Receive new posts as email.
RSS 0.91 | RSS 2.0
RDF | Atom
Podcast only feed (RSS 2.0 format)
Get an RSS reader
Get a Podcast receiver
| 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 |
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 or JiWire, Inc.
Entire site and all contents except otherwise noted © Copyright 2001-2006 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
« Wee-Fi: Wi-Fly Me to the Stars; London Undersound | Main | Good News in Minneapolis, Some Delays in St. Louis Park »
Carol Ellison files this thoughtful article at MuniWireless on Cleveland’s approach to city-wide Wi-Fi: She notes that despite having five responses from an RFP issued in April, the mayor is saying that the city won’t be an anchor tenant. She tried to get clarification as to what the “phased approach” the mayor was pushing meant, and wasn’t given additional information. She thinks that the lily-pad approach engaged in by a non-profit in Cleveland might be the model in mind; hotzones, not a city-wide network to start with. She notes that MetroFi and EarthLink both responded to the RFP.
Posted by Glennf at November 8, 2007 10:21 AM
Categories: Metro-Scale Networks, Municipal
TrackBack URL for this entry:
https://db.isbn.nu/mt3/mt-tb.pl/4903