Slashdot Mirror
Working Toward Roaming For Wireless ISPs
hrhsoleil writes "In the category of: This seems like a no-brainer and why-didn't-someone-do-it-before,
according to SearchMobileComputing, the Internet Protocol Detail Record Organization (IPDR) is pushing a set of specifications that would allow users to roam among different providers' hot spots. IPDR is an industry group that addresses billing issues for wireless carriers -- they've got the Wi-Fi Alliance, Gric Communications, and the Canadian Wireless Telecommunications Association backing them up on this one so it might actually get off the ground. It's about time that wireless ISPs get their act together and make roaming possible. If I can go to almost any bank machine in the world and be able to use it without needing to sign up for a new account, why can't I do the same with hot spots?"
Its a great idea, but as in the case of every good idea, its already being done, and has a patent.
see:
6,633,761
6,665,537
Probably more but I'm too lazy to look.
www.bleepyou.com
When's 802.11* going to support on-the-fly connection migration? Why can't I walk around a large area and switch between base stations automatically and invisibly as reception changes? That would go a long way towards making those "you're not tied down to anywhere"-type commercials a reality.
Granted, without the billing (because they feel that internet access should be free for their community), but many Dutch universities and research institutions together with SURFnet (the National Research and Education Network) have developed a roaming solution already. Based on IEEE 802.1x, EAP-TTLS and RADIUS it allows for seemless roaming between the participants.
This WiFi roaming has recently been extended and now institutions in Portugal and Croatia are joining as wel.
As the founder of a free community hotspot , I wanna say, if giant corporations are willing to provide web services for free, because it's the only way to get people to come, why wouldn't we want to provide wireless access to those web services for free?
Basically, I don't see that the pay-to-play model of the wired ISP is the necessary model for wireless ISPs. In fact I think it's a doomed model. People are going to gravitate to the free hookups. It's not just cheaper, it's easier, and easier always wins.
It's not time to figure out how to get roaming on paid wireless ISPs. It's time to figure out how to stop charging for it.
Such systems should include the possibility of negotiating rates on the fly. The mobile device should be programmed with upper prices for particular levels of service. Then, for each unit of service purchased a negotiation takes place. If the ISP is not busy the price is low. If the ISP is close to saturation the price is high. If there are multiple ISPs to choose from market competition occurs as everyone negotiates to determine the price. This would result in a balance between coverage and what people are willing to pay.
I don't think the "free" roaming involves any agreements between cell phone providers, any more than "free" long distance involves an agreement to carry long distance calls at no charge. Your provider covers the costs you rack up on other networks, and passes them on to you in your monthly fee. All they have to do is figure out how much to charge monthly to make a profit.
Don't blame me; I'm never given mod points.
Its more refined than that even,
In most circumstances, the big players have "peering" arrangements. Its the same for long distance, VoIP, Internet, etc.
Essentially there are only a few players that own significant bandwidth on the Internet and closed-switching systems. They build physical locations where the networks tie together and the big fat pipes interconnect (hence, the InterNetworking of the Internet). Here is where accounting of packets/data transferred takes place. In most cases the big players trade packets 1-for-1, meaning, if Spring and MCI send each other an equal amount of data no money changes hand (well, perhaps it does on paper to prop up "gross income" or whatever, but an equal amount is paid out).
Money is only gained by one provider or another when there is an imbalance.
The same principle will generally apply to phone carriers: Company A will trade minute for minute long-distance calls for Company B of a similiar nature. Only when there is an imbalance of A->B or B->A calls is significant charging taking place. This means that in real terms the largest portion of the cost is maintaining the internal networks and support of the infrastructure. External connectivity reaches a point of critical mass where the demand to communicate with an organizations customers generates fees that offset its own outgoing costs.
Hopefully the same thing will happen with big and small Wireless ISP's. User A from ISP A will use 40MB of ISP B's bandwidth but no money will have to change hands since User B from ISP B will end up using 40MB of ISP A's bandwidth. Some of the smaller WiSP's - say in rural areas or less traveled areas - will end up having to pay for an imbalance in, say, metropolitian Florida or New York or California, but in general, in many cases, the amount needed to expend to make this work financially isn't a huge barrier.
Over time the system is likely to become very smooth and automatic. Today calling long-distance triggers dozens of systems across a myraid of billing systems, but magically, somehow, the bills are *generally* accurate, the plans complex but manageable, and service universal reliable - even though there are nearly a half-dozen big long-distance companies out there.