cross posted in alt.cellular.attws to support Oxford's fantasy.
Promises Free Wireless in San Francisco
Meraki Networks Inc.
[sniped] San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom plans to help Meraki "publicize and grow the network without the bureaucracy and politics that challenged our last effort to bring free Wi-Fi to San Francisco," spokesman Nathan Ballard wrote in an e-mail. Newsom has been pushing for three years for citywide Wi-Fi.
DTC wrote in news:Tv8gj.28423$4V6.13287 @newssvr14.news.prodigy.net:
"Customers Chip In
A key advantage is that by asking users instead of the city for mounting rights for its gear, Meraki will bypass the rancorous political fights over contract terms like the one that slowed down EarthLink's initiative last year. But seeking volunteers also makes sure that however fully Meraki has actually covered the city by the end of the year, it is pretty sure to have coverage where people actually want it."
This is a great idea. I'll host one to replace the free hotspot I'm already providing to cable.
SELLular could learn a lot by this concept, too.....
"Would everyone willing to let his SELLular company put a microcell on his roof to cover the neighborhood and make a full-scale signal everywhere inside his house...please raise their hands."
This concept would work well for BOTH services. A friend of mine owns a small farm near Charleston, more of a hobby than a job. A couple of SELLphone companies approached him to put a tower on his property because it's near I-26 where their customers come and go. He made them a deal they couldn't refuse, way back in the AMPS days. They put a 500' tower on his land that serves 3 SELLphone companies. They have a 99 year lease agreement with him that provides:
1) AC power to his farm....
2) A SELLphone to each member of his local family every 2 years, their choice, including all services available.
3) SELLular internet aircards and service to his computers.
4) Coordinated tower space for his ham radio antennas on a non- interfering basis with the primary carriers.
The SELLphone company was more than happy to agree as it costs them nearly nothing, compared to what they pay for tower space. The first company provides all these services. They rent tower and power out to the other companies which more than covers any costs providing service to him. It's a sweet deal for all and has been running for many, many years.
All his kids have the latest and greatest toyphones...(c; The AMPS phones in his cars and truck still function great, out there in the country. I'm not sure how many numbers they have. I have 5 of them... (c; There's also no need to conserve electricity on the "All Electric Farm". The power never fails, either, because the farm is downstream of the monsterous diesel genset and multiKW UPS. His lights don't even blink! The tower is 800', a safe distance, from the house, to satisfy his wife's fears....(c;
We already got that covered! It's called CABLE TELEVISION or SATELLITE TELEVISION, from various sources. They actually PAY cable companies to bring advertising into their homes to play on their $5,000 monster billboards in the middle of their living rooms....in 5-channel stereo!
On Wed, 09 Jan 2008 01:00:41 GMT, John Navas wrote in :
Ugly truths about mesh networks - they dont scale - for now. by Francis daCosta
As founder and CTO of a Wireless Mesh networking company, I have pondered long and hard about whether or not I should submit this.
The buzz on mesh networking certainly works in our favor. However, there is more hype than reality around mesh networking. Its time for a reality check on what mesh can and cannot do.
First, Mesh networks are not a new concept. In some ways, the internet is a mesh network. And it works, despite its size - because it does not suffer from the limitations of conventional wireless mesh networks:
1- Radio is a shared medium and forces everyone to stay silent while one person holds the stage. Wired networks, on the other hand, can and do hold multiple simultaneous conversations.
2- In a single radio ad hoc mesh network, the best you can do is (1/2)^^n at each hop. So in a multi hop mesh network, the Max available bandwidth available to you degrades at the rate of 1/2, 1/4, 1/8. By the time you are 4 hops away the max you can get is 1/16 of the total available bandwidth.
3- That does not sound too bad when you are putting together a wireless sensor network with limited bandwidth and latency considerations. It is DISASTROUS if you wish to provide the level of latency/throughput people are accustomed to with their wired networks. Consider the case of just 10 client stations at each node of a 4 hop mesh network. The clients at the last rung will receive -at best- 1/(16,0000) of the total bandwidth at the root.
4- Why has this not been noticed as yet? Because first there are not a lot of mesh networks around and second, they have not been tested under high usage situations. Browsing and email don t count. Try video - where both latency and bandwidth matter - or VOIP where the bandwidth is a measly 64Kbps but where latency matters. Even in a simple 4 hop ad hoc mesh network with 10 clients, VOIP phones wont work well beyond the first or second hop the latency and jitter caused by CSMA/CA contention windows (how wireless systems avoid collisions) will be unbearable.
Mesh networks are a great concept. But the challenge lies in managing the dynamics of mesh networks so users receive an acceptable level of performance in terms of both latency and throughput.
Its time to focus on solving some real problems to make mesh networks scale and provide stable performance.