I'm here in California at the Tech Policy Summit and just presented on a panel, "The Future of Wide-Area Public Broadband." The panel's been covered by Capitol Valley Media here.

Here's a picture from Andrew (I'm the first seated fellow on the left):

I've been telling folks for some time that 1 gigabit wireless was just around the corner. iTWire is reporting on a new wireless chip prototype that will broadcast at throughput rates of 5 gigs per second. These chips, operating way up in the 60GHz unlicensed band, will be great for PANs and LANs, but probably won't be as useful for community networking (since they'll absolutely need line of sight). But with 7GHz of spectrum to work with (57-64GHz), these devices are showing the power of spread spectrum wireless.

You can tune into a live broadcast of The Future of Municipal Wireless streaming live from the New America Foundation here in Washington, DC. We will also be using a live web chat for remote viewers so that you will be able to ask questions and comment on the proceedings.

Discussion will focus on alternative municipal wireless business models that have proven successful (both in the US and overseas) in delivering affordable (often free) broadband to their local communities. There's a lot to be learned from the panel of experts -- participants include:

The Honorable Mike Doyle (D-PA)
Vice Chairman, Subcommitee on Telecommunications, House Commerce Committee
U.S. House of Representatives

Joshua Breitbart
Principal and Co-Founder
Ethos Wireless

Jonathan Baltuch
President
MRI

Aaron Kaplan
Director
FunkFeuer (Austria)

Jon Peha
Associate Director of the Center for Wireless and Broadband Networking
Carnegie-Mellon University

Richard MacKinnon
Founder and President
Austin Wireless City Project

Sascha D. Meinrath
Research Director, Wireless Future Program
New America Foundation

For long-time readers, you know that I've been working on the 3650-3700 MHz FCC proceedings for a few years nowthe FCC created a rather unique quasi-(un)licensing rule for the band, allowing community networkers, WISPs, and other interested parties to access this resource. By 2007 we began to see the widespread availability of 3650-3700 MHz equipment.

I've begun to collect data on real-world use of 3650-3700 MHz equipment (yes, it's already being implemented in networks across the country):

WISPs have been leading the charge and people are reporting 15km non-line-of-sight (NLOS) connectivity with 3650-3700 MHz (operating at 10W) -- which is a huge boost over 802.11. Meanwhile, capacity seems to be hovering around 15 Mb per 7.5 MHz (or 20Mb per 10MHz) -- so 100Mb connections over 15km without line of sight are quite feasible using this band. All in all, that's pretty impressive for first-generation equipment. The equipment vendor Aperto is claiming that their new equipment will get 20Mb per 7MHz (so you can see the development curve is already fairly steep).

To give you a feel for the real-world implications, folks testing things out reported, "6mb/s indoor at 2 miles NLOS. The base station was a 1 sector install using diversity at approximately 50ft up on tower using 120 degree sectors" -- try to get that with an 802.11 access point.

Sooner or later metro wireless folks will figure it out (at which point they're deploy like crazy before realizing the capacity limits given population/user density). Meanwhile, I think it's fairly clear vindication as to the import and utility of the band. Hopefully, municipal networkers will check with objective experts before jumping onto what is sure to be a 3650-3700 MHz bandwagon, but all in all, this is great news for wireless networkers everywhere.

We just launched the Wireless Innovation Alliance here at year's end to help counter the massive, multi-million dollar lobbying and PR blitz by the National Association of Broadcasters (NAB). At stake is access to the unused frequencies in-between TV broadcast channels. The NAB says that allowing unlicensed devices in these channels would destroy TV (and they have zillions of dollars and lobbyists on their side). We say that's bunk (and have research/physics/reality) on our side.

I recently drafted an in-depth white space device policy backgrounder on the issue that's both accessible and chock-full of useful information about white space devices.

Meanwhile, a number of congressional members weighed in this week supporting white space devices, and Ofcom (the British equivalent of the Federal Communications Commission) just announced their support for white space devices -- what they call "interleaved spectrum" (maybe physics works differently across the pond?).

If you're now asking yourself, "What are these white space devices of which you speak?" -- here's a quick synopsis of the current battle (from the white space device policy backgrounder):

White spaces devices use the unassigned frequencies between broadcast TV channels to offer a range of wireless services to the public. Access to the vacant TV channels in each market has been the subject of intense lobbying, yet far too many of the arguments against white space devices rely upon misinformation about the technologies and the FCC process that will ensure that harmful interference TV broadcasts and other incumbent services does not occur. Much of the analysis that underlies anti-white space device lobbying does not equip policymakers with the information they need to make decisions in the public interest. We believe that policymakers deserve better than the torrent of misinformation that has characterized the debate over white spaces devices. Therefore, this paper is an effort to help policymakers strike the appropriate balance between protecting existing services from interference while making the benefits of mobile broadband services available and affordable for all consumers. This policy backgrounder contains an analysis of the impact of white spaces devices from the New America Foundation, an independent think tank that has published numerous independent studies on this issue over the past five years. The paper contains links to primary sourcing to support its claims and aid in the critical analysis of the counterclaims currently being made about these new technologies. Our goal is to provide decision-makers and interested parties with: 1) a brief historical background to the current FCC proceedings; 2) a description of White Space Device (WSD) technologies; 3) a point-counterpoint “Myths vs. Facts” section on some of the key concerns raised about WSDs; 4) an overview of the public benefits of WSDs; and 5) a concise summary of where we are in the multi-phase process of adopting WSD technologies for consumer use.

Thanks to Peter Kese, who took my presentation and merged it with video on his nifty platform over at videolectures.net. My presentation, Wireless Tech & Regulatory Reality: Policy & Fantasy in the 21st Century provides a background analysis of community wireless technologies and an overview of the political battle over White Space Devices in the United States. This was presented in Maribor, Slovenia on October 26, 2007 at the Kiblix Conference.

Wireless Tech & Regulatory Reality: Policy & Fantasy in the 21st Century provides a background analysis of community wireless technologies and an overview of the political battle over White Space Devices in the United States. This was presented in Maribor, Slovenia on October 26, 2007 at the Kiblix Conference (an intriguing blend of art and Linux -- Maja Vuksanović did a great job coordinating my time there).

I've been talking for awhile now about open tech and the coming disruptions to established business models and incumbent communications infrastructures. The Elevate.at Conference was a fantastic integration of music and politics -- DJs and tech-heads hanging out together in an underground bunker dug out of the mountain under a medieval castle (yes, it was quite cool -- a big thanks to Roland and Dan for inviting me).

Open Technology and the Wireless Future discusses the rise of the Intranet era, Intranet services and applications, and the COMMONS Project. I gave the presentation on October 25, 2007.

I'm attending the Broadband in Cities and Towns Conference that Jabari Simama hosts each year, having just arrived back stateside from a speaking tour and series of strategy workshops in Austria and Slovenia. My friend Helga Schmidt documented one of the (many) highlights of my trip -- Andreas Marksteiner's open source based quad copter. Imagine deploying solar nodes to rooftops in 2 minutes -- the quad copter currently only has 1-2kg of lift, but as a proof of concept it's quite interesting -- plus, it was incredibly cool to see this tool in action.

From Harold Feld -- lots of amazingly useful info on the pending 700MHz fiasco/proceedings:

Ya know, I had real hopes that, barring a Petition for Reconsideration or two, I was pretty much done with the 700 MHz auction. Sure, Verizon filed a lawsuit with the DC Circuit, but at least we could sit back and stop worrying about the FCC stuff. And besides, the lawsuit didn't really have much of a chance anyway. So, after a grueling 6 months or so, I thought I could finally relax and turn to something new, like kicking the bejeezus out of the cable monopoly.

Hah.

As recent reports indicate, Verizon has apparently pressed the FCC to “clarify” the C Block conditions. I say “apparently” because Verizon has not actually filed a request for any sort of clarification, reconsideration, or declaratory ruling. Indeed, to my considerable annoyance, it took a modest reprimand from the Wireless Bureau and Martin's staff for Verizon to actually put something in the record vaguely resembling a description of what Verizon's most senior lobbyists actually discussed with the Chairman and his staff. Verizon, meanwhile, vigorously denies they ever asked for reconsideration (and, separately, that it finds the accusation that it violated the ex parte shocking and deeply offensive).