Community
Wireless Networking
and
Open Spectrum Usage:
A
Research Agenda to Support
Progressive
Policy Reform of the
Public
Airwaves
Sascha Meinrath
Project
Coordinator
Champaign-Urbana
Community Wireless Network
Urbana,
IL
Policy
Analyst
Free
Press
Washington,
DC
The document
below is a tale of trinities: facets of an emerging communications revolution
that we need both to better understand and to actively support.
Wireless
technologies and the public airwaves that are this medium's lifeblood are
rapidly being cordoned off, made proprietary, and licensed -- a process being
driven by a desire to maximize profit margins, not serve the public good. A
refocusing of priorities on "open infrastructures" that better serve
the general public is desperately needed. These systems should be predicated on
utilizing open spectrum, open source software, and open architecture hardware.
In addition,
a major research initiative needs to be conducted to support "open"
technological development, progressive policy reforms, and implementation of
these new technologies. Thus, this document is both a call to action and a work
in progress: over the past half-year, this research agenda has been formulated
with the input of scores of the brightest technical geeks, policy wonks, and
network implementers, with the goal of collecting information on technical,
policy, and social aspects of wireless networking and facilitating far better
community networking than is currently the norm. It is clear that a major
telecommunications battle is coming -- if we do not prepare, the future of
broadband will continue to ignore many communities and marginalize vast
constituencies. For those of us who are interested in Community Networking,
this is a chance to help mould the future communications systems and
information-dissemination processes that will become ubiquitous in the coming
decade. Nothing less than the future of social networking -- and the ways in
which people relate, affiliate, and communicate -- is at stake.
In August 2004, over 200 wireless developers came together
for the first National (US) Summit for Community Wireless Networks. On the last
day of the summit, a group of policy experts and Community Wireless Network
implementers formulated an outline for supporting progressive spectrum policy
reforms. While many other uses for unlicensed spectrum exist, Community
Wireless Networks are at the forefront of open spectrum usage and policy reform.
In the months following the summit, based upon the initial framework, an
international team of wireless developers fleshed out a twelve-point research
and inquiry program to support open spectrum policy development around the
globe. The research falls into three broad areas (policy, technical, and
social); these areas are explained briefly below.
POLICY ASSESSMENTS
TECHNICAL RESEARCH AREAS
SOCIAL INQUIRIES
POLICY
ASSESSMENTS
Five
policy research areas for supporting open spectrum reform were identified.
First, identify major research that has
already been conducted and impacted (or been cited) in regulatory/policy
debates, as well as the independent research labs that are most active in
contemporary spectrum research areas. This assessment would survey the
literature that "counts" -- encompassing technical, economic, social,
and other domains that should be taken into account and help inform
contemporary regulatory/policy debates. This literature could then be used to
help set the agenda for future policy debates.
Second, document in-vivo effects of
interference -- including actual interference effects and any possible
discrepancies between claimed interference and real-world deployments. In
non-technical terms -- this would mean conducting research that would help
answer questions such as, "How much interference causes interruption of
services?"; "How can we lessen interference within a geographic area?";
"How can multiple devices utilize the same spectrum without interfering
with each other (i.e., what interference temperature does not cause degradation
of service)?"; etc. For Community Wireless Network users, this research
would help network implementers solve interference problems. One problem facing
Community Wireless Network deployment is that groups and organizations that do
not want to share spectrum claim "interference problems," causing an
enormous artificial scarcity for spectrum access. To date, no proper independent
analyses of interference problems have been conducted. However, researchers
should be able to obtain experimental licenses from the FCC to conduct this
type of research. In addition, it would be useful to work to set up mechanisms
whereby an outside entity could audit the interference claims of licensees.
Third, document spectrum usage -- both
actual and claimed -- paying particular attention to possible differentials
among geographic areas (e.g., metropolitan vs. rural communities; developed vs.
developing economies). For Community Wireless Networks, this would provide a
topology of spectrum usage that would be extremely valuable for laying out new
systems and/or avoiding areas where spectrum is congested. It has been
suggested that this area of research further focus on two specific areas: bands
the FCC (or relevant licensing authority) has already identified as possible
for sharing; and bands that the Community Wireless Networking Community wants
to see shared based on their physical characteristics. It would be especially
interesting to identify significant differences between the frequencies
identified by the FCC or other licensing body and Community Wireless Networking
allies.
Fourth, a policy and regulatory assessment
of the pros and cons of existing rules as well as an unlicensed spectrum/public
access growth plan has never been conducted for open spectrum. Likewise, with
the rise of "Voice Over IP" (VoIP) services and the continuing growth
of Community Wireless Networking, an estimate of the service costs and
feasibility of universal (broadband) wireless service has yet to be conducted.
This research should target areas of regulation that are most amenable and/or
useful to change and include both a policy assessment and a technical
assessment. This would be an ideal location for discussing alternative economic
models (e.g., ones that take the externalities ignored by mainstream models
into account); but this is also an area where political blowback might be
greatest. In many ways, this inquiry area presents a Faustian bargain -- it
could really open up new doors for open spectrum, but one could also seriously
harm the movement by creating immense political fallout.
Fifth, estimate the trans- and
international impacts as well as the regulatory structures, processes, and
regulations of unlicensed and public use spectrum. The International
Development Research Centre has already begun this documentation project for
the Latin American and Caribbean region, but much more needs to be done to help
identify places where public use of the public airwaves is endangered. This
analysis would focus both on cross-border/international-agreement issues as
well as on non-U.S. practices generally. Wireless communications do not care
about borders; thus, the Canadian/US boundary (or other spectrum usage-heavy
border) would make for an interesting case study. But also, international
regulatory practices are extremely important to many peoples, and decisions in
one area of the globe can have dramatic impacts on all other areas. The paper
presented at the Telecommunication Policy and Research Conference is a good
case in point -- if a single country required that radio manufacturers provide
open interfaces to their equipment (which almost none do currently), it would
impact open-source wireless development around the globe, allowing for drivers
to be programmed and disseminated around the globe. This too is a fairly
untapped area -- in that most of the focus has been on impacting US telecomm
policy; while potential areas where it might make more sense to target other
regimes to affect changes in telecommunications policy.
TECHNICAL RESEARCH AREAS
Four future technical research areas that would
support community networking projects were identified.
First, testing signal propagation
characteristics in different frequencies, within different topologies and
network architectures. In essence, identify vectors for interference and
possible solutions -- both existing and areas for future technological development.
This is, in many ways related to the policy area focusing on interference
issues, but goes straight to the heart of the hardware problems that community
wireless network users face. Often, the problem has to do with faulty software
-- even the firmware put out by major corporations, the software that runs
wireless cards that millions of users buy at their local "big-box"
electronics store, have bugs in them that cause problems. In addition, new
devices continue to flood the consumer market without any attention to problems
of interference and frequency congestion. A detailed analysis needs to be
undertaken before unlicensed spectrum, the lifeblood of Community Wireless
Networks, becomes a "junk band."
Second, and in a related vein, a
technically focused research area to test the effects of dynamic transmit power
on signal propagation, temperature interference, network architecture,
congestion, etc. By identifying technological development impacts (e.g., for
cognitive radios, smart antennas, etc.), researchers could greatly aid open
spectrum implementers and help identify the best hardware options available for
building dynamic, robust infrastructures.
Third, the documentation of
implementation models (both successful and unsuccessful) and their attendant
"how-to" resources and guides is almost entirely non-existent. Open
spectrum advocates have identified a need for end-users to have access to more
information; and for additional information to be made available to
infrastructure implementers. Exemplars that span the gamut from private
enterprise to municipal ownership to hybrid public/private partnerships are all
needed and best practices need to be collected and disseminated. Paralleling
this, open-source/non-proprietary tools for use by community wireless network
and software developers need to be identified and their existence made known to
the growing number of groups and individuals who are building these systems.
Setting up a central library for these resources, where groups can
"contribute" as well as find information collected by the research
team (and where all participants can update the content) should be a high
priority. The Association for Progressive Communications is currently working
on a documentation project; however, they have chosen to focus heavily on
documentation of proprietary systems -- leaving open-source and non-proprietary
knowledge and resources fairly unexamined.
Fourth, documentation of security issues
and solutions affecting open source network deployment has been relatively
ignored. With all the fear, uncertainty, and doubt surrounding wireless
communications, these technical issues also impact the social aspects of the
project. Currently, many people have a vague fear of wireless communications
(much like people had, and some continue to have, concerning shopping online).
The reality is that wireless communications, much like any other mode of
communication, are only as secure as end-users make them -- which means that
both documenting security issues and educating the public about how to best
deal with these issues in incredibly important.
SOCIAL INQUIRIES
Three areas for additional social research concerning
open spectrum use were also identified.
First, conducting an in-depth Community
Wireless Network asset mapping and needs assessment would help identify
particular ways in which available resources could be more effectively utilized
among developers, implementers, etc. The goal would be to map the current
networking community as well as develop a profile of communities to be targeted
for future network deployment.
Second, analyze and identify major
components that impact the digital divide (e.g., access to hardware, access to
connectivity, system administration expertise, lack of translated information)
with the goal of empirically accounting for a majority of the digital divide
variance. Identify community wireless network usage characteristics (e.g.,
demographics, structural constraints). This inquiry area includes components
that do not appear, at first glance, to go together -- analyzing the economic
barriers to deployment as well as conducting user case studies; but they are,
in many ways, two sides of the same coin. This analysis would focus not just on
economic barriers, regulatory barriers, fear of technology barriers, gender
barriers, etc. but also on the multi-faceted, global digital divide. Current
thinking assumes which aspects are most important to attend to (e.g., access to
computers, technical training); but there is little in the way of empirically
driven answers to the question of "What are the most important mediators
and moderators for the divide?"
Third, and finally, a thorough impact
assessment of open source software use needs to be conducted. These analyses
would ideally include social, economic, and networking capital generated by
these systems. Especially important is the inclusion of aspects that are often
excluded from mainstream economic impact studies (e.g., include a detailed
externalities assessment).
Taken together, these twelve policy,
technical, and social research areas provide a comprehensive (though certainly
not exhaustive) list of research areas that would help us understand and
support open spectrum at the local, national, and international levels.
***PLEASE
FORWARD***
FOR
IMMEDIATE RELEASE
February 1,
2005
PRESS
CONTACT:
Sascha
Meinrath
(217)278-3933
sascha@cuwireless.net
CUWiN
Website: http://www.cuwireless.net
CUWiN
ANNOUNCES PUBLIC RELEASE OF FREE OPEN SOURCE WIRELESS NETWORKING
SOFTWARE:
Imagine a
free wireless networking system that any municipality,
company, or
group of neighbors could easily set up themselves. Over the
past
half-decade, the Champaign-Urbana Community Wireless Network
(CUWiN) has
been developing an open source, turnkey wireless networking
solution
that exceeds the functionality of many proprietary systems.
CUWiN's
vision is ubiquitous, extremely high-speed, low-cost networking
for every
community and constituency. Following in the footsteps of
Linux and
Firefox, CUWiN has focused on creating a low-cost,
non-proprietary,
user-friendly system. CUWiN's software will share
connectivity
across the network, allowing users to buy bandwidth in bulk
and benefit
from the cost savings. CUWiN networks are self-configuring
and
self-healing -- so adding new wireless nodes is hassle-free, and the
system
automatically adapts to the loss of an existing node. And,
because
CUWiN networks are completely ad-hoc, there's no need for
expensive
central servers or specialized administration equipment.
To set up a
network, all end-users need to do is burn a CD with CUWiN's
software
(which will be available for free at
http://www.cuwireless.net), put the CD
into an old desktop computer
equipped
with a supported wireless card, and turn the computer on. Once
the computer
boots from the CD, the rest of the setup is completely
automated:
from loading the networking operating system and software,
sending out
beacons to nearby nodes, negotiating network connectivity,
and
assimilating into the network -- all the complicated technical setup
is taken
care of automatically. Unlike most broadband systems, CUWiN's
software
builds a local intranet as well as providing for
Internet-connectivity
-- thus, a town that uses CUWiN's system is also
creating a
community-wide local area network over which streaming audio
and video,
voice services, etc. can all be sent.
CUWiN is a
cutting edge research and development initiative. CUWiN has
pioneered
the first open source implementation of Hazy Sighted Link
State
routing protocol (first developed by BBN Technologies); thus
CUWiN's
software creates a highly robust, scalable ad-hoc wireless
networks.
CUWiN's route prioritization metric is based on research
conducted at
MIT and will automatically adapt to any network topology
and local
geography.
CUWiN's
software is, and always will be, available for free. CUWiN is a
non-profit
organization supported by grants and donations. CUWiN's
software
provides one of the world's most advanced networking solutions
available
today; and we are now making our software available to the
general
public to use, test, and help develop. We know that there are
features and
improvements that people will want to see in future
releases --
as an open source project, we are counting on the feedback
and input
from people around the globe.
More information
on setting up your own CUWiN network is available
online now
at: http://www.cuwireless.net/documentation
The latest
version (0.5.5) of the CUWiN software will be available for
public download
by the end of the week at:
http://www.cuwireless.net/downloads
A brief
article on the background, history, and ethos of the CUWiN
project is
available at: www.comtechreview.org/article.php?article_id=259
***
About CUWiN:
The
Champaign-Urbana Community Wireless Network (CUWiN) has built a
communications
system using wireless networking equipment. This is
essentially
the same "WiFi" equipment used in homes and offices, but we
put it on
rooftops to connect neighbors and form a high-speed community
network.
CUWiN's
three-part mission is to: connect more people to Internet and
broadband
services; develop open-source hardware and software for use by
wireless
projects world-wide; and, build and support community-owned,
not-for-profit
broadband networks in cities and towns around the globe.
CUWiN gives
communities a new choice for their communications
infrastructure
by building a house-to-house wireless "mesh." CUWiN makes
it possible
for neighbors to share broadband Internet access and
services
including Voice over IP as an alternative to traditional phone
service, and
alternatives to radio and cable -- such as live broadcasts
from grassroots
media-makers from Independent Media Centers and
"Internet
radio stations" in subscribers' homes.