Over 1.7 millions people in the country side areas will soon be able to enjoy internet access after a successful auction organized by the Federal Communications Commission. More than half of the rural population will get to access to high speed internet with download speed of 100 mbps. At least 19% of them will be able to access gigabit connection. The rest will enjoy an internet connection speed of at least 25 mbps.
FCC chairman, Ajit Pai told the press that he has always been trying to improve the broadband service for rural area. He said he is motivated by the people he saw in the rural communities who always try to use internet to help others. He hope that many people will choose to stay back in the rural community and not move away since they are now providing broadband access. It is the goal of FCC that everyone in rural regions can access a decent speed internet at home in the next 10 years.
The agency created the auction 2 years ago calling out to providers to start offering internet broadband services to customers in the rural areas. The auction was officially started nearly 2 months ago on the 24th July. Universal Service Fund is the company that contributed the two billions dollars to the Connect America Fund for subsidizing the broadband companies interested in building the infrastructure. About $1.5 billions of the fund has been allocated to 103 providers. The cost is enough for covering the broadband for about 10 years.
There are 3 companies that will receive a combined funding of $12 millions. The first company is Viasat who received $5.43 millions as subsidy for building the infrastructure in West Virginia. Viasat also receive other funding that total up to $122.5 millions which makes it the largest auction beneficiary. Viasat’s minimum internet standard is 25 mbps download speed.
The second company is Citynet who received $6.51 million as funding for carrying out the work on 898 locations. The third company is Hardy Telecommunications who receives $47,435 for setting up an infrastructure with gigabit connection in Hampshire County. Hardy Telecommunications offers internet in the gigabit performance, which is the highest standard in the performance tier. No funding is provided for Frontier to carry out the work in West Virginia.
The auction was participated by over 220 companies and has 103 winning bidders. The winning bidders will constructing infrastructure in the rural area of the 45 states to connect the residents their to internet. The priority is given to bidders who is able to offer internet services with high speed, low latency and generous bandwidth. There is no restriction on the type of technology the bidder uses to build the infrastructure.
Winning bidders are required to submit long form application that explain how they will plan to use the fund. They will only receive the funding following the approval of their long form applications. The building of the infrastructure must be completed by the 6th year. The FCC will soon launch another auction called Mobility Fund Phase II auction to increase the coverage of 4G LTE in rural areas.
Tech corporations and politicians frequently campaign on the need to build the local networks that will bridge this divide. In spite of all the talk, efforts from tech corporations to bridge the divide have been mostly in the form of isolated experiments like Microsoft’s “white spaces.” On the governmental side, most rural network expansion still comes from begrudging concessions in corporate mergers.
Meanwhile, small Wireless Internet Service Providers, or “WISPs,” are emerging as the real heroes in this story, building out local networks to customers who the major providers can’t (or won’t) serve in rural and low-income areas.
Share with your friends
These small companies are surprisingly well liked. In an industry known for bottom-barrel ratings and high customer churn, WISP customers give consistently positive reviews and remain loyal customers for years. One WISP operator our team spoke to told us that as of 2008, their top source of churn wasn’t from customers switching to other providers or moving — it was that they died.
While morbid, there’s a strong point here; WISPs bring better connectivity, local jobs, and economic growth to underserved parts of the USA. Unsurprisingly, those of us who live in these areas are glad they’re standing up and doing it.
WISPs and the digital divide
In America, the digital divide is a starkly measurable issue and has been a key focus for both Democratic and Republican FCC chairmen over the past two administrations.
The idea of getting fiber run to every home in the US is, for now, little more than a pipe dream.
FCC statistics show that wireless broadband only held a 3% share of the market in 2016, but given the complexity of filing coverage paperwork for small businesses, our analysis suggests that share is probably a point or two higher (especially considering Fixed Wireless’ 51% nationwide coverage). 
Advances in 5G technology are pushing up the speeds on these services, and the Net Neutrality debate has stirred local advocacy and spawned hundreds of local network operators. These services provide a fixed wireless alternative to the major broadband players, and whether you’ve heard of them before this point or not, they’re worth looking into.
In short, while these smaller operations don’t get as much attention as the Big Cable cartel, they are the forces actually working to bridge the divide described above, bringing reasonable speeds to areas that have been left behind by technological progress. Unlike fiber which has mostly paused so far as major providers like Verizon and Google go, fixed wireless point-to-point and point to multipoint networks are already being set up all over the country.
This is evidenced in the difference between the costs of deploying a basic WISP and laying additional fiber to get more areas wired up; though specific startup numbers are hard to come by, anecdotal sources seem to show that a company can deploy a WISP in a local area for about $100,000. Compared to average costs of about $3,072 per location for laying fiber, the difference is apparent. At the 500-user mark, that’d mean a total approximate install cost of over $1,500,000. For Google, it cost around $1 Billion dollar per city to connect Fiber to the Home service.  Ouch.
WISPs vs. ISPs: What are WISPs?
As briefly touched on above, WISPs provide a fixed wireless Internet service. This means that it relies upon a direct, line-of-sight connection from the access point (normally on top of a tower or tall landmass) to the roof of your home. Don’t get it mixed up, though; this isn’t the “wireless” Internet you’ve come to know with satellite and mobile phones.
Because these access points are usually within 3–5 miles of where you live, you can expect speeds that match what many cable providers offer; and those that dwarf what you’re probably used to in areas with only satellite, DSL, or dial-up. WISPs are also starting to take advantage of technologies such as millimeter Wave (sometimes referred to as mmW) to drive enhancements to their services.
This is a crucial component in the 5G specification, which will supposedly bring Gigabit (1000 Mbps) speeds in the near future. For now, speeds around 500 Mbps are commonly offered for business connections, and the only thing holding them back from residential application is the equipment cost, which descends quickly with any new technology. With millimeter Wave, you’re essentially looking at super high-frequency spectrums, which differ from the lower spectrums used commonly by wireless carriers. Think of it like this:
- High wavelength = high speeds but fragile (such as Wi-Fi)
- Low wavelength = low speeds but durable (such as AM/FM radio)
In addition to their differences from legacy forms of connectivity, WISPs also differ from cable broadband providers in several distinctive ways. With a conventional cable ISP, you’re getting service from a physical cable or fiber connection that runs all the way to your home in some form or another.
Fixed wireless providers don’t have to lay fiber or do anything at all other than set up an antenna on your roof that connects to the access point, making it much easier to get operational quickly and efficiently.
Customers served by WISPS
So, are you trying to decide if a WISP is the best way for you to get online? If so, you may find that it’s the right choice if you:
Have been burned by cable in the past
Let’s face it. Broadband giants like Comcast and AT&T don’t have a perfect reputation amongst many customers. Complaints range the field from a lack of service options and speeds to unreasonable data caps, sudden pricing increases, and contracts. WISPs may represent a more straightforward and fair option for those disenfranchised by their past experiences.
Are looking for Internet-only options
For many users, Internet is king. In the age of providers bundling together TV, phone and web services, this often means that you’re stuck paying for services that you don’t even want because “it was the best deal available.” WISPs provide a comparatively minimal alternative, allowing you to pay a fair rate for a straight-up Internet connection and nothing else.
Live in a rural area
This one is the most obvious on the surface; if you live in a rural area far from a major urban hub, you are highly likely to only have subpar options for getting online. WISPs know this, and in recent years, these companies have made huge strides to get more and more connections set up in these out-of-the-way places.
WISPs vs Big Cable
If there’s one thing that Big Cable has remained consistent on through the years, it would be the tendency for massive corporations like Verizon and Comcast to leverage their political clout to prevent new technologies and service types from posing a tangible threat to the rigged game they’ve so carefully crafted.
This can perhaps most clearly be seen with the recent rescinding of the FCC’s net neutrality regulations, which in theory could represent yet another way for the heavy-hitters to use their vice grip to choke out any potential competition from smaller, bootstrapped players.
This has set off a chain reaction of sorts, rekindling talks by users in online communities about bypassing any potential cable monopolies by literally building their own ISPs. Initiatives such as startyourownisp.com are a direct example of this.
So, it’s clear that consumers and ISPs aren’t exactly known for their long-term love affairs. When it comes to WISPs, however, the story can be different.
Issues facing WISPS:
While WISPs absolutely represent an exciting potential for the future, they do admittedly have their share of roadblocks to push past before they become a serious player on par with the cable giants. Here are a few of the most common problems these operations are grappling with:
The FCC is currently debating whether to make portions of specific bandwidths available to be licensed affordability to local operations. If this were to happen, it would be a huge boon for WISPs, as the smaller, shorter-term licenses mean that they would be feasible for a local operation.
Despite this, mobile carriers are (predictably) pushing for larger, longer-term license zones that only they can afford. These decisions will potentially affect the CBRS (3.55–3.65 GHz), 3.7–4.2 GHz, and 2.5 GHz bandwidths, much of which could be used by WISPs to improve signal propagation through difficult elements such as heavy tree cover and other obstructions. How the FCC leans in the end will directly affect these companies and their ability to serve their customers.
While fixed wireless as a technology has made strides in recent years, it still has several weak points that can affect performance in certain areas. As touched on above, trees, buildings, and uneven terrain can all be detrimental to a good signal, because again, this tech relies on a line-of-sight from the access point to the roof of your home. Providers we spoke to while researching this story frequently reported difficulty serving wooded areas, where only a physical wire like DSL can provide reliable speeds.
Weather can also present a challenge. “Rain fade” is an issue in climates with frequent precipitation, effectively degrading the wireless signal as it travels through the air. This can be mitigated with proper planning, however, and new technologies aimed at building more robust networks are on the horizon.
Though this issue is arguably more perceptual than actual, some voices in the industry have expressed concerns over encryption and authentication techniques used with wireless networks. That said, though the issues facing wired and wireless networks can vary, both mediums are generally understood to be roughly equal in terms of security.
Share with your friends
What you can do to support WISPs
If you’re feeling inspired and energized by the idea of ditching your cable provider for a WISP, where can you go from here? For starters, you can find out if there are any wireless ISPs operating in your area.
If none are currently available, you can consider contributing to WISP PAC, whose mission it is to bring bipartisan awareness and support for emerging fixed wireless operations to Congress. Co-founder of Rise Broadband and Chairman of the WISP PAC Jeff Kohler had this to say when our team contacted him:
“Politicians must be open to learning about the realities of our industry and support us in areas such as continued access to spectrum, eliminating burdensome regulations that affect small business, and allowing access to government subsidies on a technology neutral basis. Residents can do the same – write to your Senators and Representatives and tell them to listen to the needs of those trying to provide these services.”
Finally, if you’re technically inclined and entrepreneurial, there is a growing movement of local groups building out their own WISPs or mesh networks to create your own cable alternative.
While they may not be the only answer to America’s digital divide (SpaceX’s super-fast satellites come to mind), it’s clear that going forward, WISPs will have an increasingly vital role in getting people in rural areas and beyond connected to the Internet. In what is undoubtedly an added bonus for consumers, they seem to be aiming to do so fairly and securely as well.
The post WISPs Are The Real Heroes in Bridging The Digital Divide appeared first on Broadband Now.
Startups in the U.K. will be hoping for better performance from the local broadband market after telecoms regulator Ofcom agreed to a deal with the country’s largest broadband provider, BT, to legally separate Openreach: aka the division of BT that builds and maintains the broadband infrastructure.
It’s not a full structural separation — as some have called for — but is a step further than the functional separation imposed by the regulator just over 10 years ago. Under the new deal, Openreach will still be owned by BT but will be more independent, gaining its own management staff, an independent board and directly employing its circa 32,000 staff.
Ofcom believes this legal separation will allow Openreach to develop “its own distinct organisational culture” as a BT-owned company versus just being a division of the telco giant. And although BT will still be setting Openreach’s overall budget, the decisions on how the money is allocated will be taken independently of the telco.
The main hoped-for outcome is increased investment in broadband infrastructure and better access for rivals to BT’s networks. Competitors (and consumers) have long complained the telco has dragged its feet about investing in the network in order to protect its own bottom line — leaving U.K. broadband consumers to suffer slower speeds and higher prices than they might otherwise.
BT does not own and operate the only broadband network in the U.K., but, given its long history and former status as a monopoly supplier of the national telephone service, it does have the largest network. Meanwhile rivals that have built their own broadband networks — such as cable provider Virgin Media — have tended to concentrate on more densely populated regions, leaving large areas of the country where the only choice for broadband is to use BT’s pipes.
There’s added significance to the separation because BT does not just control fixed-line broadband either; just over a year ago its $19 billion acquisition of a major U.K. mobile operator, EE, was cleared by the U.K.’s Competition and Markets Authority — bringing the telco back into the mobile market as a dominant player.
In a statement commenting on today’s deal, Ofcom’s CEO Sharon White said: “This is a significant day for phone and broadband users. The new Openreach will be built to serve all its customers equally, working truly independently and taking investment decisions on behalf of the whole industry — not just BT.”
How significant the arrangement will prove remains to be seen, of course. And despite the regulator’s upbeat sentiments, the very large expense of laying full fiber to the home/premise — aka the fixed-line broadband installation that supports the highest broadband speeds, versus alternatives such as fiber to the cabinet (which BT has preferred) — means the telco will, in practice, still exert considerable control on Openreach’s ability to ramp up broadband investment, given its continued hold on the purse strings.
Without the ability to significantly increase investment, Openreach will be unable to significantly expand access to the fastest fixed-line broadband speeds — so it’s not clear that a legally independent Openreach will be as radically transformative for the national broadband landscape as some might wish. (As of last August, fewer than 780,000 U.K. homes were estimated to have access to BT’s full fiber to the premise broadband product, which supports speeds of around 300Mbps and is slated to rise to 1Gbps.)
The deal with Ofcom does mean Openreach will be obliged to consult formally with customers such as Sky, TalkTalk and Vodafone on large-scale investments. So rivals should be able to exert more influence on the direction of infrastructure travel.
Ofcom also notes there will be “a ‘confidential’ phase during which customers can discuss ideas without this being disclosed to BT Group, as well as further protections for confidential customer information” — but again, it remains to be seen how that works in practice.
The regulator adds that it will also be monitoring the new model “to ensure it is effective.” So there’s always the chance that BT will face further action in the future — albeit regulatory intervention timescales to date in this space suggest BT will have a fair amount of breathing space before having to worry about further intervention.
Ofcom had previously threatened to resort to EU regulators if BT would not agree to changes to how Openreach operates — but securing a voluntary deal with BT is by far the faster route to achieving at least some change. (Not least given the added complication of Brexit.)
The U.K. government also finally put out its long-awaited digital strategy last month — which includes a commitment for a universal service obligation for broadband (with a floor of 10Mbps connection). BT has previously said it is ready to fund the USO itself, although it wanted an agreement to be reached with Ofcom before starting work — so today’s deal paves the way for movement on that front.
A basic floor of 10Mbps by 2020 isn’t going to excite the cutting edge of U.K. tech. But closing some broadband blackspots should at least raise the overall addressable market for most digital services.