Re: [gaia] draft-irtf-gaia-alternative-network-deployments. Mitar review, question #3. Typical scenarios

["Jose Saldana" <[e-mail]>]

Hi,

> -----Mensaje original-----
> De: Mitar [mailto:[e-mail]]
> Enviado el: miércoles, 13 de abril de 2016 13:27
> Para: Jose Saldana <[e-mail]>
> CC: gaia <[e-mail]>
> Asunto: Re: [gaia] draft-irtf-gaia-alternative-network-deployments. Mitar review,
> question #3. Typical scenarios
> 
> Hi!
> 
> OK, for me it was just confusing categorization. Maybe because other
> categorizations list one option per dot, here we list separate dimensions for each dot
> (urban/rural, south/north). Type checking does not match with other categories. :-)
> And then we use most of the time "urban and rural" anyway. :-)
> 
> BTW, WISPs can be both urban and rural. In San Francisco we have a popular
> WISP:
> 
> https://monkeybrains.net/wireless.html
> 
> Pretty urban use. There is nothing really in WISPs to make them rural only.
> 

This is the current version
5.2.  Wireless Internet Service Providers, WISPs

   +----------------+--------------------------------------------------+
   | Commercial     | company                                          |
   | model/promoter |                                                  |
   +----------------+--------------------------------------------------+
   | Goals and      | to serve underserved areas; to reduce capital    |
   | motivation     | expenditures in Internet access; to provide      |
   |                | additional sources of capital                    |
   +----------------+--------------------------------------------------+
   | Administration | centralized                                      |
   +----------------+--------------------------------------------------+
   | Technologies   | wireless e.g. [IEEE.802-11-2012],                |
   |                | [IEEE.802-16.2008], unlicensed frequencies       |
   +----------------+--------------------------------------------------+
   | Typical        | rural (urban deployments also exist)             |
   | scenarios      |                                                  |
   +----------------+--------------------------------------------------+

                  Table 2: WISPs' characteristics summary

Thanks,

Jose

> 
> Mitar
> 
> On Tue, Apr 12, 2016 at 7:14 AM, Jose Saldana <[e-mail]> wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> >> Section 4.5, typical scenarios:
> >>
> >> I do not see usefulness of this categorization, because almost any
> >> network
> > I know of
> >> outgrow and changed through time inside all these categories.
> >> Community
> > networks
> >> maybe start somewhere (like urban or rural area), but then they grow
> >> and
> > spread
> >> over the whole country, then start connecting with other countries.
> >
> > In my understanding, there are some networks especially targeted for
> > rural areas. So I think the division does make sense. Perhaps in the
> > future a lot of them will be interconnected, but nowadays some rural
> > deployments exist, so for me the classification makes sense.
> >
> > Thanks!
> >
> > Jose
> >
> >
> 
> 
> 
> --
> http://mitar.tnode.com/
> https://twitter.com/mitar_m