On Mon, Dec 20, 2010 at 10:01 PM, Charles N Wyble <char...@knownelement.com> wrote: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > On 12/20/2010 04:56 PM, Jeromie Reeves wrote: >> While I do agree with the idea that we need less regulation of (fixed) >> wireless and a lower barrier to entry for cellular wireless, I would >> like to knwo what parts of this particular proposal you have a issue >> with. I, personally, would love to see the layer 1 and layer 2+ be >> forcably broken apart for wired isps (IE, if you are a ILEC, you must >> have a separate business entity run the 2+, with set prices for >> everyone who wants to be a layer 2+ entity on that layer 1 network) >> with wireless getting a mix of this (unlicensed is not bound to layer >> 1/2+ split, with some licensed being (like cellular) and some licensed >> not being bound (like 3.65, sub 700) and opening more spectrum (that >> is a mix of bound and non-bound) and see where that takes us. Time to >> wake up and go pickup the kids. > > > Um..... > > so you want the big guys to have to play by certain rules (be dumb > pipes) but you wouldn't have to play by those rules as a small player? > > Why shouldn't that regulation be applied to wisps as well? Why shouldn't > you have to share spectrum? > > Let's realize we are all in this together and come up with workable > solutions. Let's be partners with the ISPs and not make it us vs them.
You did not read my post well at all. I DID say wireless should play by the same rules, just not ALL wireless. 900,2.4,5.x and such unlicensed bands <could never hold up to the SLA needed for such rules>. I said NEW bands should be found and licensed <to the same sharing rules>. The rules also should be a little different for wireless, since it is a more over subscribed pipe then cable/dsl/fiber. Still, a NEW band WITH the sharing rules I would be all for. It needs to be LICENSED as such. > > ..... > > I have been doing a lot of thinking about how to make packet movement > (in particular backhaul) somewhat more fair. I already discussed peering > on the list in recent days. > > Have folks been following the NBN rollout in Australlia? It leaves a > certain amount of rough edges on the implementation specifics (see the > AUSNOG mailing list archives for several very detailed discussions). > However it's a national l2 network. Pretty cool stuff. > > See I'm a layer3 and above guy, and have targeted very specific areas > for my wireless deployment (currently in 4 locations in the greater > la/oc area). I'm deploying an advertising network and giving internet > access away. I'm going into areas that don't have a lot of existing > wifi, running heavily localized advertising driven hotspots. So I don't > have spectrum issues. This is what I am doing also, cept I am targeting areas that both have and do not have a lot of existing wifi. One of the good things since everyone jumped on the WPA/2 bandwagon is no more open wifi! =) > > However I face the same problems as many wisps at layer3 and above > (namely getting bandwidth at a good price where I need it). > > So what would folks like to see? Would you like to see a layer1/2 > "natural monopolie" run as a municipal utility, that would run an open > access/co-op fiber network? No. For ILECs to be ran as a layer1 corp, and everyone layer 2+ to be ran as a separate one. That would mean that I could do layer2+ where I wanted to on tax payer funded lines, and my other corp could do layer1, with or with out tax payer monies. Corp1 has to lease from Corp2 and Corp2 has to lease to <everyone> under the same schedule. No sweetheart deals for my self cause I am both Corp 1 and Corp 2. Take Qw's $15 DSL. It costs ME $40/mo for that same loop with NO IP on it. It was paid for by tax payers, it should be available. And do you think Qw will let ME into the local CO or the RT's to offer better services? > > How many here participated in the broadband forum meetings that were > held prior to the Obama election? How many people here reached out to > those folks and requested exactly this? I know I did (I went to the Los > Angeles meeting). > > Don't get mad, get even!!! > > Hmmm... the above was a bit rambling... looks like rough pieces of a > mind map for a blog post. :) > > Things to think about anyway. > > > > > > > > > >> >> >> >> On Mon, Dec 20, 2010 at 4:30 PM, MDK <rea...@muddyfrogwater.us> wrote: >>> No, we LOST. You see, once they have the power, they have the power. It >>> is not a victory to be partially regulated, or to get "partial exemption". >>> >>> I cannot imagine why industry is rolling over and playing dead for this. >>> >>> As far as I’m concerned it's "come and arrest me, coppers" and I will damn >>> well NOT comply. >>> >>> And if we all did that. They'd just give up. But we're too chicken to >>> stand up for ourselves, as a country, anymore, apparently. I don't know >>> when people forgot that according to the Constitution, we tell the >>> government what to do and where to get off, not the other way around. >>> > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- > Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux) > Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ > > iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJNEEKgAAoJEMvvG/TyLEAt19AQAJ37RZb/1ORF1XUr+Cb6O2xX > M1Sp2QKxqPUfG+EaGGosLRchOrK8TyWrlxR8LR9qEYzFXbNO8VDg4DQlsl06p7FC > rlrSDwXhFWHjJ7bx2EbSIhXC5JQoWsBRy1vS4D4FRdG5NqoTOEZbmCuFLhGM6FbG > gd+lcawW1v4IcmK5clRceVqMC3Re/oPKGoMFSKLeQlv2eyXGz8qmyGT9h2XV+85j > jzzVcjdypTzTVtPW3oT5d5FgPPLEfkTlCQN0POYTELyJGrEmVyYjgCKfttK90Jjy > vgO5NPBISZzPV9K5iTt6znDiMda+es2olIn13FI20wAl6WZJCdKmId4zqHWnWm+O > 8075XcuMoydANddR/0SPiJcoJo0pMI2yScTf4Iy79eVXQVKMFIbqS8uoZEnmJRXE > /jxwXdzR69hxww91eTWEtDnbpBxyki10WCvPReCma2VE/9BoQKBIuol7qhMHg999 > BPqgCW8U6g/lBrxNmwVNPGftngXi5UzyNqwfsksUxpV/OwNjU5/dr2v6DAdpRcPK > 0w7N+Urkh7sUApFEc3hYTpYPBJTL2Rhjp3s5xt89cxjr/DimuhH0WyKCcIPsTQNv > uwP9xq3YcpQ12wIJyZP6ODSwNV1Aabzdr+tZIHsTcfwrEpw6GIJaNtNsqxq6//2v > PWBrSECldSImdr5ZqrDN > =hM4B > -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > WISPA Wants You! Join today! > http://signup.wispa.org/ > -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org > > Subscribe/Unsubscribe: > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > > Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ > -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
