[CWN-Summit] Students tout WiFi co-ops as alternative to municipal WiFi

[David Young]

On Thu, Feb 07, 2008 at 07:04:15PM -0600, ben wrote:
> This appeared in Ars Technica yesterday:
> 
> "Students tout WiFi co-ops as alternative to municipal WiFi"
> http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20080206-students-tout-wifi-co-ops-as-alternative-to-municipal-wifi.html

It has always seemed to me that the best and only way to provide
ubiquitous, low-cost/free WiFi is to aggregate existing access points
in this manner, especially since you cannot feasibly match the coverage
of APs that citizens have already installed.

A municipality may have an important role to play in providing a
low-cost/free service to neighborhoods where WiFi adoption is very low.
Where they fill that role, munis should not necessarily avoid aggregating
inexpensive APs that connect to disparate Internet providers.

Freeloading could be a problem, you cannot deny it, but you can protect
against that by requiring that you offer an AP in order to use an AP.
I believe that is FON's approach.  What irks me about FON is that their
model has a central "tollbooth" that is not strictly necessary for any
technical reason.  Of course, it is quite desirable for business reasons
to collect those tolls!

If freeloading is difficult, then ISPs have little ground for objecting.
It actually adds value to their Internet service if, when you buy it,
you get roaming WiFi access for free, and the ISP doesn't have to pay
for the roaming network's upkeep.

Years ago, SBC (now AT&T) would sell you your DSL with one of those
frightening 400mW 2Wire-brand access points.  As I recall, WEP was
activated by default.  I thought SBC was going to use those APs to
provide a paid WiFi roaming service.  They never did.  I don't know if
the idea hadn't actually occurred to them, or if they weren't able to
sell enough APs to get the coverage they desired.

Dave

-- 
David Young             OJC Technologies
dyoung at ojctech.com      Urbana, IL * (217) 278-3933 ext 24