
The farmer who built her own broadband - velodrome
http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-37974267
======
jt2190
This video goes into some of the details:

B4RN Launch Event Presentation, 2012 (with CEO Barry Forde)
[https://youtu.be/LmzvzT9Qd58](https://youtu.be/LmzvzT9Qd58)

    
    
      00:27 What is the problem?
      02:35 Does it matter?
      03:46 VIDEO Cabinet Office: Director of Digital Engagement
      05:03 VIDEO Google Fibre Kansas City project
      06:08 Solutions
      07:07 Community Initiative
      08:07 It needn't be complicated
      09:37 Cost (laying and connecting the cable)
      10:46 Community Involvement
      14:25 Skills (laying and connecting the cable)
      15:56 How? (laying and connecting the cable)
      17:36 VIDEO Mole Ploughing (JFDIT)
      18:36 Numbers (parishes, routes, distances)
      20:43 Phase 1 Map
      12:12 Broadband for the Rural North Ltd
      22:31 Building it
      ---- FUNDRAISING
      25:05 Membership (Mutual Society)
      26:34 Funding the build out
      27:35 Type "A" shares
      28:04 Type "B" shares
      28:40 Enterprise Initiative Scheme (EIS)
      30:01 Holding Shares 1
      31:14 Holding Shares 2
      31:48 Holding Shares 3
      32:38 Incentives to Invest
      34:14 CLOSE

------
Adaptive
Worth reading Tim Wu's "The Master Switch". He has a chapter that discusses
the early history of wiring up the United States for telephony and how in the
1890s many of the early telephone lines in rural America were run by farmers
(based on cheap "squirrel line" wire often just nailed to existing fence
lines).

This is followed by the inevitable buy out of these rural telcos and the even
more inevitable shuttering of what (for AT&T) was unprofitable business.

 _Wu, T. (2010). The master switch: the rise and fall of information empires
(pp. 48-49). New York: Alfred A. Knopf._

~~~
drdeadringer
On a related note "Victorian Internet" is also a good read regarding
developing and wiring up for telegraphy.

~~~
agumonkey
It's funny, there's some cycle, a DIY friendly period, heavily regulated, then
back to DIY pressure.

------
gigatexal
If only the telcos here weren't so corrupt we could have more municipal fiber
projects. Yes I'm looking at you Comcast.

~~~
rayiner
There are a few places where state laws are getting in the way of municipal
fiber, but that really isn't the explanation. After all, why isn't fiber
getting built in Palo Alto, San Francisco, San Jose, or Seattle? Is some
Philadelphia company really more politically connected on Google, Microsoft,
etc.'s home turf?

And how do you explain the lack of fiber in Baltimore and Los Angeles? Those
cities have been aggressively trying to get someone to build municipal fiber.
No state laws are standing in the way. Still, nobody will do it.

~~~
1024core
> why isn't fiber getting built in San Francisco,

Because SF is notoriously corrupt. The city government doesn't give a shit
about the citizenry; it's all a question of who can do whom favors and help in
their next election.

// sf resident

~~~
rayiner
It's not far fetched to believe that San Francisco is corrupt. But it's pretty
far fetched to believe that it's corrupt in a way that's contrary to the
financial interests of deep-pocketed local businesses like Google, etc. That'd
be like Houston favoring out of state companies over its local oil and gas
industry. It doesn't make any sense as an explanation for the lack of fiber in
SF and the surrounding suburbs.

~~~
1024core
> financial interests of deep-pocketed local businesses like Google, etc.

I'm sorry, but Google isn't going to slip someone envelopes full of money.
Here's a starter, if you want to read more: [http://www.sfexaminer.com/new-
details-political-corruption-c...](http://www.sfexaminer.com/new-details-
political-corruption-case-reveal-sfs-alleged-pay-play-culture/)

~~~
rayiner
Is anyone who is opposed to municipal fiber going to slip someone envelopes
full of money?

------
sandworm101
These stories from the uk are great, but i envy their soil. Im in BC with
mountains and rock. Running a cable through or over 100m of granite is
horribly difficult, as too is digging a path through rainforest roots. And
dont get me started on distances. The uk seems a sandbox in comparison to
running broadbad in rural bc. I just installed a dish on a property because
the nearest broadband/cell tower was only 800m away... 150m vertical of forest
and rock blocking any good signal. Sats will be around here for a long while.

~~~
scott_karana
Is stringing outdoor-rated fibre from tree to tree or ad-hoc utility poles
viable, or are there issues doing that in crown land?

~~~
sandworm101
Poles ŕequire setbacks, cutting lots of trees. Even then, it isnt easy to
mount a pole on bare rock. That needs an engineered tower bolted in place. Is
it even possible to hang fiber? Ive never seen it done.

~~~
scott_karana
Beats me: I don't know anything about this topic, and was hoping to learn by
asking you :)

~~~
amazon_not
Yes, you can hang fiber, it's called aerial fiber.

------
mrbill
My mother lives out in the boonies of rural Oklahoma, and until about five
years ago, had to make-do with 28.8 (on a good day) dialup.

She now has up-to-3Mbps/1Mbps via a WiMax antenna on the roof, pointed at
another antenna on the water tower of the nearest "town" a few miles away. For
this, she pays $65/month.

It's expensive, but it's her only option. If she lived just a few miles in
another direction, she could get these awesome DSL prices (from her ISP's
website):

"Extreme Package = 5 Meg bps at $84.95 per month

Premium Package = 3 Meg bps at $64.95 per month

Gold Package = 2 Meg bps at $54.95 per month

Silver Package = 1.5 Meg bps at $44.95 per month

Bronze Package = 512 Kbps at $27.95 per month"

~~~
kilroy123
Could she use this?

[http://boingboing.net/2016/09/22/i-have-found-a-secret-
tunne...](http://boingboing.net/2016/09/22/i-have-found-a-secret-
tunnel-t.html)

~~~
kbaker
Probably not, Sprint doesn't have the greatest coverage, especially not in
'the boonies of rural Oklahoma.' That's a pretty neat trick though... (tax
deductible, unlimited wireless hotspot for $500/year!)

------
Friedduck
I've seen firsthand how difficult and time-consuming the buildout is of Google
and AT&T fiber is in Atlanta. Idle fiber runs just 100 yards from my house,
where it's been sitting for months. Just for this single run it's required
dozens of people, traffic permits, closed roads, sidewalk repair, new access
panels embedded in sidewalk, let alone pulling the fiber itself.

At the phone poles there are large devices (repeaters?) and I assume more
equipment at the nearest colo.

This is all on a street that already had a lot of infrastructure and easy
access. I haven't seen a single run through people's backyards in a hilly,
densely populated neighborhood. It's going to be difficult.

I'm in awe of what this woman and others like her have done.

~~~
amazon_not
> At the phone poles there are large devices (repeaters?) and I assume more
> equipment at the nearest colo.

Fiber networks don't use repeaters out in the field. It may have been a
(large) splice enclosure or some non-fiber equipment.

------
g00gler
I love this.

I have to pay Comcast for TV when I just want internet, that'd be bad enough
but my parents pay 2x more for 20x slower connection (5mb/100b).

Kinda inspired me to talk to some of my neighbors and ask if they'd like to
share internet.

~~~
amazon_not
Just make sure you use an Internet connection that allows sharing. Residential
connections can't be shared.

------
tnvaught
So, they had to have access to the backbone somehow. Is this possible for an
individual rural location? Or even a small community in the U.S.? Do backbone
providers have to give you access? Are the rates at all reasonable?

~~~
amazon_not
B4RN connects to the Internet backbones in Manchester, some 70 miles away.
While it is possible in rural locations to do the same, rural locations do not
have many access points, very few providers to select from and no Internet
Exchanges.

Backbone providers don't _have_ to give you access, but they will sell to you,
provided there is a way to connect you.

Backbone providers sell you IP transit, which is a very competitive market in
well connected locations. The problem is to get to those well connected
locations. You often pay far more (like 10x) for the transport to that
location than for the actual IP transit.

------
djhworld
I think there's something really endearing about this, I love the idea of a
group of people coming together to effectively bootstrap their own ISP

------
stuaxo
As she is a service provider, does she have to provide a GCHQ backdoor into
her own internet?

~~~
dboreham
I've run a small ISP for the past 14 years. Men in black suits and mirrored
sunglasses never showed up (actually they did show up, but for an unrelated
issue..)

~~~
tertius
Let me guess, you're not allowed to talk about it?

------
finid
DIY broadband. Can that happen in the US of A?

~~~
toomuchtodo
Totally. My cousin and her husband are moving from the Wesley Chapel area of
Tampa (where they had 100Mb up/down at my uncle's house) about 20 miles north
to 1000 acres of rural farmland, where no connectivity options exist. We're
using two 65 foot self supporting towers and $400 worth of point to point
Ubiquiti wifi gear to bring 100Mb to their property.

The difficulty level goes up if you want to run copper, coax, or fiber, but it
too can be done. Just google "community broadband", "municipal broadband", or
"broadband coop".

~~~
codeddesign
I believe what he meant was that this would be against the TOS of many
providers. You are essentially buying a service plan for one location and
distributing it. While I would agree that "if I am buying 100mbps than I
should be able to use it how I wish" unfortunately just isn't the case and not
how u.s telecom works. With that assumption, a city could technically buy 10
packages and distribute free wifi internet to an entire city on the cheap.

~~~
jcrawfordor
Against the ToS of home providers, sure, but there are tons of companies who
will happily sell you transit for your small ISP - including some of the big
incumbents, e.g., most of the small wireless ISPs in my area use CenturyLink
as their upstream provider. This is a standard service offering in the
commercial space, and if you want enough capacity to get 100+mbps service to
multiple people, then you're going to be shopping in the commercial space.

~~~
toomuchtodo
CenturyLink is good, and believe it or not, I had an excellent experience with
Comcast Business running greenfield fiber for me for backhaul (no one was more
surprised than I!). ~$3000/month with a 3 year commit, 100mb symmetrical, and
they ran the fiber over a mile with no up front cost.

~~~
closeparen
Why does that cost 30x more than a personal 100mbit connection?

~~~
jcrawfordor
The service level assurance is radically different between commercial and
residential service. The main way that this manifests is that your terms of
service on a commercial connection allow you to do all kinds of things you
can't do with residential (or business) service - like resell to other people.

Technically, the main difference is that the 100mbit symmetric line is fully
provisioned, and so you can actually use all 100mbit of it on a continuous
basis. This will quickly get you in trouble with a residential provider.
There's also the issue that this is symmetrical, and the way that ISP networks
are engineered the upstream is usually actually more expensive to provide
(mostly because they use a lot of underlying technologies and equipment that
are designed for asymmetric service), and the issue that this service will
probably come with fixed IPs that will be SWIPd over to the customer, which is
extra administrative overhead, not to mention the IPs themselves getting more
expensive to hold these days. Oh, and contract terms regarding service
interruptions are usually much more generous towards commercial customers.

Once you really get into the big leagues, you usually don't pay on a cap basis
but instead of a 95%ile basis, where you pay a rate based on the 95th
percentile of your bandwidth usage over the previous month. These rates end up
being very high because you are paying for bandwidth that you actually,
seriously used - unlike on a residential connection, where you might pay your
ISP for 150Mbps but they expect your 95%ile usage to be more like a couple of
Mbps tops (you probably aren't even using the connection at all most of the
time).

~~~
amazon_not
> There's also the issue that this is symmetrical, and the way that ISP
> networks are engineered the upstream is usually actually more expensive to
> provide (mostly because they use a lot of underlying technologies and
> equipment that are designed for asymmetric service), and the issue that this
> service will probably come with fixed IPs that will be SWIPd over to the
> customer, which is extra administrative overhead, not to mention the IPs
> themselves getting more expensive to hold these days. Oh, and contract terms
> regarding service interruptions are usually much more generous towards
> commercial customers.

This isn't really accurate. ISP networks aren't engineered to be asymmetrical
and the upstream isn't any more expensive than the downstream. The only
asymmetry you will see is in the access network. Anything past that will be
symmetrical.

If you use fiber (which almost any 100M or faster service will be) you can
have any speed you like up to multiples of 100G symmetrically delivered.

IPs aren't really that expensive either. They are like $1 a pop per month. You
can buy you own for $10-20.

Service interruptions will also just get you some service credits proportional
to the outage.

Mostly commercial service costs more because you can charge more.

> Once you really get into the big leagues, you usually don't pay on a cap
> basis but instead of a 95%ile basis, where you pay a rate based on the 95th
> percentile of your bandwidth usage over the previous month.

You don't really have to be big in any sense to buy bandwidth using 95th
percentile billing. I've had circuits on 95th percentile starting at a 100
Mbps commit. Probably could have gotten it at a lower speed too.

However, nowadays bandwidth is so cheap it might not even be sold to you at
95th percentile. It might just be rounded up to the nearest gig.

> These rates end up being very high because you are paying for bandwidth that
> you actually, seriously used - unlike on a residential connection, where you
> might pay your ISP for 150Mbps but they expect your 95%ile usage to be more
> like a couple of Mbps tops (you probably aren't even using the connection at
> all most of the time).

This is not true (anymore). Bandwidth is dirt cheap. If you have any change in
your pocket you can afford a few megs. Prices are like 20 cents a Mbps per
month.

~~~
toomuchtodo
Your post is correct for bandwidth at a colo or an IXP, not for last mile
service, especially when buildout it required.

~~~
amazon_not
A lot of IP transit bandwidth is bought at a colo or an IXP, regardless of
where the end customer is physically located.

This is because it is usually more expensive to buy bandwidth directly from
the local (monopoly) provider than to buy transport from the same local
(monopoly) provider to a colo or an IXP and buy then buy IP transit bandwidth
at the remote site.

This is regardless of whether you require a buildout to get last mile service
or not. You need not buy bandwidth to get business fiber extended to your
premises. Buying transport to a colo or an IXP will suffice.

------
amelius
> Her motto, which she repeats often in conversation, is JFDI. Three of those
> letters stand for Just Do It. The fourth you can work out for yourself.

That's all nice, but what if local governments and businesses start
counteracting the project with bureaucratic rules, and lawsuits? It seems to
me that the "JFDI" mantra doesn't really work then.

------
ge96
JFDI haha, no excuse

