Slashdot Mirror
NYC: Leverage Fiber, Offer Free Wi-Fi
gpmap writes "A new study from the New York City Council is recommending that the Big Apple throw open the competitive bidding process for its annual $130 million phone and Internet bill in order to leverage one of the most expansive -- and underused -- fiber optic networks in the country.
In so doing, New York City could not only cut its annual telecom bill, but would also be in a position to deploy wireless networking links as the "last mile" connecting metropolitan area networks, or MANs. In addition, it suggested using the fiber to deploy free Internet access with a Wi-Fi Network in Brooklyn's Prospect Park."
Guess that brings a whole new meaning to MANhattin.
Galium Arsenide is the material of the future, and always will be.
..sleeping on a park bench, clutching my wireless internet handheld still displaying slashdot's latest before I dozed off to another night spent sleeping in the streets
Let's say free access happens. What happens when people start using it (in mass) to conduct fraud, send death threats to the President, start a boutique email spam business, etc.
This is one thing I never understand about goverments , they lock them selves into a contract and keep on renewing it without looking for cheaper alternatives . In ottawa city counsil finally woke up and founded ottawa telecom to use there power company ROW on the poles to do there own direct fiber (for cheaper inet access for schools , libraries and city goverment with medium prices for other business) . .
Now I see NY is takeing the first step , looking for a competitor to verizon (the incumbant I'm guessing) ; as a sort of after thought why dont they see how well they could serve there own needs as well (not sugesting that they just go it alone but if its cheaper why not?)
I sincerly whish best of luck to NY with there future projects.
Note : in this post NY = NYC
There are many wifi hotspots in downtown manhattan, and areas of brooklyn and other boroughs. The internet cafes have them. And slashdot has carried stories on private individuals providing wifi connectivity in nyc ad nauseum.
If the terrorists haven't brought down the world from a nyc wifi connection yet, what makes you think this would be a tremendous problem now?
You can also check out nycwireless.net mailing list for more discussions on this.
L
NYC: Leverage Fiber, Offer Free Wi-Fi
By Erin Joyce
A new study from the New York City Council is recommending that the Big Apple throw open the competitive bidding process for its annual $130 million phone and Internet bill in order to leverage one of the most expansive -- and underused -- fiber optic networks in the country.
In so doing, New York City could not only cut its annual telecom bill, but would also be in a position to deploy wireless networking links as the "last mile" connecting metropolitan area networks, or MANs (define). In addition, it suggested using the fiber to deploy free Internet access with a Wi-Fi (define) Network in Brooklyn's Prospect Park.
Prepared by Council Speaker Gifford Miller and Councilman Gale Brewer, who chairs the council's select committee on technology in government, the report is entitled "Network NYC: Building the Broadband City."
With the rapidly unfolding maturation of wireless and fiber optic technologies, along with a glut of fiber optics lines left over from the telecom bubble, the use of network pricing that can reduce current and future telecom costs is expanding, the report said.
The 22-page study, released Thursday, recommends that the Mayor's office competitively bid "the city's $130 million annual phone and Internet bill -- 75 percent of which has been historically provided as a sole source contract to Verizon."
Verizon has held the annual contract for decades, according to a city official.
The report suggested the move would help address the city's ongoing fiscal crisis, which was already reeling from a recession before Sept. 11.
"Without competition, and with Verizon's lock on 75 percent of the City's telecom bill, the Comptroller's Office repeatedly has asked a basic question: how can New York City be assured that it is getting the best telecom rates and services if it is not soliciting multiple bids in a rigorous, open market process?"
A Verizon spokesman was not available for comment by presstime.
New York City is the largest municipal buyer of telecommunications goods and services in the U.S., said the report. In addition, it said the Department of Information Technology and Telecommunications (DoITT) manages franchise agreements for 21 separate fiber-optic companies -- more companies holding more high capacity metropolitan fiber than in any other city, as well as a portfolio of over 2,220 municipal rooftops potentially ripe for wireless deployments.
Yet "there has been little public discussion or long term strategic thinking about how the city could better organize this public and private infrastructure to encourage a truly citywide deployment of affordable, high speed networking capacity," the report said.
It also criticized the lack of coordination among so many fiber-rich departments within the city. Locally, for example, New York City already essentially owns, operates and manages, an albeit limited fiber network known as the Institutional Network, or I-Net.
In addition, "and as a further indication of the lack of coordinated telecom planning in the City, several [city] agencies, DOT, and the New York Public Library (NYPL), operate their own separate fiber networks for transmitting large amounts of data and/or as backhaul networks for Internet traffic."
It also cited an example of neighborhoods with several bandwidth-rich municipal buildings clustered nearby. Typically, the firehouses, police precincts, library branches and other government offices are all connected separately via the telephone companies' network, with multiple T-1 lines, "that cost anywhere between $400 and $1,200 each."
Instead, the report suggested, with "secure, point to multi-point wireless last mile or last hundred feet links, however, the tallest municipal building in a given area can distribute bandwidth wirelessly to all the various municipal sites off of the one building's fiber backbone." In effect, the building itself would become a Point of Presence (define)
Bush is on fire and its not good for my lungs.
Check out TeloPhase Communication Networks http://www.telophase.org
e st .pdf
C ommunity-Based_Networks_BP.pdf
s e_C ommunity-Based_Networks_Presentation.pdf
They've come up with one of the best models yet for utilizing community-based 'communicative capital' as leverage for increasing broadband.
They have a position paper here (recently solicited by the FCC)
http://www.telophase.org/Library_Files/FCC-Requ
Also there is good information available for their business case http://www.telophase.org/Library_Files/TeloPhase_
and a presentation that goes into elementary detail on the model, here -
http://www.telophase.org/Library_Files/TeloPha
It's entirely possible for communities to take control of their citizen's communicative assets, turn those assets into 'community capital', and keep communication-based profits at home, rather than sending those profits to large communication conglomerates who are attempting to recover from broken telecom models at the consumer's expense.
If the political will is there, the TeloPhase model, and others similar to it, are the future and hope of universal broadband.
Rememeber they paid for laying the fibers so they can service the financial industry based in lower manhattan. In their opinion its their god given right to protect their assets at all costs. There is even a building with the old bell labs logo still on that is visual from the brooklynn bridge. I believe that one is owned by AT&T today and yes they also laid hundreds of miles of fiber there as well.
http://saveie6.com/
There probably won't be any large scale free and uncontrollable internet access in the US for any foreseeable future.
1: Nothing is free. Especially not in NYC
2: Anything that can be exploited for profit or crime, will be. Especially in NYC
3: With untracable and encrypted cell phones being prevented from being available the US even BEFORE 9/11, and with the political climate changes of today, the chance would be slim for a free, mobile and anonymous Internet, sponsored by those in power. Especially in NYC.
Sure, they may throw up a few access points here and there, usable by those who pay and register to use it. That's as far as it's likely to go. Your average homeless person won't be able to use it any more than he'll be able to vote -- i.e. only in theory, but not in practice.
Of more interest is the proposal to cut costs by offering up the phone and Internet infrastructure reorganization to the "open" market. What will this mean in savings, how will it affect the current providers, what will it do for connectivity, and how low can the QoS be pushed by the new private interests before it becomes painful? The states and cities need to cut costs where they can, and using something that already exists is a good thing. It doesn't, however, imply that there will be service improvements.
"Free" doesn't have to mean anonymous;
Absolutely true. That's the most convenient model -- you walk in the park, you're assigned an IP via DHCP, presto -- but that doesn't have to be the way it is. You may have to signup, just like I did for my local library. And that's OK with me.
Something else: the terms of service can also be enforced technically -- that is, what you're free to do can be constrained. You could throttle port 25 for each computer, for example, or watch for certain traffic patterns that suggest a kind of attack...
Tweet, tweet.
We could lobby the New York State to implement Internet repeaters that are strictly based on longitude and latitude. Most repeaters need some sort of Internet Protocol address as assignable by the I.A.N.A. organization. The longitude and latitude designation would deploy an independant solution. Any New Yorker could localize there connection without signage to commerical Internet Service Provider if logitude and latitude were is use as the address that wiresless devices use within its headers. [I won't bore you with the details.]
We need to re-establish the non-commerical Internet carriers; the "last mile" is the place. Lets not re-learn the same old lesson, as we did with cable systems that say they own equipment that we more than completely bought.
"Other suggestions in the report said that excess fiber capacity built as a consequence of city funding should be open to third parties at competitive wholesale rates."
Nobody's nationalizing (or even municipalizing) anything. Lines laid under contract are exactly what's being discussed.
Verizon is in the picture not because anyone wants to take over their property, but because they've been getting a sweetheart deal from the city; the City Council wants to open the bidding for its telcom contracts while leveraging all that underutilized fiber at the city's disposal. Instead of soliciting bids for full service, laying new lines, etc, they'd be soliciting bids to provide services over that existing fiber. Hopefully those contracts will carry obligations to provide free public service as well, the same way real estate development permits are often contingent on the developer providing public park space or low-income units or expanding a subway station.