[CWN-Summit] Re:[wsfii-discuss] SF Bay Area project Status / Stanford GROW-Net project

[Steve Okay]

On Dec 3, 2007, at 10:00 , cwn-summit-request at lists.cuwireless.net  
wrote:

> Send CWN-Summit mailing list submissions to
> 	cwn-summit at lists.cuwireless.net
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> 	http://lists.chambana.net/cgi-bin/listinfo/cwn-summit
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> 	cwn-summit-request at lists.cuwireless.net
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> 	cwn-summit-owner at lists.cuwireless.net
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of CWN-Summit digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
>    1. Re: [wsfii-discuss] SF Bay Area project Status / Stanford
>       GROW-Net project (Ramon Roca)
>    2. SF Bay Area project Status / Stanford GROW-Net project
>       (Ramon Roca)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Sun, 02 Dec 2007 20:47:38 +0100
> From: Ramon Roca <ramon.roca at guifi.net>
> Subject: [CWN-Summit] Re: [wsfii-discuss] SF Bay Area project Status /
> 	Stanford GROW-Net project
> To: Discuss list on the World Summit on Free Information
> 	Infrastructure	<wsfii-discuss at lists.okfn.org>
> Cc: CWN-Summit at lists.cuwireless.net
> Message-ID: <47530BDA.8090102 at guifi.net>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
>
> Some info on this:
>
> http://pnrl.stanford.edu/grownet/Files/Grownet-cleanslate-poster.pdf
> http://pnrl.stanford.edu/grownet/grownet.htm
>
> En/na Ramon Roca ha escrit:
>> I've a colleague who has been in Stanford this week, and there he  
>> heard
>> about the GROW-Net project.
>> Looks like is about the SF initiative. I thought that it was over.

The links on that page do indeed point to the Google/Earthlink  
project which was voted
down in the San Francisco City elections back in November.
IIRC, the issues were that the free part of the network were going to  
be relatively low-speed
and not cover all of the City, plus had a number of anti-CWN  
components to it which were added/dropped/modified
as varying forms of the proposal were hammered out.

The overall aim of the proposal seemed to be to provide "the first  
taste is free" access to everyone in hopes of driving them
to actually sign up and pay for Earthlink service which would be much  
faster.

Was was voted on was not so much "Should there a mandate for free  
city-wide Wi-Fi in SF" as "Should there be a mandate for city-wide Wi- 
Fi that must use
the Google/Earthlink deal as a model for any current or future plan".

----Steve