Well, my hats off to your NTIA friend for taking an interest.


Tom DeReggi
RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc
IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Brian Webster" <bwebs...@wirelessmapping.com>
To: "'WISPA General List'" <wireless@wispa.org>
Sent: Tuesday, April 13, 2010 8:23 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Broadband Fiasco Followup


Big brother (my friend at the NTIA) should be subscribed to this list now
:-)



Thank You,
Brian Webster


-----Original Message-----
From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
Behalf Of Jason Bailey
Sent: Tuesday, April 13, 2010 7:22 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Broadband Fiasco Followup

Big Brother is listening...Shhhh! lol:)

--- On Tue, 4/13/10, Matt Larsen - Lists <li...@manageisp.com> wrote:


From: Matt Larsen - Lists <li...@manageisp.com>
Subject: [WISPA] Broadband Fiasco Followup
To: "WISPA General List" <wireless@wispa.org>, nnsq...@nnsquad.org, "Telecom
Regulation & the Internet" <cyberteleco...@listserv.aol.com>
Date: Tuesday, April 13, 2010, 6:50 PM


Apparently my tirade about broadband mapping reached a few ears in
Washington, as the NE PSC called me this afternoon to let me know that
the NTIA is willing to accept shape files and is willing to relax some
of the data requirements in order to get fuller representation from
WISPs. Making ourselves heard and showing a willingness to be part of
the solution is the first step to getting better results.


Here is a copy of the email that I sent to the Nebraska PSC today with
my followup comments. Other commentary and discussion regarding this
is available at Wireless Cowboys http://www.wirelesscowboys.com/


Matt Larsen
vistabeam.com


I am writing with further comments and concerns about the Nebraska
Broadband Mapping Initiative. After participating in the conference call
about the mapping program yesterday, I was left with several concerns.

My first concern is about the accuracy of the data that will be
collected. The number of providers that have not responded to the NDA
request and/or the data request is very high, and that means that there
will be substantial inaccuracies in the final dataset that will make the
final results of the project flawed. A dataset that only includes 20-50%
of the total data needed could lead to policy decisions that could have
an adverse affect on the smaller providers that cover otherwise unserved
areas by encouraging government supported overbuilds. This would be
wasteful of taxpayer money and could put many of the smaller providers
out of business, causing a net loss of jobs and the loss of broadband
service to customers of those smaller providers. It is critical that
most if not all of the broadband providers in the state be represented
in this project. The attitude that the state contractor appears to have
is that non respondents will simply not be included. I would hope that
this attitude will change to be more inclusive of the smaller,
non-wireline providers who do not have the ability to generate the
requested data easily.

My second concern is about the data that is being requested. The data
request template is asking for a lot of data that I don't feel
comfortable divulging to any outside entities, including customer
addresses, GPS coordinates and frequencies used on our towers and the
anchor institutions that we serve. Many of the other WISPs that I work
with are also not comfortable turning this information over to an
outside party, even with the NDA. After several discussions with other
experts in the mapping and data collection field, I have come to the
conclusion that the mapping requirements would be effectively served by
delivering the GIS shape files of our coverage areas along with a
summary of subscribers in each census block. I have already delivered
the requested shape files showing our coverage, and am working toward
the census block summaries. If the data requirements could be adjusted
so that this information would be suitable, I believe that you would get
more response from the smaller providers.

My third concern is about the cost for smaller, non-wireline providers
to collect the data. While most wireline providers already have shape
files and geocoding information already collected and available, many
wireless providers do not have this information readily available and do
not have the tools or technical knowledge to get this information
collected within the requested time frame. Committing man hours to do
this in-house or bring in outside assistance places an undue financial
burden on providers that are often self-funded and would prefer to
invest that money into their networks. The grant was given to the PSC,
not the providers, and yet we are being asked to spend our time and
money to get this information together. Coming up with a way to help
provide the manpower and financial assistance necessary to collect this
information would provide a win-win situation for the providers and the
PSC and increase the amount of data collected.

Finally, I believe that more effective outreach could be established
with the providers so that the comfort level is higher. Sending an email
with a large data request and a short deadline for response is not going
to be received well. A series of emails with detailed explanations of
the program's purposes and benefits to providers, an intelligently
designed website with progress reports and followup phone calls to the
providers who have not returned the information would go over much
better. WISPs have not been required to collect this information up to
this point and there is no mandate for its collection, so it makes sense
to build up a positive relationship rather than dictate what should be
provided. One benefit of this process is that it is an opportunity for
the Public Service Commission to build a rapport with the WISPs and gain
a better understanding of their place in the broadband infrastructure
while educating them about the purposes and benefits of the Public
Service Commission.

Thank you for taking the time to work through this process. I hope that
my comments reflect my desire to improve the process and get us closer
to the desired outcome.

Best Wishes,

Matt Larsen

Vistabeam.com




----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----

WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/






----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----

WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ 



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Reply via email to