focus on virtualization linked here http://www.vmware.com/partners/programs/vap/

Both programs are excellent and offer access to the latest technology, high quality curriculum, courses that can be integrated into existing curriculum, course paths that lead to certification, and faculty development opportunities.

FCC Internet Access and Telephone Competition Reports Released

The Federal Communications Commission released a couple of reports today titled Internet Access Services and Local Telephone Competition.  Both  reports are based on data submitted by carriers every six months on FCC Form 477. Each report tracks Internet service subscribers using 72 different speed teir combinations along with the number of wireline, mobile and interconnected Voice over Internet Protocol (VoIP) telephone subscribers. These reports cover FCC data collected through June 30, 2010.

Highlights from the Internet Access Services report include the following:

• 60% of connections were slower than the benchmark 4 megabits per second (Mbps)
  download speed identified by the FCC as the minimum bandwidth generally required to
  accommodate today’s uses: high-quality voice, data, graphics, and video. 
• Growth of fixed broadband service appears to have flattened at 1% in the first half of 2010, to 82 million connections.

Highlights from the Local Telephone Competition report include the following:

• Interconnected VoIP grew by 21% between June 2009 and June 2010.
• Conventional switched access lines (i.e., traditional wireline telephone lines) decreased
  by 8% between June 2009 and June 2010.
• 28% of all residential wireline connections were interconnected VoIP as of June 2010.
• An estimated 77% of interconnected VoIP subscribers received service through a cable
  provider.
• The number of subscriptions to wireless phone service grew by 5% in the year.

 Both reports can be downloaded at www.fcc.gov/wcb/stats.

Last month, the FCC began to consider reforms to the Form 477 program, with concerns about the lag time time between data collection and reporting. As an example - we're just seeing reporting today on data that was collected the first six months of 2010.

You can comment on reforms here http://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/ecfs/, using WC Docket No. 11-10. Initial comments are due on or before March 30. Reply comments are due on or before April 14.

Breaking Down The G's

Martin Sauter has a nice post over at WirelessMoves titled The G Is Dead, Long Live the G!. In the post he discusses how "G" is being misused to death. Here's a quote from Martin:

In almost every report the acronym "4G" is used for just about everything that is faster than a crawling few kbit/s. 4G is HSPA, 4G is LTE, 4G is this, 4G is that. Well, 4G isn't any of it. And quite frankly I am a bit tired and nerved because just like "open" and "free" it has lost any meaning in the mobile world.

It is confusing but it looks like we'll be stuck with all these G's for a while. How do we sort it all out? One of the comments by Alexander D. on Martin's post breaks down the wireless G's. Here it is:

1G: Analog
2G: Digital technologies that originated as purely circuit-switched ones, later expanded to packet-switched (within the constraints of the old tech)
3G: Both circuit-switched and packet-switched from the ground up
4G: Purely packet-switched

 Short and concise. I'm using it! Very nice.

In Some Countries Broadband Has Become A Legal Right

The International Telecommunications Union (ITU) has a new snapshot report out with some interesting information. Here's some details:
  
On Competition
During the first decade of the 21st century, new information and communication technologies (ICTs) came within reach of most of the world’s people for the first time in human history – a success story facilitated by the introduction of competition and the creation of independent regulators across the globe.

• By 2010, competition was available in over 90% of countries in mobile and Internet services.
• There are now 157 independent regulatory authorities worldwide – up from 106 at the beginning of the decade.
• The number of mobile cellular subscriptions worldwide grew from under 1 billion to over 5 billion over the course of the decade.
• The number of Internet users worldwide grew from under 400 million to over two billion from 2000 to 2010.
• The following services have seen the strongest growth in competition over the past 10 years:
  • International gateways – competition now available in 78% of countries, up from just 38% in the year 2000;
  • Basic voice services – competition now available in two-thirds of countries worldwide, up from under 40% in the year 2000;
  • Leased lines – competition now available in three-quarters of the world’s countries, up from under 50% in the year 2000;

On Privatization

• Twenty years ago, in 1991, just 37 countries’ main fixed-line operators were privatized. Today, 126 countries’ incumbent operators are partly or fully in the hands of private sector owners.
• Substantial differences remain between regions: 86% of European incumbents have been fully- or partially-privatized; in the CIS the figure is just 50%.
• With many markets already privatized, privatization activity has slowed down over the past few years, especially in the aftermath of the economic downturn, with fewer interested investors and lower investment funds available.

On Making Broadband a National Policy Priority

• By 2010, some 82 countries around the world – from Afghanistan to the United States, Australia to Malawi, and Chile to Slovenia – had adopted or planned to adopt a national broadband strategy.
• National broadband policies and plans are clearly focusing on the benefits of building nationwide broadband infrastructure to provide public services online – including e-health, e-education and e-government.
• Over 40 countries¹ (the U.S. is one) now include broadband in their universal service / universal access definitions – and in some countries broadband access has become a legal right.

ATETV Blog Post - Fourth Generation (4G) Technologies

Thanks ATETV.ORG for allowing me to post over on your blog! Here's my post that went up on Thursday:

**********

ATETV adviser Gordon Snyder oversees the Telecommunications Technology program at Springfield Technical Community College, which concentrates on the numerous technologies that deliver information — in the form of voice, data, video or a combination of these.

Today, federal deregulation, growing security requirements, and rapidly changing developments in the areas of fiber optics, ATM, DSL, LAN/WAN technology, Cisco networking, and wireless technology, have all helped to make telecommunications and network technicians highly sought after in the marketplace.

In this week’s blog, Gordon brings us up to speed on some of the latest developments in wireless technology.

I’d like to thank the folks at ATE TV this week for the re-airing of episode #34 to coincide with our Winter 2011 ICT Educator Conference and for allowing me to post here on the ATETV blog. The episode covers why internships are important to employers and employees, the future of Information and Communication Technologies, and Biotechnology career options.

These days, most of us are carrying some sort of mobile device with the expectation of continuous connectivity and availability. With all of the advertising we’re seeing lately from providers like Verizon Wireless, AT&T Wireless and Sprint I thought it would be interesting to write a little bit about 4G wireless technologies.

4G is short for fourth generation and is a successor to third generation (3G) wireless technologies. 4G includes both LTE (Long Term Evolution) and WiMAX (Worldwide Interoperability for Microwave Access), and sets peak mobile download speeds of 100 Megabits per second (Mbps) and 1 Gigabit per second (Gbps) for fixed services. An example of a fixed service would be an antenna used for wireless access on top of your house.

You may be wondering – if both are considered 4G technologies and both offer the same bandwidths, what’s the differences between LTE technology used by providers like Verizon and AT&T and WiMAX used by other companies like Sprint? Is one technology better than the other? Why would one company decide on LTE while another decides on WiMAX to deliver next generation services? If they are very similar – what makes them different?

Here’s some quick answers taken from a few of my recent blog posts:

LTE is the 4G technology of choice of the larger mobile carriers like Verizon Wireless (launched LTE last month) and AT&T Wireless (scheduled to start LTE rollout this year). These carriers already have LTE spectrum and the money to buy more spectrum. They will also tell you that LTE more easily supports backward compatibility with earlier cellular technologies. LTE uses Frequency Division Duplex (FDD) spectrum.

WiMAX is the choice of carriers with Time Division Duplex (TDD) spectrum (launched by Sprint in 2008) and also makes sense for for green-field situations where backward compatibility is not needed.

So, LTE uses FDD spectrum and WiMAX uses TDD spectrum – what’s the difference? Here’s a quick explanation from three-g.net:

Frequency Division Duplex (FDD) and Time Division Duplex (TDD) are the two most prevalent duplexing schemes used in broadband wireless networks. TDD is the more efficient scheme, however, since it does not waste bandwidth. FDD, which historically has been used in voice-only applications, supports two-way radio communication by using two distinct radio channels. Alternatively, TDD uses a single frequency to transmit signals in both the downstream and upstream directions.

Basically, FDD (LTE) uses two channels and TDD (WiMAX) uses one channel for two-way communications.

Which technology will dominate? It looks like LTE in the United States but….. there are already issues with expensive and crowded spectrum. There’s also a lot more TDD spectrum available than FDD spectrum and TDD spectrum is cheaper.

Now, if LTE is preferred by the larger carriers in the United States and spectrum is in short supply, wouldn’t it make sense to try and develop a version of LTE that could use TDD spectrum? That’s what an emerging technology called TD-LTE does – it uses TDD spectrum for LTE transmission. Does it work? It sure looks like it. Last July, Ericsson and China Mobile demonstrated an end-to-end TD-LTE solution that achieved a single user peak downlink rate of 110Mbps and on Friday (December 31, 2010) China Mobile announced it had finally received approval from regulators and will start large-scale testing of domestically developed TD-LTE technology. This is going to be really interesting to watch!

Want to find out more? Watch (and search) places like ATETV.org and Gordon’s Information and Communications Technologies (ICT) Blog (my blog!) for more on emerging information and communications technologies like 4G along with the different kinds of great technical career opportunities community colleges can provide.

********

Here's episode #34 that I refer to.

Excellent! Thanks everyone at ATETV.ORG!!

FCC Net Neutrality Order Rules - Not Looking Like It's Going To Happen

In my last post I took a look at the first basic rule of Transparency in the 194 page Net Neutrality Report and Order document approved by the FCC on 12/21/10 and released on 12/23/10. Today let’s take a quick look at the second basic rule, No blocking, and the third rule, No unreasonable discrimination.

Starting with the No blocking rule, here’s a quote from page 88 of the report:

A person engaged in the provision of fixed broadband Internet access service, insofar as such person is so engaged, shall not block lawful content, applications, services, or non-harmful devices, subject to reasonable network management.

A person engaged in the provision of mobile broadband Internet access service, insofar as such person is so engaged, shall not block consumers from accessing lawful websites, subject to reasonable network management; nor shall such person block applications that compete with the provider’s voice or video telephony services, subject to reasonable network management.

This rule actually looks pretty good fo the consumer and the content provider but not so good for the ISPs like Verizon and Comcast. Here’s some detail from Stacey Higginbotham over at Gigaom.com hin her review titled Who Wins and Loses Under the FCC’s Net Neutrality Rules.

• ISPs can’t block lawful content, but won’t be put in a position to judge what is lawful or not.
• ISPs are not allowed to degrade content to the point where it can’t go through. For example, Comcast always maintained it didn’t block P2P files; it merely slowed the transmission of those files. However, that had the same effect as blocking P2P files, a distinction the FCC won’t tolerate.
• The rules also seek to prohibit the blocking of devices from wired networks by creating ungainly and expensive certification procedures such as Comcast was recently accused to be doing with Zoom Telephonics.

Higginbotham says this is good for consumers on fixed broadband networks, good for service providers in general, and bad for ISPs interested in overtly blocking competitive content.

Let’s look at the No unreasonable discrimination rule next, starting with another quote from page 88 of the report.

A person engaged in the provision of fixed broadband Internet access service, insofar as such person is so engaged, shall not unreasonably discriminate in transmitting lawful network traffic over a consumer’s broadband Internet access service. Reasonable network management shall not constitute unreasonable discrimination.

This is where the FCC condones usage-based pricing. There is also some crossover with the transparancy rule. Here’s more from the Higginbotham piece on the unreasonable discrimination rule.

• Thanks to ISPs telling end users how they manage their networks, consumers can ensure that discrimination isn’t unreasonable. End users can also discriminate, for example, blocking porn from their homes.
• This is also where the FCC condones usage-based pricing, although it assures us it will keep a watchful eye out for anti-consumer packages. In general, the FCC will scrutinize discrimination that harms end users, harms a competitive service to one an ISP provides or stifles free expression, such as slowing traffic from a website the ISP doesn’t agree with.
• It also calls out paid prioritization, by which a content provider pays an ISP more money in order to deliver its content faster as problematic.

Higginbotham says this rule is not great for consumers or web service and device providers, because they will have to go to the FCC and prove the ISP is being unreasonable when problems occur. Not every consumer or company has the resources for such a fight.

I’ve read all 194 pages (more than once!) and found the document to be unclear, confusing and at times contradictory. I’m not an attorney but it looks like I’m not the only one having problems understanding it. Consumers, providers, and ISPs are all claiming victory which likely means they are almost as confused as me. They all appear to be interpreting to their advantage. This kind of confusion typically leads to legal issues and that is the last thing we need when we’re trying to catch up with the rest of the world.

There’s also 85 new Republicans (along with 9 new Democrats) coming to take control of Congress in a couple of days on January 5. In a December 21 press conference, incoming House Commerce Chairman Fred Upton (R-Mich) said that his committee is planning multiple hearings to beat back regulations the FCC approved. Other Republicans are backing him up including chairman of the Communications subcommittee Greg Walden (R-Ore.) and incoming vice chairwoman of the trade subcommittee Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.) who has also said she will reintroduce legislation to block the rules.

It's not looking like this is going to happen.

FCC Net Neutrality Order Rules - Transparency

I've held back writing about the new FCC order because I wanted some time to digest what it all means. With the holidays I have not had a lot of time to take a real good look. This post is my first attempt at explaining how the order will impact people like myself - the average consumer.

The 194 page Report and Order document approved by the FCC on 12/21/10 was released on 12/23/10. The Report and Order lays out three basic rules that, according to the FCC, are grounded in broadly accepted Internet norms, as well as FCC prior decisions. Here they are:

1. Transparency. Fixed and mobile broadband providers must disclose the network management practices, performance characteristics, and terms and conditions of their broadband services;
2. No blocking. Fixed broadband providers may not block lawful content, applications, services, or non-harmful devices; mobile broadband providers may not block lawful websites, or block applications that compete with their voice or video telephony services; and
   
3. No unreasonable discrimination. Fixed broadband providers may not unreasonably discriminate in transmitting lawful network traffic.
   

I've written in the past about the FCC net neutrality -this new order is a compromise of a 2009 FCC proposal that was countered with a proposal from Google and Verizon. Technically it actually dates back to February 2004 when then FCC Chairman Michael Powell gave a speech titled Preserving Internet Freedom: Guiding Principles for the Industry where he laid out his vision of the broadband Internet and what he called the four Internet Freedoms in response to calls for some type of network neutrality.

In this post I'll look at just the transparency rule. Here's a quote pulled frowm page 88 of the Report and Order.

A person engaged in the provision of broadband Internet access service shall publicly disclose accurate information regarding the network management practices, performance, and commercial terms of its broadband Internet access services sufficient for consumers to make informed choices regarding use of such services and for content, application, service, and device providers to develop, market, and maintain Internet offerings.

Sounds good right? Not so quick. Stacey Higginbotham over at Gigaom.com has put together a nice review titled Who Wins and Loses Under the FCC’s Net Neutrality Rules. Here's a piece from her post:

• The FCC doesn’t go as far as to establish a so-called Schumer Box for broadband which would disclose speeds or details in some type of consumer-friendly standardized language, but it does say an ISP must disclose on their websites and at the point of sale how it manages congestion on its network, the speeds it offers and what types of applications would work over those speed packages.
  
• The FCC needs to explain how a user might trigger security restrictions, how the ISP inspects its traffic generally and how an aggrieved end user might address issues with the ISP.
  
• An ISP must also show how its own VoIP or IPTV services affect how it delivers broader Internet traffic.
• The FCC outsources the tracking of violations of these rules to consumers and engineers. It provides the enforcement, but isn’t going to hunt down the problems, it seems.
  
• Since transparency is the foundation of this whole order, the lack of a standard framework that’s easily understood by end users is bad for consumers.
  
• Outside applications and watchdog groups can fill in the gap and may find the task easier with these rules.

Overall Higginbotham says the transparency rule is good for carriers, because it’s minimally invasive in terms of how they market their services, yet poor for consumers, because it won’t help the average user much, and good for tech-savvy edge service providers who will have the information needed to build apps for certain networks.

I'll review the no blocking rule in my next post.

Happy Holidays!

FCC Chairman - Net Neutrality Proposed Rules

I've written here in the past about Net Neutrality and the issues. Yesterday, FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski announced a set of proposed rules to protect the open Internet. Here's a summary of Genachowski's announcement with pieces taken from a post by Nick Farrell:

• Genachowski will present the principle that broadband companies shouldn't block or degrade rival web content, services or applications to a vote that will be held on 21 December.
• The compromise rules in theory mean that US Internet users can use peer-to-peer software and see whatever websites they like and use any equipment they like on their cable or DSL connections.
• Carriers and ISPs will be barred from slowing down or blocking content from competitors. The ISPs will also have to be transparent about how they manage congestion on their networks to ensure that anti-competitive behavior isn't being disguised.

Sounds good so far but is it enough? Carriers will still be allowed to create paid fast lanes on the net and the FCC is not reclassifying the Internet as a "telecommunications service", which would have given the FCC clear authority to enforce its rules.

According to Farrrell, Genachowski has the support of Cisco CEO John Chambers, AT&T senior executive VP Jim Ciccono, and Comcast EVP David Cohen. The Communication Workers of America is also in support with a petition you can sign here. Not everyone thinks it goes far enough though. Sascha Meinrath, director of the New America Foundation's Open Technology Initiative has a post over at Wired. Here's a quote from Meinrath's piece:

Without fundamental changes to the current order, the Chairman’s proposal will be a great victory for the largest telecom corporations and a sound defeat for those working to support innovation and the economic vibrancy that an open Internet facilitates. The New America Foundation is hopeful that the Chairman’s office and Commissioners that support open Internet rules will develop a final order that uphold the FCC’s responsibility to protect consumers and Internet freedom.

In order to take effect, the proposal must be approved by a majority of the five FCC commissioners . Here's how Wireless Week breaks down that vote if it were to happen today.

• There’s no way Genachowski will vote against a proposal he himself introduced and has fought so hard for. He's a YES.
• Michael Copps issued the most carefully-worded statement of the bunch, but so far he’s been a big proponent of Genachowski’s net neutrality push and it’s unlikely he’ll back out now. Also a YES.
• Mignon Clyburn seemed to be in favor of the plan, saying “clear rules of road are absolutely necessary.” Another YES.
• Meredith Baker and Robert McDowell came out against the idea in comments filed today. That is two NOs.

Right now it looks like it would pass 3-2. We'll see what happens on December 21.

Verizon and Rural Fixed 4G LTE Wireless

The turkey's just about gone at our house, transitioning from a Thanksgiving Day bird to turkey sandwiches, turkey salad, turkey chili and maybe (just maybe) some turkey soup. It was a nice relaxing holiday and like most people, I enjoyed watching some football on Thanksgiving day - it was especially good this year because the New England Patriots were playing the Detroit Lions. Go Pats!

During the game on Thursday I found one commercial particularly interesting - the new one from Verizon Wireless 4G LTE (Long Term Evolution). If you have not seen it - here it is.

What's so interesting?

• The commercial is rural focused - no fancy city slicker stuff here and no mobile/cell phones are shown. What looks like an old farm that could have been taken out of the 1940's - the kind of location telcos like Verizon have avoided or, at most, have been trying to push low bandwidth DSL service to.
  
• The farm in the commercial looks like it only has electrical power strung on poles - take a look around 6 seconds into it - there are some poles running down a very long driveway. I only see one cable and it looks like power to me. I guess they could be telephone wires or the copper could be buried for phone service.

So, we've got this rural farm out in the middle of nowhere with this big long driveway/access road. Not a place anyone would expect to find any kind of internet access beyond dial-up or maybe some kind of satellite service. The kid runs back with the Verizon package and.... you see the rest..... broadband!

Picking the commercial apart here's what I see for today and the future:

• Verizon will be pitching LTE as a both a mobile and a fixed service. Fixed service will be pushed especially in rural areas where other broadband options are not available. LTE won't just be for mobile devices and the commercial makes this clear.
• Initially fixed voice and data services will be available but in time, we'll likely see a video service being sold. But - with all of the major networks streaming now along with companies like Hulu and Netflix delivering online content - the line is rapidly blurring between data and video services.
  
• Can video be delivered over LTE - yes. There are capacity issues when it comes to the number of cell towers and backhaul fiber that needs to be run to the towers to handle the load. Over time this will be taken care of. I think we'll see something similar to the Optical Network Terminals (ONT's) used for FiOS installed in people's homes - they will be called WNT's (Wireless Network Terminals) or something like that.
• Verizon FiOS is basically finished - what's there and in the process of being negotiated is there. Nothing more at least from Verizon when it comes to fiber to the home (FTTH). For now. the push is wireless.

Things are (finally) going to start moving - Verizon Wireless claims they will have full nationwide LTE coverage by 2013. AT&T is not far behind when it comes to roll-out plans and Sprint/Clearwire has had WiMax (a competing 4G service) availble for the past year or so.

Living in rural New England with only one broadband option I'm pretty excited about the kind of competition LTE is going to bring. When it comes to the Patriots though - I'm not real excited about the competition those New York Jets are bringing - they are a really good team!