Email Delivery

Receive new posts as email.

Email address

Syndicate this site

RSS | Atom


About This Site
Contact Us
Privacy Policy


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
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


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.


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

« Heartland Institute Continues to Tell Story of Municipal Broadband Failure | Main | Speakeasy Says No Deal with Fon »

February 5, 2006

Google, Skype, Others Invest in Fon

I have noticeably ridiculed Fon since its hapless announcement and subsequent hype fest two months ago (Reuters, Associated Press, New York Times, Wall Street Journal, Fortune): Today, news broke that instead of a bottom-up, grassroots-driven effort to spread Wi-Fi access through individuals installing Fon's firmware on commodity gateways, this group is aiming to become a multi-hundred-million-dollar company. That's more like it.

Google, Skype, Sequoia Capital, and Index Ventures have put in nearly $22 million to spread Fon's idea, which I suspect will involve Fon installing seed nodes through the world. Fon's model, partly implemented, involves three categories of users: free operators, for-fee operators, and non-operators. The free operators, or Linuses, provide no-cost access to other Linuses; for-fee operators, or Bills, charge everyone and receive no free access; non-operators or Aliens pay for service at all locations.

Part of why I'd ridiculed Fon was because it seemed to rely on an idea already discarded in the Wi-Fi hotspot world that by providing the right software and incentives, tens of thousands of people would install hotspots, building a worthwhile network. But this is problematic because hardware and physical locality are tough sells.

Skype is useful when even two people have Skype in the entire world. Those two people, if geographically distant, save money using it and have better quality calls. With a few thousand people on Skype, it becomes viral because its value is much higher the more connections among people. A few million, and you have a multi-billion-dollar acquisition by eBay.

Fon is harder because home gateways of the type they are providing software for initially--some Linksys models with Linux embedded operating system software--can't produce much of a signal. Home users can provide service to relatively few other home users via these gateways. There's only utility in the Fon network if you're charging for service and a lot of people use a hotspot, or if you're not charging for it and a lot of Fon locations exist in the places you travel to (around town or the world) for you to also use for free.

The investment capital they've raised signals that while their network might be extended on a peer-to-peer basis, they'll be putting their money into seeding the network by putting nodes in well-trafficked areas, probably in the thousands.

They have a real ISP problem, discussed extensively in the AP and Reuters story on Fon's incoming capital, because (as the AP reporter quotes me saying) it's trivial for ISPs to track Fon operators if the ISP bans sharing an Internet connection. Fon has central authentication so even with encryption, the destination of Fon messages will be known. (Of course, if Fon uses a peer-to-peer model like Skype, they could tunnel authentication through peers making this impossible, but that's not a reliable way to run a login system.) Speakeasy and Sweden's Glocalnet have signed up, Reuters reports; Speakeasy is the only national ISP I am aware of in the U.S. that encourages sharing their connections. (Update: Speakeasy says there's no deal.)

Om Malik points out that Skype has concerns about being blocked by ISPs, so an alternate network of sorts--ISPs are still in the middle of this--benefits them, while Google is sorting out Wi-Fi business models. I argue strongly that Google will not become a Wi-Fi provider beyond San Francisco and Mountain View (at least not on any large scale) because their interest is high-margin businesses like advertising not low-margin ones like service provision.

Fon can only succeed with critical mass being achieved quickly enough to encourage the grass-roots uptake they need and with ISPs not banning them as critical mass grows. (Fon's founder said they'll subsidize the gateways so people can buy versions with Fon software installed--flashed over existing firmware--for $25, instead of $50 to $70 retail.)

And shouldn't municipal-scale networks with limited free access kind of distort the Fon model? Why use Fon when you can get 300 Kbps for fee (Google's bid for San Francisco) or two hours a day for free (many other cities)? If Google is as successful in building a business model for ISPs to run municipal wireless networks, advertising-supported service--such as what MetroFi now offers in three Bay Area cities--seems to wipe the floor with Fon.

Lest Fon be seen as entirely new and unique exclusive of the three firms mentioned before that tried this model using cheap computers and software instead of commodity gateways and firmware--Joltage, SOHONetworks, and Sputnik--remember that LessNetworks and Radiuz have been offering community authentication for a while. LessNetworks has been kicking around for a couple of years, a for-profit outgrowth of the Austin Wireless City Project that offers a gateway page, community features, and user accounts for free access for a small management fee; they donate their services to nonprofits and others, too. Radiuz is free WPA Enterprise authentication, which combines secure logins and unique WPA encryption keys with RADIUS features found in virtually all consumer and enterprise gateways. Radiuz started up a year ago.

Update: I must be naive, but thought of this as a relatively small story. I am now seeing separate accounts in practically every major newspaper and publication in the world--I suppose Skype (eBay) and Google will do that to a company. Read what Doc Searls has to say about it, and also David Weinberger, who is part of Fon's US advisory council.

Update: Fortune's article mentions that the Fon founder brought on board to that US advisory council a whole array of digerati and A-List technology bloggers.


"it�s trivial for ISPs to track Fon operators if the ISP bans sharing an Internet connection. Fon has central authentication so even with encryption, the destination of Fon messages will be known. (Of course, if Fon uses a peer-to-peer model like Skype, they could tunnel authentication through peers making this impossible, but that�s not a reliable way to run a login system.) Speakeasy and Sweden�s GlocoNet have signed up, Reuters reports; Speakeasy is the only national ISP I am aware of in the U.S. that encourages sharing their connections."

Glenn, if authentication is happening on the FON system, how would the ISP discriminate between the bandwidth used by a hotspot operator's computer(s) and the traffic of others? Is this something that can be discerned through packet analysis?

[Editor's note: ISPs could declare that simply authenticating through Fon's system is de facto acknowledgement of sharing one's bandwidth. I can't see any impediment to that in the way in which ISPs are allowed to enforce their terms of service in the U.S. This could be very different in the EU with privacy laws. Even if Fon were against a TOS, an ISP in Europe might not be allowed to test for benign traffic rather than traffic specifically harmful to their network--gf]

What about wireless Mesh networks techology associated with fon?

Glenn, don't you think that wireless Mesh networks could extend the fon community to make them available virtually everywhere by using each laptop as a bridge and finding authomatically the closest connections to the wired Internet?

[Editor's note: Yes and no. Mesh requires density or high-powered antennas. The adapters found in laptops can't be used as mesh nodes without different software. Because there are so many Wi-Fi adapters and because so many have closed software, it would be very difficult to either produce mesh software for each kind of adapter and convince people to install that sort of software.

And it would only work when there were a lot of people around with that same software. Mesh seems to have more applications right now at the gateway side where gateways without Internet access to link via other nodes to gateways that do. But that requires real planning in order to get signals to reach and avoid hidden nodes that would disrupt network functionality.--gf]