| |
|
| Minutes 01/12/04 |
| |
|
| |
Minutes of Meeting on 01 Dec 04 at Talbot Court
Farm, Tresham |
| |
|
| 5 |
Matters Arising from Meeting on 16
Nov. |
|
| 5.1 |
Howard Nichols is looking into progress made on
providing the school with broadband. As a governor he is in a good
position to ask questions of the LEA. |
HN |
| 5.2 |
John Huntley and James Vernon still waiting to hear from respective
mobile phone companies with masts on their land as to whether they
have any arrangements with wireless ISPs. |
JH and JV |
| 6 |
Discussions with ISPs |
|
| 6.1 |
RG issued a statement (Appendix A) he had compiled entitled Comparison
of ISPs which reports on the current position. |
|
| 6.2 |
There was discussion about whether satellite companies should be
asked to quote. Members reported mixed results with satellite broadband,
the main problem being latency which can rule out use for VPNs (virtual
private networks, where you use the applications on a remote computer).
They are also unsuitable for gaming which some residential users might
want. |
|
| 6.3 |
On balance the group decided to ask the three wireless ISPs to:
- quote for providing coverage to all users in the Leighterton
exchange area;
- have regard to three levels of user:
- low-level home user requiring a basic service at say 256Kbps,
40:1, for ~£20pm incl vat;
- large household / home-worker / small business requiring say
512Kbps, 20:1, for ~£30pm incl vat; and
- large business requiring 1-2MBps, 10:1, for ~£40/50pm
- be able to provide a service by the end of January;
- set out full costs and location of their equipment;
- specify the technical detail of their solution – see below.
- set out the minimum number of users they would need (grouped
into tariffs) to make the scheme viable;
- specify any additional funding they would need if their projections
mean the project is not viable;
- state how profitable is the company and provide a copy of last
year’s accounts.
Note – technical specification to include:
- Type of backhaul (satellite, copper, fibre?)
- Resilience, e.g. back-up connection to the internet in the event
of failure of the primary connection.
- Maximum number of radio hops from customer to backhaul.
- Specification of technology, e.g. use of mesh radio.
- How customer bandwidth is controlled.
- Details of network security in place.
- An explanation of radio issues – e.g. what are your fade
margins on customer and backbone links (eg. >15dBs and >20dBs
respectively)?
- Confirmation that radio power outputs are legal.
- Any data caps in place.
- Confirmation that the service is symmetric.
- Details of contention rates.
It was agreed a formal specification beyond this is not necessary. |
RG to write to ISPs. |
| 6.4 |
It was agreed that if we decided to proceed with a scheme which
required external funding from RABBIT, then the group would coordinate
grant applications (for the Leighterton exchange area), submit them
to RABBIT, receive the funding into a special bank account set up
for that sole purpose, and distribute the funds to the ISP. |
|
| 6.5 |
The group will discuss the quotes at its next meeting and consider:
• inviting the ISPs to make a presentation;
• sending
the ISPs our survey results so they can finalise their bids;
•
arranging to visit existing user-sites of the ISPs. |
|
| 6.6 |
In the meantime, it was decided that group members would carry out
a door to door survey of all users to establish their requirements,
whether they have any possible business use, how much they are willing
to spend, and whether they would like a public meeting to discuss
the proposals; the survey, including user location details, to be
finished and reported to RG also by 17 December. |
RG to issue questionnaire.
Help carrying out the survey would be much appreciated –
please contact RG.
|
| 7 |
Date of Next Meeting:
17.00, Monday, 20 December at Talbot Court Farm
|
|
|
|