BME Wireless Community Networks: Motivations, Design and Business Models Based on tutorial lectures held at Tridentcom 2008 and OPAALS 2008 conferences © Cs. Szabó, K. Farkas, Z. Horvath Vezeték nélküli és mobil 2009 ősz
Outline BME v Introduction v Community networks v Available wireless technologies v Design considerations v Business models v Summary Vezeték nélküli és mobil 2009 ősz
Objective of this tutorial BME v Give an overview of requirements, services, technologies and business models for Community Networks v From this lecture the participants are expected: Ø to obtain a reasonably good understanding of the state-of-the art technologies and the most important business models; Ø to learn from experiences of some case studies; v and Ø will be provided with guidelines as a starting point for the planning of wireless CNs Vezeték nélküli és mobil 2009 ősz
Ubiquitous access and CNs BME v Some historical infrastructures such as electricity networks, road systems became ubiquitous, but v ubiquitous access and reliability certainly cannot be taken for granted in the case of telecommunication networks and the Internet. v Telecom and internet companies operate according to their business models, the consequence is often the “digital divide”. v In a regional environment, however, it is possible to create network infrastructures which, if properly designed, can provide ubiquitous coverage and accessibility as well as the required degree of reliability plus several more advantages. Vezeték nélküli és mobil 2009 ősz
Introduction: Community Networks BME v Infrastructure and services created with high level of involvement by a v v community belonging to a specific geographic area Grassroot origins: “free nets”, “civic nets” Newer examples of community initiatives: “municipal fiber”, “condominium fiber” Government initiative and governance Most of community networks today are driven by (local) government initiatives, thus a definition for CN can be: Ø Network infrastructure (mostly wireless), created by some form of public participation plus Ø the underlying business model plus Ø the applications and services provided to communities v related terms: Ø Digital cities, digital communities (Intel), wireless cities, municipal wireless Vezeték nélküli és mobil 2009 ősz
Outline BME v Introduction v Community networks v Available wireless technologies v Design considerations v Business models v Summary Vezeték nélküli és mobil 2009 ősz
A simple architectural model of CN infrastructure Vezeték nélküli és mobil 2009 ősz BME
The connectivity layer BME v To provide connectivity for all components (humans, organizations, agents etc. ) of the CN v A few important concepts Ø IP Ø the Internet as well as most of modern telecommunication systems rely on IP, which provides just a best-effort type service but has become THE network protocol of current and future networks. Ø Wireless Ø vast majority of community networks is based on wireless technologies Ø this oldest technology has become widespread during the last decade due to advances in microwave technology, the cellular principle of network organization and the acceptance of related standards. Ø Mobility Ø capability of the network to “keep track” of users that change their locations. Ø Ad-hoc network Ø self-configuring network consisting of mobile nodes and wireless links and form an arbitrary topology. The nodes can be placed and are free to move randomly and organize themselves into a network in an arbitrary fashion. Vezeték nélküli és mobil 2009 ősz
Service provisioning platform BME v SDP, Service Platform, Service Delivery Platform v A new concept that has also emerged in the telecom world (NGN) Ø change from the classic telco service model of independent, vertically integrated networks to a new architecture that comprises a variety of access networks and has a new horizontal layer or platform v A set of components to deliver services through a horizontal service network and a multiplicity of access networks. Ø call control, Qo. S provisioning, media gateways, authentication, authorization, and accounting (AAA) Vezeték nélküli és mobil 2009 ősz
Applications that drive the development of wireless community networks BME v A) Access to public information and services v B) Public safety applications v C) Traffic control and transportation v D) Health care and telemedicine applications v E) Business services v F) Educational applications v G) Applications for utility companies (electricity, water, gas, etc. ) Vezeték nélküli és mobil 2009 ősz
CN applications detailed (1) A) Access to public information and services BME ØPublic Internet kiosks for access to public information, tourism, portals for egovernment services and for tourists B) Public safety ØEnhancing public safety by remote surveillance of public areas ØImproving the communication with police, civilian police, fire department and the like C) Traffic control and transportation ØCoping with traffic congestion by vehicle monitoring and intelligent traffic light control ØVehicle management for public transportation (buses) ØIntelligent parking systems with flexible payment ØMonitoring of road conditions, in particular in winter Vezeték nélküli és mobil 2009 ősz
CN applications detailed (2) BME D) Health care Ø Improving the efficiency and cost-effectiveness of health care services by broadband wireless communications among and within health care providers (incl. telemedicine services) Ø Home health care and assisted living E) Business services Ø Business partners/providers/clients searching Ø B 2 B and B 2 C transactions Ø Advertising products and services F) Educational Ø Internet access, e-learning, administration portal on the campus and extending educational network to the home G) Utility companies (electricity, water, gas, etc. ) Ø Collecting measurement data and billing information Vezeték nélküli és mobil 2009 ősz
Wireless cities and their primary applications v v v BME Chaska, MN – Digital divide for schools, businesses and residents; Cheyenne, WY – Traffic signal management; Corpus Christi, TX – Automated meter reading for city-owned utilities; Lewis&Clark County, MT – leased line replacement; access to remote county buildings; Medford, OR – public safety; Ocean City, MD – Integrated digital, voice and video for city buildings; Piraí, Brazil – Municipal field-force productivity; Portsmouth, UK – Bus passenger information dissemination; San Mateo, CA – Police field-force productivity improvement; Shanghai, China – Police field-force productivity improvement; Spokane, WA – Municipal applications and e-Government initiatives; Westminster, UK – Video surveillance and enhanced security. Vezeték nélküli és mobil 2009 ősz
Wireless community networks: current status (only USA) BME www. muniwireless. com City Initiatives Directory v ~200 networks in “deployed” or “running” status v ~180 in “in progress”, “negotiating” or “feasibility study” status v Europe: lagging but ambitious objectives v Asia-Pacific: many similar initiatives Vezeték nélküli és mobil 2009 ősz
Case studies (to be dealt with in detail in the Business Models section) BME v Wireless Philadelphia, USA Ø to provide Internet access in the city, as the level of broadband penetration is very low; subsidizing Internet access for low-income residents v Corpus Christi, USA Ø AMR application as a driving force plus other applications v T. Net – Trentino, North Italy Ø cope with digital divide in the region Vezeték nélküli és mobil 2009 ősz
Outline BME v Introduction v Community networks v Available wireless technologies v Design considerations v Business models v Summary Vezeték nélküli és mobil 2009 ősz
Available wireless technologies for CNs BME v Wi-Fi mesh Ø the well known Wi-Fi (standard-based wireless LAN) combined with the mesh network principle v Wi. MAX Ø a relatively new standard-based wireless technology to cover significantly larger area than a LAN – wireless MAN (metro area network), both fixed and mobile v (Cellular mobile) Vezeték nélküli és mobil 2009 ősz
Available wireless technologies BME Source: Intel Corp. , Understanding Wi-Fi and Wi. MAX as Metro-Access Solutions, White Paper, 2004 Vezeték nélküli és mobil 2009 ősz
IEEE 802. 11 family of standards BME Standard Frequency range Modulation Compatibility Data rate (max. ) 802. 11 a 5 GHz OFDM - 54 Mbps 802. 11 b 2, 4 GHz DSSS 802. 11 g 11 Mbps 802. 11 g 2, 4 GHz OFDM/DSSS 802. 11 b 54 Mbps Distance Indoor: 30 -90 m Outdoor: 100 -300 m OFDM: Orthogonal Frequency Division Multiplexing, DSSS: Direct Sequence Spread Spectrum Vezeték nélküli és mobil 2009 ősz
New IEEE 802. 11 standards BME v IEEE 802. 11 e Ø Qo. S (Quality of Service) enhancements for WLAN Ø Already approved v IEEE 802. 11 n Ø Next generation of Wi-Fi Ø Extends the maximum data rate to 248 Mbps Ø Expected ratification: 2009 v IEEE 802. 11 s Ø Mesh capabilities to the Wi-Fi standard Ø Still to be ratified Vezeték nélküli és mobil 2009 ősz
Wi-Fi mesh networking BME v Definition Ø A wireless mesh network is a peer-to-peer multi-hop wireless network in which participant nodes connect with redundant interconnections and cooperate with one another to route packets Ø Mesh networking is an alternative to “infrastructure based” network where there is a backbone that interconnects all nodes to which the end users are connected Vezeték nélküli és mobil 2009 ősz
Unwire the WLAN with mesh BME AP: Access Point, STA: Mobile station, SSID: Service Set Identifier Source: W. S. Conner, J. Kruys, K. J. Kim, J. C. Zuniga, IEEE 802. 11 s Tutorial, Dallas, 2006 Vezeték nélküli és mobil 2009 ősz
Properties of mesh networks BME v Mesh networks are Ø “Organic”, nodes may be added and deleted freely Ø Fault tolerant, nodes may fail and packets will still be routed Ø Manageable in a distributed way Ø Of high overall capacity v Challenges Ø If there are too many nodes Ø If there are too few nodes Ø Security Ø Interoperability Vezeték nélküli és mobil 2009 ősz
Fault tolerant property BME Source: Proxim Wireless, Mesh Technology Primer, Position Paper, 2005 Vezeték nélküli és mobil 2009 ősz
Fault tolerant property BME Source: Proxim Wireless, Mesh Technology Primer, Position Paper, 2005 Vezeték nélküli és mobil 2009 ősz
Wi-Fi mesh backbone solutions BME v Single-radio mesh Ø Each mesh node acts as AP and backbone node Ø The same radio is used for access and wireless backhaul v Dual-radio mesh Ø The mesh APs have separate radios for client access and backhaul Ø Typical configuration: Wi-Fi local access IEEE 802. 11 b/g, backhaul IEEE 802. 11 a v Multi-radio mesh Ø Access and backhaul are separated like with dual-radio Ø Multiple radios in each mesh node are dedicated to backhaul Vezeték nélküli és mobil 2009 ősz
Single-radio mesh (IEEE 802. 11 b/g) BME Source: Bel. Air Networks, Capacity of Wireless Mesh Networks, White Paper, 2006 Vezeték nélküli és mobil 2009 ősz
Dual-radio mesh (IEEE 802. 11 b/g for access, IEEE 802. 11 a for backhaul) Source: Bel. Air Networks, Capacity of Wireless Mesh Networks, White Paper, 2006 Vezeték nélküli és mobil 2009 ősz BME
Multi-radio mesh (IEEE 802. 11 b/g for access, IEEE 802. 11 a for backhaul) Source: Bel. Air Networks, Capacity of Wireless Mesh Networks, White Paper, 2006 Vezeték nélküli és mobil 2009 ősz BME
Capacity comparison of the different Wi-Fi mesh backbone solutions Source: Bel. Air Networks, Capacity of Wireless Mesh Networks, White Paper, 2006 Vezeték nélküli és mobil 2009 ősz BME
Capacity comparison of the different Wi-Fi mesh backbone solutions Source: Bel. Air Networks, Capacity of Wireless Mesh Networks, White Paper, 2006 Vezeték nélküli és mobil 2009 ősz BME
Limitations of IEEE 802. 11 standards BME v IEEE 802. 11 standards are focused on the Physical and MAC (Media Access Control) layers v More work is needed to define Ø System interoperability Ø Specific applications (e. g. Voice over IP) Ø Roaming Ø Core networks Vezeték nélküli és mobil 2009 ősz
Wi. MAX BME v Wi. MAX (Worldwide Interoperability for Microwave Access) is an industrial forum that promotes deployment of “Broadband Wireless Networks” v It supports IEEE 802. 16 family of standards v Certifies interoperability of products and technology v Global drive for acceptance of broadband wireless Vezeték nélküli és mobil 2009 ősz
Wi. MAX features and advantages BME v Flexible architecture Ø Point-to-point, point-tomultipoint, ubiquitous v Qo. S (Quality of Service) support Ø Supports real-time data streams v Wide area coverage Ø Up to tens of km in LOS (Line v Support for mobility -of-Sight) environment Ø Mobile Wi. MAX standard (IEEE 802. 16 e) v NLOS (No Line-of-Sight) operation v Easy, quick and inexpensive deployment v High capacity and data rates v Flexibility in spectrum Ø Up to 70 Mbps allocation v High level of security Ø Licensed and license-free Ø AES and 3 DES encryption standards Vezeték nélküli és mobil 2009 ősz frequency bands
IEEE 802. 16 family of standards BME Standard Frequency range 802. 162004 (802. 16 d) 2 -66 GHz 802. 16 e 2005 (802. 16 e) 2 -6 GHz Distance Data rate (max. ) LOS: 50 km Modulation LOS: 70 Mbps OFDM Security Roaming yes NLOS: 8 km OFDMA Qo. S 15 Mbps (NLOS) no yes high level yes NLOS: 40 Mbps 3 km (NLOS) high level OFDM: Orthogonal Frequency-Division Multiplexing, OFDMA: Orthogonal Frequency-Division Multiple Access, LOS: Line-of-Sight, NLOS: No Line-of-Sight, Qo. S: Quality of Service Vezeték nélküli és mobil 2009 ősz
Wi. MAX applications and Qo. S BME Source: Wi. MAX Forum, Mobile Wi. MAX, May 2006 Vezeték nélküli és mobil 2009 ősz
Typical Wi. MAX network topology BME Source: Intel Corp. , Understanding Wi-Fi and Wi. MAX as Metro-Access Solutions, White Paper, 2004 Vezeték nélküli és mobil 2009 ősz
Wi-Fi & Wi. MAX integration BME Source: Intel Corp. , Understanding Wi-Fi and Wi. MAX as Metro-Access Solutions, White Paper, 2004 Vezeték nélküli és mobil 2009 ősz
Wi. MAX-based services BME v Telcos carried out many pilot projects worldwide, but have been reluctant to launch commercial services so far v First commercial operator offering mobile Wi. MAX-based internet-access: Sprint Ø Sprint’s XOhm service was launched just a week ago (Sep. 29, 2008) in Baltimore, USA, planning to extend it to other cities v World. Max, The Netherlands Ø currently nomadic access based on fixed Wi. MAX Ø starting from 2 H 2008, more likely from 2009: mobile Wi. MAXbased service Vezeték nélküli és mobil 2009 ősz
Wi. MAX as a viable solution for developing countries and underserved areas BME v The new wireless MAN technology is a “professional” one but v v suitable not only for service providers! Communities can deploy, too, using either licensed or unlicensed frequency bands As opposed to fiber or copper based infrastructures, Wi. MAX requires significantly less investment, offers high flexibility in installation Many non-profit, government subsidized pilot projects: Iberbanda (Spain), India, Vietnam Intel co-subsidized projects: Ø Parintins (Amazonia), Brazil Ø Ghana Ø New Zealand Vezeték nélküli és mobil 2009 ősz
Wrap-up: Wi-Fi BME v Benefits v Challenges Ø Off-the-shelf 802. 11 standard Ø Shared bandwidth products are available Ø Qo. S support Ø Cost effective initial Ø Interoperability of mesh investment Ø Flexible deployment Vezeték nélküli és mobil 2009 ősz devices Ø Security
Wrap-up: Wi. MAX BME v Benefits Ø Built-in Qo. S support Ø Built-in security Ø High performance Ø Standard based operation Ø Flexible deployment Ø Flexibility in spectrum allocation Ø Interoperability Ø Integration with Wi-Fi Vezeték nélküli és mobil 2009 ősz v Challenges Ø New technology with emerging support
Outline BME v Introduction v Community networks v Available wireless technologies v Design considerations v Business models v Summary Vezeték nélküli és mobil 2009 ősz
Design objectives BME v Differences between planning of CNs (Community Networks), and ISPs’ and other service providers’ design methodology v Requirements to take into account in the planning of CNs Ø Ubiquitous Wi-Fi access covering the whole territory of the community (e. g. a city, a county or a province), no matter if some parts are sparsely populated and/or geographically challenged Ø Mobility or at least nomadic access across the covered area must be supported Ø Support of a multiplicity of user devices from simple mobile phones through PDAs and laptops to video conferencing equipment Ø The network should support a specific set of government, business and societyrelated applications, accessible also from inexpensive communications services and user interfaces Vezeték nélküli és mobil 2009 ősz
Steps of the design process BME 1. Identifying applications and services Ø Select the key applications and services which raise requirements toward the network 2. Identifying network technology requirements based on the applications Ø Analyze the requirements of the applications and services selected in the first step. This analysis should contain Qo. S (delay, jitter) and bandwidth parameters 3. Identifying coverage requirements and the possibilities and limitations of the environment Ø Determine the area which is supposed to be covered by the network, with its topography, natural obstacles such as hills or trees as well as buildings, availability of support structures, towers etc. Vezeték nélküli és mobil 2009 ősz
Steps of the design process BME 4. Choosing network technology Ø Choose optimal solutions both for the access and the backbone network. This decision should be based on the identified requirements and conditions of the environment 5. Planning of network topology Ø Plan the network topology according to the topography and the optimal station placement strategies using the results of the coverage requirement analysis as well as the network technology selection 6. Verifying original requirements Ø Recognize the differences between the original requirements and the capabilities provided by the planned network and repeat the design if necessary Vezeték nélküli és mobil 2009 ősz
Design process BME v A top-down approach, starting from application requirements v As opposed to building an infrastructure first and then see what it can be used for… Vezeték nélküli és mobil 2009 ősz 47
Technology and configuration selection v Application requirements Ø v Wi-Fi mesh is available now, however we should keep in mind that currently there is no interoperability between different vendors’ mesh products, standard is only coming. Fixed Wi. MAX is on the market, but prices will go down. Mobile Wi. MAX is new in the market Frequency issue Ø v We should analyze the requirements of the applications and services selected in the first step. This analysis should contain Qo. S (delay, jitter) and bandwidth parameters Timeframe Ø v BME In many countries or regions, mainly in Europe, it is difficult to obtain licenses required for Wi. MAX. Using unlicensed ISM band can result in weak Qo. S and low bandwidth because of disturbance of other devices and providers Costs Ø A careful calculation is needed for each individual project. Equipment price is not enough to take into account (a Wi-Fi node is much less expensive than a Wi. MAX station). Required density of Wi-Fi mesh nodes should be considered vs. number of Wi. MAX base stations Vezeték nélküli és mobil 2009 ősz
Technology and configuration selection BME v Taking into account Ø Parameters defined by the relevant standards Ø Calculated and measured data Ø Technologies and conditions (Wi-Fi, Wi-Fi mesh, Wi. MAX LOS, NLOS, Wi. MAX mesh) Ø Availability of Qo. S assurance v We show Ø what application scenarios the given set of technologies/parameters can be used for Vezeték nélküli és mobil 2009 ősz
Assumptions used v v v v BME Microcell is an area covered by one access point or mesh node in the access network. Macrocell is a union of well-connected microcells. Macrocell connects to the backbone with one or more backbone access points There is no sectorization in the multimode network topology scenarios, we use only omni-directional antennas Each mesh node has 4 mesh neighbors Wi-Fi nodes use IEEE 802. 11 g at 54 Mbps in the physical layer Soft Qo. S means IEEE 802. 11 e standard in Wi-Fi. Managing Qo. S is one of the inherent features in Wi. MAX The delay and jitter parameters are one-way latency measures Distances and cell size parameters are based on transmission power limited by EUconform regulation at high data transfer rates for high cell efficiency The values are mostly maximum values at optimal coverage. We can increase maximum bandwidth density by decreasing the cell radius Vezeték nélküli és mobil 2009 ősz
Technology and conf. selection, capacity and coverage planning BME Technology No. of Max. micro Max. Configumicro-cell macro-cell ration cells in capacity macro-cell Max. microcell radius Max. coverage AP dist- (macro-cell ance size, 0. 01 km 2) Max. bandwidth density (Mbps/ 0. 01 km 2) 1 Wi-Fi NLOS 20 Mbps 100 m 160 m 3 7 hotspot 2 Wi-Fi mesh Max. 2 hops NLOS 7 Mbps 25 175 Mbps 100 m 150 m 50 3. 5 high density coverage (optimal) 3 Wi-Fi mesh Max. 4 hops NLOS 2 Mbps 85 170 Mbps 100 m 140 m 150 1 high density coverage with few backb. APs 4 Wi. MAX LOS 100 Mbps 1 100 Mbps 3 km 1000 0. 1 rural, backhaul, special req’s 5 Wi. MAX NLOS 50 Mbps 1 km 100 0. 5 urban, suburban 6 Wi. MAX mesh Max. 2 hops NLOS 16 Mbps 25 380 Mbps 1 km 2500 0. 15 rural, urban, suburban Vezeték nélküli és mobil 2009 ősz Typical usage
Comments to the table on technology and conf. selection BME v Maximum microcell capacity Ø Effective usable data rate at network layer, lower than the physical data rates defined by the given technology (decreased by 10 -20% at Wi. MAX, 40 -60% at Wi -Fi) due to multiple access v Maximum microcell capacity in mesh Ø Effective usable data rate becomes lower due to the fact that part of the capacity is used forwarding v Maximum macrocell capacity Ø Max. microcell capacity multiplied by the no. of microcells v Maximum microcell radius Ø Achievable at max. transmit power and max. data rate Ø It is smaller than the max. AP distance to ensure full coverage (overlapping areas exist) v Area unit Ø 0. 01 sq. km is used just for convenience (an area of 100 x 100 m) Vezeték nélküli és mobil 2009 ősz
Comments to the table on technology and conf. selection v No. of microcells in a macrocell M Ø an=1+2 n(n+1); n – no. of hops Ø for n=2: an= 13 Ø for n=4: an= 41 BME M M M v No. of microcells in a macrocell, 2 -level architecture Ø an=1+4 n(2 n+1); n – no. of hops Ø Illustration for n = 3 Ø M – mesh node Ø B – base station Ø D – node with dual interface for the connection to the B and to the environment Vezeték nélküli és mobil 2009 ősz M M M M D M M M M M M M D M M B M M D M M M M M M M D M M M 53
Technology and conf. selection, Qo. S planning Technology Configuration Max. micro-cell capacity Average delay per hop (low utilization) Average delay per hop (high utilization) without Qo. S Average delay per hop (high utilization) with Qo. S Bandwidth allocation capability BME Voice transm. capability with/ without soft Qo. S 1 Wi-Fi NLOS 20 Mbps 5 ms 400 ms 100 ms no yes / no 2 Wi-Fi mesh Max. 2 hops NLOS 7 Mbps 10 ms 1000 ms 200 ms no yes / no 3 Wi-Fi mesh Max. 4 hops NLOS 2 Mbps 25 ms 2000 ms 400 ms no no / no 4 Wi. MAX LOS 100 Mbps 20 ms 100 ms 50 ms yes 5 Wi. MAX NLOS 50 Mbps 30 ms 150 ms yes 6 Wi. MAX mesh Max. 2 hops NLOS 16 Mbps 80 ms 300 ms 100 ms yes Vezeték nélküli és mobil 2009 ősz
Combining Wi-Fi, Wi-Fi mesh and Wi. MAX BME v Wi-Fi will remain the only feasible customer access solution for the next 2 -3 years (until mobile Wi. MAX cards will be as ubiquitous and cheap as expected by major players) Ø Fixed Wi. MAX as backbone/distribution network and Wi-Fi access from Wi. MAX subscriber stations v Wi-Fi is also a feasible technology to cover relatively large areas as a distribution network in mesh topology but the weak point is the backhaul and connecting the clusters Ø Wi-Fi mesh with Wi. MAX backhaul and interconnection network Vezeték nélküli és mobil 2009 ősz
Wrap-up: technology and conf. selection in typical scenarios BME v If some not frequently connected spots should be covered by a wireless network, standalone Wi-Fi access points as hotspots should be used. It can be used in LOS and, to a limited extent, in NLOS conditions. IEEE 802. 11 e capable devices should be used to support Qo. S requirements to realtime services such as voice communication Ø Planning tables, 1 st row Vezeték nélküli és mobil 2009 ősz
Wrap-up: technology and conf. selection in typical scenarios BME v If a larger area has to be covered by a limited number of backbone access points (BAPs), Wi-Fi mesh network with only a few hops should be used. The benefits of a mesh network are simple installation and using nodes as access points for users and as retransmission points of the backbone network. More than 2 -3 hops to the BAP cause degradation in effective bandwidth and also in Qo. S parameters. Real-time applications can tolerate this relapse up to 2 or 3 hops with 802. 11 e support Ø Planning tables, 2 nd and 3 rd rows Vezeték nélküli és mobil 2009 ősz
Wrap-up: technology and conf. selection in typical scenarios BME v Wide areas with low density of users should be covered by Wi. MAX. It can be used not only in access but even in backbone networks in point-to-point or point-to-multipoint configuration. Robustness and high data rate of Wi. MAX guarantees Qo. S and sufficient capacity in LOS and even in NLOS environment. Ø Planning tables, 4 th and 5 th rows Vezeték nélküli és mobil 2009 ősz
Wrap-up: technology and conf. selection in typical scenarios BME v Wi. MAX can operate in mesh mode, too. In this case, advantages of Wi-Fi mesh and Wi. MAX are combined. This solution is not widely implemented yet. Ø Planning tables, 6 th row Vezeték nélküli és mobil 2009 ősz
“Wireless City” design example in Hungary BME v Objectives Ø Estimate investment costs for several scenarios, including a pilot network Ø Create a pilot wireless CN in a real environment Ø Implement some “simple” applications, carry out testing and measurements Vezeték nélküli és mobil 2009 ősz 60
Area to cover BME Vezeték nélküli és mobil 2009 ősz 61
Network topology BME Vezeték nélküli és mobil 2009 ősz 62
Installation costs for 3 scenarios BME Qty Total Wi. MAX Base Station Set 1) Pilot Price 1 9, 200 Wi. MAX-Wi-Fi Dual Node Set 3 5, 040 15, 120 Wi-Fi Mesh Node Set 10 2, 300 23, 000 Planning and installation 6, 000 Total 53, 200 Wi. MAX Base Station Set 2) “Hot places” 2 9200 18, 400 Wi. MAX-Wi-Fi Dual Node Set 10 5040 50, 400 Wi-Fi Mesh Node Set 40 2300 92, 000 Planning and installation 12, 000 Total 172, 800 Wi. MAX Base Station Set 3) “Everywhere” 3 9200 27, 600 Wi. MAX-Wi-Fi Dual Node Set 12 5040 60, 480 Wi-Fi Mesh Node Set 55 2300 126, 500 Planning and installation 18, 000 Total 232, 580 Vezeték nélküli és mobil 2009 ősz
Outline BME v Introduction v Community networks v Available wireless technologies v Design considerations v Business models v Summary Vezeték nélküli és mobil 2009 ősz
Business models for a public entity BME v Getting the invested money back in short term is not of primary importance, thus longer ROIs are acceptable v Maximizing the profit is not the primary objective Ø There are important indirect benefits which result from aiding new service providers, ISPs, telecom companies, value added service providers to enter the market and grow. Hence, the public entity can obtain additional revenues from the company taxes. Ø The public sector can significantly decrease its expenses for telecom services using the public entity’s own infrastructure. Vezeték nélküli és mobil 2009 ősz
Basic models of public involvement Content, Services, Applications, Customer care BME community operated services model Broadband networks “carriers’ carrier” (active infrastructure model Ducts, Masts, Poles, Colocation sites, Dark Fiber, Passive elements passive infrastructure model level of intervention Lowest level of investment: aggregation of demands Vezeték nélküli és mobil 2009 ősz 66
Legal/regulatory issues BME v At government and inter-gov level: main objectives are like “Broadband services for all” (EU) v At regulatory level: Ø Permissive type clauses in USA (Telecom Act 1996), Ø A Telecom Act reform is expected to happen. Municipalities are preparing to defend their positions. Vo. IP service can be one of the critical issues. Ø In EU: “directives”, and the specific ruling belongs to the competence of national regulatory bodies. v Example: offering fibre optic infrastructure is mostly allowed (maybe not directly by the public entity, a public enterprise such as a utility company can be a solution, in many European countries) Ø From regulatory point of view this is the preferred form (physical level or infrastructure-based „unbundling”) v Providing service to end-users is not advisable even if it is allowed (conflict with market players which the public entity wants to help entering the market) v Providing connectivity and even telephony (Vo. IP) service to public administration institutions instead of leasing lines and using services from telcos Vezeték nélküli és mobil 2009 ősz
A possible business structure BME LG (M) Potential co-owner (m) “Infrastructure” company Potential co-owner (m) “Services” company Vezeték nélküli és mobil 2009 ősz 68
Some basic public/private models (1) BME 1 Publicly owned and operated 2 Privately owned and operated 3 Non-profit owned and operated 4 Publicly owned, privately operated 5 Owned and operated by a public utility 6 Privately owned and operated jointly with the municipality The choice of the appropriate model is influenced by regulatory issues Vezeték nélküli és mobil 2009 ősz
Some basic public/private models (2) BME high Complexity of management and administration by the public entity 3 Non profit 6 Private/public 1 Public/public 5 Utility 4 Public/private 2 Private/private high Level of public investment and costs Vezeték nélküli és mobil 2009 ősz
Some statistical data on municipalities’ involvement in building and operating wireless CNs BME Municipal Wireless Business Models Report, 2007 Vezeték nélküli és mobil 2009 ősz 71
Why municipalities build/operate their own network? Vezeték nélküli és mobil 2009 ősz BME 72
Why municipalities do not build/operate their own network? Vezeték nélküli és mobil 2009 ősz BME 73
Main models and examples BME v 1) The “Wireless Philadelphia” model (“private corporate franchise” model) Ø Wireless Philadephia Ø Several other wireless city projects in the USA Ø Newer attempts (NSW, Australia; Fresno, CA, USA) v 2) “Anchor tenant” model Ø Corpus Christi, TX, USA Ø Trentino, Italy v 3) “Communitarian” (grassroot) models Ø FON Ø Spark. Net, Finland Vezeték nélküli és mobil 2009 ősz
1) “Wireless Philadelphia” v v v BME The Wireless Philadelphia initiative started with a pilot, covering the central districts and expanded to cover the entire metropolitan area with a total 20 million USD investment. The project was financed and implemented by Earthlink. The business model was based on providing Internet access in the city, as the level of broadband penetration is very low (below 25%) and is mainly dial-up access. Earthlink was also planning to sell bandwidth both to retail and wholesale customers. The city was planning to subsidize Internet access for low-income residents. The model did not work for Earthlink and after a long period of uncertainty about the future of Wireless Philadelphia Earthlink withdrew. Why many Type 1 models failed or are in trouble in the USA? Ø lack of commitment by the city to the service provider Ø false assumptions, e. g. that free internet access can be financed by advertisements Ø internet access is not enough, business applications are needed Vezeték nélküli és mobil 2009 ősz
2) Corpus Christi, TX, USA BME v The largest coastal city in Texas, with about 300, 000 inhabitants and a very large territory of suburban character v Key application: Automated Meter Reading (AMR) system for water and gas customers. v The city built a pilot network covering 17 sq. miles and organized a brainstorming with stakeholders which resulted in 20+ application ideas Ø Ø building inspection (implemented) health care: electronic health records made available on site video surveillance city portal (implemented) v The city extended the network to cover a territory of 147 sq. miles Ø Access point density is 60 -70 per sq. miles in the center and as low as one AP per sq. mile in suburbs. v The city then sold the network to Earthlink v Business model: city pays 500 k/yr to Earthlink and saves 300 k from AMR only. Earthlink provides advanced internet service to citizens and hosts applications; pays 5% from its profit to city Vezeték nélküli és mobil 2009 ősz
T. Net - the community network in the Province of Trento, Italy BME • Geographically difficult, sparsely populated areas • Poor broadband coverage by telco • Large public sector (including e. g. health care) • Province decided to invest in a network infrastructure –> the T. Net project Vezeték nélküli és mobil 2009 ősz 77
The Italian T. Net project (1) BME Vezeték nélküli és mobil 2009 ősz
The Italian T. Net project (2) BME v T. Net - a community network project under implementation in Trentino in Northern Italy. v It is part of the e. Society project of the local government, whose strategic aims are: Ø innovation of the local economy, Ø improvement of Public Administration efficacy, and Ø reduction of the gap which keeps many citizens from participating in the Information and Knowledge Society. v Management model: publicly controlled companies for Ø implementation and management of the broadband infrastructure, Ø supply of transport services, connectivity and IT services for public administration, Ø renting infrastructure to market operators under fair and non-discriminatory conditions. v The network consists of a fiber optic backbone and a pre-Wi. MAX-based (Hiper. LAN-2) wireless access network. v The number of backbone nodes will be 78 with the total length of optical cable over 750 km. The network will connect in total 223 municipalities. Vezeték nélküli és mobil 2009 ősz
The Italian T. Net project (3) Network technology Vezeték nélküli és mobil 2009 ősz BME
Creating a business model BME v Voice traffic, internal needs: It can be usually assumed that 40% of the traffic is internal (and v v v can be totally carried by the CN) and that a 20% cost cut can be achieved on the external traffic by using the community network before reaching the external world. Data traffic, internal needs: On the data and information related traffic, it is reasonable to assume a conservative scenario, where the bandwidth growth and the price reductions will compensate each other. Wholesale of excess capacity: Scenarios are to be drawn up for two different types of customers: (i) telecom operators; and (ii) business customers. It can be usually assumed that 1 -2 out of the potential telecom operators and ISPs will be customers of the CN for the near future. Investments: Here we need a total investment figure, the total length of the investment period and the division of investments over that period. The model should also include depreciation calculation for different periods. Financial assumptions: Include the total needed equity and its division into own equity and external financing. The repayment conditions of external financing have to be taken into account, too. Operational costs: The operational costs can be split into three main groups: Operation & Maintenance, Personnel costs and Other costs. Vezeték nélküli és mobil 2009 ősz
Results from a particular set of assumptions Vezeték nélküli és mobil 2009 ősz BME 82
3) Communitarian (grassroot) models BME v Based on sharing internet connections among the members of the community v FON: “the largest Wi-Fi community in the world” Ø FON router (La Fonera), Foneros, non-Fonero users Ø Cooperation with service providers (e. g. British Telecom) Ø FON communities are growing in: Geneva, Oslo, Munich, Tokyo, New York, San Francisco v Why FON-type models are of interest? Ø failure of type 1) models in many cities in the USA Ø lack of public money and/or lack of interest from commercial operators to build CN infrastructures v Can FON-type networks serve as CN infrastructures? Yes and no. Ø for plain internet access and for applications that do not demand high bandwidth and Qo. S: yes Ø availability issue Ø for Qo. S-demanding applications and services: no Vezeték nélküli és mobil 2009 ősz
Outline BME v Introduction v Community networks v Available wireless technologies v Design considerations v Business models v Summary Vezeték nélküli és mobil 2009 ősz
Summary BME v CNs should not be technology driven v Identifying key applications and anchor customers is critical v The exact form of public-private cooperation/partnership depends on Ø willingness and capabilities of local governments to invest and manage the investment Ø willingness of market players to become partners Ø finding business models that satisfies both sides’ interests v Technology planning includes Ø selection of the most suitable wireless technology Ø planning methodology for coverage and quality of service is needed v Two key broadband wireless technologies Ø Wi-Fi Mesh Ø Wi. MAX (currently fixed, in near future mobile) Ø and combinations, e. g. Wi-Fi mesh with Wi. MAX backbone v Planning for coverage and Qo. S Vezeték nélküli és mobil 2009 ősz
Future trends BME v Applications Ø new applications based on geospatial information systems Ø example is services for tourists: accessing maps, getting directions, finding shops, restaurants and lodging, learning about local attractions and programs Ø enabling technologies are GPS and the emerging WPS (Wi-Fi based positioning) v Wireless technologies Ø Mobile Wi. MAX is coming, ? if it will meet the expectations of Intel and others Ø B 3 G (Beyond 3 G) cellular mobile systems such as LTE Vezeték nélküli és mobil 2009 ősz
Some references v C. Szabó, I. Chlamtac and E. Bedő, "Design Considerations of Broadband v v v BME Community Networks, " Proceedings of 37 th Annual Hawaii Int’l Conf. on System Sciences (CD/ROM), January 5 -8, 2004, Computer Society Press, 2004. Ten pages. Chlamtac I. , Gumaste A. , Szabo C. A. , Broadband Services: Business Models and Technologies for Broadband Community Networks, Wiley, 2005. W. S. Conner, J. Kruys, K. J. Kim, J. C. Zuniga, IEEE 802. 11 s Tutorial, Dallas, 2006. Szabó C. A. , Horváth Z. and Farkas K. , “Wireless Community Networks: Motivations, Design and Business Models”. Proc. WICON 07, Oct 22 -24, 2007, Austin, TX, USA. Also in: Mobile Networks and Applications, Springer, 2008. Proc. 2 nd Annual European Congress on Wireless & Digital Cities, Cannes, 26 Sep 2007. F. Botto, S. Danzi, E. Salvadori, C. A. Szabo, A. Passani, “Digital Ecosystems and the Trentino Community Network, ” OPAALS (EU No. E project) report D 7. 2, January 2008. K. Farkas, C. Szabo, Z. Horvath, „Planning of Wireless Community Networks”, in: Handbook of Research on Telecommunications Planning and Management for Business, Editor: In Lee, Publisher: Information Science Reference, 2008, to appear. Vezeték nélküli és mobil 2009 ősz 87
Скачать презентацию BME Wireless Community Networks Motivations Design and Business
f6ce2ab5b17815e2bb66de53653bc574.ppt