FCC To Expand Wireless Spectrum

Makarand writes "According to this article in the SF Chronicle the FCC will expand the wireless spectrum to push broadband into rural areas. However, consumer groups were quick to point out that these frequencies are not powerful enough to handle long range broadband communications. They want the FCC to open lower frequencies that can penetrate through walls and trees for wireless applications in rural areas."

Comments

What about Ricochet?

[RobertB-DC]

Sometimes, the best links on an article are the ones that go to yet another story.

SFGate.com also has this interesting article from almost a year ago on the return of Ricochet:
Ricochet is also targeting residents who can't get high-speed access otherwise. Its signals are sent from radios on poles and rooftops, allowing users with laptops and other mobile devices to stay connected while they roam around.

It sounds like Ricochet is going to use the unregulated 900 MHz band to do the same thing that the FCC is going to do with regulated spectrum (that's already in use by the military).

Of course, another kicker is this paragraph:
Aerie Networks Inc. has resurrected Ricochet, spending $8.25 million for technology and equipment that Metricom spent $1.3 billion developing.

Of all the times to have spent $8,250,000 on lottery tickets!

Re:What about Ricochet?

[mrmoa]

It may be on its way out...again. According to this story the company is "actively evaluating a number of options relative to its business prospects". In my book that's code for "trying to figure out how to make next week's payroll."

Re:What about Ricochet?

[t0qer]

I'll tell you about ricochet since I used to work there a long time ago.

I have several post related to them, and usually I copy 'n paste them here. A few of them I targetted specific individuals that I felt were useless and probably contributed to their demise, undoubtably these individuals know about my posts because by the third or fouth time I touched based on this subject other "insiders" responded saying my post was nothing more than a troll. Fuck them, and fuck their Los Gatos rich kid clique they rode in on.

Ricochet didn't die because of a bad product, they died from pisspoor management decisions. These bad managers surrounded themselves with even more idiots just to keep themselves looking good. Just because shit has perfume, it's still shit.

I recently saw a fellow ex-metricommer at a bar I frequent. I didn't recognize him because we worked in different departments (He worked for biztell, a company outsourced to sell ricochet)

Basically the story he told me corroborated my original theories of piss poor management leading to the companies demise a few years after I left.

Biztell was making the numbers for metricom, They had outperformed the other two companies partnered to sell the product. I think MCI and ATT were the other two companies licensed to resell the ricochet. (If i'm wrong on these two please correct me)

Somewhere along the line a new CEO came in to take over ricochet. As with all the previous CEO's he used his business network to raise some unneeded capital for the company. When they were still in their Los Gatos location which was a building owned by one of the Chairmen, they were actually starting to creep towards profitability, since the rent was low and Biztell was making their sales quota.

For some reason, this didn't sit well with the new CEO. During a lucid dream he had while smoking crack (joke) he got the idea that ricochet needed a downtown SJ address. Rather than seek pre-existing space, he decided to take all that capital he had just recieved, and invest it in real estate.

Later a suitable location was selected, and construction began on the new 2 building 4 story glass encased cubicle farm. (I heard the property was purchased from the CEO's buddy, the construction contract was given to another buddy, and everyone was lining everyone elses pockets on the whole deal)

Now all idiot CEO's know the best way to justify even more funding is to show a high burn rate. To facilitate this even more useless corpses were hired, and a add campaign began. Rather than focus on the merits of the technology the ads featured a sexy long legged model driving around in a silver Jaguar ala James bond. By the time you got done watching the ads, other than the quick flash of the ricochet name across the screen, it didn't really sell anything. I remember watching these ads and thinking how stupid they are.

At the same time prices for both the modem and the service were raised.

Well, as all stupid idea's go, the new corporate HQ, the ad campaign, and the rush of new employees drained the metricom coffers faster than a lapdance at your favorite strip club. Instead of being accountable for their actions, the executive board seeked a scapegoat for the declining sales. Biztell's contract was not renewed, and sales of the ricochet service plummeted along with their stock mcom.

Well we all know the end result. People came to the new corporate HQ one day to find it locked, and a bankrupcy notice glued to the door. It was over.

Now let's fast forward to the present.

Phonix networks (Not sure if thats right) Purchased the ricochet network for pennies on the dollar. I personally have no contacts within the company, but from what my freind whom I saw at the bar last week told me, it's no different than when mcom was owned by a bunch of rich guys from Los Gatos. /. featured a story about the buyout 2 years ago, yet the new company has yet to bring service back. Again pisspoor mana

Re:What about Ricochet?

[tachyonflow]

It sounds like Ricochet is going to use the unregulated 900 MHz band to do the same thing that the FCC is going to do with regulated spectrum

What, you mean this Ricochet?

I can't wait for it to reach Britain

[paulhar]

I live in Rural Britain. We need the FCC to enable much lower signals so that we can _finally_ get broadband.

I can't wait :)

Hurrah!

Re:I can't wait for it to reach Britain

[rk]

And the FCC have no authority in rural Britain!

Please be patient. We are working on correcting this problem as quickly as we can. United States Government, LLP, thanks you for your continued business. Have a nice day!

Why choose a frequency that doesn't work?

[burgburgburg]

The move was supported by high-technology heavyweights Microsoft Corp. and Intel Corp.

Oh, okay. I'll stop complaining now. Everything will be alright.

how about secure protocol?...

[zasos]

Excelent news but what about developing Wi-Fi protocol that does not have inherent security flaws?.. or is it realm of consumer education how to turn on encription and password on the wireless routers?..

as long as

[OwlofCreamCheese]

I just want it to be something small enough so it goes through me. wireless networks are everywhere these days... and somehow I like the idea that wherever I am there will be porn in my heart.

You don't want much more power!

[Garak]

You don't want much more power, not only for security reasons but for frequency reuse!

Keeping the power down lets you use the same frequencys over and over again in the same city. If you went with more power and lower frequencys you would interfear with people accross town using the same frequencys.

You don't need more power to go the distance. For point to point links you can use high gain dish's to go the distance. To cover larger areas you just deploy lots of cheap lower power access points/routers.

Re:You don't want much more power!

[NanoGator]

"Power level has nothing to do with security."

Yes it does. The less you use, the closer somebody has to be to your physical location to peek into your signal.

Think, then reply.

Re:You don't want much more power!

[SheldonYoung]

Again, no. There's security but it's as in false-sense-of.

You can't assume how far your signal can be detected. If you're counting on distance to help protect your signal, unless it's a veeeery long distance without physical access, you are deluding yourself. What if someone is listening with very sensitive equipment? What if a firmware upgrade increases the output power of your gear? What if it's the office in the floor above you doing the evesdropping? There are a lot of what-ifs.

If you're thinking about signal strength in the same breath as security you have a lot to learn about what it means to be secure.

Re:You don't want much more power!

[LiENUS]

and YOU have a lot to learn about what it means to be secure as well... lets assume someone wants to get into your network, you use encryption such as the current wifi encryption incarnation, the more packets someone gets ahold of our of your encryption the faster they crack it, thus if your power level is higher it is easier for someone to break in, security isnt a wall a wall that stops everything, it is barbwire that deters people on foot from coming in.

Re:Tin foil please.

[PenguiN42]

Consumer groups should know that thanks to lower frequencies that can penetrate through walls and trees

Yeah, those damn radio stations.

Wireless in the forest

[bucketoftruth]

I never have any problems with my wireless connection in the trees. They don't stand a chance against my wireless tool

Re:Tin foil please.

[zasos]

"This is a bad thing (tm)"

SCO will come after you for violating the trademark!! or will it be Fox news?...

They did this on purpose.

[PhilipPeake]

BPL (broadband over electricity distribution lines) has been pretty much abandoned/banned in most of the world because of the interference it causes. Of course, in the US, interference has to be balanced against MONEY, so its still somehwta alive here. Especially with the newest version, which doesn't spew its guts all over the SW spectrum, but zaps the... wait for it ... 5GHz band!

No wonder the FCC is so benevolent as to donate this spectrum to wireless internet services - they know its about to become useless thanks to pollution from BPL.

This just in: FCC Changes Laws of Physics

[kinema]

"the FCC will expand the wireless spectrum"

I'm not sure if the FCC has the authority to widen the electro-magnetic spectrum.

Anything would be a step forward

[Zygote-IC-]

I'm a mere seven miles outside a city. It's not a metropolis by any means, but those seven miles are the difference between DSL/Cable and absoultely no real broadband.
And no, DirecWay does not count.
Anything they would do to close that gap and allow us people who live out in "the country" to participate in the broadband revolution would be a blessing.
I keep hearing that broadband is failing because it costs too much or there is no real content that people want. No one ever mentions the fact that there is a large segment of the population that flat out has no real options.
Now if you'll excuse me, I'm going back to downloading my 152 meg game demo. It should be finished sometime before the sun explodes.

Re:Anything would be a step forward

[hypertex]

Can do! We've connected from a hilltop to our office using an Orinoco card and a 20+dB BBQ grill looking dish antenna. It was at least 7 miles.

Re:Anything would be a step forward

[anthony_dipierro]

What city? Have you check Verizon Express Network?

The Crimson Tide...

[paulhar]

ULF access sounds _interesting_ Imagine...

"Captain... Con... we've just been pinged".

"Pinged? Shit! Red Alert"

"Sir, there is an incoming message. It says... W...o...u...l...d....you....l...i...k...e....t..o. .."

"Any more sailor?"

"Sir yes sir. e..n..l..a..r....g..e....y.ou...r..e.....p....e... ni...s... sir!"

Re:The more the better.

[Aardpig]

They will find uses for each frequency range.

...all the while ignoring the fact that many frequency ranges are already used by astronomers to observe and study the universe. By polluting our window on the Cosmos, we risk losing the chance to discover how it all began. *Sigh*.

Chart of radio frequencies circa 1996

[LuxFX]

It isn't current, but here is a chart (PDF)
that shows how the radio bands were divided up in 1996.

Re:The more the better.

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm against it if it starts consuming the important frequencies...

Like the Ham radio bands. too many times the ham radio bands are sacrificed for the good of selling some damned service that will be done half assed.

EVERYTHING that has been invented in radio was invented in Ham radio first.

hurt the ham bands, and you hurt innovation.

lower frequencies

[GigsVT]

Lower frequencies that can penetrate walls and trees aren't likely going to give you anything you'd consider broadband speeds. You might be able to get a couple Mbits at 900Mhz, but once you get more than a few people sharing it, it's not going to be so hot. To go even lower means less and less bandwidth available.

Re:lower frequencies

[part15guy]

"Lower frequencies that can penetrate walls and trees aren't likely going to give you anything you'd consider broadband speeds. You might be able to get a couple Mbits at 900Mhz, but once you get more than a few people sharing it, it's not going to be so hot. To go even lower means less and less bandwidth available."

This is not entirely true. Lower frequencies will require more complicated modulaction schemes to get the same data rates, but it is still possible.

Also, we should be careful when using the word "bandwidth" when talking wireless Internet. In the quote above, I think that it is supposed to mean datarates. However, bandwidth from an RF perspective can also mean frequency range.

Increasing RF bandwidth used is another way to get around the lower frequency issues with datarates.

Either way, this stuff does NOT belong in 900MHz. Make it at 700MHz, 2.1GHz, or somewhere else that does not require band sharing. Wireless Internet causes interference and should be given its own spectrum. We are all consumers and band hogs should NOT be tolerated.

Re:lower frequencies

[GigsVT]

Also, we should be careful when using the word "bandwidth" when talking wireless Internet. In the quote above, I think that it is supposed to mean datarates. However, bandwidth from an RF perspective can also mean frequency range

You are correct in that we must be careful with terminology, but even taken to mean RF bandwidth, my statement is still true.

At lower frequencies, bands will tend to be smaller. The 2.4Ghz band, IIRC is a couple hundred Mhz across. The 900Mhz band is only what... 5mhz wide?

These numbers are just off the top of my head, but I think you see my point.

How about interferences with hearing aids?

[antdude]

My bone conduction hearing aid has interferences with many cellular phones and WAPs (if I am close enough to one).

Will this FCC's decision going to make the situation worse for those who wear hearing aids like me?

Re:How about interferences with hearing aids?

[Detritus]

You need a better hearing aid, one with better shielding and filtering. Designs that were adequate 10 oe 20 years ago are marginal today. There are many more RF sources today. Modulation techniques like those used by GSM are more likely to result in interference than the modulation techniques used in older devices.

"New" spectrum is useless for wireless broadband

[Brett Glass]

Unfortuantely, while the FCC is giving lip service to wireless broadband, its proposed rules actually hurt it rather than help it. The "new" spectrum can't be used outdoors, and the transmitters have to shut up if a signal that looks anything like radar is detected. (Can you say "DoS attack," boys and girls? I knew you could.) What's more, older transmitters operating on that band would have to be removed. So, the FCC's proposed rules are a step backward, not a step forward.