Building the Untethered Nation II
Transcript of Building the Untethered Nation II
a strategy paper from
Building the Untethered Nation II:Understanding the Vital Role of Local Governments in Wireless Broadband Implementations
Building the Untethered Nation II
�
I. AbouttheGuide..................................................................................................................3
II. Introduction .........................................................................................................................4III.TheGreatUntethering:TheCampaignThusFar .........................................................5 TheStateofSupplyandDemand...............................................................................................5 WirelessBroadband—MissionOne,PublicSafety..................................................................... .6 PublicHealthandSocialServices................................................................................................7 BridgingtheDigitalDivide..........................................................................................................8
IV.TheRoleofGovernment:APublicorPrivateInvestment? ......................................10 TheChoices:Build,BuyorBroker.............................................................................................10 AChecklistofQuestionstobeAnswered...................................................................................11 Governance:SumminguptheFight..........................................................................................12 BusinessModels:FeeorFree-for-All?........................................................................................13
V. TechnologyandtheMarket:Cellvs.IEEEWireless ....................................................15 TheIndustryShakeOut............................................................................................................15 WiMAXStandardization..........................................................................................................15 Innovation...............................................................................................................................16
VI.TheNewInfrastructure:Yours,TheirsandOurs .......................................................17 Security..................................................................................................................................17 Hybridity................................................................................................................................17 QualityofService.....................................................................................................................17 LicensedandUnlicensedSpectrum...........................................................................................18 Stand-aloneWirelessorIntegrationwiththeNetworkBackbone.................................................18 End-userTestingandTraining...................................................................................................19 ContractManagement............................................................................................................19
VII.Conclusion .......................................................................................................................20
“Mobile Internet … will not just be a way to do old things while moving. It will be a way to do things that couldn’t be done before.”
— Howard rHeingold, Author, Smart mobS
Table of Contents
Building the Untethered Nation II:Understanding the Vital Role of Local Governments in Wireless Broadband Implementations
A Strategy Paper fromThe CeNTeR foR DIGITaL GoVeRNmeNT
�
I. about the Guide
When the Center for Digital gov-
ernment coined the phrase Untethered
Nation through the release of an origi-
nal wireless strategic planning guide in
2005, the paper served as recognition
that broadband wireless extended the
value of public networks. moreover, the
guide was based on the modest proposi-
tion that broadband landline and wireless
networks have earned a position along-
side roads, bridges and ports as key public
infrastructures that support commerce,
education, recreation and government in
communities across the nation.
the Center’s intention with the origi-
nal guide was to capture pioneering local
governments’ emerging practices for the
benefit of those jurisdictions that follow
their lead. some success factors from the
original UntetheredNation include:
• Coming to terms with a public entity’s
responsibility for ensuring success.
• Understanding the responsibility of a
provider (including fiscal stability).
• Committing to a long-term view of
wireless deployment.
• Deciding whether public entities will
be providers (utility), brokers or cus-
tomers of wireless infrastructure.
• reflecting infrastructure choice in
architecture.
• pursuing meaningful pilots in limited
geography.
• reviewing and learning from proof of
concepts.
• Developing a funding model that
accounts for vendor solvency and fiscal
sustainability of wireless deployment.
• Building out full deployment based on
newly earned and learned competence.
the original release was, and continues
to be, one of the most popular downloads
from the Center’s white paper repository.
over time, readers have asked for follow-
up work to address issues that were beyond
the scope of the original, particularly in the
area of when, whether and how to invest
in this new public infrastructure.
enter BuildingtheUntetheredNationII:
UnderstandingtheVitalRoleofLocalGov-
ernmentsinWirelessBroadbandImplemen-
tations, the second paper in the series. It
begins by exploring the “great Untether-
ing,” discussing the campaign thus far and
looking for answers about where we are
going. the paper examines widely diver-
gent opinions regarding the role govern-
ments should play in enabling wireless
broadband, from the municipal utility
builder to a broker or buyer of wireless
broadband. In that context, the sequel
guide discusses:
• the major role public safety plays and
will play as the government’s wireless
anchor tenant.
• Business models that may be most
appropriate for governments to pursue.
• Competing technologies and standards,
and what’s on the horizon for wireless.
this paper concludes with a series of
caveats or admonitions about security,
hybridism, quality of service, the relative
advantages of licensed and unlicensed
spectrum, the dangers of standalone wire-
less solutions, and finally, a brief discussion
about training and contract management.
Building the Untethered Nation II
�
II. Introduction: extending the Network to Where the Public’s Work Gets Done
a new platform is under construction.
this build-out is leading to an untether-
ing of activities that had long been place-
bound due to the physically connected
network cable. the rise of the mobile
Internet extends the reach and value of
the nation’s network infrastructure. It
brings the promise of fulfilling marshal
mcLuhan’s famous 40-year-old prediction
about the network becoming an exten-
sion of us and how we live.1 the new
infrastructure will contribute to more
mobility, and to a more interconnected
network — more denseness than has
previously existed. the clarion call of
“chips everywhere” is made more fea-
sible with the addition of a broadband
wireless infrastructure. Like the brain,
these denser pathways with greater con-
nections can support a vast expansion of
new knowledge across all human activity.
the untethering will connect a vast swath
of the nation’s information and human
resources. It will also wirelessly connect
hard assets such as roads, buses, police
and emergency vehicles, and military
equipment. Ultimately, it has the potential
to lessen the impact of catastrophes and
to save lives.
examples of new uses for this chip-
embedded and wirelessly connected
infrastructure are already emerging. recall
for a moment that brisk thanksgiving
evening in 2005. about 20 minutes from
downtown Chicago, a westbound com-
muter train approached the elmwood
park crossing. Unable to stop, the train
plowed into five vehicles, creating a chain
reaction with 17 cars, standing some cars
on end before the train came to a final
stop. all told, 16 people were injured,
leaving three in critical condition. But what
seems to be only another example of an
all too-common event, and a reminder of
the danger of cars attempting to race the
light and getting caught inside the crossing
gates, this particular occurrence contains a
twist. a remote strongbox-encased cam-
era — recently purchased with home-
land security grant funds and connected
to Cook County, Ill.’s new wireless net-
work — captured the scene on video as
the event unfolded.2 the video became a
prime piece of evidence in a subsequent
transportation safety investigation that
cleared the train’s engineer of any wrong-
doing.3 Cook County’s wireless remote
security camera infrastructure platform is
apparently already earning its keep.
Interestingly, the construction of a wire-
less broadband platform harkens back to
a brilliant though costly military campaign
waged more than 60 years ago. the pri-
mary author of this guide recently had the
opportunity to stand at another kind of
ground zero, in another place and from
another era. the ghosts remain at arro-
manches on the wide beaches of Nor-
mandy, where the remnants of mulberry
Harbor pay tribute to British engineering
ingenuity. mothballed British vessels were
assembled and limped their way across
the english Channel completely under
their own steam. they were anchored
and sunk to form the first components
of an artificial harbor just off the coast
of france. along with caissons, floating
quays, moorings, floating roadways and
docks, the harbor became a platform,
without which the D-Day landings at
omaha and Utah beaches could never
have been successfully executed. as D-
Day — a campaign that changed the face
of europe forever — began, likewise, the
mobile broadband infrastructure will form
the technology platform that will support
vast opportunities. New uses will emerge
and new users will be attracted as the
great untethering campaign unfolds.
still, as the mobile Internet flows into
both major aspects and minor niches of
human culture, it would be unrealistically
optimistic to expect it will deploy seam-
lessly, without fits and starts. Wireless
broadband deployment is complicated by
a highly volatile technology environment
as higher speed cell phone, Wi-fi, WimaX
and satellite technologies compete for
market niche and market dominance.
the discussion that follows focuses
on the great untethering campaign as it
presently exists: examining governments’
roles as builders, buyers and brokers; the
state of the industry and its solutions; the
shape and the elements of the emerging
infrastructure.
A Strategy Paper fromThe CeNTeR foR DIGITaL GoVeRNmeNT
�
III. The Great Untethering: The Campaign Thus far
TheStateofSupplyandDemand
Both the supply of and demand for
wireless is expanding. Customers and
providers are extending service delivery
by extending the network. In a 2005
report, aBI research estimated that
municipal Wi-fi networks covered only
about 1,500 square miles worldwide.
By 2010, that coverage is anticipated
to increase to 126,000 square miles,
or roughly the area of the state of New
mexico. most of the growth will occur
in North america and asia. more than
1 million wireless mesh routers will be
shipped by that time and manufacturing
revenues from those shipments alone will
exceed $1.2 billion.4
What is now clearly a digital majority is
racing to adopt a third screen — the pDa/
cell phone, which joins the tV and com-
puter as it competes for the attention of a
new sector of “viewers.” Demand is accel-
erating (even though the uptake rate in the
United states lags behind europe and asia
in this technology adoption). according to
an april 2006 survey, there are more than
178 million wireless subscribers in the
United states — a number projected to
grow to 233.5 million by 2009.5
even greater adoption of the third
screen is already occurring among young
people who represent a larger share of
the 7 to 9 percent of americans who do
not have home phone lines, using cell
phones as primary phones. Just under half
(48 percent) of cell-only respondents are
under 30 years old, while 35 percent are
30 to 49 years of age.6
this unprecedented demand — “the
largest one-year addition of new sub-
scribers since 1983 — when commercial
wireless services were first offered…”
— shows no signs of abating. six-month
revenues have doubled over a five-year
period. this trend also did not take into
account the latter half of 2005, which
included the Christmas shopping season
and also coincidentally coincides with local
government It year-end spending cycles,
at a time when tax revenues at state and
local government are on the rebound.7
this year was good to the wireless industry, which reported the largest one-year addition of new subscribers since 1983 — when commercial wireless service was first offered.
source: CtIa — the Wireless association
118.4
134.6
148.1
169.5
194.6
$41.4
$49.3
$55.7
$36.7
$30.9first half 2001
first half 2002
first half 2003
first half 2004
first half 2005
total revenues shown in billions
total subscribers shown in millions
Figure1:WirelessUsage
Building the Untethered Nation II
�
Local governments and cities in par-
ticular are increasingly taking the lead.
Wireless mobility easily figures into com-
munity strategies, for everything from
reducing the digital divide to expanding
economic development. the build-out
of city wireless infrastructures is closely
watched, widely celebrated in many
quarters and decried in others, but still
— all in all — nascent when considering
wireless availability in communities from
coast to coast. figure 2 provides a high
level view of what remains as an uneven
deployment pattern across the country.
public wireless availability, coupled with
dedicated-use wireless networks, provide
a wireless broadband platform for doing
the public’s business. and chief among
the myriad uses is public safety.
WirelessBroadband—
MissionOne,PublicSafety
Local government chief information
officers (CIos) from across the country
express genuine excitement about real
progress improving the day to day opera-
tions of police, fire and emergency health
personnel. Clearly public safety is priority
one for municipal wireless uses.
CIo richard aldridge explains how
wireless technology is making emergency
medical technicians (emts) more efficient in
Charles County, maryland. “the emts got
their application online for ambulance track-
ing and ambulance transport, so when they
pull into the hospital they just key everything
in and press a button. and the hospital’s got
the transport information which made it
really, really nice,” says aldridge.
CIo Cathy maras o’Leary is helping
Cook County, Illinois build a dedicated
use or private wireless network to sup-
port multi-jurisdictional homeland security
efforts, using $50 million in federal funds
(shared with the City of Chicago) to aug-
ment the county-wide area network and
their legacy radio system. o’Leary has
ambitious plans to link the county, the city
of Chicago and all the suburbs into a web
of interoperability. Wireless connections
are being installed in every suburb and an
802.11 antenna is being added to eigh-
teen 300-foot, 800 megahertz radio tow-
ers. o’Leary says that when the installation
is complete, they will equip every police
car to be connected to a hotspot on the
expanded network.
“When you are in the hot spot,”
o’Leary explains, “you are at 30 frames
per second [of streaming video]. one
reason for the increasing demand for
streaming video technology is the pro-
liferation of security cameras installed at
various sites such as shopping malls, con-
vention centers, and schools…[a]reas
where people [congregate].” o’Leary
predicts increasing demand for more
cameras since video has been made rela-
tively inexpensive and efficient. “[W]e are
literally using off the shelf systems and the
secret of our video is the compression
that we are using…we don’t want to use
all of our bandwidth [on video].”
alisoun K. moore, the chief information
officer for montgomery County, md., says
her county is also heavily committed to
wireless broadband. Under montgomery
County’s ambitious plan, moore says that
all police and fire vehicles have broadband
wireless data communications in addition
to voice. officers complete all incident
reports wirelessly from their patrol cars,
which are then seamlessly uploaded to the
record management system.
moore explained that montgomery
County built what she refers to as the
“wireless lifeline infrastructure,” which
is seamlessly integrated with their fiber
optic infrastructure and connects to more
than 100 facilities.
New york City is also an equal partici-
pant in the wireless game. their wireless
expansion plans call for up to a $500
million wireless investment over the next
five years. and similar to Cook County
and Chicago, mission one is public safety.
the NypD is finishing its migration away
from a “sneaker net” to support its new,
real-time Crime Center (rtCC).
on July 18, 2005, the rtCC opened
for business 24 hours a day, seven days a
week. Its initial focus has been to provide
direct, real-time support for field investi-
gators working high-profile cases. In the
30,000-74,999
75,000-124,999
125,000-249,999
250,000-or more
Avg.
available in public facilities (libraries, airports, government offices and schools)
20% 27% 41% 38% 32%
available in downtown business district, commercial areas and enterprise zones
12% 22% 24% 36% 24%
available in residential areas 12% 10% 7% 11% 10%
available across the entire city 20% 16% 17% 16% 17%
source: Center for Digital government, DigitalCitiesSurvey, 2005
Figure2:PublicWirelessAvailability
A Strategy Paper fromThe CeNTeR foR DIGITaL GoVeRNmeNT
�
eight months since its initial launch, the
rtCC has provided investigative support
for more than 2,500 incidents, and has
been credited with important contribu-
tions to efficiency, effectiveness and suc-
cessful case resolution. this real-time
access to information increases the effec-
tiveness of the investigators in critical initial
stages of the canvas, and correspondingly
increases officer safety. the rtCC Data
marts contain data with very specific foci,
such as arrest, complaint, domestic vio-
lence, criminal summons, stop and frisk,
investigator cards (iCards), parole, pro-
bation and warrants. marts are updated
immediately upon availability of source
data, with geo-coding attached. Links
among incidents are created automati-
cally. the marts underpin extensive ana-
lytic and ad hoc reporting capabilities of
the rtCC and provide useful and timely
access to incident history, thus supporting
real-time crime investigations.8
other examples of public safety-focused
initiatives span the United states, from both
coasts to the heartland and into the south:
• Wireless laptops in patrol cars extend
and enhance finite police human
resources in oakland, Calif., everett,
Wash. and Cisco, texas.
• a wireless infrastructure streamlines
emergency response in the states of
North Carolina and Washington.
• Wireless field support allows a seven-
member coroner’s staff to handle
2,500 cases per year, cutting wait
times for police and families from days
to hours in Kane County, Ill.9
yet progress is uneven across the
country and not all stories from the field
are positive. public safety and emergency
health entities also have an opportunity to
capitalize on the trend of expanding cell
phone use by providing improved emer-
gency response with the e911 program.
Under the e911 program, satellites and
cell towers can communicate a customer’s
location to a dispatcher. as envisioned, the
dispatcher can then immediately notify
emergency responders to the general
location of the call. While an advance in
public safety, progress in some states can
be patchy and slow.
Unfortunately, such disadvantages can
cost lives. Consider the death of a Utah
man named scott aston in october
2004. Dispatchers could not pinpoint the
exact location of the call and emts ended
up at the wrong place, even though the
call was placed from a cell phone. In fact,
police in provo, Utah were unable to
locate aston’s body until four days later.
additionally, other states and localities
are quite far behind: alabama, arizona,
Idaho, Illinois and Wisconsin. those five
states have all indicated to the federal
government accounting office (gao)
that they may never be able to imple-
ment the e-911 service.10
Unfortunately, shifting political priorities
and the desire to trim spending, particu-
larly in election years, can lead to gov-
ernments neglecting tested and proven
technologies. these issues will remain a
key challenge for the foreseeable future.
as issues related to wireless availability,
functionality and reliability consume indus-
try efforts and the public sector information
technology (It) community, public agencies
have begun to imagine how mission-criti-
cal work can be completed and improved
using this new wireless platform.
Despite political and financial hurdles,
wireless deployments in non-public safe-
ty service areas are also expanding. the
current landscape includes:
PublicHealthandSocialServices
Wireless technologies are being
deployed to monitor, detect and respond
to public health threats, such as:
• West Nile Virus in pennsylvania
• restaurant Inspections
• mosquito-borne diseases in Harris
Co., texas
• radiation and environmental toxins in
New york, N.y.11
PropertyAssessmentandInspection
• economic development building in-
spectors and tax assessors visit sites,
work with clients, and upload and
download data, reports, graphs and
photos.
• philadelphia will reevaluate all 600,000
land parcels within its boundaries by
2007 — an early deployment prior-
ity for the Wireless philadelphia infra-
structure.12
PublicWorksandEnforcement
Wireless technologies are heavily involved
in the support and management of:
• fleets of police, fire and animal
control vehicles, street cleaners and
garbage trucks in sacramento, Calif.
• train stations and airports in san
francisco
• Water and waste water infrastructure
in edgecombe County, N.C.
• Detection of illegal dumping in Doña
ana, N.m.
• fire hydrants in elsinore, s.C.
• road signs in Boulder, Colo.
• electrical substations in Laurens, s.C.
• Weed abatement in riverside,
Calif.13
to be clear, there is no single pattern
in wireless deployments. many jurisdic-
Building the Untethered Nation II
�
tions “layer” the wireless infrastructure,
bifurcating between dedicated, secure
capacity for public safety and other layers
to support the other functions of govern-
ment. However, some jurisdictions choose
to deploy separate networks — one for
public safety, another for everything else
— out of caution or a very conservative
reading of security-related mandates. the
duplicate network approach brings advan-
tages in terms of disaster recovery and
business continuity. While public safety
traffic runs on a dedicated network, the
second network can serve as a readily
available backup during times of emer-
gency or disruption to the primary public
safety wireless network.
BridgingtheDigitalDivide
In addition to montgomery County’s
public safety initiative previously dis-
cussed, CIo alisoun moore explains
how the county is bridging the digital
divide. Currently, montgomery County
libraries are equipped with Wi-fi. moore
can barely contain her excitement when
she describes this high-value citizen ser-
vice: “they are actually building a library
with a concession stand that we think
will be owned and operated by a coffee
shop. people just enjoy their libraries.
they like to go there with the kids; they
like to hook up with not just our librar-
ies but some of our more public facilities
with Wi-fi access as well. Like the sec-
ond floor where our county executive is
— he gets so many visitors; they all have
public access as well. so in that case, we
are definitely providers to our citizens.”
other low- or no-cost broadband
wireless services bridge the digital divide
and support vital public services in:
• philadelphia: When completed, earth-
Link will offer broadband from $10
per month.
• san francisco and mountain View,
Calif.: google built a Wi-fi network in
mountain View, Calif., and won a bid
with earthLink, Inc. to build another
network in san francisco.
• New orleans: the city began service
to residents after Katrina damaged
landline infrastructure.
• tempe, ariz.: the city launched a net-
work in february through mobilepro.
• Walla Walla, Wash.: County-wide
outdoor wireless is provided through
the public utility district.
• macedonia: the first country to
establish a border-to-border wireless
“cloud.”
• fredericton, New Brunswick: this
Canadian city provides free border-
to-border Wi-fi to all.
this eclectic mix of deployments
reflects a continuing evolution and cus-
tomization in the fit between wireless
broadband and the communities it is
deployed in. Broadband can be a cata-
lyst for economic development in rural,
geographically isolated or economically
disadvantaged regions. such regions’
wireless infrastructures bring the potential
of new jobs, while also helping to retain
jobs. Indeed, in an economy increasingly
reliant on off-shoring, such “rural shoring”
holds promise of taking advantage of rural
america’s benefits: lower costs (including
affordable housing) and desirable quality
of life (improved air quality, safer streets,
better schools and freedom from traffic
congestion) can attract college grads (who
demographers remind us have different
work and life values than earlier genera-
tions), and retired professionals (who are
looking for a second career or just want or
need to work another five to 10 years).
to compete in today’s economy,
small- and medium-sized businesses
need access to data and clients in real
time. With a wireless infrastructure,
there is nothing to prevent even the
most remote communities from provid-
ing easier, low-cost hosts for the virtual
operation of any company that relies on
staff who work from home.
a final word on the seeming inevita-
bility of ubiquitous wireless: increasingly,
we are all living and working in ways that
make personal area networks (paNs)
necessary. paNs are popping up to con-
nect formerly discrete computing devic-
es (including cell phones and personal
digital assistants) that surround a single
person. paNs typically have a reach of a
few meters and serve as an aggregation
point for local devices to access both local
resources (printers, scanners and the like)
as well as larger networks. put another
way, all our nomadic devices use paNs as
the digital equivalent of oxygen.
A Strategy Paper fromThe CeNTeR foR DIGITaL GoVeRNmeNT
�
Figure3:AQuickReferenceGuidetoUnderstandingCurrentandEmergingWirelessProtocols
It is critically important to match traffic
(voice, data and video) with the protocols
that best carry them. the following is a list
of protocol definitions and explanations:
1) Wi-Fi – “Wi-fi” is short hand for
“Wireless fidelity.” Wi-fi-certified
products are tested and approved for
interoperability. the Institute of elec-
trical and electronics engineers (Ieee)
developed what is referred to as
802.11™ standards. all Wi-fi prod-
ucts — including hotspots (the receiv-
er or base station) found in homes,
airports, hotels, parks, Internet cafes
and other locations and their clients,
the device cards or chips (transmit-
ters) — all operate on radio frequen-
cies of either 2.4 gHz (802.11b or
g) or 5 gHz radio frequency band
(802.11 a). speed or throughput of
these various devices are measured
in megabits per second (mbps) and
802.11a run at more than twice the
speed of 802.11g and nearly five
times the speed of 802.11b.14 range
will vary based on obstruction, but is
generally about 300 feet.
2) WiMAX – WimaX, or Worldwide
Interoperability for microwave access
protocol, was developed in 2002 and
is emerging as a new wireless technol-
ogy. Like Wi-fi, the standard was pro-
mulgated by Ieee and is referred to as
802.16. WimaX has some advantages
over Wi-fi, mainly because it has a range
of up to 30 miles and also has the abil-
ity to license spectrum. the advantage
of licensed spectrum is that it minimizes
the chance of interference because oth-
ers cannot broadcast on frequencies that
a provider controls. WimaX transmits
in the licensed 10 gHz and 66 gHz
range and between the 2 gHz and 11
gHz, which offers both licensed and
unlicensed frequencies. WimaX uses
what is referred to as the media access
Control Layer (maC). the purpose of
this communications protocol is to pre-
vent signals from different stations collid-
ing and thus garbling the message.15
3) UMTS – Universal mobile telecom-
munications system (Umts) is a third
generation, sometimes referred to as
3.5 g, broadband wireless technology
delivering voice, data, and video over
a digital network at speeds far superior
to currently popular but much slower
cellular technologies. although more
expensive than Wi-fi, the advantage
(along with other 3g deployments)
is that it has a greater coverage area
because it relies on established wireless
provider networks. It is estimated that
Umts will represent a $2 billion indus-
try by 2010.16
4) EV-DO–evolution-Data optimized,
or eV-Do, is a wireless third genera-
tion data standard currently available
in the U.s. cellular market. It has one
of the highest data transfer rates cur-
rently available in the United states at
2.4 mbps. Like Umts, the advantage
is the availability of coverage plus the
ability to work in moving vehicles. eV-
Do is more widely deployed than
Umts. It is not capable of competing
in the throughput arena, with Wi-fi
transfer rates of up to 54 mbps.17
5) HSDPA – High speed Downlink
packet access (HsDpa) is another of the
alphabet soups of 3g providers. some
also refer to this at 3.5 g technology
and as the next evolution of Umts.
Latest claims by wireless providers indi-
cate throughput of 10 mbps.18
matching competing wireless solutions and
the web of emerging standards can be a
challenge in an environment characterized
more by change than stability. Webopedia
offers a good description of wireless stan-
dards for those trying to better understand
which standard might fit best for their par-
ticular problem and solution.19
Building the Untethered Nation II
10
IV. The Role of Government: a Public or Private Investment?
Clearly, local governments are becom-
ing deeply involved in wireless broad-
band, yet have significantly divergent
opinions when it comes to thinking about
and determining what role or roles they
will play. Understandably, municipal lead-
ers are struggling with the value propo-
sitions of building, buying or brokering
wireless services. In reality, many local
governments do a little of each, mostly
using hybrids that fit with the community’s
unique histories, priorities and politics.
for this reason, the authors broached this
discussion directly with those involved in
daily wireless considerations, interview-
ing a cross section of municipal leaders in
early 2006.20
When CIos and other county leaders
think about wireless, deployment runs
along a broad continuum – from legacy
wireless voice systems (such as an 800
megahertz radio system for first respond-
ers) to extensive Wi-fi coverage through-
out their jurisdictions. according to a
recent survey by the Center for Digital
government, governments lack consen-
sus about which role is best to assume
when involved in broadband, whether
in wired or wireless deployments, as the
chart below demonstrates.
still, governments and their leaders
exist to make decisions and each govern-
ment needs to decide what its primary
role will be. these decisions will be driven
by weighing cost against potential reward
and scientific feasibility. the decision will,
in the end, be determined within the con-
text of each community’s values.
TheChoices:Build,BuyorBroker
public entities are faced with three main
role choices, although hybrids are likely to
proliferate as infrastructure development
moves from conceptual to the concrete.
Build– an entity owns and builds the
infrastructure and delivers wireless ser-
vices across the network.
Buy – these governments mainly con-
sume services from third parties for inter-
nal operations, leaving citizen provision of
wireless broadband to the myriad of pri-
vate sector providers that decide where,
when and if they will offer services within
various geographic sub-regions.
Broker – governments acting as bro-
kers may enter into agreement or contract
with one or more wireless service provid-
ers to ensure service provision within their
jurisdiction. these may also be referred to
as public-private partnerships.
Below, figure 4 represents one view of
the role of the public and private sectors
in information technology deployments,
but it also applies to the specific case of
wireless.
In a tradition that traces back to New
Deal-era rural electrification, a consider-
able amount of people see government’s
role as an agency that helps bring broad-
band to rural, poor and underserved
consumer markets where private sec-
tor development lags. this role selection
involves a delicate dance, and at times,
pitched battles with local incumbent tele-
com providers. Despite appearances, such
RoleofPrivateProviders:Deliver broadly available tele-communication services that are priced competitively as commodities or at some other optimal price point.
TransitionRoles:as marketplace dynamics and technologies change, some public services should be transitioned to the private providers. other services not broadly available or affordable are made available through the public service entity.
RoleofPublicServiceEntity:Deliver education, govern-ment service, telemedicine, and other services that are not broadly available or affordable, and serve as a research and development test bed.
Figure4:BalancingPublicandPrivateRoles
source: richard Varn, “emerged, Converged, and Connected: the Wireless american Landscape,” southeast Wireless Conference, 2005.
A Strategy Paper fromThe CeNTeR foR DIGITaL GoVeRNmeNT
11
conflicts are not governed by deliberate con-
frontational politics and mean-spiritedness,
but arise based on the specific characteristics
of the user community and the impact on
private sector business models.
AChecklistofQuestionstobe
Answered
Because of these differences, there are
several important questions which merit
careful consideration before a municipal-
ity or local government embarks on a
wireless broadband initiative:
1) Why is a wireless strategy necessary to
pursue? for a more detailed explana-
tion on this topic, see the companion
strategic guide to this paper entitled
BuildingtheUntetheredNation.21 the
companion paper makes a convincing
general business case that must then
be made operational and tailored to
the community in question.
2) What are the proposed boundar-
ies and the location of the rollout?
are the communities urban, rural, a
city, municipalities within a county, a
regional deployment, or a statewide
infrastructure?
3) How is the initial build-out and subse-
quent maintenance paid for, and what
entities will pay for it?
CIo moore indicates that montgom-
ery County is quite comfortable playing
all three roles: builder, buyer and broker.
moore is convinced of the importance of
the broker role in supporting Wi-fi access
in municipal areas, but she also under-
stands the political implications of step-
ping into roles that have traditionally been
filled by private sector providers. accord-
ing to moore:
[I]tdidn’tmakeanysenseforustopro-
videwirelessInternetaccess[everywhere],
butwedidwantto[offer] ittoourdown-
town business district, to people who are
outsidethe[publictransportationtrains]or
insomeofourparkareasandareaswhere
thereisalotofoutsidedining…Inorderto
avoidanycontroversy,weissuedarequest
forspecialintereststothecarriercommu-
nityand[askedifthey]wouldliketopartner
with… the county [to]…advertise ser-
vicestocertaindowntowndistricts.
this partnership would be a pro bono
arrangement, and is how a provider was
selected. the county provided some of
the infrastructure, including servers and
buildings on which to mount antennas.
the county worked closely with the
community associations to choose service
locations. according to moore, it worked
out well in the end, and for a minimal
amount of money.
the montgomery example is instruc-
tional because it underscores the impor-
tance of understanding and tapping into an
increasingly popular business model; the
advent of google and other new entrants
may yield some advantages to counties
considering similar public-private partner-
ships. But out of necessity and curiosity,
the question becomes why the private
sector would partner in such a way with
the public sector. Here is moore’s specu-
lative response to the question:
Why would the private sector do this?
ThisparticularproviderwasanInternetser-
vice provider (ISP)who is actually located
in thatarea,and they got freemarketing
forpressreleases;wehavepamphletsand
nameplatesupallaroundplaceswithinthe
Wi-Fiarea.Oncetheygotthatnamerec-
ognition—becauseagain,thisisanurban
area—guesswhathappened?Apartment
owners, residential business building own-
ers,realestatefolks…[and]peoplethat
owned properties quickly contacted [the
ISP]andsaid, ‘Hey,we’d liketooutfitour
buildingwiththisaccess.’Sincethey[part-
neredwithus,theISPhas]hadtheirbest
monthever.
montgomery County’s Wi-fi access
was implemented with an initial county
investment of $20,000, followed by
$1,000 to $1,500 per year. the mont-
gomery County model demonstrates
what can be done with some creativity,
ingenuity and “stick-to-it-iveness,” com-
bined with a pinch of political realism.
TheRoleofGovernanceinWireless
BroadbandInitiatives
another key ingredient in a successful
wireless broadband initiative is identifying
a good place to start. the best start to a
local government initiative comes with a
shared vision of the community leaders’
role. this vision can then lead to funda-
mental questions that must be answered
before moving forward. should the local
government primarily be a consumer,
whose job it is to create a “government-
only cloud”? Within the narrow role of
consumer, government can either deliver
or broker those services — but only to
that government itself.
other governments have taken a dif-
ferent approach and view of emerging
communications infrastructure, whether
untethered or wired, in a more holistic
manner. this view is broad. such govern-
ments have taken action to promote uni-
versal broadband access and have looked
to wireless opportunities to increase the
speed of the build-out at a significantly
lower cost. they see the world through
the lens of the municipal utility. yet as gov-
ernments will soon discover, duplication of
infrastructure serves no one’s interests.
Building the Untethered Nation II
1�
for example, in jurisdictions where cur-
rent penetration rates for Internet connec-
tivity exceed 90 percent, municipal leaders
claim they did not need to build their own
wireless infrastructure for public broadband
because it would be duplicative of existing
private sector infrastructures.22
another variable affecting governance
roles was reported by counties that have
large urban cities within their bounds. these
counties were often specifically prohib-
ited by statute from providing emergency
services such as police and fire. these enti-
ties tended to house lower consumers of
wireless because they were not primary
providers of emergency services.
still other counties that cover very
wide geographic regions report they
have encountered difficulty from a cost
standpoint deploying universal wireless
broadband, even when it is badly need-
ed. However, even in these counties
we are beginning to see some innova-
tive and targeted Wi-fi projects and, in
some instances, emergency services have
became anchor tenants for more ambi-
tious wireless deployments.23
Governance:SummingUptheFight
If local governments do decide to own
and control a broadband municipal utility,
this direction requires delicate balancing
of cost against economic opportunity.
Clearly, managing the expectations of pri-
vate sector providers, legislatures and the
courts becomes a major challenge. as was
touched upon earlier, some counties have
large coverage areas. In these instances,
the goal of public, universal wireless
broadband appears to be less attractive
from a cost perspective. Due to extensive
lobbying efforts by influential telecommu-
nications providers, 14 states have already
placed some restrictions on municipalities
from building their own wireless or wired
broadband networks, adding a number of
implementation barriers.24
Nevertheless, governments are often
wrested into setting up their own net-
works as a response to complaints from
constituents who say they are ignored
by their incumbent telecom company,
which they claim provides poor, little or
no broadband service in their geographic
location. telecom providers often respond
by saying they do provide this service, but
customer demand is low, thereby increas-
ing their cost. Customers respond saying
they refuse to purchase broadband servic-
es for as high a price as incumbents offer,
particularly if the company is unresponsive
from a customer service standpoint. pro-
viders then argue that although there are
some areas where coverage is not provid-
ed, this is simply a temporary situation and
the market will work this out over time.
this argument is, of course, of little sol-
ace to businesses, which are relocating or
opening new businesses and don’t have
time to wait for the market to catch up.
many public officials can recall angry calls
from businesses claiming they were being
forced to relocate or lose their business
because they were unable to get the ser-
vice they needed when they needed it. yet
these same providers have taken their case
to state legislatures and argued convincingly
that local municipalities put the taxpayer at
risk by carrying unsustainable, long-term
debt. furthermore, they argue that since
technology is changing so quickly, localities
will soon be saddled for years with out-
dated technology infrastructures. the point
is that such infrastructures will drive citizens
to abandon subscriptions with local govern-
ment entities in favor of the nimble, private
sector, advanced technologies.
While the debate continues, some cit-
ies and counties have chosen to build,
maintain and operate municipal wireless
networks themselves. they obtain the
necessary funds, perhaps through issuing
bonds or seeking lines of credit, to build
the network, then act as an Isp by selling
Internet access at various speeds to inter-
ested residents.
other cities and counties have cre-
ated partnerships. GovernmentTechnology
associate editor shane peterson describes
such partnerships in this way:
In one popular arrangement, a private-
sectorcompanyassumestheupfrontcosts
of deploying the necessary network infra-
structure, such as antennas and access
points,andthemunicipalityallowsthecom-
panies free access to streetlights or traffic
lightsinthemunicipalrightofwaytomount
theequipment.Establishedtelephonecom-
paniesraisetheloudestoppositiontothese
municipalmaneuversbecause thecompa-
nieshavethemosttolose.Nomatterifthe
municipalitybuildsandownsthenetworkor
strikesadealwithaprivate-sectorpartner
togetthenetworkofftheground,anestab-
lishedtelephonecompanycouldlosemany
customerstothenewserviceandlosingcus-
tomersmeanslosingmoney.25
Irrespective of whether a government
assumes the build, buy or broker role, the
one role that government cannot afford to
assume is that of no involvement. the role
of government-as-anchor-tenant is crucial
to the build-out of outdoor broadband.
for example, customer applications such as
video, a natural for broadband, are still in
search of a driver on the citizen side. yet
as we have discovered from the Center’s
discussions with CIos, a security camera
infrastructure for public safety is a major
A Strategy Paper fromThe CeNTeR foR DIGITaL GoVeRNmeNT
1�
driver on the governmental side. By being
an anchor tenant for video, governments
help set up an infrastructure and know-how
that can be utilized as the potential for citi-
zen video as applications become available
and proliferate. Certainly, location-based
advertising may be one option for using and
funding wireless broadband, particularly in
high-traffic areas in the city core.
BusinessModels:
FeeorFree-for-All?
It is not surprising that “free” or “free-
for-all” is an attractive concept when it
comes to wireless connectivity, as it is
for many other things we do in life. free
music in the parks sounds pretty good as
compared to events such as home shows
that charge the consumer an entrance
fee simply to sell you a product. In fact,
“free” sounds downright democratic (with
a small “d”). free is, of course, a good way
to hook interest. still, municipalities consid-
ering establishing free wireless broadband
relationships with citizens or vendors must
also consider the costs of “free” and think
hard about what free really means. In the
wireless broadband space, “free” comes
in two main categories: taxpayer-funded
models and self-funded models.
TheTaxpayer-fundedModel
We don’t normally expect people to build
and repair the street they live on, nor the
water and sewer systems that run beneath
them, but we do expect them to buy natu-
ral gas from a private provider. the debate
over what services ought to be provided by
the government and what the government
has no business being involved in is peren-
nial. few services are funded solely with
tax dollars. even libraries charge fines and
fees for lost and overdue books. In the case
of taxpayer-funded Wi-fi, for instance, this
service is paid for by the municipality with-
out extra charges for use by any individual
who wishes to log on to the network. this
does not mean that the local government
does not use private providers to offer part
or all of the service, it simply means that the
cost is not passed along to the consumer
through a fee structure.
In other instances, however, the local
government does own the wireless net-
work. It may appropriate development
and maintenance costs from the county
or city general fund or through bonding.
AdvantagesandDisadvantagesofthe
Taxpayer-fundedModel
there are several advantages and dis-
advantages to keep in mind with this kind
of “free” service.
advantages include:
1) EconomicAccess — Wireless broadband
would be available to a far larger share of
the population because it is less expen-
sive over time to own a laptop than to
pay a monthly subscription charge. It
lowers the economic barrier to access.
2) Economic Development — Increased
access is an advantage to local busi-
nesses that can benefit from more
potential customers knowing about
their business through location-based
portals, or simply by drawing foot traf-
fic to Wi-fi locations.
3) ConvenientAccess — If a fee is associ-
ated with using a wireless service, an
individual must register and pay with
a credit or debit card to set up ser-
vice. often such access is granted for a
24-hour period. Without having to col-
lect fees, the ability to log on and access
the Internet is seamless with modern
computer technology. Without it, one
confronts the “hassle factor.”
Disadvantages include:
1) Bonding — If the municipality bonds
for this service it raises taxpayers’ cost,
who will have to pay service on the
debt for many years into the future.
2) SupportandMaintenance — respon-
sibilities associated with support and
maintenance need to be anticipated
because the municipality owns the
infrastructure.
3) Economic Cycles — economic cycles
drive municipality revenues, and what
seems like a good investment in flush
economic times can be an albatross
during a recession. Downturns are
also the least palatable times for gov-
ernment tax increases.
4) RefreshRates — Wireless technologies
are in a state of disruption and instability.
the technology and standards are rap-
idly evolving in a market of stiff competi-
tion. Wireless providers must continually
upgrade offerings to remain competitive.
government-owned technology can
quickly become obsolete, causing users
to abandon a government-run wireless
project for private sector alternatives. In
turn, public support may wane without
high levels of government investment to
refresh the technology.
5) LackofStatistics — few studies exist
on the true cost of municipal wireless
broadband, making it difficult to budget
and plan. one such study estimates
that “the average cost of building and
maintaining a municipal wireless net-
work is $150,000 per square mile
over five years.” the report also states
that “roughly 50 percent of current
initiatives will fail to break even if the
benefit of the initiative is assumed to
be $25 per user, per month.”26
Building the Untethered Nation II
1�
Self-fundedModels
this “free” model means service is
free to the end-user. the private entity
pays for the up-front investment. a vari-
ety of self-funded government models
have existed for a number of years. one
currently popular model is the advertis-
ing-supported model, promoted by large
search portal providers such as google
and yahoo!. for example, google is
offering universal Wi-fi to san francisco
within the city limits at no cost to the city
or consumers. In this proposal, google
teamed up with earthLink. the proposed
free services will run at a slower speed
(256 kilobits per second (kbps) up to 384
kbps) and a paid, citywide higher-speed
service will be offered at one megabit
per second (mbps), both upstream and
down. although such proposals are often
vague, many industry analysts predict that
google will use san francisco as a test
bed for potential national service offerings
and tools. also, other analysts conjecture
that location-based advertisements will
help fund the free service.27
AdvantagesandDisadvantagesof
Self-fundedModels
advantages include:
1) LowerCostsandFinancialRisks — a pri-
vate company, through shareholders
or angel investors,28 funds the project.
this reduces the need for bonding
or a taxpayer-funded infrastructure.
advocates believe this significantly
lowers both costs and financial risks.
2) LowerRiskofObsoleteTechnology — for
a company to remain competitive, it will
likely need to upgrade infrastructure and
equipment more often than the public
sector, so the risk of becoming obsolete
sooner is lower.
3) Reduced Risk of Changing Political
Climate — Long-term contracts can
span elections, thereby reducing the
effect political upheavals have on service.
Disadvantages include:
1) Picking the Wrong Vendor — Not all
vendors are created equal. as with
any outsourced arrangement, gov-
ernment stands the risk that the cho-
sen vendor will not or cannot deliver
what was promised. a company must
be financially stable enough to assume
the risk. a thorough review of the
company’s finances and positioning in
the marketplace is an essential part of
a proposal review process, needed to
reduce the risk of a potential failure.
2) Shifting Business Climate, Mergers
and Acquisitions — the direction of
a private sector partner may change
due to an unfavorable business cli-
mate, mergers, acquisitions or events
beyond company control. Continuing
investment in a wireless network may
not be advantageous to the company,
despite its value to the customer.
3) Just Remember: “The First One’s
Free!”— reduced fees or free services
are the hallmark of many companies’
early attempts to gain market share.
Nevertheless, free service may not be
sustainable over the long haul. early
success of community efforts to pro-
mote wireless broadband can lead to
dependency on the “free” infrastruc-
ture. When the contract comes up for
renewal the terms may change from
free to subscription-based pricing, and
soon the governmental entity may find
itself “over a barrel,” caught between
the demands of the company and the
public.
one final point must be made before
leaving the business model discussion.
“fee” or “free” expands or contracts
funding choices, and ultimately govern-
ments must decide the answers to at least
two key questions:
• Whopays?the customer, the ratepayer,
the taxpayer, or the shareholder?
• Whereisthemoneycomingfrom? taxes,
telecommunication provider deduc-
tions, credits or penalties, business
user deductions or credits, consumer
deductions or credits, appropriations,
grants, venture capital, loans and/or
universal service funds?
Ultimately, access to the network may
be “free” — through deliberate political,
policy or business choices — but some-
one has to pay to put in the plumbing.
as mentioned earlier, “the average cost of
building and maintaining a municipal Wi-
fi mesh network is $150,000 per square
mile over five years.” to break even on
the investment, the investor “would need
an average revenue per user (arpU) of
more than $30 per month.”29
regardless of the choices made, match-
ing technology investments with practical
and sustainable business models that yield
positive, long-term roIs are the goal.
A Strategy Paper fromThe CeNTeR foR DIGITaL GoVeRNmeNT
1�
V. Technology and the market: Cell vs. Ieee Wireless
TheIndustryShakeOut
as stated earlier, the wireless broadband
industry is consumed by competition, yet
cooperation around standards is growing,
and each technology and standard has its
advocates. While a proponent of wireless
broadband over the long haul, san Diego
CIo mike moore says that given the func-
tional requirements of the current genera-
tion of wireless applications, government
must confront the reality that broadband
cellular can not be dismissed.
moreover, incumbent cellular carriers
have an installed cellular base that has a
footprint larger than Wi-fi and other non-
cellular forms of wireless – and it is turf
they are prepared to defend. the reach
of the three major cellular players cover
more than 80 percent of the U.s. popu-
lation – meaning that at least 220 million
americans and 6,500 cities and towns30
have a minimum of three choices for cel-
lular access. the cellular footprint dwarfs
broadband deployments at this point, and
may be indicative of a looming industry
shake out and reinvention of the Beta
versus VHs confrontation.
WiMAXStandardization
If you are betting the farm on WimaX,
you may be a little early to the party. yet
when WimaX does arrive, it will be a for-
midable contender to cellular and other
forms of Ieee wireless. south Korea has
already commercially deployed WimaX
and proven its viability. still, as this paper
goes to print, not a single U.s. carrier is
deploying WimaX in 2006. However,
regional service provider arialink is work-
ing with samsung. they are vying to be
the first to deploy a commercial mobile
WimaX network in North america. ari-
alink hopes to launch WimaX in muske-
gon County, mich. in early 2007.31
toward the end of the year, mini
pCmCIa cards (portable computer
cards) should become available for lap-
tops with built-in WimaX functionality.
personal Digital assistants (pDas) and
smart phones will be introduced to the
market at a later stage. 802.16e function-
ality will increase with time in parallel with
the widening selection of different form
factors for user devices.
the WimaX forum32 expects that initial
products will support only simple mobil-
ity, which uses hard handoffs and does not
support real-time applications. as demand
for more advanced forms of mobility is
fueled by the introduction of pDas and
smart phones, certified products will
include support for soft handoffs, mobile
VoIp (Voice over Internet protocol), and
real-time applications.
although this discussion only whets the
appetite for a more detailed explanation of
evolving wireless technologies, there are
some preliminary caveats for technologists
and program directors seeking to deploy
solutions. Clearly, Wi-fi is a growing presence
in the hybrid mobile mix. David Hughes, Brit-
ish telecom (Bt) director of mobility, states
Wi-fi’s strengths succinctly when he says, “at
the moment, it looks like Wi-fi is one-tenth
the price of 3g (higher speed cellular), and
four times as fast.”33 Likewise, Utah’s tele-
communication open Infrastructure agency
(UtopIa) project seems to suggest a hybrid
mix of a fiberoptic ring while making the last
mile wireless.34
for the foreseeable future, it is likely that
we will see the wireless hybrid mix pre-
vail as one technology seeks to disrupt the
other and gain market share. Near-term
border-to-border Wi-fi will prevail in a
few cities but will remain a small, signifi-
cant minority of total deployments. Wi-fi
Figure5:WiMAXForumTimelineforProductCertification
source: the WimaX forum
2005 2006 2007
802.16-2004 lab opens
air protocol certification – outdoor
service certification – outdoor
Indoor certification
802-16e lab opens
802-16e first certification
Building the Untethered Nation II
1�
for special purpose use in high-traffic areas
such as restaurants, parks, libraries and
downtown business districts will be com-
monplace. public safety Wi-fi has already
been shown as viable, although many
municipalities do not have universal cover-
age. patrol cars still need to stop and sit in
hotspots in most cities. Cellular is becom-
ing highly competitive as data transfer rates
increase, and WimaX penetration based
on the Korean example is expected to be
significant in the future.
all forms of provision for broadband
will exist, including government municipal
utilities, local exchange carriers, Internet
service providers, long distance carriers,
cable tV, power companies, converged
carriers and other wireless carriers. CIos
will need to continually scan and monitor
wireless technology trends in an ever-
changing landscape.
Innovation
trend spotters may find themselves
looking to the regional Bell telephone
companies to sidestep a number of tech-
nological obstacles and make significant
progress on Ip (Internet protocol) multi-
media subsystems, wireless broadband
and fiber-based video initiatives over the
next year — a sign that compelling new
business and consumer services are immi-
nent. this innovation will be enabled by
Ims standard setting. Ims is an architecture
that takes the place of traditional circuit-
switched telephone networks, separating
services from the underlying networks
that carry them.35
another area to watch is the recent
deployment of mobile satellite broadband
service that deployed this year. this is a
first of a kind initiative to provide global
broadband service to 98 percent of the
world’s population in 85 percent of the
world’s landmass.36 Voice and data ser-
vices are now available as the market
seeks to understand whether this excit-
ing technology will have the appropriate
price-to-performance ratios to disrupt
and overtake competitors as the wireless
broadband race heats up.
A Strategy Paper fromThe CeNTeR foR DIGITaL GoVeRNmeNT
1�
VI. The New Infrastructure: Yours, Theirs and ours
Security
stealing personal information, surrepti-
tiously installing spyware and launching
denial-of-service attacks against Web sites
has become commonplace. a greater
focus of It resources and attention must
be paid to wireless security. When dealing
with wireless technology, one must under-
stand that it is inherently more insecure
than a wired infrastructure. Nevertheless,
it can be effectively protected. security
is, particularly on a new public safety and
emergency infrastructure, a high prior-
ity. for instance, montgomery and Cook
Counties are both very serious about
protecting traffic traversing their network.
alisoun K. moore, CIo for montgomery
County, md., explains. “all messages com-
ing across county airwaves are encrypted,
secure and seamlessly integrated within
a fiber optic infrastructure.” CIo Cathy
o’Leary from Cook County, Ill. adds, “It’s
very secure. We are using three levels of
military [security], and what we’re finding
[is that] really the technology is there.”
security precautions will vary based
on customers’ needs. for example, if a
customer base is populated with mostly
teleworkers using laptops or desktops that
must be connected to data residing inside
the government firewall, the security
and bandwidth needs for these workers
increase. Conversely, a citizen who sim-
ply wants to report a pothole has a much
lower security need.
as part of security precautions, a profes-
sionally staffed It security team, operating
within the discipline of a well-formulated
security plan, is a must for governments
that handle sensitive and highly confiden-
tial personal information on a daily basis.
for a more thorough treatment about
the ways governments can secure their
networks, see the Center for Digital gov-
ernment publication, GettingBackOnline
byGoingOfftheBeatenPath:APractical
GuidetoProtectingYourInformationAssets
andTenThingsYouWishedYouKnewBefore
theDisasterStruck.37
Hybridity
Local governments have an important
choice to make between radios that deliv-
er voice only or the host of multi-media
mobile devices including cell phones,
pDas, tablet pCs, laptops, and “walkie
talkies.” Choosing which endpoint devices
will be supported on the future network
will inform and impinge upon the decisions
about what components are necessary in
the access and transport layers.
It is also important to develop a clear
understanding of how these devices will
primarily be used in the field. project man-
agement, requirements analysis and other
traditional It approaches apply here.
for example, a police officer who needs
a radio that is interoperable with fire, emts
and the local health department is very dif-
ferent than a police officer conducting a
suspect’s background check on a laptop in
his car. With adequate bandwidth, an officer
could do fingerprint matching in the field.
QualityofService
to paraphrase an incumbent cellular
carrier’s popular ad campaign, “Can you
hear me now?,” the question here is, “Can
I connect from here?”
Wireless networks, particularly Wi-fi,
struggle to maintain a high quality of ser-
vice (Qos) level. the goal is to deploy a
network that delivers the highest data trans-
fer rates possible while still maintaining the
integrity of messages traversing the net-
work. In contrast to the wired world, the
key challenge here is that we are talking
about radio technology — some of which
traverses unlicensed spectrum domain.
there are several components to assur-
ing Qos: meeting the user’s needs, select-
ing the right technology, achieving optimal
coverage and throughput, and optimizing
cost while extending the reach of network
resources to nomadic devices.38
LicensedandUnlicensedSpectrum
to those who are new to the wire-
less broadband arena, Wi-fi may seem
like a natural fit. It is inexpensive because
the spectrum is unlicensed and free. fur-
thermore, Wi-fi gear has a mass market,
also factoring into the low cost. there are,
however, limitations to Wi-fi. Because
the spectrum is unlicensed, Wi-fi signals
are subject to interference. In addition to
interference from other Wi-fi signals, 2.4
gHz cordless phones, microwave ovens
and full-spectrum lighting systems are a few
additional sources of interference. also, the
technology is not designed nor engineered
to perform over long distances.
Licensed spectrum can initially be more
costly, but it is more reliable. as cell phone
and other licensed spectrum equipment
usage expands, the costs per unit will inevi-
tably decline. for example, free (subsidized)
cell phones have been commonplace for
several years. yet current speeds for cellu-
lar service will not overtake Wi-fi anytime
Building the Untethered Nation II
1�
soon, causing cellular to be plagued in the
near term by lower data transfer rates.
still, each technology has found a role
to play. Wi-fi, for instance, appears well
suited for wireless LaNs in private homes
and small businesses. It is also a boon
for high-density locations such as airport
lounges, hotel and public office building
lobbies, libraries, and coffee shops. Low-
cost Wi-fi cards or chips, which often
come as standard equipment in laptops,
make the technology highly desirable.
Licensed spectrum works well with appli-
cations that require greater security, quality of
service (Qos), mobility, or those that require
converged voice and data services.
Stand-alone Wireless or Integra-
tionwiththeNetworkBackbone
governments planning a wireless imple-
mentation should avoid the standalone
wireless trap and deliberate more carefully
and thoroughly about how to take advan-
tage of an existing network, transport and
physical layers. the figure below provides
a good view of these layers.39
Unfortunately, some “consultants”
or vendors will recommend to poten-
tial government partners a “one-off”
wireless solution to support a specific
business function developed without
particular regard for existing local or
state-controlled enterprise voice and data
networks. these networks then become
the unfortunate recipients of unexpected
traffic that affect latency and data transfer
rates due to bandwidth issues.
to avoid such problems, it is important
to work closely and communicate often
with the Isp (Internet service provider)
partner — whether public or private
— before, during and after a wireless
deployment. furthermore, such provid-
ers often have research and development
groups that can advise local governments
and their contractors how to take advan-
tage of the trends occurring in the move
toward the telecommunications indus-
try convergence. Unfortunately, it is too
late to begin this discussion once the
equipment has been purchased or the
contracts with the service provider let.
maintaining an intense level of produc-
tive and well-informed communication
may be the single action that can ensure
project success or failure. otherwise,
increasing long-term costs coupled with
poor performance becomes the down-
stream legacy of such projects that will be
inherited by the next CIo.
one final note: a true converged and
brokered network (meaning getting the
right traffic at the right level of quality in
the right way to the right device in the
most cost-effective manner) must seam-
lessly switch between kinds and qualities
of various wire and wireless technologies
and services to send and receive digital
messages (voice, data and video). thus
the wireless deployment should be physi-
cally or virtually integrated, or as Jack Vega,
information technology director for John-
son County, Kan., puts it: “Wireless always
has to hit a wire somewhere.”40
some organizations installed wireless
hotspots for one purpose and then dis-
covered how they can extend the value of
the network by adding other high-demand
applications. for example, in Johnson
County, Kan., the courts wanted an e-filing
application option for claims and petitions.
Now people can file remotely or come
into the courthouse. once Wi-fi was avail-
able, potential jurors became aware of
it and started bringing their laptops to the
courthouse. anyone that has been part of
a jury pool quickly realized that potential
jurors can spend many hours waiting to
find out whether they have been selected
or dismissed. also, many employers com-
Figure6:The7LayersofOSI(OperatingSystemInterconnection)
application layer
presentation layer
session layer
transport layer
network layer
data link layer
physical layer
physical link
TransmitData
ReceiveDataUser
http://www.ictp.trieste.it/~radionet/1998_school/networking_presentation/page6.html
A Strategy Paper fromThe CeNTeR foR DIGITaL GoVeRNmeNT
1�
pensate employees for their time spent at
the courthouse. to employees it can mean
increased stress, and for employers, lost
productivity. according to Jack Vega, Wi-
fi service has been advantageous for both
employers and employees because poten-
tial jurors continue to work during the
jury selection process. this is simply one
example of how governments can encour-
age civic participation while reducing the
unnecessary burdens associated with it.
End-userTestingandTraining
Wireless broadband deployments, like
other aspects of government services
delivery, require effective end-user testing
and training to achieve a smooth and suc-
cessful deployment, particularly for new
services or devices. It is also key to the
successful long-term adoption and use of
the technology.
In addition to user training, a process
for customer support and troubleshoot-
ing should be developed and com-
municated. most mobile workers, for
instance, are mobile only part of the
time. If they rely on desktops at a home
base, synching data from a pDa or cell
phone can be troublesome. Different
versions of applications and operating
systems often become problematic if
not carefully implemented when mov-
ing across stationary to mobile platforms
and vice-versa. some governments are
moving away from the desktop/mobile
device interfaces and replacing them
with server side solutions. this option
helps governments avoid the variability
of some agency desktop configurations.
either way, chronic problems can be
avoided by thorough user testing prior
to full deployment. failure to do so can
result in portable devices that are pur-
chased but seldom used.
ContractManagement
In the municipal wireless world of build,
buy and broker, a contract manager some-
times faces a web of complex relationships.
Before building out wireless broadband,
the final steps toward deployment begin
with an effective procurement process. In
the best cases, the process will end in suc-
cessful and long-term relationships with
private sector partners, if desired.
governments can take action to reduce
contract risk in the following ways:
• The RFI – Consider taking the extra
step of doing a request for Informa-
tion (rfI) prior to conducting requests
for proposals (rfps) or bids. this extra
step may add time to the procurement
process initially, but can save enormous
amounts of time at the back-end, while
decreasing risk for vendor and govern-
ment alike. an rfI is particularly useful
in developing a project where govern-
ment staff may not have sufficient inter-
nal expertise to correctly scope an rfp.
a poorly-scoped or vague rfp can be
quite risky for both vendor and govern-
ment. an rfI can bring useful informa-
tion to the rfp crafting process, making
it more specific and properly scoped.
• In-source Oversight and Governance–
one reason governments move
quickly to an outsourced solution is lack
of appropriate skill sets among internal
staff. In large projects, there is often
the expectation that a private sector
partner will manage all It and some-
times non-It aspects of a project. yet
consortia of private contractors must
be carefully monitored, as handoffs
between carriers, equipment provid-
ers, software solutions and professional
services contractors are not always as
well coordinated among the parties as
a government might hope. this is par-
ticularly problematic with large-ticket,
multi-year contracts. such contracts
can be challenging to get into, and later
can pose a greater challenge to get
out of if relationships and projects go
south. Using an existing or hired skilled
contract manager, independent of the
private partner, is essential. When out-
sourcing has gone awry, it has not sim-
ply been the failure of the private sector
partner to perform their responsibilities
— it has been the government’s ability
to lead when governance and oversight
is needed and required. these respon-
sibilities are often full-time jobs, not to
be simply added on to an overloaded
program manager’s priority list. pro-
fessional, full-time project and contract
management is the prudent way to
move wireless broadband projects suc-
cessfully toward fruition.
Building the Untethered Nation II
�0
VII. Conclusion: Public Services and the Third Screen
In 1971, starbucks founder Howard
schultz envisioned a global network of
coffee shops as “the third place” — that
is, third only to home and work — where
people choose to gather. three decades
later, the postage stamp-sized displays on
cell phones, pDas and a myriad of other
nomadic devices have emerged as the third
screen, next to television and computers.
a growing critical mass of individuals and
institutions have chosen to be connected
but untethered. they use a wireless sec-
ond (laptop) or third (nomadic) screen
from the third place — any third place
— of their choosing. Indeed, it is the way
work gets done. and it is supported by the
wireless extensions of the network. as
detailed here and in the original installment
of the Center’s wireless guide, untethering
is both a process and a destination.
the age of the mobile Internet is upon
us, expanding the reach and density of our
current networks far beyond anything we
have ever seen. New users will be recruit-
ed and new uses found, but one thing is
certain – as author Howard rheingold
reminds us, “it will not just be a way to do
old things while moving. It will be a way to
do things that couldn’t be done before.”
Navigating an environment rife with
disruptive technologies and companies
competing for a dominant foothold in the
untethered world is a challenge that local
governments are destined to address. Will
governments stumble, saddling citizens
with long-term debilitating debt, or will
they bring a wave of economic prosper-
ity and valuable services to their com-
munities? Clear vision, creative ingenuity,
access to accurate and reliable informa-
tion, impeccable timing and skillful execu-
tion are attributes that governments need
from their new leaders at the dawn of the
mobile Internet. risky pitfalls, as well as
enormous opportunities to contribute to
public service, lie ahead for those willing
to meet the challenge.
A Strategy Paper fromThe CeNTeR foR DIGITaL GoVeRNmeNT
�1
BertJarreau
Chief Information officer
National association of Counties
RichardAldridge
Chief Information officer
Charles County, md.
PhillipL.Balke
Chief Information officer
Lake County, Ill.
JackClegg
Director of Information technology services
Johnson County, Kan.
JimHamlin
District Clerk
Dallas County, texas
RandyJohnson
Commissioner
Hennepin County, minn.
WarrenLee
emergency management Director
New Hanover County, Del.
TimothyLoewenstein
supervisor
Buffalo County, Neb.
AlisounK.Moore
Chief Information officer
montgomery County, md.
CathyA.MarasO’Leary
Chief Information officer
Cook County, Ill.
VirginiaPeterman
gIs Coordinator
Howard County, md.
ShaunScholer
Wayne County gIs Department manager
Court House
richmond, Ind.
LeslieStanfield
Information technology Director
New Hanover County, N.C.
RobertTaylor
Chief Information officer
fulton County, ga.
SponsorContributions:
RizKhaliq
global Business executive,
Digital Communities
IBm public sector
MichaelE.Dillon
Director, safety, security & Community
Broadband
IBm global services Its
JimHueser
sales executive
Wireless Broadband americas group
Public Sector Participants
the Center for Digital government would like to thank the following
public sector participants for their contribution to this guide.
Building the Untethered Nation II
��
endnotes
1 marshall mcLuhan, UnderstandingMedia:ExtensionsofMan, the mIt press, 1964, reissued 1994.2 maureen o’Donnell, “metra clears engineer after re-enactment of train crash,”ChicagoSun-Times, November 28, 2005.
http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qn4155/is_20051128/ai_n15909625 3 “train hits cars near Chicago; 16 hurt,” CNN, Wednesday, November 23, 2005.
http://www.cnn.com/2005/Us/11/23/train.crash/index.html 4 Unstrung news feed, “metro Wi-fi to soar,” Light reading, Inc., march 15, 2006.
http://www.unstrung.com/document.asp?doc_id=90833&Wt.svl=wire1_2 5 paul taylor, “the Internet Nation,” powerpoint presentation, Instat and W3C, april 20, 2006. 6 the pew research Center, the pew Internet & american Life project, the associated press, and aoL, the Cell phone Challenge
to survey research, may 16, 2006. 7 Cellular telecommunications & Internet association (CtIa) government technology supplement, MobileGovernment, 2005.8 NypD nomination to the 2006 Best of New york awards, on file with the Center for Digital government.9 “from a Joint aggregation of field Dispatches” by the Center for Digital government and GovernmentTechnology (Unpublished, 2006). 10 matthew D. Laplante, “Utah slow on 911 tracing, state hopes to catch up on finding cell callers,” SaltLakeTribune, march 15,
2006. also see “2006 teLeCommUNICatIoNs states’ Collection and Use of funds for Wireless enhanced 911 services,”
GovernmentAccountingOfficer, march 2006. http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d06338.pdf 11 op Cit., “from a Joint aggregation of field Dispatches.” 12 Ibid.13 Ibid.14 “802.11”, Webopedia http://www.webopedia.com/term/8/802_11.html 15 Ibid, “maC layer,” http://www.webopedia.com/term/m/maC_layer.html 16 “Umts forum forecasts sunny skies for 3g Data revenue,” by paul Quigly, may 7, 2001. Wireless Week.
http://www.wirelessweek.com/article/Ca74056.html?spacedesc=News&stt=00117 minimum transfer rates both ways (up and downstream) should be at least 350 kbps to 1 mbps, which is a more practical definition
of wireless broadband from the consumer perspective in current environment. the traditional government definition of 256Kbps is
too slow for most uses. 18 “Nokia HsDpa solution,” Nokia, 2003.
http://hsdpa-coverage.com/hsdpa-video-phones-evdo-evdv-blackberry/5-HsDpa-wcdma-nokia-umts-evdo.pdf 19 Webopedia Web site, “Wireless Networking standards,” 2006. http://www.webopedia.com/quick_ref/WLaNstandards.asp20 paul taylor and al sherwood, “a Discussion session with municipal Leaders,” 2006 National association of Counties (NaCo)
technology summit I, march 3, 2006.22 op. Cit., taylor, “the Internet Nation.” 23 op. Cit., “from a Joint aggregation of field Dispatches.” 24 Ibid.24 Harold feld, gregory rose, mark Cooper, Ben scott, ryan Chesley, “Connecting the public: the truth about municipal
Broadband,” Consumer federation of america, Consumers Union, media access project, free press, april 2005.
http://freepress.net/docs/mb_white_paper.pdf 25 shane peterson, “Boiling point,” GovernmentTechnology,November 4, 2005.
http://www.govtech.net/magazine/story.php?id=97156&issue=11:2005 26 “municipal Wireless: partner to spread risks and Costs While maximizing Benefit opportunities,” Jupiterresearch, Jupitermedia
Corporation.
A Strategy Paper fromThe CeNTeR foR DIGITaL GoVeRNmeNT
��
27 glenn fleishman, “google, earthLink submit Joint san francisco Bid,” Wi-FiNetNews, february 21, 2006. http://wifinetnews.com/
archives/006305.html 28 an angel investor is; “…an individual who provides capital to one or more startup companies. Unlike a partner, the angel investor
is rarely involved in management. angel investors can usually add value through their contacts and expertise.” Definition of Venture
Capital terms from TheVentureCapitalGlossary, funding post, 2006. http://www.fundingpost.com/glossary/venture-glossary.asp29 op. Cit., “from a Joint aggregation of field Dispatches.” 30 Based on regulating filings from at&t, sprint pCs and t-mobile (2004) and compiled by IDg, TheUntetheredWorker, 2006.31 “plans announced for North america’s first Commercial mobile WImaX Deployment,” Science,Technology,PhysicsandSpace
News, april 14, 2006. http://www.physorg.com/news64242975.html 32 “the WimaX forum is an industry-led, non-profit corporation formed to promote and certify compatibility and interoperability of
broadband wireless products.” http://www.wimaxforum.org/home/ 33 steven J. Vaughan-Nichols, “802.11 vs. 3g,” Wi-FiPlanet,January 31, 2003
http://www.wi-fiplanet.com/tutorials/article.php/1577551 34 shane peterson, “the golden egg?” GovernmentTechnology, December 8, 2005.
http://www.govtech.net/magazine/story.php?id=97502&issue=12:2005 35 the 3rd generation partnership project (3gpp) Web site, http://www.3gpp.org/ .
also see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ip_multimedia_subsystem .36 Inmarsat, “BgaN goes global with Launch across the americas,” may 15, 2006.
http://about.inmarsat.com/news/00019704.aspx?language=eN&textonly=false 37 al sherwood, paul W. taylor, ph.D., richard Varn, GettingBackOnlinebyGoingOfftheBeatenPath:APracticalGuidetoProtecting
YourInformationAssetsandTenThingsYouWishedYouKnewBeforetheDisasterStruck, Center for Digital government, 2006. http://
www.centerdigitalgov.com/center/reports.php 38 song Ci, “Link adaptation for Qos provisioning in wireless data networks,” University of Nebraska, Lincoln, 2002. student dissertation.39 Carlo fonda and fulvio postogna, “Hypertextual version of the lectures notes of the ICtp - UrsI – ItU/BDt school on the Use
of radio for Digital Communications In Developing Countries Including spectrum management,” the abdus salam International
Centre for theoretical physics programme of training and system Development on Networking and radiocommunications,
trieste, January 1998. http://www.ictp.trieste.it/~radionet/1998_school/networking_presentation/page6.html http://www.ictp.
trieste.it/~radionet/1998_school/networking_presentation/osI-layers.html#osi1 and http://webopedia.internet.com/quick_ref/
osI_Layers.asp 40 for a more detailed technical treatment on the topic of integrating wireless networks into the Internet, see rob flickenger,
“Building Wireless Community Networks: Implementing the Wireless Web,” oreilly, November 2001.
http://www.oreilly.com/catalog/wirelesscommnet/chapter/ch03.html
© 2006 e.republic, Inc. all rights reserved.100 Blue ravine road
folsom, Ca 95630916.932.1300 phone
916.932.1470 faxwww.centerdigitalgov.com
IBm is a registered trademark of International Business machinesCorporation in the United states, other countries or both.Ieee 802.11and 802.16 are registered trademarks of Ieee
Underwrittenby:
IBm is a recognized leader in the digital government evolution. We deliver value to local governments through services and technologies that meet the demands of results-oriented customers. In addition to managed opera-tions and consulting, our solutions include health and human services, safety and security, parking, revenue and fiscal management, wireless, and community networking.
Acknowledgments:
AlSherwood, senior fellow for the Center for Digital government and former deputy CIo for the state of UtahPaulW.Taylor,Ph.D., Chief strategy officer for the Center for Digital government and the Center for Digital education RichardJ.H.Varn, Ph.D., senior fellow for the Center for Digital government, former CIo for the state of Iowa and former Iowa state senator
AboutCenterforDigitalGovernment:
the Center for Digital government, a division of e.republic, Inc., is a national research and advisory institute on information technology policies and best practices in state and local government. Its advisory services, online resources and special reports provide public and private sector leaders with decision support, knowledge and opportunities to help effectively incorporate new technologies in the 21st century.
the Center’s strategy papers provide two decades of experience and insight into the most critical It topics governments are faced with today. the papers address important policy and management issues and offer strategic approaches for planning and implementing technology, funding sources and case studies from jurisdictions.