Email Delivery

Receive new posts as email.

Email address

Syndicate this site

RSS | Atom

Contact

About This Site
Contact Us
Privacy Policy

Search


November 2010
Sun Mon Tues Wed Thurs Fri Sat
  1 2 3 4 5 6
7 8 9 10 11 12 13
14 15 16 17 18 19 20
21 22 23 24 25 26 27
28 29 30        

Stories by Category

Basics :: Basics
Casting :: Casting Listen In Podcasts Videocasts
Culture :: Culture Hacking
Deals :: Deals
FAQ :: FAQ
Future :: Future
Hardware :: Hardware Adapters Appliances Chips Consumer Electronics Gaming Home Entertainment Music Photography Video Gadgets Mesh Monitoring and Testing PDAs Phones Smartphones
Industry :: Industry Conferences Financial Free Health Legal Research Vendor analysis
International :: International
Media :: Media Locally cached Streaming
Metro-Scale Networks :: Metro-Scale Networks Community Networking Municipal
Network Types :: Network Types Broadband Wireless Cellular 2.5G and 3G 4G Power Line Satellite
News :: News Mainstream Media
Politics :: Politics Regulation Sock Puppets
Schedules :: Schedules
Security :: Security 802.1X
Site Specific :: Site Specific Administrative Detail April Fool's Blogging Book review Cluelessness Guest Commentary History Humor Self-Promotion Unique Wee-Fi Who's Hot Today?
Software :: Software Open Source
Spectrum :: Spectrum 60 GHz
Standards :: Standards 802.11a 802.11ac 802.11ad 802.11e 802.11g 802.11n 802.20 Bluetooth MIMO UWB WiGig WiMAX ZigBee
Transportation and Lodging :: Transportation and Lodging Air Travel Aquatic Commuting Hotels Rails
Unclassified :: Unclassified
Vertical Markets :: Vertical Markets Academia Enterprise WLAN Switches Home Hot Spot Aggregators Hot Spot Advertising Road Warrior Roaming Libraries Location Medical Public Safety Residential Rural SOHO Small-Medium Sized Business Universities Utilities wISP
Voice :: Voice

Archives

November 2010 | October 2010 | September 2010 | August 2010 | July 2010 | June 2010 | May 2010 | April 2010 | March 2010 | February 2010 | January 2010 | December 2009 | November 2009 | October 2009 | September 2009 | August 2009 | July 2009 | June 2009 | May 2009 | April 2009 | March 2009 | February 2009 | January 2009 | December 2008 | November 2008 | October 2008 | September 2008 | August 2008 | July 2008 | June 2008 | May 2008 | April 2008 | March 2008 | February 2008 | January 2008 | December 2007 | November 2007 | October 2007 | September 2007 | August 2007 | July 2007 | June 2007 | May 2007 | April 2007 | March 2007 | February 2007 | January 2007 | December 2006 | November 2006 | October 2006 | September 2006 | August 2006 | July 2006 | June 2006 | May 2006 | April 2006 | March 2006 | February 2006 | January 2006 | December 2005 | November 2005 | October 2005 | September 2005 | August 2005 | July 2005 | June 2005 | May 2005 | April 2005 | March 2005 | February 2005 | January 2005 | December 2004 | November 2004 | October 2004 | September 2004 | August 2004 | July 2004 | June 2004 | May 2004 | April 2004 | March 2004 | February 2004 | January 2004 | December 2003 | November 2003 | October 2003 | September 2003 | August 2003 | July 2003 | June 2003 | May 2003 | April 2003 | March 2003 | February 2003 | January 2003 | December 2002 | November 2002 | October 2002 | September 2002 | August 2002 | July 2002 | June 2002 | May 2002 | April 2002 | March 2002 | February 2002 | January 2002 | December 2001 | November 2001 | October 2001 | September 2001 | August 2001 | July 2001 | June 2001 | May 2001 | April 2001 |

Recent Entries

In-Flight Wi-Fi and In-Flight Bombs
Can WPA Protect against Firesheep on Same Network?
Southwest Sets In-Flight Wi-Fi at $5
Eye-Fi Adds a View for Web Access
Firesheep Makes Sidejacking Easy
Wi-Fi Direct Certification Starts
Decaf on the Starbucks Digital Network
Google Did Snag Passwords
WiMax and LTE Not Technically 4G by ITU Standards
AT&T Wi-Fi Connections Keep High Growth with Free Service

Site Philosophy

This site operates as an independent editorial operation. Advertising, sponsorships, and other non-editorial materials represent the opinions and messages of their respective origins, and not of the site operator. Part of the FM Tech advertising network.

Copyright

Entire site and all contents except otherwise noted © Copyright 2001-2010 by Glenn Fleishman. Some images ©2006 Jupiterimages Corporation. All rights reserved. Please contact us for reprint rights. Linking is, of course, free and encouraged.

Powered by
Movable Type

« New Bluetooth Profile Extends Automotive Hands-Free Use | Main | Quiet Addition of 255 MHz in 5 GHz for 802.11a, Backhaul »

February 17, 2006

Chicago Plots Wi-Fi

Chicago is starting plans to have a Wi-Fi network built across its nearly 230 square miles: The city's CIO said companies will be asked to talk about how they might build the network, which sounds like an RFI (request for information) rather than a more concrete RFP (request for proposals). The CIO said quite firmly that no city money would be involved in building or operating the metro-scale network.

Oddly, Steven Titch of the Heartland Institute, a perennial opponent to the construction of municipal telecom, is quoted as being in favor of this approach. It's possible there's a subtlety missing in his quote, or that the institute has moved to supporting cities that are essentially franchising the building of wireless networks. But this jibes with the statement earlier this week by the CTIA, the cell industry trade group, that it's not opposed to these kinds of networks, either, as their members might bid on them. Update: Titch confirms (see comments below) that his views are accurately represented and notes there's no connection with the CTIA statement. He also points readers to reason.org for more on the franchised city-wide network topic.

One commentator noted that if you stop calling a municipally requested network a "municipal network" and call it something else, like metro-scale or city-wide, you suddenly remove the notion that the city is controlling or funding it. That semantic change may be significant.

The RFI or RFP will be issued in spring with recommendations for the mayor and city council before fall.

2 TrackBacks

According to a recent report by the Chicago Tribune the city is looking offer a free wi-fi grid to blanket the city of Chicago. This will help to bring Chicago up to speed with San Francisco [with help from Google] Read More

Chicago Plots Wi-fi from BroadbandIssues.com on February 20, 2006 5:52 AM

Wi-Fi Networking News:One commentator noted that if you stop calling a municipally requested network a “municipal network” and call it something else, like metro-scale or city-wide, you suddenly remove the notion that the city is controlling or fun... Read More

2 Comments

Glenn, you hit the nail on the head with this insight about the difference in a name. I think there is a significant difference in a "city" (an urban area), a "municipality" (an urban area under a single government - or, the government itself), and a "metropolitan area" (a larger contiguous urban area). That's why I call them MetroNets - no government, no city. But there's more to the lack of objections by the Heartland Institute and the CTIA.

When the municipal government forswears any capital or operating expense, they're removing much of the objection from arguments made by the Titches of the world. You have to wonder what would be left to object to - Chicago's CIO is prudently seeking to bring more value into his city by taking this initiative, thereby creating opportunity for the private sector at next to no risk for the taxpayers. Ironically, by taking "the pledge" to spend no money on the network, city planners can actually make it more attractive to a private sector partner to jump in. Reminds me of how TXU split the bill with Current Communications, leaving the network to Current, but granting them a long-term service contract to lower their risk. I hope we see more of this model. How about a "NextGen MetroNet?" Works for me.

The Tribune quoted me accurately, but the article did not get into some of the other questions I raised: particularly transparency. Even if there's little or no financial risk, the city is placing political capital on the line. They want the municipal service to succeed. If Chicago, as in Philly's case, takes the role of "anchor tenant," providing much of the cash flow in for the early years, there should be enough transparency to ensure city departments that don't have -- and never will need -- wireless communications aren't suddenly given six-figure budgets to "spend" on wireless services.
There's also the question of whether the city can single out one contractor for special ROW rates, or whether the rate offered to one must be offered to all. I understand that Philadelphia is trying to pin this down.
Still, on the whole, these franchise-like agreements are less egregious than putting city resources at risk. My opinion on this did not spring from the CTIA announcement, as Glenn hints. You can find similar thoughts at the Out of Control blog at www.reason.org that go back a few months.