Working Toward Roaming For Wireless ISPs 107
hrhsoleil writes "In the category of: This seems like a no-brainer and why-didn't-someone-do-it-before,
according to SearchMobileComputing, the Internet Protocol Detail Record Organization (IPDR) is pushing a set of specifications that would allow users to roam among different providers' hot spots. IPDR is an industry group that addresses billing issues for wireless carriers -- they've got the Wi-Fi Alliance, Gric Communications, and the Canadian Wireless Telecommunications Association backing them up on this one so it might actually get off the ground. It's about time that wireless ISPs get their act together and make roaming possible. If I can go to almost any bank machine in the world and be able to use it without needing to sign up for a new account, why can't I do the same with hot spots?"
Roaming fees (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Roaming fees (Score:2, Insightful)
There is no reason to think that you aren't right. If it mirrors the the telecommunications industry, in this case cell phones, it will be expensive for many years to come. But, over time those wireless ISPs will merge and then there will be less area that you're actually roaming, since it'll be the same company.
This is definately something I will be watching closely. My house is already wireless enabled, and I am dieing for public wireless to mature another level or two.
Re:Roaming fees (Score:1, Interesting)
Re:Wireless ISP's problem with this (Score:5, Insightful)
In this case the local WISP would surcharge you and your cheap WISP would pass the surcharge right along to you, perhaps with a handling fee to boot.
This not only prevents the scenario you speak about, but also allows the installation costs of a hot spot to be borne more by those who use that hotspot. If it's hard to get wireless into a particular area for whatever reason, trust me, whatever ISP installs a hotspot will cover that cost or they won't let you on.
cleetus
Re:Wireless ISP's problem with this (Score:5, Insightful)
I'm not a cell phone expert, but I'm pretty sure a portion of the roaming charges you pay on your cell phone get passed on to the owner of the network you're roaming on. For instance, if you're a T-Mobile customer in a location with no T-Mobile cell, and you roam through an AT&T cell, part of the extra money T-Mobile charges you gets passed on to AT&T. A lot of big cell providers will negotiate roaming charges between themselves, so they can offer lower rates to their customers, and be more competitive than smaller cell providers.
The same would likely happen here. WISPs like Boingo and such would pass on some of the roaming charges to their competitors to gain access to their networks, allowing the customer to roam in the first place. And most likely, they would negotiate for better prices depending on how large their own network is (the more hotspots they operate, the less they have to pay someone else to use theirs). So while competition would drive prices down (which is a good thing), noone will be getting anything for free. At least not until the WISPs have paid off their investment into their infrastructure.
Re:Wireless ISP's problem with this (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Wireless ISP's problem with this (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Wireless ISP's problem with this (Score:1)
um yeah, what I said.
Comment removed (Score:4, Interesting)
Another stupid article (Score:2)
Because the organization providing support on that machine is allowed to charge a fee to out-of-network users. Is there a mechanism in place to charge you $1 if you roam into another ISP's area? No, there is not.
If this were allowed, you could just have crappy ISPs who dont support their equipment make all the money, while their users roam into
Re:Wireless ISP's problem with this (Score:1)
where did my packet go?! (Score:1)
LA is already doing something like this (Score:3, Informative)
Re:LA is already doing something like this (Score:1)
Universal ID (Score:5, Insightful)
You can use your bank card anywhere, because it's a distributed Universal ID system.
Your account includes a bank identifier, and an account identifier, which uniquely points to your pile of cash.
To allow a similar system w/ Wireless, you'd need some kind of 'accepted' universal ID system.... and we've a disussion of where this goes a few months back (see Liberty Alliance and MS's .net Passport)
Done and done (Score:4, Insightful)
On some devices, this is already done. From the article:
Re:Universal ID (Score:3, Insightful)
In fact, that is exactly what RFC 2486, The Network Access Identifier [rfc-editor.org] does. No need for anything new there.
Re:Universal ID (Score:4, Informative)
What you need is a universally unique ID for the user. There's only one person with your email address. RADIUS realms uses the '@' to separate username from the realm. Since a realm is often the same as a domain anyway (although not always), this gives rise to an interesting idea.
Dialup ISPs have been doing limited roaming internally or among a limited number of ISPs partnered specifically for a larger roaming area for years. It's generally done with RADIUS using realms.
All a RADIUS server needs to do is to refer a request for a user in a realm it doesn't handle to the proper other RADIUS server, then forward back the response. Normally you must configure a RADIUS server with which other server is authoritative for which realm. There's no reason there couldn't be a TXT record in DNS that lists the authoritative RADIUS server for a realm that's the same as a domain name.
The other part is a bit more tricky -- the RADIUS server that is authoritative for the domain generally requires that the requesting device (an access server or another RADIUS server usually, but it could be a Linux box or whatever else that wants to speak RADIUS) be listed in advance, and that it shares a plaintext secret used for shared-key encryption.
Billing for usage-based access is often done straight from RADIUS login, logout, and traffic records anyway, so this part is easy.
What would need to be done is for public-key encryption to be used between devices (at least from oen RADIUS box to another or as an option -- it may be hard to get the firmware on certain access servers to do this) and for the authoritative RADIUS servers for one domain to be allowed to authenticate against another domain. With these fairly simple updates to the venerable protocol, it could allow universal roaming not just among dialups and among wireless ISPs, but even across those two types of entities. Then you still have the problem of getting deadbeat hotspot owners and ISP owners to pay for their roaming customers...
Note that cell companies don't all roam on everyone else's networks. There are a handful of networks, and there's coverage in most places by any particular carrier or at least one of their roaming partners. Some cell companies don't do roaming -- if you're off their network, you're out of luck.
So what's really needed is for ISPs and hotspot providers to sign mutual roaming contracts in the model adopted by the cell phone providers. Then, no changes to RADIUS would even be required.
It's often the fact that when you go to reinvent a wheel, it's simply because you didn't bother to see if that wheel existed already. This wheel's been in use a long time. Don't reinvent it.
ASN.1/LDAP identifier. (Score:3, Interesting)
The way this was supposed to work from the X500 and LDAP people, using ASN.1 syntax, is 'uid=joe,dc=mac,dc=com' would tell you to forward the authentication lookup to "mac.com" as "joe". I could theoretically do this from an AP owned and operated by dc=speakeasy,dc=net. The authentication thingie on the AP would ask its favorite directory for authentication service, and that directory would do referrals.
All you need to know is that you are "joe" at "mac.com" and the password to your Keychain(TM). If you
Who's the MAC? (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Who's the MAC? (Score:2)
But you can spoof the MAC. Not sure the proper way to do it for actual devices, but under VMware there's a setting in the configuration file for the virtual NIC's MAC. So just run your wireless network from a VM and you can get Joe Schmoe to pay your bills.
Not that I'm advocating this, by the way; I'm making light of a an insecure proposal. I hope they don't use the MAC address!
Fees? (Score:5, Insightful)
I just hope that they don't charge me $2.50 everytime I want to use a someone else's hotspot.
Re:Fees? (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Fees? (Score:1)
Re:Fees? (Score:1)
No need for ATM account (Score:3, Funny)
Equality (Score:5, Insightful)
Assume that the average contract is $40 a month. (About what it is now) Assume that a big company has a sizable saturation in an area.
Now, assume that a competitor comes into an area and wants to charge $30 per month. Interoperability means that this new competitor can provide the same service as the bigger company yet charge a lower price.
So, there must be fees that the smaller competitor must pay to the larger company in order for this to work. Do you think the larger company will be cheap? Do you think that they will *really* let the smaller company charge $30 and still make a profit?
Whatever this deal is, it'd better be mighty strong.
-Ben
Re:Equality (Score:2, Insightful)
Same problem exists with internet backbone carriers, yet they've managed to make it work by entering into contractual interconnection arrangements.
Same problem exists with wireline carriers, yet they've managed to make it work through a combination of contractual interconnection arrangements (after being forced to do so by Congress and the FCC).
Re:Equality (Score:2)
Re:Equality (Score:2)
I can use my T-Mobile GPRS on any network with which they have a contract, even though T-Mobile's data plans ($20/mo for unlimited) are far less expensive than competitors' (often $60-$80/mo for comparable data quantities). That's one emperical example of int
The answer is obvious... (Score:2, Insightful)
The rest of the economic calculations is left as an exercise to the reader, but here's a hint:
($30/((60*24)*30))/5 where the number "5" represents a median number of WISPs/Hotspots across which a consumer will roam. The end number is less than 1% of 1 cent per minute. The electricity to store the transactions, the paper to print the bill and the customer service representitive to explain the se
Aggregation (Score:2)
Abuse? (Score:2)
Maybe because bank machines are less easily hacked/abused/cracked than most wireless systems?
We've seen cracked or hijacked cellphones, don't you think that this would be done for WiFi?
Moreover, think of the content: crackers would likely be using these hotspots for pr0n, warez, spam, etc. Actually, some already are, but it could get worse unl
Watch out for those patents (Score:5, Interesting)
see:
6,633,761
6,665,537
Probably more but I'm too lazy to look.
Re:Watch out for those patents (Score:2)
Is it just me, or are "666"s showing up a lot more in the past few years?
(Oh, there's my medication!)
Screw roaming... (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Screw roaming... (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Screw roaming... (Score:3, Informative)
WiFi roaming is reality already (Score:5, Interesting)
This WiFi roaming has recently been extended and now institutions in Portugal and Croatia are joining as wel.
Technically this isn't straightforward. (Score:1)
Free is the way to go here. (Score:5, Interesting)
As the founder of a free community hotspot [brooklynmuseum.org], I wanna say, if giant corporations are willing to provide web services for free, because it's the only way to get people to come, why wouldn't we want to provide wireless access to those web services for free?
Basically, I don't see that the pay-to-play model of the wired ISP is the necessary model for wireless ISPs. In fact I think it's a doomed model. People are going to gravitate to the free hookups. It's not just cheaper, it's easier, and easier always wins.
It's not time to figure out how to get roaming on paid wireless ISPs. It's time to figure out how to stop charging for it.
Re:Free is the way to go here. (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Free is the way to go here. (Score:2)
Re:Free is the way to go here. (Score:2)
While I agree that free wifi hotspots are incredible (and applaud my local coffee shop, my local Mellow Mushroom [mellowmushroom.com], and Atlanta Freenet [atlantafreenet.com] for providing free hotspots close to me) and users will gravitate towards those for preferred access, I can definitely see where fee-based hotspots can work as well. What the fee providers need to unde
Yo, Brooklyn (Score:2)
Re:Free is the way to go here. (Score:2)
Apples and Oranges? (Score:4, Insightful)
The groups behind it have no hotspots, however (Score:5, Informative)
More likely, the GSM Association's roaming standards group that drafted a long document (referenced here in June 2003) [wifinetnews.com] on handling WISP roaming for hotspots (with members on the committee from some of the world's largest cell operators) will become the backend.
Or, iPass, GRIC's rival, which will gross about $200 million in 2003 after a very successful public offering this year, will make its clearinghouse standard, which requires standardized authentication, the de facto method of fee settlement and roaming across networks. iPass has 10,000 hotspots under contract now, including T-Mobile, Wayport, and other major networks worldwide.
roaming charges (Score:1)
Can I set up my own? (Score:3, Insightful)
On the flip side, what if there are two different hot spots covering the same area, but which have different surcharges? Does this roaming system include a way of determining such things? What about a way of selecting the cheaper connection, or forcing a more expensive but better connection, or automatically rejecting connections to hot spots with surcharges that are too high?
Re:Can I set up my own? (Score:1)
[I have no affiliation with this company [sonic.net] but it has a good reputation among local users.]
looks like (Score:3, Insightful)
It would be in the best interests of the hotspots to make them accessible to as many providors as possible, including independents.
The problems would be:
-- The hotspots would get money from providors, and no longer have much of an incentive to provide service for free to individuals not affiliated.
-- Both the provider and maintainer of the hotspot would want to keep records of who's using the hotspot.... for billing.
-- Stupid marketing people will think the business model works best as a per-minute or per-megabyte fee, and will fail conssitently until someone wises up and makes things consistently all-you-can-eat
--It wont be free
The benifits would be
-- Your wifi connection would work, more often than not, as seemless hand-off technology would be in the best interest of everyone involved
-- connections would develop a consistency as a multitude of providers do their damdest to make sure they can connect to as many hotspots as possible, and hotspots doing their best to connect to as many providers as they can.
-- Connecting gets easier for the user as everyone wants you using it as much as posible.
--Lots of people make money.
Similar idea... (Score:2)
Why couldn't a handful of ISPs get together for this concept
Banks had a head start (Score:3, Interesting)
The banks had something of a head start in doing this, since they already had inter-bank facilities in place (for things like wire transfers and check clearing).
Also, when ATMs first became popular, the banks were very hesitant to allow the use of machines belonging to other institutions. At least in the US, it was the success of the NYCE network in and around New York City that really broke the ice.
Another interesting historical tidbit: when the banks first started to introduce ATMs, some of them went to a couple of big supermarket chains, and offered to put in the machines for a fee paid by the supermarket. The supermarkets said, "Guess again. We'll put in our machines, and charge you a fee when your customers use them." (At that time the largest holders of currency in the US were not banks, but supermarkets. I don't know if that's still true.)
Understand the truth abou IPDR. (Score:1)
IPDR really is- it is a means of altering
the internet protocol to enable per service
and per packet charging beyond anyone's current
imaginations.
I'm sure you can figure out the implications-
no more flat monthly rates
nickling and diming to death for everything
Need I say more?
Client power (Score:3, Insightful)
Where is the platform for this transaction agent for my "phone"? Let's get cracking in the apps, before the WISPs have completely 0wn3d the space, and we're at their mercy.
Already being done? (Score:1)
Cafe Roaming (Score:2, Informative)
Meanwhile, no one seems to be using the T-Mobile/Starbuck's WiFi service. I tried it. Beyond the expense, I was irritat
Re:Cafe Roaming (Score:2)
too late? (Score:2, Interesting)
I can't see myself paying $30 a month for cafe and hotel coverage in two years even if the roaming is seamless. EDGE is available nation-wide now (at ~168kbps its perfectly fine for email), EV-DO and EV-DV will up the speeds further, and then there's WiMax coming along with city-wide range for broadband. My hope is in a few years I'll just pay my garbage/sewer/WiMax utility and the roaming agreements will be between cities. The
Re:too late? (Score:1)
I personally agree with your vision of wifi/communications as a city utlity, but unfortunately such a concept faces a firestorm of FUD from corporations (Baby B
A little more than this may be needed. (Score:4, Informative)
To solve all this stuff you need things to be addressed at multiple layers.
That's why the IEEE has started 802.21 [ieee802.org].
Should include price negotiation protocol (Score:4, Interesting)
Such systems should include the possibility of negotiating rates on the fly. The mobile device should be programmed with upper prices for particular levels of service. Then, for each unit of service purchased a negotiation takes place. If the ISP is not busy the price is low. If the ISP is close to saturation the price is high. If there are multiple ISPs to choose from market competition occurs as everyone negotiates to determine the price. This would result in a balance between coverage and what people are willing to pay.
Re:Should include price negotiation protocol (Score:2)
use a hardware bw limiter, so the wifi half of your network doesn't kill off the bandwidth you need for playing Doom 3 or something. Shoot, get a nice linux firewall, setup squid for some nice caching, filter or don't filter, bw limit... would
FastPass Atlanta (Score:2, Interesting)
long long ago (Score:2, Insightful)
When ATM's were first started up you could only use the one's from your bank with your card. After a few false starts things got a lot better.
You can't always expect a "new" technology to have all of the answers the moment it starts up.
Many of the wireless access providers complain about not making money. They don't understand I don't want
Roaming for Cheap (Score:2)
2) Establish ssh PPP tunnel (or IPSEC) to your home system.
3) Route all traffic through your home system.
It kinda requires a high speed link at home though.
Re: (Score:2)
SMTP while roaming? (Score:2, Insightful)
Will this perhaps cause a rise in authenticated SMTP (allowing people to send mail regardless of from where they're connected, while still addressing ISPs spam-control concerns)?
Do people have better solutions to SMTP while r
Roaming (Score:1)
ITS ALIVE (Score:1)
Unencrypted wireless node detection script (Score:3, Interesting)
Slashdot does not let me post the code (BELIEVE ME I tried).
Email me if you with to play with it.
zavpublic at mac.com
Re:Unencrypted wireless node detection script (Score:1)
iwlist ethX scan
where ethX is the wireless interface.
Ofcourse, you need to apt-get install wireless-tools
Roaming w/in a single ISP...extrapolate it out (Score:1, Interesting)
Mobile IP is the answer (Score:1)
The Real Links (Score:1)
Seesh... Perhaphs we could go link to the source; first hand information is almost always more reliable
Insane (Score:1)
It's bad enough that any child molesting pervert can enjoy near-total anonymity thanks to war-driving or simply visiting a McCafe sponsorted hot-spot... Now spammers and other Internet scumbags will enjoy total freedom of momement as they slowly pillage what usefulness there is left in the Internet...
Damn it.