Wireless ISP’s under fire

[ColinR]

Shame man iBurst, you poor little operator.
The more I hear from this company - the more I start liking eek Telkom

 

[rendan]

"Free for all" is a short sighted agument. Many WISPS break the law by using ampliferers and they basically saturate the wifi space with their money-grabbing attitudes. Wifi is FOR the people, NOT for buisness,

Well said.. the bastards can go &^%* themselves.
If the idiots cant do anything to make things better in this country, atleast leave the people to do something...This doesnt affect them. Just because this affects Ibursts future profits they are complaining. They act the same way as telkom, i c no difference.

 

[jb007za]

I am appalled by this… can Icasa sink any lower? They can’t even enforce their own ADSL regulations three months after issuing them. Now they want to stifle what little innovation there is in the ISP market. In my mind, this makes them little worse than criminals in terms of tearing this country apart. And they wonder why they are hated!

 

[moosag]

The whole world including Somalia are heading forward into the future....

We here in SA are heading back to the dark ages... Tsk. Tsk. Tsk..

This is sooo Sad.

 

[eugenevdm]

Here are some questions regarding this matter:

* How did iBurst obtain a wireless license and why have they been the only company (apart from state-owned Sentech) in the last three years who have been able to legitimally provide wireless?

* What is the current license that iBurst holds under the ECT act called and are other companies able to obtain such a license in order to provive competive licenses?

* Who owns iBurst? (Vodacom's CEO's son)

* Who owns 50% of Vodacom? (Telkom)

* Can everyone in South Africa apply on an equal basis for a frequency license and who actually gets it?

* How long does it take to issue a frequency license and how long have these licenses been available?

* How does this event help in establishing competition in South Africa?

* What is the response from ICASA if you call them today and ask for a frequency license? What is the response from ICASA if you called them three years ago and asked them for a frequency license?

* How many countries in Africa have banned ISM over public boundaries? (Two, SA and Ethopia)

* How many other countries apart from Africa bans the use of the ISM band?

* Does the government realise that technology is evolving at a very rapid pace and by hindering laws such as this South Africa is loosing out on the technology race?

* Why are entrepeneurs punished by competitors and / or ICASA for providing access to information and how does this help South Africa's reputation?

 

[drowssap]

i guess they r just sour 'cause they no longer have the lotto loot ... so need 2 find other avenues for loot, namely wisp's

 

[Tommygun]

Iburst basicly saying if you are not using them as a wireless provider you are likely to get no service in the future....Ill believe it when it happens if ICASA are going to be responsible.
ICASA then must clamp down and stop all the illegal wireless conectivity happening in all our cities. A walk through Cape Town and you will see transcievers on nearly every rooftop. Stop them all and contribute to job and company losses and make us even more uncompetative than we already are. All very sad.

 

[Plaasjapie]

Name and Shame IBurst

This is a sad day for SA that the reputation of a company like Iburts which took so long to build , can so quickly get destroyed by commercial greed and be named in the same breath as swearword, "Telkom". I wonder who the responsible person are at Iburst that "decided" something should be done against these "illegal" WISP's to try and get some more profit for themselves. The WISP's are not even allowed to compete fairly with the likes of Iburst.

I would like to appeal to MyAdsl to name and shame Iburst for this action of theirs in the interest of consumers deprieved of alternative services, or just in the interst of freedom of choice in general. I would also like to see mr, Antony McKechnie, iBurst’s Head of Product Development, to come to my rural town and explain to them why he wants to deny them a proper internet connection and force them to spend an hour on a dial-up to do one internet banking transaction! He must come and tell them why he wants to drive his CEO's BMW in the city and have broadband access while they must watch their businesses stagnate because they are not able to access the online world and have proper e-mail services. He must come and tell them if he will come and put up a Iburst AP on top of a snow and ice covered mountain to give only 5 people a broadband connection so that they can also enjoy the merits of 24/7 access. WISP's are not criminals. Many of them are providing a service for which hundreds of customers are very grateful and which no other provider is willing or able to provide.

Shame on you Iburst !

 

[sabagamma]

IBurst, please fix your congested towers, your weak signals, your "dead" IP address problems, your incompetent accounts department and your overpriced packages before you start complaining about the competition.

"many of us may face information black-outs because some wireless Internet Service Providers (ISPs) are providing illegal Internet access to consumers"

I can explain the quote above, it seems that the entire IBurst management team uses Wisp for their internet access. Apparently they have a problem with the reliability and performance of the IBurst product

 

[ambo]

ICASA has issued a warning, saying that “The Authority wishes to point out that this technology [WiFi] can only be used without the required telecommunications licenses if specific conditions are adhered to

Ummm - what might those be???

 

[ColinR]

Ummm - what might those be???

well I'm not holding my breathe for the answer to THAT.

 

[floppy_za]

Ummm - what might those be???

Does anybody know what these "specific conditions are adhered to" are?

Where do they draw the line regarding WIFI hotspot and a businesses wireless network?

Does anybody know the procedure to obtain a license from ICASA to become a WISP? Can't imagine it is cheap?

 

[ColinR]

Does anybody know the procedure to obtain a license from ICASA to become a WISP? Can't imagine it is cheap?

ICASA doesn't know - even if they did they couldn't (wouldn't) enforce it.

 

[floppy_za]

ICASA doesn't know - even if they did they couldn't (wouldn't) enforce it.

Who is responsible for the license?
The business providing the hotspot?
or the company that installed/manages it for them?

As a business that provides hotspots (WISP) , is this something I should be worried about?

 

[ambo]

Who is responsible for the license?
The business providing the hotspot?
or the company that installed/manages it for them?

Wifi Hotspots are not subject to this licencing - as long as they do not cross a boundary or public road. Now there is always the debate of "how do you stop the radio signal crossing the road" but practically speaking I don't think anyone really cares if you share your Internet with 1 or 2 neighbours. There are bigger fish to fry :-

The complaints that iBurst has made relate specifically to WISP's that are putting up a tower using wifi technology that then will provide an entire neighbourhood with wireless internet access. The use of the wifi technology for commercial purposes is something that is regulated when it crosses boundaries.

The current grey area is what about if it is for non-commercial purposes - eg community mesh networks. There is an allowance in the act for these networks to exist - as I understand it - in a similar way that HAM networks have existed for many years. But last I heard - ICASA had a time-line in the order of years for when they planned to flesh out this portion of the act.

 

[dominic]

Does anybody know what these "specific conditions are adhered to" are?

Where do they draw the line regarding WIFI hotspot and a businesses wireless network?

Does anybody know the procedure to obtain a license from ICASA to become a WISP? Can't imagine it is cheap?

Telecommunications Act: Regulations: Use or possession of certain radio apparatus without radio frequency spectrum licence, certificate, authority or permit (Gazette 26193, Notice 533), 24 March 2004

http://www.info.gov.za/gazette/notices/2004/26193.pdf

applicable to ism band usage (2.4.....not other ISM bands)

- there is no such thing as a specific wisp licence
- it remains next to impossible for VANS operators to get access to spectrum
- iburst (previously WBS) have a deemed licence going back a long way which establishes them as a national operator - nobody else has the same licence...this may or may not change in the license conversion process (iBurst will get an individual electronic communications network service licence and an individual electronic communications service licence + they will hold ontotheir frequency allocation)

 

[floppy_za]

Ok

So basically if I am providing a simple hotspot to a coffee shop or whatever then there is no real problem. Obviously there is no control over the range of the wireless network but if you are managing access from the shop itself then there is to a degree some limitation on "public" access?

The problem comes in if you are now trying to supply a commercial merto-wifi solution. Where you are providing wifi access to large area - crossing public roads etc.

 

[Roman4604]

While I'm sure the motivation for iBurst's statement is self-serving, I do agree with the basics of their point. The intent or 'spirit' of the un-licensed 2.4 spectrum is for private short-range usage.

If we get to a free-for-all situation were a proliferation of mini-WISP saturate all avaliable channel in an area so that private usage (business or residential) is not possible without interference (e.g. signal loss, perf degredation), then I think its clearly wrong.

If a bunch of WISP had to pollute all avaliable channels over the 'air space' of my property I would use any means at my disposal to take them out incl. using ICASA, Telkom, SAP etc.

 

[dominic]

While I'm sure the motivation for iBurst's statement is self-serving, I do agree with the basics of their point. The intent or 'spirit' of the un-licensed 2.4 spectrum is for private short-range usage.

please point me towards a basis for this statement in the context of modern telecommunications.

If we get to a free-for-all situation were a proliferation of mini-WISP saturate all avaliable channel in an area so that private usage (business or residential) is not possible without interference (e.g. signal loss, perf degredation), then I think its clearly wrong.

agreed without reservation - as stated above there are moves in their final stages to address this...there is clearly a need for some regulation and co-operation

If a bunch of WISP had to pollute all avaliable channels over the 'air space' of my property I would use any means at my disposal to take them out incl. using ICASA, Telkom, SAP etc.

cool - in the specific context of the article i would like details of cases of wisps interfering with iBurst

 

[Debbie]

Antony McKechnie, iBurst’s Head of Product Development, warns that many consumers who didn’t carefully “choose wireless ISPs with solid regulatory track records now face disconnection as ICASA cracks down on illegal operators.”

This is the equivilent of any one of us warning any teleco that ICASA is coming after them for breaking the law.

The difference, of course, is that ICASA won't listen to us, but they might listen to them.

"Consumer protection": not a buzzword at ICASA.