From chtechboard at yahoo.com Thu Sep 1 15:44:02 2005 From: chtechboard at yahoo.com (Will R) Date: Thu, 1 Sep 2005 12:44:02 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [Chtechcomm] Massachusetts dumps Microsoft Office Message-ID: <20050901194402.24454.qmail@web31511.mail.mud.yahoo.com> http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=25845 Massachusetts dumps Microsoft Office Its the Boston Tea Party again By Nick Farrell: Thursday 01 September 2005, 07:58 [] THE STATE of Massachusetts, the people who brought you the Boston tea party, have joined in another revolution against good King Billy?s Office software. The state government has decided that all electronic documents saved and created by state employees have to use open formats from the beginning of 2007. >From then every state document must be in PDF or using Open Office formats. The big idea is to make sure that every citizen one can open and read electronic documents, something that it is convinced that VoleWare cannot do. Microsoft is clearly worried. A lot of people live in Massachusetts and that is a big thumbs up for open sauce. However Vole is hoping to get around the problem by applying recognition from a technology industry standards body for recognition of its own formats as open standards. However, since the new formats, soon to be seen in the next version of Office, will still include some proprietary elements, and are specifically excluded under the Massachusetts proposal. http://www.forbes.com/business/feeds/afx/2005/08/31/afx2200406.html The state of Massachusetts is proposing to make all its workers stop using Microsoft's Word, Excel and other desktop software applications and switch to open source software, said the Financial Times. In its online edition, the newspaper reported that the US state said yesterday that at the beginning of 2007 it is planning to order all state employees to create and save documents using only open format software. Microsoft's Office software is a closed format software. The report said OpenDocument, which is used in open source applications like OpenOffice, and PDF, a widely used standard for electronic documents, would be the only software permitted. The proposal, which is open for comment until the end of next week before it takes effect, would give open source software like OpenOffice a huge boost. OpenOffice is created by volunteer programmers and made available free of charge. ..... __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From tbuckner at ibiblio.org Thu Sep 1 16:45:45 2005 From: tbuckner at ibiblio.org (Terri Buckner) Date: Thu, 01 Sep 2005 16:45:45 -0400 Subject: [Chtechcomm] Should Wi-Fi Networks be a City Utility? Message-ID: <43176879.9020606@ibiblio.org> Should Wi-Fi Networks be a City Utility? http://wxpnews.com/ Last week, one of our neighboring Dallas suburbs launched a city-wide wireless network in conjunction with a private Wi-Fi provider. You can read about it at (free registration may be required): http://www.wxpnews.com/rd/rd.cfm?id=050830ED-City_WiFi Addison is only one of a number of cities across the country that have built or are in the process of building wireless networks that will provide Internet access almost anywhere within the city limits. The City of Addison is helping to fund the building of the network, but users will have to pay $16.95 per month or $9.95 per day for the service. Some cities around the country are footing the bill completely (or, more accurately, their taxpayers are footing the bill) to provide "free" wireless access to anyone with a wireless-equipped computer. And that's where the issue gets controversial. Private Internet Service Providers complain that they can't compete in a market where the government sees Internet access as a welfare entitlement. Why would any average computer user want to pay an ISP for access when they can log on "free" to the city's network? After all, if they pay taxes, they're having to pay for the municipal network whether they use it or not. Those on the other side argue that 'Net access has become almost as essential as electricity, water, or phone services, and thus should be seen as a utility and provided, or at least partially controlled by the government. Traditionally, "utilities" - whether run by the government itself or by profit making companies - were monopolies. With the deregulation of first the phone companies and later (in some states) electric companies, that changed. Competition was supposed to drive prices down, but does it really work that way? California was one of the first states to deregulate electricity and soon had prices that were shocking to the rest of us. Texas followed suit and deregulated a few years ago, and my electric bills are literally four times what they were before deregulation. Of course, it's hard to say how much of that, if any, can be blamed on deregulation since other factors (the price of natural gas being one of the biggest) are also at work. Yes, we have more choices now, but it seems as if all of those choices are expensive. The reason government-owned utilities are (theoretically) cheaper for the consumer is that government agencies (theoretically) aren't concerned with making a profit. But the personnel and resources used by the government to provide a service have to be paid for somehow, and generally there are two ways for governments to get revenues: taxes and user fees. With tax-funded services, everyone pays. With user fees, as Addison plans to charge, those who use the service pay for it. But those fees can still be less expensive than a private company can afford to charge because no profit is necessary. As we discussed in a recent editorial, private ISPs are already being driven out of the DSL business by recent court rulings that phone companies don't have to make their infrastructures (DSL lines) available for their use. Now they're being driven out of the wireless business as cities decide to get into it. Of course, this new trend of setting up city-wide wireless networks gives urban dwellers yet another choice in Internet services, and doesn't do a thing to help all those folks in rural areas who are still limited to either analog phone lines or satellite. What do you think? Is it great that cities are getting involved in creating wireless networks, or should the government stay out of the Internet business? If cities are going to run their own Wi-Fi nets, should they be "free" taxpayer funded services, or should users pay to connect? Will small local ISPs soon be a thing of the past? If so, is that a good thing or a bad thing? Let us know your opinions at feedback at wxpnews.com. Deb Shinder, Editor (email us with feedback: feedback at wxpnews.com) Source: WXPNews E-Zine, Tue, Aug 30, 2005 (Vol. 5, 35 - Issue 191) (WXP = Windows XP, btw.) From tbuckner at ibiblio.org Mon Sep 5 09:58:34 2005 From: tbuckner at ibiblio.org (Terri Buckner) Date: Mon, 05 Sep 2005 09:58:34 -0400 Subject: [Chtechcomm] Sand, sun and spectrum policy Message-ID: <431C4F0A.40005@ibiblio.org> Sand, sun and spectrum policy From In These Times, August 30, 2005 By Craig Aaron Summer is no time to talk about spectrum policy. So instead, let?s pretend this is a column about going to the beach. Imagine for a moment that you?re relaxing on the white sand, with a slight breeze in the air, just steps from the clear blue water. This beach is open to the public, but it?s never too crowded. It?s a great place to surf. But then one day you show up, and there?s a huge brick wall blocking your path to the shore. Without telling anyone, the government sold off this seaside spot to a private developer. Seems they were a little short of cash because of too many tax cuts. If you still want to dip your toes in the water, the new management expects you to pay through the nose. You?d be pretty angry, right? Well, that?s exactly what?s happening right now in Congress. Only the valuable public resource being auctioned off isn?t the beach?it?s a prime slice of the public airwaves. A little background: In 1996, Bill Clinton and Congress handed the nation?s television broadcasters billions of dollars worth of the radio spectrum for free to make the transition from analog to digital broadcasting. Where broadcasters now have one channel on the air, they?ll soon be able to ?multicast? four to six channels simultaneously (with no new obligations for public interest programming). This will be especially troubling if the broadcasters succeed in overturning broadcast ownership rules at the FCC. They could potentially control as many as 12 or 18 channels in a single market. In exchange for this windfall, the broadcasters were supposed to complete the digital transition by the end of next year?and return their old analog spectrum to the government. But they?ve been slow to make the switch, so Congress is preparing to impose a new ?hard date? of Dec. 31, 2008, at which point your TV will stop working if you don?t subscribe to cable or satellite. That?s right. Though nobody has bothered to warn consumers, millions of TVs being sold right now will soon be obsolete. Even though 85 percent of U.S. households subscribe to cable or satellite, Consumers Union estimates that 39 percent of homes have at least one TV relying on over-the-air analog signals. Unless the government pays for a subsidy, tens of millions of viewers will have to cough up at least $50 for a converter or buy new TVs altogether. (Guess which one the electronics industry is counting on.) But the real scandal of the digital television transition is what?s going to happen to the analog spectrum that?s being vacated by the broadcasters and returned to the government. After returning from the recess, Congress intends to auction off the public airwaves to the cell phone companies for at least $20 billion. You wouldn?t know from the paltry press coverage of this boondoggle that there?s an alternative. Instead of a one-time fire sale, Congress could open the airwaves to the public and lay the groundwork for universal, broadband access. All they have to do is set aside a portion of the spectrum as ?unlicensed,? meaning anyone can use it, not just the highest bidder. The wireless network at your corner coffee shop uses unlicensed spectrum. But right now Wi-Fi operates in the high-frequency ?junk bands,? which are cluttered with signals from cordless phones, microwave ovens and baby monitors. The airwaves being taken from the broadcasters, however, are the Malibu of the radio spectrum?fine beachfront property. Signals at these lower frequencies travel farther at lower powers and can go through obstacles like walls, trees and mountains. That means lower infrastructure costs for broadband providers, encouraging the development of local wireless networks and lowering prices. With more unlicensed spectrum, the ?Community Internet? networks being set up across the country would be even faster and more reliable. Super-high-speed broadband connections for just $10 a month could be a reality. Under the current regime, a majority of Americans are unable to get connected or afford the high-priced commercial service offered by the cable and phone companies. The United States has fallen to 16th place worldwide in broadband penetration?behind countries like South Korea, Japan and even Canada. More unlicensed spectrum would help narrow the digital divide. We?re heading for a world in which all communications?television, telephone, radio and the Web?will be delivered over the Internet. The choice seems clear: We can sell off our public resources to pay for the war, tax cuts or more pork-barrel projects. Or we can invest in the future, bringing the benefits of broadband to all Americans. But first our lawmakers need to pull their heads out of the sand. From mhoylman at co.orange.nc.us Tue Sep 6 13:58:05 2005 From: mhoylman at co.orange.nc.us (Martha Hoylman) Date: Tue, 06 Sep 2005 13:58:05 -0400 Subject: [Chtechcomm] Fwd: [nclgisa] SouthEast Wireless Symposium 2005 Message-ID: Interesting conference in Asheville in November - from NCLGISA listserv. Martha -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.ibiblio.org/pipermail/chtechcomm/attachments/20050906/e70e56c4/attachment.html -------------- next part -------------- An embedded message was scrubbed... From: "Gray Cassell" Subject: [nclgisa] SouthEast Wireless Symposium 2005 Date: Tue, 6 Sep 2005 11:57:59 -0400 Size: 9688 Url: http://lists.ibiblio.org/pipermail/chtechcomm/attachments/20050906/e70e56c4/attachment.mht From tbuckner at ibiblio.org Thu Sep 8 09:40:59 2005 From: tbuckner at ibiblio.org (Terri Buckner) Date: Thu, 08 Sep 2005 09:40:59 -0400 Subject: [Chtechcomm] High-tech parking meters rake in cash for cities that need it Message-ID: <43203F6B.7040106@ibiblio.org> http://www.usatoday.com/tech/news/techinnovations/2005-09-04-parking-meters_x.htm High-tech parking meters rake in cash for cities that need it . . . Advanced parking technologies can lower a city's operating costs, reduce staffing needs and increase ticketing accuracy, resulting in fewer challenges in traffic court. Bill Francis, a vice president at the Los Angeles-based Walker Parking Consultants, says technology can also help local officials more smoothly collect on outstanding tickets, which for several cities he's familiar with added up to $4 million in just five years. Pacific Grove, a coastal resort town where visitors to the nearby Monterey Bay Aquarium and Pebble Beach golf course compete with locals for the few oceanside spaces, went for the gold when it went digital last year. It installed meters that increase parking fees over time, so that quick errands remain relatively inexpensive but long stays become more costly. A wire grid under the pavement triggers a sensor whenever a car pulls in. The information can be sent wirelessly via radio signals to traffic enforcers so they'd know when time runs out on any parking spot in town. The meter resets itself as soon as the car pulls away, so the next car has to pay the full fee . . . From dunn.joel at gmail.com Fri Sep 9 08:41:46 2005 From: dunn.joel at gmail.com (Joel Dunn) Date: Fri, 9 Sep 2005 08:41:46 -0400 Subject: [Chtechcomm] fwd: [CAnet - news] Can ISPs survive elimination of open access DSL? Message-ID: <6bbffd1a0509090541223bc364@mail.gmail.com> In the interest of continuing to inform all of interesting views/opinions in the technology area, esp. in communications and network access... Bill St. Arnaud (aka BSA) is very well respected in the high-end research & education networking space, and I give a lot of credence to what he says... *************** For more information on this item please visit the CANARIE CA*net 4 Optical Internet program web site at http://www.canarie.ca/canet4/library/list.html ------------------------------------------- [I personally think elimination of open access DSL will eventually be a boon to independent ISPs, but not without some pain, and may even position them to compete even more effectively with the incumbents as they will have to invest in the newer technology such as fiber and perhaps wireless. Some excerpts from the original article -- BSA] http://www.isp-planet.com/business/2005/survival.html Editorial: ISPs Can Survive While the FCC seems determined to eliminate independent DSL, survival strategies exist for ISPs willing and able to adapt. We identify three key skills and two elements of local geography that could be vital to your success. Strategies for survival ISPs are local businesses, and an ISP's success or failure will, we feel, depend more upon local circumstances than business acumen. We see two elements in local geography, and three ISP skill sets, that could determine that ISP's success or failure in the near future. 1. Access to fiber 2. Public private partnerships 3. Wireless RF skills 4. Business integrator skills 5. Current number of business customers Access to fiber will, we think, be the most important determinant of an ISP's ability to do business in the future. Fiber is available in places you might not expect. Williamsport, Pa. is not the largest city in Pennsylvania, but it has a great deal of fiber. Fiber has helped businesses as diverse as Easystreet in Oregon and Conxx in rural Alleghany County, Md. Fiber is particularly useful to fixed wireless providers who often find they can deliver more bandwidth over the last mile than they can backhaul. It goes without saying that the only reliable provider of fiber connectivity is a non-RBOC provider, and ISPs will suffer as the RBOCs absorb AT&T and MCI. Public-private partnerships provide opportunities, especially to local ISPs. The story of Poplar Bluff, Mo.-based SEMO.net shows how a local ISP can work with city government to ensure that a municipal project helps it. Timothy Hicks, SEMO.net director of marketing, told us, "the municipal government doesn't want to compete with taxpaying businesses." No city government wants to be accused of competing with local business. Wireless RF skills will help any ISP grow, giving it an alternative pipe to the monopoly-controlled one. Commentators and practitioners have adopted wireless precisely because it is an alternative to the RBOC (see for example, David Isenberg's Wi-Fi Planet Conference & Expo keynote, Wi-Fi vs. Telcos). Dave Hughes has argued that wireless is, in the long term, a much cheaper way of connecting schools to the Internet and that the USF, by preventing schools from going wireless, is an insidious RBOC subsidy. As the Conxx story (above) shows, an independent ISP can work with local government to connect the entire government, including schools, administrators, and first responders, for far less than the RBOC. Fixed wireless broadband providers may even be able to retain residential customers. ------------------------------------- To SUBSCRIBE: send a blank e-mail message to news-join at canarie.ca To UNSUBSCRIBE: send a blank email message to news-leave at canarie.ca ------------------------------------- These news items and comments are mine alone and do not necessarily reflect those of the CANARIE board or management. ----------- Bill.St.Arnaud at canarie.ca www.canarie.ca/~bstarn skype: pocketpro SkypeIn: +1 614 441-9603 _______________________________________________ news mailing list news at canarie.ca http://lists.canarie.ca/mailman/listinfo/news *************** -- + Joel Dunn + joel at jdunns.com From chtechboard at yahoo.com Sun Sep 11 01:22:21 2005 From: chtechboard at yahoo.com (Will R) Date: Sat, 10 Sep 2005 22:22:21 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [Chtechcomm] [Fwd: Will Raymond moving email from chtechboard@yahoo.com to chtechboard@willraymond.org] Message-ID: <20050911052221.95221.qmail@web31509.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Hello, I'm transitioning off of my email address chtechboard at yahoo.com to chtechboard at willraymond.org. I'm moving on because of the recent evidence of Yahoo's complicity in the conviction of Chinese journalist Shi Tao. Shi Tao was convicted in April for revealing a government order preventing media reports of the 15th anniversary of China's repressive and brutal '89 Tienanmen Square crackdown and massacre of pro-democracy activists. Shi Tao received 10 years for lifting the lid on yet another case of China's censorship. I find Yahoo's argument that they were "just" complying with local rules, in addition to their notorious assistance in creating the new Internet Chinese Wall to filter out the rest of the world ("Public Pledge on Self-Discipline for the China Internet Industry"), unacceptable. I will celebrate the courage and fortitude of those democratic activists by severing my relationship and suggesting others do the same. Please update your address books. Thank you, Will encl: More information here: http://www.rsf.org/article.php3?id_article=14884 from Reporters Without Borders ______________________________________________________ Yahoo! for Good Watch the Hurricane Katrina Shelter From The Storm concert http://advision.webevents.yahoo.com/shelter From tbuckner at ibiblio.org Mon Sep 12 19:40:17 2005 From: tbuckner at ibiblio.org (Terri Buckner) Date: Mon, 12 Sep 2005 19:40:17 -0400 Subject: [Chtechcomm] Cleveland threatens to seize Adelphia fiber Message-ID: <432611E1.1000007@ibiblio.org> Cleveland threatens to seize Adelphia fiber From Cleveland Plain Dealer, September 11, 2005 By Thomas Ott Cleveland Heights ? The city has threatened to seize miles of fiber-optic cable so it can provide wireless Internet service. The network, which belongs to the Adelphia cable television company, links all City Hall, schools and all other public buildings in Cleveland Heights, keeping them in contact through high-speed telephone, data and video connections. Adelphia built the system as a condition of its municipal franchise agreement. Adding transmitters would let laptop-computer owners jump onto the Internet in any area near the public buildings. The city has decided to explore the project, Law Director John Gibbon said. Officials have not determined how many transmitters to use, who would operate the system and whether to charge users a fee. ?It depends a lot on cost,? Gibbon said. ?I think it?s premature to say what this would eventually look like.? If Cleveland Heights gets access to Adelphia?s cable, the city would save money on installation, leapfrog to the front of the Wi-Fi movement and bolster the aging suburb?s appeal to young professionals. ?In the big picture, it?s one more reason to live in Cleveland Heights,? city Planning Director Richard Wong said. Gibbon said Cleveland Heights would be content to lease or tie into the network but threatened to go to court under its powers of eminent domain because Adelphia has not turned over information on the network. City Council delayed action Tuesday, at Adelphia?s request. Adelphia spokeswoman Lee C. Shapiro said the company is negotiating with the city, but she declined to say more. Telecommunications companies have protested the creation of municipal wireless systems, and some states have outlawed them. Ohio legislators have discussed a ban, said Gibbon, who oversees a telecommunications section at the law firm of Walter & Haverfield. Cox Communications, which supplies cable television to 10 cities in western Cuyahoga County, has talked with several of the cities about adding wireless Internet service, spokeswoman Christy Frederick said. She would not name the cities. Cleveland officials want to set up wireless Internet service for city workers with the help of the nonprofit group OneCleveland. OneCleveland seeks to provide high-speed, ultra-broadband Internet access to public and other nonprofit agencies in Northeast Ohio. From RimerAE at bv.com Tue Sep 13 09:53:23 2005 From: RimerAE at bv.com (Rimer, Alan E.) Date: Tue, 13 Sep 2005 08:53:23 -0500 Subject: [Chtechcomm] Web Site Info Message-ID: <1FCCA98A98B17F44AB044D5871145B92014FEC6F@kaci-mail-11.na.bvcorp.net> Bob: How are you. Hope all is well with you and that your son continues to mend. Wanted to let you know that the web looks pretty good. Have not explored the whole set yet, but have found no errors so far. Thanks for pushing this "freebie" along. Cheers Alan ________________________________ From: chtechcomm-bounces at lists.ibiblio.org [mailto:chtechcomm-bounces at lists.ibiblio.org] On Behalf Of Bob Avery Sent: Wednesday, August 24, 2005 7:24 PM To: Chapel Hill Information Technology Advisory Committee Subject: [Chtechcomm] Web Site Info To all, As follow-on to the message I sent to the Manager and forwarded by Will, I'll add a few more details about the web site. I have shifted the server addresses so that the new web site will be active. It will take between 24-72 hours for the full DNS replication. The old site will remain active so users should not get a "not found" Hopefully you will see the new site by Thursday morning. We incorporated as much into the new site as we could. A couple of department sites hosted on other servers will remain active for a while (Library is on a server at the Library and Parks/Rec is on another commercial server). Transit is the last required resource still on the old server (Road Runner server). The transit information is being migrated so we can abandon the Road Runner server; this should be done by the weekend but the information will be available on the old site until it is shifted. Key item here is to keep bus route info available throughout. The "townhall" server remains the location for Council agenda and minutes. At the moment, the web site search does not tap this. The composite search server (a linux server operating at Town Hall) will bridge the gap and should be active in a few days. (A necessary delay to let the DNS settle out.) One of the goals in the process was to develop the ability for departments to contribute and where possible make immediate updates. This is proceeding well. We have a good group of departmental reps and good support within IT (Bill Rehm) to make it work. Hope you like the new look. Bob -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.ibiblio.org/pipermail/chtechcomm/attachments/20050913/018bc9a3/attachment.html From tbuckner at ibiblio.org Wed Sep 14 15:32:54 2005 From: tbuckner at ibiblio.org (Terri Buckner) Date: Wed, 14 Sep 2005 15:32:54 -0400 Subject: [Chtechcomm] Notes from September 8 Downtown Wifi meeting Message-ID: <43287AE6.3010607@ibiblio.org> Notes from September 8 Downtown Wifi meeting *Council resolution:* "...the petitions from the DECD and the four members of the Technology Committee are referred to the Manager, the Attorney, and the Technology Committee with a request for reports and options for consideration by the Council regarding establishment of a wireless Internet environment in the downtown and in the neighborhoods adjacent to the downtown such as the Northside and Pine Knolls neighborhoods." *Attendance:* Ray Reitz and Doug Noell: Chapel Hill Carrboro City Schools Joel Dunn, UNC Andrea Rohrbacher and Liz Parham: Downtown Economic Development Comm. Delores Bailey: Empowerment Inc. Jeremy Collins, Wireless Subcommittee of IT Advisory Committee Brandon Perkins, Wireless Subcommittee of IT Advisory Committee Allan Polak, Wireless Subcommittee of IT Advisory Committee Terri Buckner, Wireless Subcommittee of IT Advisory Committee Steve Irving: IT Advisory Committee Questions discussed: 1. Who will be the partners in conducting the feasibility study (as described in the Council resolution)? *Discussion:* a. Each group represented in the meeting wants to stay involved as a steering committee. The IT Committee should take the lead. b. Determination of the extent of involvement should wait until we have a sense of the costs involved. c. We should also explore additional partners including but not limited to the Chamber of Commerce, Orange County Emergency Management Services, Chapel Hill Transit and Public Safety. (NOTE: Jason Jolley from the Chapel Hill-Carrboro Chamber of Commerce has expressed his interest and willingness to join in future discussions) 2. Who are the constituencies that should be involved in providing input for the study? *Discussion:* This question should be addressed once we have a better idea of the cost estimate. The majority of individuals present did agree that access to the Internet is a basic economic development issue for residents as well as businesses. 3. Can we pursue a short-term project, such as access to Pine Knolls, while investigating a larger scale deployment? *Discussion:* This question should be addressed once we have a better idea of the cost estimates and the extent of a reasonably-sized deployment. 4. What are the next steps for this group? *Discussion:* a. Interview owners of Panera and Weaver Street to determine what business purpose their current public wifi projects serve. b. Create a fact sheet for partners (not the general public) outlining the different types of deployment that might be pursued (free love model, infrastructure model, mixed use model (internet, phone, cable)) c. Get estimates for a cost study from contractors. The TechComm's Wifi subcommittee will put together a list of questions to be asked of potential vendors. Brandon Perkins will schedule a conference call for week of Sept 12 for the Wifi subcomm to iron out the questions so that we can begin contacting vendors ASAP. Terri Buckner will contact the Chapel Hill GIS specialist to have the area map redrawn to include the entire DEDC service area along with calculated surface areas for downtown business district and the two neighborhoods. From tbuckner at ibiblio.org Thu Sep 15 10:06:58 2005 From: tbuckner at ibiblio.org (Terri Buckner) Date: Thu, 15 Sep 2005 10:06:58 -0400 Subject: [Chtechcomm] Sept 20 meeting Message-ID: <43298002.2020700@ibiblio.org> Gregg, The Wifi subcommittee will need about 10 minutes on the agenda for Tuesday. Thanks, Terri From wsirving at morgancreek.net Thu Sep 15 10:27:34 2005 From: wsirving at morgancreek.net (Steve Irving) Date: Thu, 15 Sep 2005 10:27:34 -0400 Subject: [Chtechcomm] Notes from September 8 Downtown Wifi meeting In-Reply-To: <43287AE6.3010607@ibiblio.org> Message-ID: <0MKoyl-1EFuiV1u6H-00070x@mrelay.perfora.net> Terri, Please advise when your conference call is scheduled and how I may participate. Thanks, Steve -----Original Message----- From: chtechcomm-bounces at lists.ibiblio.org [mailto:chtechcomm-bounces at lists.ibiblio.org] On Behalf Of Terri Buckner Sent: Wednesday, September 14, 2005 3:33 PM To: Chapel Hill Information Technology Advisory Committee Subject: [Chtechcomm] Notes from September 8 Downtown Wifi meeting Notes from September 8 Downtown Wifi meeting *Council resolution:* "...the petitions from the DECD and the four members of the Technology Committee are referred to the Manager, the Attorney, and the Technology Committee with a request for reports and options for consideration by the Council regarding establishment of a wireless Internet environment in the downtown and in the neighborhoods adjacent to the downtown such as the Northside and Pine Knolls neighborhoods." *Attendance:* Ray Reitz and Doug Noell: Chapel Hill Carrboro City Schools Joel Dunn, UNC Andrea Rohrbacher and Liz Parham: Downtown Economic Development Comm. Delores Bailey: Empowerment Inc. Jeremy Collins, Wireless Subcommittee of IT Advisory Committee Brandon Perkins, Wireless Subcommittee of IT Advisory Committee Allan Polak, Wireless Subcommittee of IT Advisory Committee Terri Buckner, Wireless Subcommittee of IT Advisory Committee Steve Irving: IT Advisory Committee Questions discussed: 1. Who will be the partners in conducting the feasibility study (as described in the Council resolution)? *Discussion:* a. Each group represented in the meeting wants to stay involved as a steering committee. The IT Committee should take the lead. b. Determination of the extent of involvement should wait until we have a sense of the costs involved. c. We should also explore additional partners including but not limited to the Chamber of Commerce, Orange County Emergency Management Services, Chapel Hill Transit and Public Safety. (NOTE: Jason Jolley from the Chapel Hill-Carrboro Chamber of Commerce has expressed his interest and willingness to join in future discussions) 2. Who are the constituencies that should be involved in providing input for the study? *Discussion:* This question should be addressed once we have a better idea of the cost estimate. The majority of individuals present did agree that access to the Internet is a basic economic development issue for residents as well as businesses. 3. Can we pursue a short-term project, such as access to Pine Knolls, while investigating a larger scale deployment? *Discussion:* This question should be addressed once we have a better idea of the cost estimates and the extent of a reasonably-sized deployment. 4. What are the next steps for this group? *Discussion:* a. Interview owners of Panera and Weaver Street to determine what business purpose their current public wifi projects serve. b. Create a fact sheet for partners (not the general public) outlining the different types of deployment that might be pursued (free love model, infrastructure model, mixed use model (internet, phone, cable)) c. Get estimates for a cost study from contractors. The TechComm's Wifi subcommittee will put together a list of questions to be asked of potential vendors. Brandon Perkins will schedule a conference call for week of Sept 12 for the Wifi subcomm to iron out the questions so that we can begin contacting vendors ASAP. Terri Buckner will contact the Chapel Hill GIS specialist to have the area map redrawn to include the entire DEDC service area along with calculated surface areas for downtown business district and the two neighborhoods. _______________________________________________ Chtechcomm mailing list Chtechcomm at lists.ibiblio.org http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/chtechcomm From wsirving at morgancreek.net Thu Sep 15 10:38:28 2005 From: wsirving at morgancreek.net (Steve Irving) Date: Thu, 15 Sep 2005 10:38:28 -0400 Subject: [Chtechcomm] FW: Notes from September 8 Downtown Wifi meeting Message-ID: <0MKp2t-1EFusz3ewP-0007O0@mrelay.perfora.net> Brandon, Please advise when your conference call, referenced below, is scheduled and how I may participate. Thanks, Steve -----Original Message----- From: Terri Buckner [mailto:tbuckner at ibiblio.org] Sent: Thursday, September 15, 2005 10:32 AM To: wsirving at morgancreek.net Subject: Re: [Chtechcomm] Notes from September 8 Downtown Wifi meeting Steve, Please contact Brandon Perkins for info. Terri Steve Irving wrote: > Terri, > > Please advise when your conference call is scheduled and how I may > participate. > > Thanks, > > Steve > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: chtechcomm-bounces at lists.ibiblio.org > [mailto:chtechcomm-bounces at lists.ibiblio.org] On Behalf Of Terri Buckner > Sent: Wednesday, September 14, 2005 3:33 PM > To: Chapel Hill Information Technology Advisory Committee > Subject: [Chtechcomm] Notes from September 8 Downtown Wifi meeting > > Notes from September 8 Downtown Wifi meeting > > *Council resolution:* > "...the petitions from the DECD and the four members of the Technology > Committee are referred to the Manager, the Attorney, and the Technology > Committee with a request for reports and options for consideration by > the Council regarding establishment of a wireless Internet environment > in the downtown and in the neighborhoods adjacent to the downtown such > as the Northside and Pine Knolls neighborhoods." > > *Attendance:* > Ray Reitz and Doug Noell: Chapel Hill Carrboro City Schools > Joel Dunn, UNC > Andrea Rohrbacher and Liz Parham: Downtown Economic Development Comm. > Delores Bailey: Empowerment Inc. > Jeremy Collins, Wireless Subcommittee of IT Advisory Committee > Brandon Perkins, Wireless Subcommittee of IT Advisory Committee > Allan Polak, Wireless Subcommittee of IT Advisory Committee > Terri Buckner, Wireless Subcommittee of IT Advisory Committee > Steve Irving: IT Advisory Committee > > Questions discussed: > > 1. Who will be the partners in conducting the feasibility study (as > described in the Council resolution)? > > *Discussion:* > a. Each group represented in the meeting wants to stay involved as a > steering committee. The IT Committee should take the lead. > > b. Determination of the extent of involvement should wait until we have > a sense of the costs involved. > > c. We should also explore additional partners including but not limited > to the Chamber of Commerce, Orange County Emergency Management Services, > Chapel Hill Transit and Public Safety. > (NOTE: Jason Jolley from the Chapel Hill-Carrboro Chamber of Commerce > has expressed his interest and willingness to join in future discussions) > > 2. Who are the constituencies that should be involved in providing input > for the study? > > *Discussion:* This question should be addressed once we have a better > idea of the cost estimate. The majority of individuals present did agree > that access to the Internet is a basic economic development issue for > residents as well as businesses. > > 3. Can we pursue a short-term project, such as access to Pine Knolls, > while investigating a larger scale deployment? > > *Discussion:* This question should be addressed once we have a better > idea of the cost estimates and the extent of a reasonably-sized deployment. > > 4. What are the next steps for this group? > > *Discussion:* > a. Interview owners of Panera and Weaver Street to determine what > business purpose their current public wifi projects serve. > > b. Create a fact sheet for partners (not the general public) outlining > the different types of deployment that might be pursued (free love > model, infrastructure model, mixed use model (internet, phone, cable)) > > c. Get estimates for a cost study from contractors. The TechComm's Wifi > subcommittee will put together a list of questions to be asked of > potential vendors. Brandon Perkins will schedule a conference call for > week of Sept 12 for the Wifi subcomm to iron out the questions so that > we can begin contacting vendors ASAP. Terri Buckner will contact the > Chapel Hill GIS specialist to have the area map redrawn to include the > entire DEDC service area along with calculated surface areas for > downtown business district and the two neighborhoods. > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Chtechcomm mailing list > Chtechcomm at lists.ibiblio.org > http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/chtechcomm > > > _______________________________________________ > Chtechcomm mailing list > Chtechcomm at lists.ibiblio.org > http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/chtechcomm From bdperkin at gmail.com Thu Sep 15 10:39:12 2005 From: bdperkin at gmail.com (Brandon Perkins) Date: Thu, 15 Sep 2005 10:39:12 -0400 Subject: [Chtechcomm] Notes from September 8 Downtown Wifi meeting In-Reply-To: <0MKoyl-1EFuiV1u6H-00070x@mrelay.perfora.net> References: <43287AE6.3010607@ibiblio.org> <0MKoyl-1EFuiV1u6H-00070x@mrelay.perfora.net> Message-ID: <6751706050915073912025a22@mail.gmail.com> Hi Steve, Unless I hear otherwise, we're having our conf. call at 3pm today (Thursday). The dial-in information for the conference call is as follows: Conference Access: Toll Free: 1-888-955-5366 Toll: 1-719-457-6420 Conference Passcode: Passcode: 151305 Thanks. Brandon On 9/15/05, Steve Irving wrote: > Terri, > > Please advise when your conference call is scheduled and how I may > participate. > > Thanks, > > Steve > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: chtechcomm-bounces at lists.ibiblio.org > [mailto:chtechcomm-bounces at lists.ibiblio.org] On Behalf Of Terri Buckner > Sent: Wednesday, September 14, 2005 3:33 PM > To: Chapel Hill Information Technology Advisory Committee > Subject: [Chtechcomm] Notes from September 8 Downtown Wifi meeting > > Notes from September 8 Downtown Wifi meeting > > *Council resolution:* > "...the petitions from the DECD and the four members of the Technology > Committee are referred to the Manager, the Attorney, and the Technology > Committee with a request for reports and options for consideration by > the Council regarding establishment of a wireless Internet environment > in the downtown and in the neighborhoods adjacent to the downtown such > as the Northside and Pine Knolls neighborhoods." > > *Attendance:* > Ray Reitz and Doug Noell: Chapel Hill Carrboro City Schools > Joel Dunn, UNC > Andrea Rohrbacher and Liz Parham: Downtown Economic Development Comm. > Delores Bailey: Empowerment Inc. > Jeremy Collins, Wireless Subcommittee of IT Advisory Committee > Brandon Perkins, Wireless Subcommittee of IT Advisory Committee > Allan Polak, Wireless Subcommittee of IT Advisory Committee > Terri Buckner, Wireless Subcommittee of IT Advisory Committee > Steve Irving: IT Advisory Committee > > Questions discussed: > > 1. Who will be the partners in conducting the feasibility study (as > described in the Council resolution)? > > *Discussion:* > a. Each group represented in the meeting wants to stay involved as a > steering committee. The IT Committee should take the lead. > > b. Determination of the extent of involvement should wait until we have > a sense of the costs involved. > > c. We should also explore additional partners including but not limited > to the Chamber of Commerce, Orange County Emergency Management Services, > Chapel Hill Transit and Public Safety. > (NOTE: Jason Jolley from the Chapel Hill-Carrboro Chamber of Commerce > has expressed his interest and willingness to join in future discussions) > > 2. Who are the constituencies that should be involved in providing input > for the study? > > *Discussion:* This question should be addressed once we have a better > idea of the cost estimate. The majority of individuals present did agree > that access to the Internet is a basic economic development issue for > residents as well as businesses. > > 3. Can we pursue a short-term project, such as access to Pine Knolls, > while investigating a larger scale deployment? > > *Discussion:* This question should be addressed once we have a better > idea of the cost estimates and the extent of a reasonably-sized deployment. > > 4. What are the next steps for this group? > > *Discussion:* > a. Interview owners of Panera and Weaver Street to determine what > business purpose their current public wifi projects serve. > > b. Create a fact sheet for partners (not the general public) outlining > the different types of deployment that might be pursued (free love > model, infrastructure model, mixed use model (internet, phone, cable)) > > c. Get estimates for a cost study from contractors. The TechComm's Wifi > subcommittee will put together a list of questions to be asked of > potential vendors. Brandon Perkins will schedule a conference call for > week of Sept 12 for the Wifi subcomm to iron out the questions so that > we can begin contacting vendors ASAP. Terri Buckner will contact the > Chapel Hill GIS specialist to have the area map redrawn to include the > entire DEDC service area along with calculated surface areas for > downtown business district and the two neighborhoods. > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Chtechcomm mailing list > Chtechcomm at lists.ibiblio.org > http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/chtechcomm > > > _______________________________________________ > Chtechcomm mailing list > Chtechcomm at lists.ibiblio.org > http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/chtechcomm > From bdperkin at gmail.com Thu Sep 15 10:44:17 2005 From: bdperkin at gmail.com (Brandon Perkins) Date: Thu, 15 Sep 2005 10:44:17 -0400 Subject: [Chtechcomm] FW: Notes from September 8 Downtown Wifi meeting In-Reply-To: <0MKp2t-1EFusz3ewP-0007O0@mrelay.perfora.net> References: <0MKp2t-1EFusz3ewP-0007O0@mrelay.perfora.net> Message-ID: <6751706050915074454b22c6c@mail.gmail.com> Hi Steve, Did you not get my previous email? The dial-in information for the conference call is as follows: Conference Access: Toll Free: 1-888-955-5366 Toll: 1-719-457-6420 Conference Passcode: Passcode: 151305 I'd say let me know if you didn't get this, but that doesn't make a lot of sense :) Thanks. Brandon On 9/15/05, Steve Irving wrote: > Brandon, > > Please advise when your conference call, referenced below, is scheduled and > how I may participate. > > Thanks, > > Steve > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Terri Buckner [mailto:tbuckner at ibiblio.org] > Sent: Thursday, September 15, 2005 10:32 AM > To: wsirving at morgancreek.net > Subject: Re: [Chtechcomm] Notes from September 8 Downtown Wifi meeting > > Steve, > > Please contact Brandon Perkins for info. > > Terri > > Steve Irving wrote: > > > Terri, > > > > Please advise when your conference call is scheduled and how I may > > participate. > > > > Thanks, > > > > Steve > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: chtechcomm-bounces at lists.ibiblio.org > > [mailto:chtechcomm-bounces at lists.ibiblio.org] On Behalf Of Terri Buckner > > Sent: Wednesday, September 14, 2005 3:33 PM > > To: Chapel Hill Information Technology Advisory Committee > > Subject: [Chtechcomm] Notes from September 8 Downtown Wifi meeting > > > > Notes from September 8 Downtown Wifi meeting > > > > *Council resolution:* > > "...the petitions from the DECD and the four members of the Technology > > Committee are referred to the Manager, the Attorney, and the Technology > > Committee with a request for reports and options for consideration by > > the Council regarding establishment of a wireless Internet environment > > in the downtown and in the neighborhoods adjacent to the downtown such > > as the Northside and Pine Knolls neighborhoods." > > > > *Attendance:* > > Ray Reitz and Doug Noell: Chapel Hill Carrboro City Schools > > Joel Dunn, UNC > > Andrea Rohrbacher and Liz Parham: Downtown Economic Development Comm. > > Delores Bailey: Empowerment Inc. > > Jeremy Collins, Wireless Subcommittee of IT Advisory Committee > > Brandon Perkins, Wireless Subcommittee of IT Advisory Committee > > Allan Polak, Wireless Subcommittee of IT Advisory Committee > > Terri Buckner, Wireless Subcommittee of IT Advisory Committee > > Steve Irving: IT Advisory Committee > > > > Questions discussed: > > > > 1. Who will be the partners in conducting the feasibility study (as > > described in the Council resolution)? > > > > *Discussion:* > > a. Each group represented in the meeting wants to stay involved as a > > steering committee. The IT Committee should take the lead. > > > > b. Determination of the extent of involvement should wait until we have > > a sense of the costs involved. > > > > c. We should also explore additional partners including but not limited > > to the Chamber of Commerce, Orange County Emergency Management Services, > > Chapel Hill Transit and Public Safety. > > (NOTE: Jason Jolley from the Chapel Hill-Carrboro Chamber of Commerce > > has expressed his interest and willingness to join in future discussions) > > > > 2. Who are the constituencies that should be involved in providing input > > for the study? > > > > *Discussion:* This question should be addressed once we have a better > > idea of the cost estimate. The majority of individuals present did agree > > that access to the Internet is a basic economic development issue for > > residents as well as businesses. > > > > 3. Can we pursue a short-term project, such as access to Pine Knolls, > > while investigating a larger scale deployment? > > > > *Discussion:* This question should be addressed once we have a better > > idea of the cost estimates and the extent of a reasonably-sized > deployment. > > > > 4. What are the next steps for this group? > > > > *Discussion:* > > a. Interview owners of Panera and Weaver Street to determine what > > business purpose their current public wifi projects serve. > > > > b. Create a fact sheet for partners (not the general public) outlining > > the different types of deployment that might be pursued (free love > > model, infrastructure model, mixed use model (internet, phone, cable)) > > > > c. Get estimates for a cost study from contractors. The TechComm's Wifi > > subcommittee will put together a list of questions to be asked of > > potential vendors. Brandon Perkins will schedule a conference call for > > week of Sept 12 for the Wifi subcomm to iron out the questions so that > > we can begin contacting vendors ASAP. Terri Buckner will contact the > > Chapel Hill GIS specialist to have the area map redrawn to include the > > entire DEDC service area along with calculated surface areas for > > downtown business district and the two neighborhoods. > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Chtechcomm mailing list > > Chtechcomm at lists.ibiblio.org > > http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/chtechcomm > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Chtechcomm mailing list > > Chtechcomm at lists.ibiblio.org > > http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/chtechcomm > > > > _______________________________________________ > Chtechcomm mailing list > Chtechcomm at lists.ibiblio.org > http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/chtechcomm > From wsirving at morgancreek.net Thu Sep 15 10:51:44 2005 From: wsirving at morgancreek.net (Steve Irving) Date: Thu, 15 Sep 2005 10:51:44 -0400 Subject: [Chtechcomm] FW: Notes from September 8 Downtown Wifi meeting In-Reply-To: <6751706050915074454b22c6c@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <0MKoyl-1EFv5q2KN0-00085v@mrelay.perfora.net> Brandon, Received both messages - thanks for being double sure. Steve -----Original Message----- From: Brandon Perkins [mailto:bdperkin at gmail.com] Sent: Thursday, September 15, 2005 10:44 AM To: wsirving at morgancreek.net; Chapel Hill Information Technology Advisory Committee Cc: Gregg Gerdau Subject: Re: [Chtechcomm] FW: Notes from September 8 Downtown Wifi meeting Hi Steve, Did you not get my previous email? The dial-in information for the conference call is as follows: Conference Access: Toll Free: 1-888-955-5366 Toll: 1-719-457-6420 Conference Passcode: Passcode: 151305 I'd say let me know if you didn't get this, but that doesn't make a lot of sense :) Thanks. Brandon On 9/15/05, Steve Irving wrote: > Brandon, > > Please advise when your conference call, referenced below, is scheduled and > how I may participate. > > Thanks, > > Steve > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Terri Buckner [mailto:tbuckner at ibiblio.org] > Sent: Thursday, September 15, 2005 10:32 AM > To: wsirving at morgancreek.net > Subject: Re: [Chtechcomm] Notes from September 8 Downtown Wifi meeting > > Steve, > > Please contact Brandon Perkins for info. > > Terri > > Steve Irving wrote: > > > Terri, > > > > Please advise when your conference call is scheduled and how I may > > participate. > > > > Thanks, > > > > Steve > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: chtechcomm-bounces at lists.ibiblio.org > > [mailto:chtechcomm-bounces at lists.ibiblio.org] On Behalf Of Terri Buckner > > Sent: Wednesday, September 14, 2005 3:33 PM > > To: Chapel Hill Information Technology Advisory Committee > > Subject: [Chtechcomm] Notes from September 8 Downtown Wifi meeting > > > > Notes from September 8 Downtown Wifi meeting > > > > *Council resolution:* > > "...the petitions from the DECD and the four members of the Technology > > Committee are referred to the Manager, the Attorney, and the Technology > > Committee with a request for reports and options for consideration by > > the Council regarding establishment of a wireless Internet environment > > in the downtown and in the neighborhoods adjacent to the downtown such > > as the Northside and Pine Knolls neighborhoods." > > > > *Attendance:* > > Ray Reitz and Doug Noell: Chapel Hill Carrboro City Schools > > Joel Dunn, UNC > > Andrea Rohrbacher and Liz Parham: Downtown Economic Development Comm. > > Delores Bailey: Empowerment Inc. > > Jeremy Collins, Wireless Subcommittee of IT Advisory Committee > > Brandon Perkins, Wireless Subcommittee of IT Advisory Committee > > Allan Polak, Wireless Subcommittee of IT Advisory Committee > > Terri Buckner, Wireless Subcommittee of IT Advisory Committee > > Steve Irving: IT Advisory Committee > > > > Questions discussed: > > > > 1. Who will be the partners in conducting the feasibility study (as > > described in the Council resolution)? > > > > *Discussion:* > > a. Each group represented in the meeting wants to stay involved as a > > steering committee. The IT Committee should take the lead. > > > > b. Determination of the extent of involvement should wait until we have > > a sense of the costs involved. > > > > c. We should also explore additional partners including but not limited > > to the Chamber of Commerce, Orange County Emergency Management Services, > > Chapel Hill Transit and Public Safety. > > (NOTE: Jason Jolley from the Chapel Hill-Carrboro Chamber of Commerce > > has expressed his interest and willingness to join in future discussions) > > > > 2. Who are the constituencies that should be involved in providing input > > for the study? > > > > *Discussion:* This question should be addressed once we have a better > > idea of the cost estimate. The majority of individuals present did agree > > that access to the Internet is a basic economic development issue for > > residents as well as businesses. > > > > 3. Can we pursue a short-term project, such as access to Pine Knolls, > > while investigating a larger scale deployment? > > > > *Discussion:* This question should be addressed once we have a better > > idea of the cost estimates and the extent of a reasonably-sized > deployment. > > > > 4. What are the next steps for this group? > > > > *Discussion:* > > a. Interview owners of Panera and Weaver Street to determine what > > business purpose their current public wifi projects serve. > > > > b. Create a fact sheet for partners (not the general public) outlining > > the different types of deployment that might be pursued (free love > > model, infrastructure model, mixed use model (internet, phone, cable)) > > > > c. Get estimates for a cost study from contractors. The TechComm's Wifi > > subcommittee will put together a list of questions to be asked of > > potential vendors. Brandon Perkins will schedule a conference call for > > week of Sept 12 for the Wifi subcomm to iron out the questions so that > > we can begin contacting vendors ASAP. Terri Buckner will contact the > > Chapel Hill GIS specialist to have the area map redrawn to include the > > entire DEDC service area along with calculated surface areas for > > downtown business district and the two neighborhoods. > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Chtechcomm mailing list > > Chtechcomm at lists.ibiblio.org > > http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/chtechcomm > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Chtechcomm mailing list > > Chtechcomm at lists.ibiblio.org > > http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/chtechcomm > > > > _______________________________________________ > Chtechcomm mailing list > Chtechcomm at lists.ibiblio.org > http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/chtechcomm > From tbuckner at ibiblio.org Fri Sep 16 08:29:57 2005 From: tbuckner at ibiblio.org (Terri Buckner) Date: Fri, 16 Sep 2005 08:29:57 -0400 Subject: [Chtechcomm] draft legislation on broadband services Message-ID: <432ABAC5.6000809@ibiblio.org> http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/09/15/AR2005091502257.html?referrer=email Draft Legislation Aims To Aid Competition In Broadband Services By Arshad Mohammed Washington Post Staff Writer Friday, September 16, 2005; Page D02 A key House committee released draft legislation yesterday requiring broadband providers to allow their subscribers to view any legal online content, a policy aimed at keeping big Internet companies from restricting access to competitors' Web offerings. The House Energy and Commerce Committee draft is a victory for advocates of "net neutrality" -- the idea that Internet providers have to stand aside and allow customers to access any Web pages as long as the content is legal. The principle is considered crucial to preserving the open nature of the Internet and preventing big broadband providers from squeezing out smaller competitors that offer voice, video or other services. Another provision in the proposed law also makes it easier for telephone companies to offer television over high-speed lines. It seeks to free cable and telephone companies from having to negotiate video franchises with numerous local authorities around the country, instead giving the Federal Communications Commission more authority over the process. That would largely benefit the major telephone companies like Verizon Communications Inc., SBC Communications Corp. and BellSouth Corp., which hope to offer television over fiber-optic lines. Yesterday, officials at those companies reacted favorably to the legislation. Other aspects of the draft legislation are aimed at making sure cable and telephone companies get equivalent regulatory treatment as they offer broadband Internet access. The draft is a first salvo from the committee, which is led by Texas Republican Joe Barton, in what is likely to be a lengthy battle in Congress over any rewrite of the 1996 Telecommunications Act. From tbuckner at ibiblio.org Fri Sep 16 14:57:14 2005 From: tbuckner at ibiblio.org (Terri Buckner) Date: Fri, 16 Sep 2005 14:57:14 -0400 Subject: [Chtechcomm] Digital Communities Best Practices Message-ID: <432B158A.1070404@ibiblio.org> This is a white paper from Intel describing a process overview of the implementation strategy of a municipal network. Quite informative. Thanks to Liz Parham from the Downtown Economic Development Corp for sharing. http://www.intel.com/business/bss/industry/government/digital-community-best-practices.pdf From tbuckner at ibiblio.org Sat Sep 17 13:02:40 2005 From: tbuckner at ibiblio.org (Terri Buckner) Date: Sat, 17 Sep 2005 13:02:40 -0400 Subject: [Chtechcomm] New Orleans debate on muninet Message-ID: <432C4C30.2030404@ibiblio.org> For the full report: http://www.freepress.net/news/11445 (from the Washington Post) Sky Dayton, who founded Internet provider EarthLink Inc. and more recently has focused on wireless ventures, said the area need not bother reconnecting all its downed lines and should instead rely on existing cellular networks and additional systems known as WiFi and WiMax, which provide high-speed Internet access. Dayton said the cost of such a network would be relatively low ? ?a rounding error in the context of rebuilding a city.? A series of small, electronic devices on top of buildings or lampposts and take signals from central towers and push them around to houses, offices or other ?hot spots.? Such networks can also deliver Internet-based telephone service. Several municipalities around the country have launched, or are considering building, government-owned or -operated wireless-Internet networks, so lower-income citizens can access the Internet more affordably. Those efforts have met with fierce opposition from the major telephone companies, which have successfully lobbied in several states for laws prohibiting governments from operating such networks if they compete with private industry. Dayton, who heads a consortium between Earthlink and SK Telecom Co., a leading mobile-communications firm in South Korea, said municipal wireless-Internet networks should be public-private partnerships. Jeffrey A. Citron, chief executive of Vonage Holdings Corp., a leading provider of Internet phone service, sees an opportunity built less around alternative technologies and more around opening up competition. ?I?d come up with a plan for a trenching system? for major thoroughfares in New Orleans while the city is largely empty and undergoing repairs, he said. High-speed, fiber-optic cables are hugely expensive to lay, so the dominant phone companies have typically been the only ones to do so. Citron said the city could dig the trenches and make them available, for suitable fees to help cover construction costs, to any carrier that wanted to lay cables to provide services ? including voice, digital television and Internet access. With more companies potentially competing, Citron said, prices would come down. From tbuckner at ibiblio.org Sat Sep 17 15:31:58 2005 From: tbuckner at ibiblio.org (Terri Buckner) Date: Sat, 17 Sep 2005 15:31:58 -0400 Subject: [Chtechcomm] notes from discussion with wireless contractor Message-ID: <432C6F2E.6030302@ibiblio.org> The Wireless subcommittee was asked by our (potential) partners (DEDC, UNC, CHCCS, Empowerment) to get a rough estimate of what kind of investment communities like ours have encountered in starting up a municipal network. Here are the notes from one contractor who says this is a very typical request--before signing on to a partnership, its only natural to want to know whether the costs involved are economically and politically feasible. His company would need the following information to provide us with such an estimate: 1. What outcome we are looking for? (rough vision/goals, any fixed or variable factors that need to be considered. 2. topology and surface area for targeted areas along with a rough description of the morphology (man made structures) 3. population of targeted area (# of households, # of small businesses <20 employees, # of other businesses) 4. time frame we want included (startup or Year 0 and maintenance Year 1 beyond) 5. type of service (see below) 6. assumptions about the technology (see below) 7. regulatory environment (constraints on type of business model including upfront funding) If we can put together this information, his company would charge us approximately $1500 to develop an estimate based on their review of projects undertaken in other communities. The report would give us a range of options from low cost to high cost and would document the assumptions upon which the estimate was made. Another option would be to bring them here for a 1/2 day 'train the trainer' session in which they would go into further details. That way we would learn more in addition to getting the report. The cost for the training session + report would be about $5,000. ******Please note this is not the same thing as a feasibility study but the effort we put into this preliminary study would be rolled into the feasibility should we decide to undertake one. In essence, this is the information our potential partners want before signing on to a feasibility study. *Types of service models:* 1. Fixed: primary location only, similar to T1/DSL/cable. This would be appropriate for Wimax deployment and would support parking/utility meters. 2. Nomadic: primary location with ability to move the computing device); Star Bucks approach. Wifi deployment. 3. Portable: computing device used in variety of locations (slow motion movement such as parking enforcement, police cruiser, buses) (wifi deployment) 4. Mobile: cellular or speed mobility (this technology is not yet ready for prime time) *Assumptions* 1. wifi 2. wimax Current best practice (in their experience) is Wifi on the edge (light poles) and Wimax used as a backhaul back to the internet They are willing to join us for a future conference call. I have at least one other contractor identified but they were not able to talk with me until next week. Hope this is helpful, Terri From tbuckner at ibiblio.org Tue Sep 20 12:52:09 2005 From: tbuckner at ibiblio.org (Terri Buckner) Date: Tue, 20 Sep 2005 12:52:09 -0400 Subject: [Chtechcomm] Mission and Objectives of Wireless Philadelphia Message-ID: <43303E39.2060702@ibiblio.org> Joel Dunn forwarded the following presentation from the Internet 2 conference. http://www.internet2.edu/presentations/fall05/20050920-network-bendis.htm The presenter is the CEO of Innovation Philadelphia. Innovation Philadelphia's Mission and Objectives are copied below for those who aren't interested in viewing the entire presentation: Mission - Wireless Philadelphia aims to strengthen the City's economy and transform Philadelphia's neighborhoods by providing wireless internet access throughout the city. Wireless Philadelphia will create a digital infrastructure to help citizens, businesses, schools and community organizations make effective use of this technology to achieve their goals while providing a greater experience for visitors to the City. ? Objectives - To spur economic development - To enhance community neighborhoods - To help overcome the digital divide - To reduce the cost of government From brussell at ibiblio.org Tue Sep 20 16:35:58 2005 From: brussell at ibiblio.org (Brian Russell) Date: Tue, 20 Sep 2005 16:35:58 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [Chtechcomm] Google WiFi & Google Secure Access? Message-ID: <65295.66.26.87.52.1127248558.squirrel@secure.ibiblio.org> Google plans own WiFi service - Reuters http://tinyurl.com/a7agb Blogs are a buzz about a new rumor of Google providing WiFi as well as secure access to it. Some report seeing a page on google's site only for it to disapear. Consider this all tenuous at best. BUT if the rumors are true then LARGEST media/information company in the world, Google, could RADICALLY alter the nature of public access to the Internet. Google is known for it's easy to use software. Imagine a easy to use tool that could make access to WiFi networks "safe"! Here is the FAQ supposedly copied from the site. Again this is speculation but exciting none the less. :) -Brian What is Google Secure Access? Google Secure Access is a downloadable client application that allows users to establish a more secure WiFi connection. Why would I want to download and install Google Secure Access? Google Secure Access allows you to establish a more secure connection while using Google WiFi. By using Google Secure Access, your internet traffic will be encrypted, preventing others from viewing the information you transmit. Does Google Secure Access connect to a VPN server? Yes, Google Secure Access connects to Google's VPN ("Virtual Private Network") server provided for this service. Why did Google develop Google Secure Access? One of our engineers recognized that secure WiFi was virtually non-existent at most locations. As a result, he used his 20% project time to begin an initiative to offer users more secure WiFi access. Google Secure Access is the result of this endeavor. What sort of information does Google have access to? If you choose to use Google Secure Access, your internet traffic will be encrypted and sent through Google's servers to the Internet. The data that is received will then be encrypted and sent back through our servers to your computer. Your privacy is important to us, we strongly encourage you to read our Privacy Policy to be fully informed about how your privacy is protected. Is there a fee for using Google Secure Access? No, Google Secure Access is free. Where can I go to download Google Secure Access? The program can currently be downloaded at certain Google WiFi locations in the San Francisco Bay Area. When I install Google Secure Access, why does it ask if I also want to install the Google Toolbar? We've included the option to install the Google Toolbar because it improves your browsing experience. Can I uninstall Google Secure Access? Yes. You can uninstall Google Secure Access by simply running the Uninstall program. This can be found by clicking on Start Menu, Programs, Google Secure Access, and then choosing Uninstall. How do I make my connection even more secure? You can make your connection even more secure by using a software firewall. Windows XP users with Service Pack 2 can find it by clicking on Start, Control Panel, and then choosing Windows Firewall. Will my corporate VPN still work? Yes. You can connect to your corporate VPN while running Google Secure Access. I have configured Google Secure Access to connect automatically, but it's not working. What's going on? Certain wireless LAN management utilities and older wireless LAN adapter drivers prevent Google Secure Access from detecting that you're connected to the Google WiFi network. In this case it will not connect automatically, and you should connect manually to ensure the privacy and security of your network traffic. Will Google Secure Access work at other locations? While Google Secure Access should work, we have not tested it at other locations. Why is Google Secure Access a beta product? Google Secure Access is a new product that is only available at certain locations in the San Francisco Bay Area. We are constantly working to improve this product. From dunn.joel at gmail.com Tue Sep 20 17:34:11 2005 From: dunn.joel at gmail.com (Joel Dunn) Date: Tue, 20 Sep 2005 17:34:11 -0400 Subject: [Chtechcomm] Google WiFi & Google Secure Access? In-Reply-To: <65295.66.26.87.52.1127248558.squirrel@secure.ibiblio.org> References: <65295.66.26.87.52.1127248558.squirrel@secure.ibiblio.org> Message-ID: <6bbffd1a050920143424df6421@mail.gmail.com> Brian, et. al., here's the link to Google's page on this... http://wifi.google.com/download.html and http://wifi.google.com/faq.html Does not seem to be responding now (or is very slow), but I went to it about an hour ago, after I saw it on Slashdot ;-) On 9/20/05, Brian Russell wrote: > Google plans own WiFi service - Reuters > http://tinyurl.com/a7agb > > Blogs are a buzz about a new rumor of Google providing WiFi as well as > secure access to it. Some report seeing a page on google's site only for > it to disapear. Consider this all tenuous at best. BUT if the rumors are > true then LARGEST media/information company in the world, Google, could > RADICALLY alter the nature of public access to the Internet. > > Google is known for it's easy to use software. Imagine a easy to use tool > that could make access to WiFi networks "safe"! > > Here is the FAQ supposedly copied from the site. Again this is speculation > but exciting none the less. :) > > -Brian > > What is Google Secure Access? > > Google Secure Access is a downloadable client application that allows > users to establish a more secure WiFi connection. > > Why would I want to download and install Google Secure Access? > > Google Secure Access allows you to establish a more secure connection > while using Google WiFi. By using Google Secure Access, your internet > traffic will be encrypted, preventing others from viewing the information > you transmit. > > Does Google Secure Access connect to a VPN server? > > Yes, Google Secure Access connects to Google's VPN ("Virtual Private > Network") server provided for this service. > > Why did Google develop Google Secure Access? > > One of our engineers recognized that secure WiFi was virtually > non-existent at most locations. As a result, he used his 20% project time > to begin an initiative to offer users more secure WiFi access. Google > Secure Access is the result of this endeavor. > > What sort of information does Google have access to? > > If you choose to use Google Secure Access, your internet traffic will be > encrypted and sent through Google's servers to the Internet. The data that > is received will then be encrypted and sent back through our servers to > your computer. Your privacy is important to us, we strongly encourage you > to read our Privacy Policy to be fully informed about how your privacy is > protected. > > Is there a fee for using Google Secure Access? > > No, Google Secure Access is free. > > Where can I go to download Google Secure Access? > > The program can currently be downloaded at certain Google WiFi locations > in the San Francisco Bay Area. > > When I install Google Secure Access, why does it ask if I also want to > install the Google Toolbar? > > We've included the option to install the Google Toolbar because it > improves your browsing experience. > > Can I uninstall Google Secure Access? > > Yes. You can uninstall Google Secure Access by simply running the > Uninstall program. This can be found by clicking on Start Menu, Programs, > Google Secure Access, and then choosing Uninstall. > > How do I make my connection even more secure? > > You can make your connection even more secure by using a software > firewall. Windows XP users with Service Pack 2 can find it by clicking on > Start, Control Panel, and then choosing Windows Firewall. > > Will my corporate VPN still work? > > Yes. You can connect to your corporate VPN while running Google Secure > Access. > > I have configured Google Secure Access to connect automatically, but it's > not working. What's going on? > > Certain wireless LAN management utilities and older wireless LAN adapter > drivers prevent Google Secure Access from detecting that you're connected > to the Google WiFi network. In this case it will not connect > automatically, and you should connect manually to ensure the privacy and > security of your network traffic. > > Will Google Secure Access work at other locations? > > While Google Secure Access should work, we have not tested it at other > locations. > > Why is Google Secure Access a beta product? > > Google Secure Access is a new product that is only available at certain > locations in the San Francisco Bay Area. We are constantly working to > improve this product. > > _______________________________________________ > Chtechcomm mailing list > Chtechcomm at lists.ibiblio.org > http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/chtechcomm > -- + Joel Dunn + joel at jdunns.com From bdperkin at gmail.com Thu Sep 22 12:20:22 2005 From: bdperkin at gmail.com (Brandon Perkins) Date: Thu, 22 Sep 2005 12:20:22 -0400 Subject: [Chtechcomm] Triangle tops for tech business Message-ID: <67517060509220920502e8986@mail.gmail.com> This is something that Steve showed me on Tuesday, and showed up in the N&O today. From: http://www.newsobserver.com/business/story/2800957p-9243923c.html The News & Observer Published: Sep 22, 2005 Modified: Sep 22, 2005 8:06 AM Triangle tops for tech business Silicon Valley takes last place By DAVID RANII, Staff Writer California's Silicon Valley has always been technology's hot spot, but the Triangle is heating up. Who says? None other than a business group in San Jose, the heart of the Valley. Its research finds the Triangle the most hospitable place to run a business among eight high-tech meccas -- ahead of Boston; Seattle; San Diego; Austin, Texas; Portland, Ore.; and Fairfax County, Va. Silicon Valley? Dead last. "We're obviously pleased with any accusations of excellence," said Rick Weddle, president of the Research Triangle Foundation of North Carolina. The foundation is the owner and developer of Research Triangle Park. The report, released Wednesday, was done by the Silicon Valley Leadership Group, which represents 195 companies that account for nearly one of five jobs in the Valley. It's meant to be a wake-up call there. "Just because Silicon Valley is the birthplace of high technology, it is not a birthright," said Carl Guardino, chief executive of the group. "It's something we have to earn every day." Raleigh-Durham ranked first or second in six of the study's eight critical performance measures. The categories were designed to measure the cost of doing business, the cost of living and the quality of life. The Triangle was best in housing affordability and had the least traffic congestion. It ranked second in unemployment rates, state tax rates (both corporate and individual) and the performance by its eighth-graders on math tests. In the other two categories -- electricity costs and the percentage of people with health insurance -- Raleigh-Durham was fifth. The study can be a weapon for Triangle economic development leaders in the corporate recruitment wars. "We'll use this study to sell, to promote, to further gain recognition as a tech region," Weddle said. The Triangle has had some success recently in high-tech recruiting. This year, Tekelec, a telecommunications gear maker, announced it was moving its headquarters from Calabasas, Calif., to Morrisville, where it already employed about 600 people. Last year, New York-based Credit Suisse chose RTP for its $100 million technology development and processing center. Venture capital The study shows that the Triangle also is a good place to start a tech business, said Monica Doss, president of the Council for Entrepreneurial Development, a nonprofit group that works with young companies. Still, Doss said, the Triangle lags in some areas that aren't in the report. One is accessibility to venture capital, the financing that new companies need to develop their technology and expand. Indeed, the report makes a passing reference to Silicon Valley remaining top dog with "the nation's largest concentration of information and biotechnology companies" and "the largest pool of venture capital." "We still believe the Silicon Valley is the top technology region in the world," Guardino said. "This report underscores that we aren't the only technology region in the world." Weddle said the Research Triangle Foundation has hired IBM's business consulting division to do a similar study of the "best practices" of research parks and research centers around the globe. "Just because we're good today," he said, "doesn't mean we can enjoy that position tomorrow." Staff writer David Ranii can be reached at 829-4877 or davidr at newsobserver.com. (c) Copyright 2005, The News & Observer Publishing Company, a subsidiary of The McClatchy CompanyMcClatchy Company From tbuckner at ibiblio.org Fri Sep 23 09:11:37 2005 From: tbuckner at ibiblio.org (Terri Buckner) Date: Fri, 23 Sep 2005 09:11:37 -0400 Subject: [Chtechcomm] Daily TarHeel: A wi-fi wonderland Message-ID: <4333FF09.3090002@ibiblio.org> http://www.dailytarheel.com/vnews/display.v/ART/4333779f8156e A wi-fi wonderland Wireless internet access along Franklin Street would be a boon to both the University and town communities ? and also good for businesses. September 23, 2005 DEDC, or the Downtown Economic Development Corporation, rebranded itself as the Chapel Hill Downtown Partnership on Monday. While we?re sure that the board wanted to disassociate itself from a certain Middle Eastern body of water, there are other, more pressing issues that we would like the corporation ? sorry, partnership ? to look at. Such as bringing wireless internet access to Franklin Street, for instance. The partnership has talked a lot about setting up wireless in the past year but has done little to nothing so far. It?s not because there?s opposition to the plan ? Student Body President Seth Dearmin told us, ?Everybody wants this to happen.? The University, the town and local business owners all stand to gain. If students can do their work and check their e-mail at local businesses, they?ll spend more time ? and money ? on Franklin Street. A lot of students are excited about the initiative, and we can?t understand why the partnership isn?t pushing harder. Luckily, we?re not alone in this opinion. Board of Trustee member Roger Perry and Mayor Kevin Foy, both CHDP members, called on the board to put up or shut up on the issue. Perry called on the partnership to ?organize this thing, provide the seed money for this thing or quit talking about it?. Carrboro doesn?t have as many resources as Chapel Hill, and yet it?s already providing limited free wireless access, making its sister town?s paralysis more glaring. The partnership isn?t alone. UNC?s Information Technology Services doesn?t seem to think it?s much of a priority, either. Dearmin, who made wireless access on Franklin Street one of his campaign planks, said that ?there?s been no real cohesion between the two groups.? ITS is more concerned with expanding wireless on campus and doesn?t see itself getting around to Franklin Street for ?one to two years.? That?s ridiculous, and it could be done by the time classes start next fall if someone would take the initiative and answer Perry?s call to action. As for Dearmin himself, he admitted to us that he hasn?t been pushing very hard, either ? but that he and the other players ?are gonna catch up and talk.? We hope so. But we also hope that the next meeting of the CHDP results in something more tangible than more talk. From bdperkin at gmail.com Fri Sep 23 14:13:08 2005 From: bdperkin at gmail.com (Brandon Perkins) Date: Fri, 23 Sep 2005 14:13:08 -0400 Subject: [Chtechcomm] Triangle tops for tech business In-Reply-To: <67517060509220920502e8986@mail.gmail.com> References: <67517060509220920502e8986@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <675170605092311134411208e@mail.gmail.com> From: http://www.newsobserver.com/opinion/editorials/story/2801784p-9244462c.html An editorial on the article from yesterday... The News & Observer Published: Sep 23, 2005 Modified: Sep 23, 2005 8:38 AM High-tech haven The folks in Silicon Valley admit up front that the reason they named the Triangle as the best place to run a high-tech business was to get the attention of their over-confident home towners. Still, it is yet another feather in the local cap to have the Silicon Valley Leadership Group put the Triangle at the head of a rather prestigious list of major players in the high-tech game. Areas included in the rankings include Fairfax County, Va., Boston, Seattle, Portland, Ore., Austin, San Diego and San Jose, Calif., the home of Silicon Valley. The Triangle was praised for its housing affordability, which may come as a surprise to local folks who have seen home prices skyrocket in recent years. Another rather curious ranking was our high mark for traffic congestion costs, meaning traffic here was judged to be not that bad. But compared with, say, the mega-mess on the highways in the Fairfax County region of northern Virginia, the jam-ups on I-40 and the U.S. 1-64 corridor may seem piddling. Everything is a matter of perspective. The Triangle ranked second on the list for its unemployment rate, which sounds good until you realize that means there is a large out-of-work labor pool looking for jobs around here. Those who constantly complain that high taxes are hurting business development in this area might be surprised to learn that high-tech business leaders think our tax rates are low and that's just peachy with them. The California crowd says we are second from the best on their list when it comes to low taxes. But some of the results were not good, regardless of perspective. The Triangle placed fifth for the percentage of its population with health insurance. It also placed fifth for the cost of electricity, meaning those costs were lower in four other regions. Bottom line: North Carolina remains what it has long been, a low-tax state with a lot of out-of-work people who are anxious for decent jobs so they can better take care of their families. That may sound like paradise for employers but it is cold comfort for many Tar Heels. (c) Copyright 2005, The News & Observer Publishing Company, a subsidiary of The McClatchy CompanyMcClatchy Company On 9/22/05, Brandon Perkins wrote: > This is something that Steve showed me on Tuesday, and showed up in > the N&O today. From: > > http://www.newsobserver.com/business/story/2800957p-9243923c.html > > The News & Observer > > Published: Sep 22, 2005 > Modified: Sep 22, 2005 8:06 AM > Triangle tops for tech business > Silicon Valley takes last place > > By DAVID RANII, Staff Writer > > California's Silicon Valley has always been technology's hot spot, but > the Triangle is heating up. > > Who says? None other than a business group in San Jose, the heart of > the Valley. Its research finds the Triangle the most hospitable place > to run a business among eight high-tech meccas -- ahead of Boston; > Seattle; San Diego; Austin, Texas; Portland, Ore.; and Fairfax County, > Va. > > Silicon Valley? Dead last. > > "We're obviously pleased with any accusations of excellence," said > Rick Weddle, president of the Research Triangle Foundation of North > Carolina. The foundation is the owner and developer of Research > Triangle Park. > > The report, released Wednesday, was done by the Silicon Valley > Leadership Group, which represents 195 companies that account for > nearly one of five jobs in the Valley. It's meant to be a wake-up call > there. > > "Just because Silicon Valley is the birthplace of high technology, it > is not a birthright," said Carl Guardino, chief executive of the > group. "It's something we have to earn every day." > > Raleigh-Durham ranked first or second in six of the study's eight > critical performance measures. The categories were designed to measure > the cost of doing business, the cost of living and the quality of > life. > > The Triangle was best in housing affordability and had the least > traffic congestion. It ranked second in unemployment rates, state tax > rates (both corporate and individual) and the performance by its > eighth-graders on math tests. > > In the other two categories -- electricity costs and the percentage of > people with health insurance -- Raleigh-Durham was fifth. > > The study can be a weapon for Triangle economic development leaders in > the corporate recruitment wars. > > "We'll use this study to sell, to promote, to further gain recognition > as a tech region," Weddle said. > > The Triangle has had some success recently in high-tech recruiting. > This year, Tekelec, a telecommunications gear maker, announced it was > moving its headquarters from Calabasas, Calif., to Morrisville, where > it already employed about 600 people. Last year, New York-based Credit > Suisse chose RTP for its $100 million technology development and > processing center. > > Venture capital > > The study shows that the Triangle also is a good place to start a tech > business, said Monica Doss, president of the Council for > Entrepreneurial Development, a nonprofit group that works with young > companies. > > Still, Doss said, the Triangle lags in some areas that aren't in the > report. One is accessibility to venture capital, the financing that > new companies need to develop their technology and expand. > > Indeed, the report makes a passing reference to Silicon Valley > remaining top dog with "the nation's largest concentration of > information and biotechnology companies" and "the largest pool of > venture capital." > > "We still believe the Silicon Valley is the top technology region in > the world," Guardino said. "This report underscores that we aren't the > only technology region in the world." > > Weddle said the Research Triangle Foundation has hired IBM's business > consulting division to do a similar study of the "best practices" of > research parks and research centers around the globe. > > "Just because we're good today," he said, "doesn't mean we can enjoy > that position tomorrow." > > > Staff writer David Ranii can be reached at 829-4877 or davidr at newsobserver.com. > > (c) Copyright 2005, The News & Observer Publishing Company, > a subsidiary of The McClatchy CompanyMcClatchy Company > From joel at jdunns.com Sat Sep 24 20:00:47 2005 From: joel at jdunns.com (Joel Dunn) Date: Sat, 24 Sep 2005 20:00:47 -0400 Subject: [Chtechcomm] [Fwd: [CAnet - news] Muni Networks - The Public's Not Buying] Message-ID: <4335E8AF.7040007@jdunns.com> FYI, an interesting blurb from BSA... As a "member emeritus" of the committee, I appreciate the interest that you all have in keeping ideas such as this in front of our elected officials... -------- Original Message -------- Subject: [CAnet - news] Muni Networks - The Public's Not Buying Date: Fri, 23 Sep 2005 09:34:23 -0400 From: Bill St.Arnaud Reply-To: bill.st.arnaud at canarie.ca To: For more information on this item please visit the CANARIE CA*net 4 Optical Internet program web site at http://www.canarie.ca/canet4/library/list.html ------------------------------------------- [Good article in Lightreading on the public perceptions of broadband. Although many of us digerati may foam at the mouth at the perceived slow pace of broadband deployment, the lack of competitive services and relatively slow broadband speeds, the public in general for the most part is satisfied with broadband services as they are offered today. On the whole broadband speeds are increasing, prices are dropping and coverage is steadily increasing. Compared to the pace of any other infrastructure deployment such as cell phones, telephone, cable TV, electricity, the rate of broadband deployment has been astoundingly fast. Other than a small number of exceptions, broadband is not on the radar for most municipalities as the public has far greater concerns with respect to road repair, education and emergency services. But the fact there are no public complaints, does not mean there are no important issues to be addressed with respect to broadband. To my mind facilities based competition in the last mile still remains the number one issue. But this cannot be achieved through regulatory fiat. This is where the municipalities have a key role to play - not in trying to be a services provider themselves, but by building the enabling infrastructure such as open conduit and/or partnering in the construction of condominium dark fiber. But the rationale to build such infrastructure cannot be justified by the non-existent public demand for something to be done about broadband. The digerati I think have a responsibility to contribute to the larger municipal concerns and issues, rather than being seen as another special interest group focused on our narrow interest of broadband now. The number issue for most municipalities is new sources of revenue. Open conduit and condo dark fiber, built on non-exclusive basis, has shown to be a steady revenue source for cities without violating any right-of-way issues with respect to FCC and CRTC. It rarely, if ever, impedes on any similar private sector service, and most importantly creates an infrastructure for competitive facilities based broadband. It also has the added benefit of minimizing impact of the serial rippers who are deploying independent fiber cables down municipal streets and reducing the number of spaghetti trees of coax and copper strung on telephone poles-- BSA] Muni Networks - The Public's Not Buying Fast, affordable broadband? "What for?" asks Joe Sixpack. http://www.lightreading.com/document.asp?doc_id=81025 ------------------------------------- To SUBSCRIBE: send a blank e-mail message to news-join at canarie.ca To UNSUBSCRIBE: send a blank email message to news-leave at canarie.ca ------------------------------------- These news items and comments are mine alone and do not necessarily reflect those of the CANARIE board or management. ----------- Bill.St.Arnaud at canarie.ca www.canarie.ca/~bstarn skype: pocketpro SkypeIn: +1 614 441-9603 _______________________________________________ news mailing list news at canarie.ca http://lists.canarie.ca/mailman/listinfo/news -- + Joel Dunn + joel_dunn at unc.edu -- + Joel Dunn + joel at jdunns.com From tbuckner at ibiblio.org Sun Sep 25 12:59:34 2005 From: tbuckner at ibiblio.org (Terri Buckner) Date: Sun, 25 Sep 2005 12:59:34 -0400 Subject: [Chtechcomm] Broadband as a Public Service Message-ID: <4336D776.8020403@ibiblio.org> Community Internet Across America http://www.freepress.net/communityinternet/ Broadband as a Public Service High-speed Internet access is fast becoming a basic public necessity ? just like water, gas or electricity. But far too many Americans are finding themselves on the wrong side of the digital divide, unable to get connected or afford expensive commercial service. Community Internet is the answer. Soon all media -- TV, telephone, radio and the Web -- will be delivered via the Internet over a broadband connection. New wireless and wired technologies allow local governments, public-private partnerships, schools and community groups to offer faster, cheaper and more reliable Internet service. Hundreds of Community Internet and municipal broadband projects have sprouted up across the country. Click on the map below to find a network near you. http://www.freepress.net/communityinternet/networks.php From brussell at ibiblio.org Mon Sep 26 17:10:05 2005 From: brussell at ibiblio.org (Brian Russell) Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2005 17:10:05 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [Chtechcomm] [Fwd: Save a Community Internet project near you] Message-ID: <65265.66.26.56.190.1127769005.squirrel@secure.ibiblio.org> "...without your calls to Congress, these Community Internet projects may be shut down by big cable and telephone companies." Real "action items" bellow for preserving a community Internet project, (See link bellow to contact your Congress person). Let's make sure all our efforts are worth it. -Brian -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Dear Media Reformer: Hundreds of U.S. cities and towns are finding that the best way to guarantee universal, affordable Internet access to their residents is to provide it themselves. But without your calls to Congress, these Community Internet projects may be shut down by big cable and telephone companies. New networks are taking root across the country. These projects improve access to information, provide education and job training, enhance public safety and bolster local economic development. They're even being used to connect families and provide relief to thousands of Americans displaced by Hurricanes Katrina and Rita. To learn more about Community Internet near you, visit Free Press' new interactive map profiling more than 270 projects nationwide at http://www.freepress.net/communityinternet . These innovative networks are not without enemies. The giant cable and telecom companies would rather squash these local efforts than provide more Americans with affordable Internet access. Industry lobbyists have pushed through laws in 14 states that prohibit or restrict municipal broadband projects. But on Capitol Hill, Sens. Frank Lautenberg (D-N.J.) and John McCain (R-Ariz.) recently introduced a bill (S. 1294) that would "preserve and protect the ability of local governments to provide broadband capability and services." Please call your senators now and ask them to co-sponsor the Community Broadband Act. Go to http://www.freepress.net/action/callcongress.php?a=cba . Tell them about local efforts underway in your state and urge them to support this crucial legislation. Please forward this message to all your friends and encourage them to call their Senators now. Onward, Ben Scott Policy Director www.freepress.net P.S. A group of Community Internet developers, coordinated by our friends at the Center for Neighborhood Technology and the Champaign-Urbana Wireless Network, have converged in Louisiana and set up wireless networks and Internet phones at a series of shelters for evacuees from Hurricane Katrina. To help the relief effort, donate at http://www.cuwireless.net/ . /*Your email ID. --*/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.ibiblio.org/pipermail/chtechcomm/attachments/20050926/17d84239/attachment.html From bdperkin at gmail.com Tue Sep 27 01:48:03 2005 From: bdperkin at gmail.com (Brandon Perkins) Date: Tue, 27 Sep 2005 01:48:03 -0400 Subject: [Chtechcomm] Clayton's wish for free Wi-Fi: 'Set us apart' Message-ID: <675170605092622486a6dc84@mail.gmail.com> From: http://www.newsobserver.com/news/story/2804112p-9248265c.html The News & Observer Published: Sep 26, 2005 Modified: Sep 26, 2005 6:28 AM Clayton's wish for free Wi-Fi: 'Set us apart' By PEGGY LIM, Staff Writer CLAYTON -- Hidden atop a shelf with jars of "Jamaican Me Crazy" and "Irish Cream" coffee beans, a small blue-and-black box soundlessly transmits wireless Internet to customers at a Clayton cafe. "It's a necessity of a coffee shop of the 21st century," said Jodi Sager, owner of The Coffee Mill, which added the perk about six months ago. Some Clayton officials want to go a giant step further and blanket the town with free or low-cost wireless Internet access points. That way, anyone with a wireless-enabled laptop or computer could go online practically anywhere in town. "It's really going to set us apart," Town Councilman Alex Harding said. As major companies race to roll out paid-for wireless broadband services across the country, municipalities such as Clayton are talking about extending Wi-Fi service at no, or low cost, to all residents. Some cities, such as Raleigh, Apex and Winston-Salem, already offer wireless Internet in sections of their downtown, but few provide the service citywide. This year, Clayton plans to bring wireless to town buildings, community parks and a public square at a cost of about $10,000. If Town Council members support it and Congress doesn't pass legislation barring municipal wireless, Clayton could begin installing other wireless access points elsewhere in town as early as next year. This summer, U.S. Rep. Pete Sessions, a Texas Republican and former employee of telecom giant SBC, introduced a bill to prohibit state and local governments from offering Internet service if a private provider already does. The likes of Verizon, SBC and Comcast lobbied Congress and states such as Florida, Tennessee, and Illinois to prohibit municipalities from providing information services. Other proposed legislation floating in Congress supports municipal broadband. Major telecom and cable companies "look at us as a competitor," said Angela Tousey, Clayton information services administrator. "We look at it as providing services to our citizens that may not be able to afford that $40-a-month bill." Clayton, a Johnston County town of about 12,000 people, may follow the model of pioneering towns such as Manteo on the Outer Banks. Manteo, where the population of 1,300 doubles during summer months, saw wireless service as another amenity to draw tourists. Partnering with cable company Charter, Manteo is installing wireless hot spots across town, which will give users free Internet access in 30-minute increments. The intent is to give people enough time to check e-mail or surf the Net, but prevent them from abusing the system and hogging bandwidth, for example, by downloading songs off Napster. Those who want unlimited access would have to subscribe with Charter for a monthly fee. Larger cities, such as Philadelphia, Portland, Ore., and Taipei, Taiwan, are also attempting to provide free or inexpensive wireless services to increase their attractiveness and reduce the divide between those with Internet access and those without. Wireless could be very expensive for a municipality to provide on its own. Michael Bavaro, CEO of the Clayton-based Internet provider Dockpoint, thinks towns should partner with local companies so they don't duplicate existing infrastructure and interfere with other wireless Internet systems. Towns have a hard enough time keeping up with power, roads and other utilities, Bavaro said. "They want to stick their finger in another pie?" He acknowledged partnering with local governments could also benefit wireless Internet providers. Unlike cellphones, the Wi-Fi technology Dockpoint and many other companies use requires line-of-sight transmissions. That means if a tree branch blocks a signal between a transmission point and a building's receiving antenna, the building could lose its Internet connection. Height helps. In North Carolina, local governments have put moratoriums on new transmission towers, and cellular phone companies are possessive of their infrastructure, Bavaro said. Local governments, however, own lots of tall buildings, water towers, power lines, light poles and telephone poles, which could serve as transmission points. Emerging technologies could make it less appealing for private companies to work with local governments, though. WiMax, a technology to which Wi-Fi companies expect to migrate, can send out signals in a radius of up to 31 miles, as opposed to up to 10 miles with current Wi-Fi technologies. The increased coverage area might make it less necessary to partner with local governments for tall transmission points. Clayton resident Patrick Tombrey, 39, said he'd welcome town-sponsored wireless hot spots. A director for global accounts at a Massachusetts-based software company, Tombrey totes his cellphone, Blackberry personal digital assistant and laptop to The Coffee Mill whenever the digital subscriber line at his Glen Laurel home inexplicably shuts down. Municipal wireless would make it that much more convenient to use Internet around town. "How can anyone argue that not being a good thing?" he said. Researcher Denise Jones contributed to this report. Staff writer Peggy Lim can be reached at 836-5799 or plim at newsobserver.com. Researcher Denise Jones contributed to this report. (c) Copyright 2005, The News & Observer Publishing Company, a subsidiary of The McClatchy CompanyMcClatchy Company From karim_kheireddine at hotmail.com Thu Sep 29 15:03:42 2005 From: karim_kheireddine at hotmail.com (karim kheireddine) Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2005 15:03:42 -0400 Subject: [Chtechcomm] Remove my email from list Message-ID: