Re: [WISPA] [AFMUG] RE: FCC broadband deployment report
Thanks for the followup Brian. I did get a bounce from his email address. I suppose that may be a good thing, if it sounded like I was throwing stones. Who was his replacement? Rick Harnish WISPA -- Sent from my Android phone with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity. Brian Webster bwebs...@wirelessmapping.com wrote: Rick, Andrew is no longer with the NTIA. I took some time to review this FCC report and can shed some light on what problems people are seeing. First this data is compiled from round 4 which was current as of June 2011. If anyone updated or provided data to their states this last round, your data will not show in this report. Second, the data shown does include fixed wireless service but not satellite or cellular. What they appear to have done is create a merge of data. In the report they tried to replicate the 4 meg down 1 meg up national broadband plan set as the national goal. The national broadband map was created before the wonderful people who wrote that report had the brilliant idea of defining something that is not part of the map standards. Give that problem the FCC decided to use the category of 3 meg or greater as the download speed and 768 or greater as the upload speed. If any WISP has reported data in round 4 or earlier that does not meet those speed tiers, it was not used in this report. As with any mapping and report it is very important to read their methodology before throwing stones. I had to answer to some of our research people in Illinois today because the FCC report says 6% unserved in Illinois and my mapping data says 1%. Most of the difference is that we calculated using just the download speed tier information and the FCC further restricted areas they deemed served by adding in the 768 or greater upload requirement. Some WISP’s get bumped off the map because of the upload requirements they used in their study. Thank You, Brian Webster www.wirelessmapping.com www.Broadband-Mapping.com From: a...@afmug.com [mailto:a...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Rick Harnish Sent: Thursday, August 23, 2012 6:19 PM To: 'WISPA General List'; a...@afmug.com; us...@wug.cc; color...@wispa.org Subject: [AFMUG] RE: [WISPA] FCC broadband deployment report Andrew, (Andrew MacRae from the NTIA is BCC’d) There seems to be some discrepancy in the Colorado and Michigan Data. Can you assist as to why Wisp coverage is not represented? Please read the email below my signature line. Also, here are some other comments from other providers. · Merrill, MI: Our coverage area is not displayed on that map. Is it only including wireline providers? · Jackson, MI: My coverage update for the 2nd to last round is not there, but the rest is. The map is for 3Meg svc. and up also. · Steamboat Springs: If you hover over a county a popup chart on the right shows up and displays the demographics for that county and % of broadband that is Fiber, Cable, DSL, or fixed wireless. both the counties we serve show 0% fixed wireless. · Yuma: wow, they have my area as covered as NON-Rural DSL and Cable no wireless links at all.. I think someone fixed the books on this info. As its completely BS.. 1. everything out here in our area is Rural.. 2. No wireless listed at ALL ( there are 2 providers ourselves and the telco to the south of us) 3. The local cable company has only a handful of customers 4. says that over 3500 folks in my county have NO internet.. Complete and total BS.. This is farm country and I'd PAY to find more than 50 homes that don't have internet. Again.. the books have been cooked, thanks to either bad info or competition. Where there is a Wisp, there is a way! Respectfully, Rick Harnish Executive Director WISPA 260-307-4000 cell 866-317-2851 Option 2 WISPA Office Skype: rick.harnish. rharn...@wispa.org adm...@wispa.org (Trina and Rick) -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Sean Heskett Sent: Thursday, August 23, 2012 5:29 PM To: wireless@wispa.org; a...@afmug.com; us...@wug.cc; color...@wispa.org Subject: [WISPA] FCC broadband deployment report Hi all, Sorry for all the cross posts on multiple lists but this seems troubling to me. We submitted our coverage data to the state of Colorado and they submitted our data for the national map. However, this FCC broadband deployment report includes this map which doesn't show our coverage. Report: http://www.fcc.gov/reports/eighth-broadband-progress-report Map: http://www.fcc.gov/maps/section-706-fixed-broadband-deployment-map What gives??? WISPA??? Is anyone else noticing their coverage area is not included? Best regards, Sean Heskett ZIRKEL Wireless High-speed Internet www.zirkelwireless.com 970-871-8500
Re: [WISPA] [AFMUG] RE: FCC broadband deployment report
Doh! I guess this is what happened. I did all my upgrades and reported those higher speeds on the next Form 477. Scriv On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 10:22 PM, Brian Webster bwebs...@wirelessmapping.com wrote: Rick, Andrew is no longer with the NTIA. I took some time to review this FCC report and can shed some light on what problems people are seeing. First this data is compiled from round 4 which was current as of June 2011. If anyone updated or provided data to their states this last round, your data will not show in this report. Second, the data shown does include fixed wireless service but not satellite or cellular. What they appear to have done is create a merge of data. In the report they tried to replicate the 4 meg down 1 meg up national broadband plan set as the national goal. The national broadband map was created before the wonderful people who wrote that report had the brilliant idea of defining something that is not part of the map standards. Give that problem the FCC decided to use the category of 3 meg or greater as the download speed and 768 or greater as the upload speed. If any WISP has reported data in round 4 or earlier that does not meet those speed tiers, it was not used in this report. As with any mapping and report it is very important to read their methodology before throwing stones. I had to answer to some of our research people in Illinois today because the FCC report says 6% unserved in Illinois and my mapping data says 1%. Most of the difference is that we calculated using just the download speed tier information and the FCC further restricted areas they deemed served by adding in the 768 or greater upload requirement. Some WISP’s get bumped off the map because of the upload requirements they used in their study. ** ** Thank You, Brian Webster www.wirelessmapping.com www.Broadband-Mapping.com ** ** *From:* a...@afmug.com [mailto:a...@afmug.com] *On Behalf Of *Rick Harnish *Sent:* Thursday, August 23, 2012 6:19 PM *To:* 'WISPA General List'; a...@afmug.com; us...@wug.cc; color...@wispa.org *Subject:* [AFMUG] RE: [WISPA] FCC broadband deployment report ** ** Andrew, (Andrew MacRae from the NTIA is BCC’d) ** ** There seems to be some discrepancy in the Colorado and Michigan Data. Can you assist as to why Wisp coverage is not represented? Please read the email below my signature line. Also, here are some other comments from other providers. ** ** **· **Merrill, MI: Our coverage area is not displayed on that map. Is it only including wireline providers? ** ** **· **Jackson, MI: My coverage update for the 2nd to last round is not there, but the rest is. The map is for 3Meg svc. and up also. ** ** **· **Steamboat Springs: If you hover over a county a popup chart on the right shows up and displays the demographics for that county and % of broadband that is Fiber, Cable, DSL, or fixed wireless. both the counties we serve show 0% fixed wireless. ** ** **· **Yuma: wow, they have my area as covered as NON-Rural DSL and Cable no wireless links at all.. I think someone fixed the books on this info. As its completely BS.. ** ** 1. everything out here in our area is Rural.. 2. No wireless listed at ALL ( there are 2 providers ourselves and the telco to the south of us) 3. The local cable company has only a handful of customers 4. says that over 3500 folks in my county have NO internet.. Complete and total BS.. This is farm country and I'd PAY to find more than 50 homes that don't have internet. ** ** Again.. the books have been cooked, thanks to either bad info or competition. ** ** ** ** Where there is a Wisp, there is a way! ** ** Respectfully, ** ** Rick Harnish Executive Director WISPA 260-307-4000 cell 866-317-2851 Option 2 WISPA Office Skype: rick.harnish. rharn...@wispa.org adm...@wispa.org (Trina and Rick) ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On* *** Behalf Of Sean Heskett Sent: Thursday, August 23, 2012 5:29 PM To: wireless@wispa.org; a...@afmug.com; us...@wug.cc; color...@wispa.org** ** Subject: [WISPA] FCC broadband deployment report Hi all, Sorry for all the cross posts on multiple lists but this seems troubling to me. We submitted our coverage data to the state of Colorado and they submitted our data for the national map. However, this FCC broadband deployment report includes this map which doesn't show our coverage. Report: http://www.fcc.gov/reports/eighth-broadband-progress-report Map: http://www.fcc.gov/maps/section-706-fixed-broadband-deployment-map* ***
Re: [WISPA] [AFMUG] RE: FCC broadband deployment report
Rick, Andrew is no longer with the NTIA. I took some time to review this FCC report and can shed some light on what problems people are seeing. First this data is compiled from round 4 which was current as of June 2011. If anyone updated or provided data to their states this last round, your data will not show in this report. Second, the data shown does include fixed wireless service but not satellite or cellular. What they appear to have done is create a merge of data. In the report they tried to replicate the 4 meg down 1 meg up national broadband plan set as the national goal. The national broadband map was created before the wonderful people who wrote that report had the brilliant idea of defining something that is not part of the map standards. Give that problem the FCC decided to use the category of 3 meg or greater as the download speed and 768 or greater as the upload speed. If any WISP has reported data in round 4 or earlier that does not meet those speed tiers, it was not used in this report. As with any mapping and report it is very important to read their methodology before throwing stones. I had to answer to some of our research people in Illinois today because the FCC report says 6% unserved in Illinois and my mapping data says 1%. Most of the difference is that we calculated using just the download speed tier information and the FCC further restricted areas they deemed served by adding in the 768 or greater upload requirement. Some WISP's get bumped off the map because of the upload requirements they used in their study. Thank You, Brian Webster www.wirelessmapping.com www.Broadband-Mapping.com From: a...@afmug.com [mailto:a...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Rick Harnish Sent: Thursday, August 23, 2012 6:19 PM To: 'WISPA General List'; a...@afmug.com; us...@wug.cc; color...@wispa.org Subject: [AFMUG] RE: [WISPA] FCC broadband deployment report Andrew, (Andrew MacRae from the NTIA is BCC'd) There seems to be some discrepancy in the Colorado and Michigan Data. Can you assist as to why Wisp coverage is not represented? Please read the email below my signature line. Also, here are some other comments from other providers. . Merrill, MI: Our coverage area is not displayed on that map. Is it only including wireline providers? . Jackson, MI: My coverage update for the 2nd to last round is not there, but the rest is. The map is for 3Meg svc. and up also. . Steamboat Springs: If you hover over a county a popup chart on the right shows up and displays the demographics for that county and % of broadband that is Fiber, Cable, DSL, or fixed wireless. both the counties we serve show 0% fixed wireless. . Yuma: wow, they have my area as covered as NON-Rural DSL and Cable no wireless links at all.. I think someone fixed the books on this info. As its completely BS.. 1. everything out here in our area is Rural.. 2. No wireless listed at ALL ( there are 2 providers ourselves and the telco to the south of us) 3. The local cable company has only a handful of customers 4. says that over 3500 folks in my county have NO internet.. Complete and total BS.. This is farm country and I'd PAY to find more than 50 homes that don't have internet. Again.. the books have been cooked, thanks to either bad info or competition. Where there is a Wisp, there is a way! Respectfully, Rick Harnish Executive Director WISPA 260-307-4000 cell 866-317-2851 Option 2 WISPA Office Skype: rick.harnish. rharn...@wispa.org adm...@wispa.org (Trina and Rick) -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Sean Heskett Sent: Thursday, August 23, 2012 5:29 PM To: wireless@wispa.org; a...@afmug.com; us...@wug.cc; color...@wispa.org Subject: [WISPA] FCC broadband deployment report Hi all, Sorry for all the cross posts on multiple lists but this seems troubling to me. We submitted our coverage data to the state of Colorado and they submitted our data for the national map. However, this FCC broadband deployment report includes this map which doesn't show our coverage. Report: http://www.fcc.gov/reports/eighth-broadband-progress-report http://www.fcc.gov/reports/eighth-broadband-progress-report Map: http://www.fcc.gov/maps/section-706-fixed-broadband-deployment-map http://www.fcc.gov/maps/section-706-fixed-broadband-deployment-map What gives??? WISPA??? Is anyone else noticing their coverage area is not included? Best regards, Sean Heskett ZIRKEL Wireless High-speed Internet http://www.zirkelwireless.com www.zirkelwireless.com 970-871-8500 ___ Wireless mailing list mailto:Wireless@wispa.org Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
