>A thought from Friday's IRC ><http://www.acslink.net.au/~tomw/irc/irc.html>:
>Has any funding or thought gone into community run wireless data networks?
>This would be the data equivalent of UHF CB Radio repeaters.
>
>Most of the wireless technology being developed appears to be for city use
>and assumes a corporate infrastructure (and profits) to support it.
>
>Instead, if we had a technology which would work with one isolated base
>station plugged into the Internet, it could service the surrounding
>community and be supported by that community. UHF CB radio repeaters cost >a
few thousand dollars and service about a 50 km radius.
I'll do some reading and get more definitive answers, but I think there are
several points of incompatibility between TCP/IP and CB radio. The CB channels
are too narrow for wideband data rates, I believe.
Also, CB is a shared access medium, ie anybody can talk on any channel at any
given time. So as well as transmitting across multiple CB "channels" to get
decent data rates, the system would have to resolve collisions. At the same
time, it would have to be able to reserve the "channel" for data access, since
anybody with a CB radio attempting voice communications across that channel
would blast the data (note, this kind of collision resolution also suggests
replacing existing voice-only CB sets).
Privacy is another issue. The open channel means any receiver can pick up any
traffic -- which means my e-mail is sent to everybody, so I have to be confident
that it's not 'snoopable' by others.
Lastly, my criticism of other wireless IP solutions -- whether wireless local
loop or satellite IP -- still applies: I'm wary of advocating something that
breaks the standard.
Sorry to be the gloomy one...
Richard Chirgwin
>Access might be free for local data and charged for remote data. As well >as
being cost-effective, this might promote a sense of community (as CB >radio
does).
>
>This might literally use UHF CB radio technology and amateur developed
>packet radio repeaters, But something a little more sophisticated may be
>possible.
>
>It may be better if some public money was put into developing this
>technology for community use, rather than short term subsidies for
>unsustainable technology. There would also be export potential for the
>technology in third world countries.
>
>
>ps: Apologies if this has already been discussed, but the title "National
>bandwidth inquiry" put me off reading any of the thread up until now.
>
>
>Tom Worthington http://www.acslink.net.au/~tomw PO Box >13
>Immediate Past President Belconnen ACT 2617
>Australian Computer Society tomw@acslink.net.au
>----------------------------------------------------------------------
>IRC 1999 Topics Needed: http://www.acslink.net.au/~tomw/irc/irc.html