Memorandum submitted by Blewbury Broadband
Campaign Group (S33)
BRINGING BROADBAND TO BLEWBURY
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This document is submitted by the Blewbury Broadband
Campaign Group (BBCG) in response to the Environment, Food and
Rural Affairs Committee's invitation for written evidence regarding
the provision of broadband in rural areas. Of the five areas of
particular interest described in the Committee's Press Notice
of 30 January 2003, this evidence focuses on the following three:
— what demand there is for broadband
in rural communities;
— what obstacles there are to the provision
of broadband in rural areas; and
— what alternatives to broadband exist
or are being developed that might be of particular relevance to
rural areas.
In each case, the evidence presented reflects
direct, "hands-on" experience gained from our eight-month
campaign to bring broadband to the South Oxfordshire villages
of Blewbury, Upton, Aston Upthorpe and Aston Tirrold—a campaign
that at last appears to be on the point of bearing fruit.
Section 1 of the document seeks to clarify the
definition of "broadband"—in particular by distinguishing
it from so-called DSL. This is important, especially in regard
to the third point above concerning "alternatives" to
broadband. In our view, there are no alternatives to broadband
as such—only to particular broadband technologies.
Section 2 sets out the background and experience
of BBCG, and describes the challenges we have faced in achieving
affordable broadband internet access for the highest possible
number of users in this and surrounding rural communities.
Section 3 deals with our enquiries into available
broadband technologies and sets out our reasons for adopting a
Broadband Wireless Access (BWA) solution. It looks at some of
the opportunities and challenges of the BWA approach, and offers
an end-user perspective on how wireless could meet long term rural
broadband needs.
Section 4 briefly summarises the technical and
financial models on which our wireless network is most likely
to be built. It also gives an initial indication of the timescales
for service roll-out.
The Conclusion summarises our total experience
so far in bringing broadband to these rural communities, and of
the views we have formed in the process. In essence, we believe
that the countryside's long term internet access needs will never
adequately be met as long as businesses, government agencies and
other key players cling to strategies involving "old model"
technologies and architectures that are manifestly unsuited to
the job. Instead—like developing nations with little or
no embedded network infrastructure—the UK needs to re-focus
its efforts on delivering a new kind of solution, through a new
kind of marketplace, that can better meet the unique challenges
and opportunities that our rural communities collectively represent.
NB Some of the following text has been—and
will continue to be—used to support applications for grant
aid from Regional Development Agencies, the Countryside Agency
and other funding bodies, to help minimise per-user start-up costs
and maximise take-up across the broadest possible spectrum of
the community. A version of the document highlighting this text
can be made available if required.
SECTION 1
1.1 What do we mean by broadband?
The reference in the Committee's Press Notice
to possible "alternatives to broadband" for rural areas
raises an important question of definition that needs to be resolved
at the outset. In the context of data communications, "broadband"
simply means "high speed", the only alternatives to
which are "low speed" and "no speed". Since
neither of these options can meet future user needs, the starting
point of this discussion must be that there is no alternative
to broadband in rural areas.
1.2 What are the options?
The question of "alternatives" can
only properly be raised in the context of individual broadband
technologies such as Broadband Wireless Access (BWA), broadband
satellite, optical transmission, leased lines and the various
kinds of Digital Subscriber Line (xDSL). The problem here is that
the most widely publicised broadband technology to date has been
the Asymmetric Digital Subscriber Line (ADSL) variety—which
has led many to believe that ADSL is somehow the "real thing"
and that other approaches are second best. But this is not the
case: ADSL is just one broadband technology that happens to make
good use of the existing copper cabling in BT's local loop. It
is not inherently a superior option (it is only effective over
relatively short distances); nor a long term option (it will always
be limited by the physical properties of copper and won't run
over fibre); nor even a "default" option (anyone served
by cable has a readily available alternative). It is simply BT's
option—and in our view, it is not one that is ever likely
to deliver a cost-effective, long term solution for the vast majority
of rural communities.
1.3 Real alternatives
At the outset of this discussion, we would therefore
urge the Committee to abandon any idea that ADSL is the "norm"
to which all rural internet users should aspire, and that other
technologies are an "alternative" to that norm. Instead,
we hope that the vital issue of rural broadband provision will
be approached with a completely open mind, focusing solely on
identifying the best possible solutions for rural internet users
in the shortest possible time. As this paper will show, we believe
we have found the solution that's right for us, and with any luck
our experience might help others find an answer more quickly and
more easily in the future.
SECTION 2
2.1 What is the Blewbury Broadband Campaign
Group?
BBCG is an informal group of residents and business
people from the South Oxfordshire villages of Blewbury, Upton,
Aston Upthorpe and Aston Tirrold.
Since July 2002, we have been trying to get
broadband internet access to the users of the Blewbury exchange
(those whose phone numbers begin 01235 85). Having exhausted all
the "conventional" approaches, we are now on the brink
of commissioning a community Broadband Wireless Access solution.
2.2 Why do we need broadband?
There are probably as many reasons for wanting
broadband internet access as there are individual users, but they
can be summarised as follows.
2.2.1 Essential requirements
For more and more business users, current internet
connections—including Home Highway and similar ISDN-based
solutions—are not just inadequate but actually counter-productive.
File transfer times, for example, now regularly exceed two hours
(the point at which many ISP connections automatically time out),
and it is next to impossible to run any kind of internet server
from premises in the area. Services such as high speed Virtual
Private Networks (required by most corporate homeworkers and at
least two Blewbury businesses) are difficult or impossible to
implement cost-effectively—and already, we have evidence
that the lack of broadband internet provision is adversely affecting
the rentability of local office space. In short, participating
in the information economy is becoming harder and harder in these
villages at precisely the time when it should be getting easier
and easier.
2.2.2 Desirable requirements
Thanks to BT's ongoing advertising campaign,
many more people are becoming aware of the generic benefits of
broadband, and are wondering why they can't enjoy the same facilities
as friends and relations who live a few miles away in Didcot,
Wantage, Wallingford or Goring. As well as freeing dozens of phone
lines from the grip of surfing teenagers, high speed access will
put local people on an equal footing with urban internet users
in their ability to enjoy web-based entertainment, retailing and
information services.
2.3 Who are our potential broadband users?
Our four villages have a combined population
of around 2,500, with around 1,600 living in Blewbury itself.
A 1997 survey based on 1,100 completed questionnaires revealed
that in Blewbury:
— 51% of the population were in work—38%
employees, 13% self-employed
— 12% were in full time education
— 8% were un-waged housewives/househusbands
— less than 1% were sick or disabled.
2.3.1 Of those working or studying, 34%
worked within the village, 23% within five miles, 6% in London
and 37% elsewhere. In the six years since the survey was conducted,
the rise of homeworking means that the relatively high proportion
of people working in the village will probably have risen still
further.
2.3.2 Thanks in part to the proximity of
major universities and research centres (Oxford, Reading, AEA
Harwell, the Rutherford Laboratories, the JET project at Culham
etc), and in part to the high number of small businesses, self-employed
and/or homeworkers in the area, Blewbury and the surrounding villages
contain an unusually high number of computer and internet users.
According to BT data, around 730 of the 1,400 local exchange lines
are registered internet users, of which 150 are classified as
"high internet users".
2.3.3 Potential broadband users represent
an enormous variety of business sectors, from software development
and graphic design to marketing services and landscape architecture.
Our experience certainly supports the findings of the Countryside
Agency, whose recent survey revealed that:
— of the 5.22 million employees and
self-employed in rural workplaces, more than 80% work in sectors
other than agriculture and tourism;
— 36% of all VAT-registered businesses
in England are in rural areas; and
— rural areas have more businesses
per head of population than cities.
2.4 What kind of solution are we looking for?
We are looking for the best possible broadband
service for the greatest possible number of users, with minimal
disruption or adverse visual impact on the local environment.
Since the whole reason for our existence is to overcome the "digital
divide" that currently discriminates against rural internet
users, we are determined to adopt a solution that minimises that
divide within the community we represent.
2.5 What levels of support do we have?
— A petition sent to BT Wholesale in
July 2002 carried 150 signatures.
— We have 150 pre-registrations on
the BT Broadband scheme.
— We have over 80 names on an email
distribution list for regular updates.
— We have the active cooperation of
the editors of four local newsletters and the Blewbury website
(www.blewbury.co.uk)
— The Parish Councils of Blewbury,
Aston Tirrold and Aston Upthorpe have expressed their support,
and we expect Upton PC to do the same shortly.
SECTION 3
3.1 Which broadband options have we considered?
To the best of our knowledge, we have tried
all the "conventional" broadband internet access solutions
and found them wanting.
3.1.1 BT
We started by asking BT for their regular ADSL
service—firstly by petition and subsequently via their national
broadband pre-registration scheme. In November 2002 they advised
us that they would require a "trigger level" of 700
users, ie 50% of all subscribers on the Blewbury exchange. Even
though the maximum trigger level was reduced nationally to 550
in January this year, this is still clearly a ridiculous number;
consequently BT has never set a formal trigger level for our exchange,
and clearly has no intention of providing an ADSL service in the
foreseeable future.
3.1.1a In BT's defence, they are clearly
constrained by a combination of technical, regulatory and financial
burdens which do not apply to other suppliers. Technically, we
understand that the ageing ATM (Asynchronous Transfer Mode) technology
that lies at the heart of BT's core network makes it extremely
expensive to provide "backhaul" links to remote exchanges
such as ours. In regulatory terms, they also have less flexibility
to strike special deals for special circumstances—so no
matter how much they spend on upgrading an individual exchange
to ADSL, their potential return on investment is limited by their
published tariffs and contract periods. Finally, BT is a huge
public company with enormous overheads and millions of shareholders—and
although they do not publish their profit targets for the exchanges
they upgrade, we can be sure that these need to be higher than
they would for smaller organisations. (Anecdotal evidence from
Easynet, one of the LLU suppliers mentioned below, suggests that
BT typically expects revenues of at least £250,000 from an
ADSL-enabled exchange over a two-year period, as compared with
Easynet's target of £100,000. How true that is, we can't
say.)
3.1.2 Local Loop Unbundling
We have approached a number of other ADSL suppliers
(Easynet, Colt, Bulldog) with a view to obtaining a Local Loop
Unbundling (LLU) solution. The most promising of these was ISP/network
provider Easynet and one of their resellers, PopTel, involving
a low-contention service via the BT local loop and a leased line
to the Easynet carrier network in Newbury. However, this eventually
foundered on the economics involved in BT converting and testing
large numbers of residential exchange lines. (According to Easynet,
BT charges £288 per line for this service—and while
that cost can be absorbed if only 25-50 premium-priced business
lines are involved, it becomes prohibitively expensive when applied
to 100-150 standard residential lines.)
3.1.3 Cable
As is the case with most rural communities,
cable is not an option in Blewbury or its neighbouring villages.
3.1.4 Oxfordshire Community Network
As part of the Oxfordshire County Council's
scheme to bring high speed internet access to the county's schools
and libraries, Blewbury Primary School is due to receive a two
Mbit/s uncontended link into the Oxfordshire Community Network
(OCN) by the end of this academic year. Although the OCC has said
it will not be offering capacity on this link to non-school traffic
in the foreseeable future, we have asked BT (who will be providing
the connection) to consider "piggy-backing" a second
link for use by the local community. So far we have had no useful
reply to this suggestion.
3.1.5 Satellite
We have looked closely at the various satellite
options currently on the market but have rejected them for a combination
of economic and technical reasons. Many satellite systems also
raise significant planning issues, especially in the case of conservation
areas and listed properties. As a class, satellite solutions are
considerably more expensive than terrestrial alternatives, and
in most cases do not deliver adequate performance for anything
other than file downloads and general "surfing". In
the case of the cheaper one-way solutions, upload speeds are limited
to current dial-up levels; and even with a fully synchronous service,
the inherently high latency (time delay) within satellite transmissions
would render applications such as Telnet (for business users)
and gaming (for residential users) virtually useless. For the
same reasons, satellite connectivity will also never be adequate
for emerging applications such as videoconferencing and IP telephony.
While satellite may be appropriate for some individual internet
users in very remote locations, we feel it has no real future
as a community access solution.
3.2 The wireless approach
Broadband Wireless Access (BWA) is a relatively
new approach to high-speed internet provision but it is without
doubt one of the fastest-growing. Technically, it offers multi-megabit
data transmission speeds, minimal installation times and high
levels of flexibility, scalability and future-proofing. Economically,
it completely by-passes the costs of exchange conversion and the
traditional copper loop, while its Customer Premises Equipment
(CPE) costs are broadly comparable with ADSL.
3.2.1 Licensed or unlicensed?
BWA solutions come in two main varieties—licensed
(using radio spectrum in, for example, the 3.6GHz to 4.2GHz band)
and unlicensed (using spectrum in the 2.4 GHz frequency band and,
in the near future, the 5.7 GHz band). Liberty Broadband is an
example of a licensed BWA provider, while Invisible Networks (our
preferred supplier) is an example of an unlicensed operator.
3.2.1a Importantly, the availability of
unlicensed spectrum also makes it financially possible for campaign
groups such as our own to set up and run a local service off their
own bat. We have chosen not to take this path if we can avoid
it, since it would involve us in long-term management responsibilities
that we would rather not take on. But we know of a number of community
groups who are either taking, or considering taking, this route,
and we believe that this entrepreneurial spirit will play a crucial
part in encouraging the future roll-out of rural broadband.
3.2.2 Community benefits of a wireless solution
In our case, choosing a Broadband Wireless Access
solution will have the welcome effect of broadening the potential
user base beyond the four core villages mentioned above to include
other communities such as East and West Hagbourne, and possibly
South Moreton to the north-east and Chilton to the south-west.
While these communities are geographically too distant from their
respective BT exchanges to receive a standard ADSL service, it
would be a relatively simple matter to extend a wireless network
to include them.
3.2.2a Unlike ADSL, BWA will also bring
the enormous additional benefit of very high speed Local Area
Network (up to five Mbit/s in our case). With a community server
installed at the primary access point, this could enable a range
of entirely new local services such as live webcasts of village
events, remote monitoring of vulnerable elderly residents, a "virtual
gallery" for local artists, remote data backup, house-to-house
gaming and videoconferencing.
3.2.3 Potential drawbacks
On the down side, BWA is on the whole more difficult
to set up and run. Technically speaking, radio access nodes have
to be sited and installed; management systems have to be implemented,
often at the local level; Customer Premises Equipment (CPE) is
usually dependent to some degree on line-of-sight links, with
performance potentially subject to weather conditions and certain
kinds of electromagnetic interference; and a backhaul connection
has to be established between the central base station and the
nearest Point of Presence on an ISP's carrier network. There are
also a number of security-related concerns, especially for users
who use wireless links to access corporate networks. And, depending
on the solution chosen, it can be difficult to provide users with
accurate information on the service levels they are receiving.
3.2.3a BWA also presents a number of non-technical
issues, mostly to do with the visual impact of the outdoor equipment,
but also relating to health and safety perceptions surrounding
electromagnetic radiation. Even though the size and power levels
of the base station equipment are negligible when compared with
those of a typical cellular telephony mast (or a typical cellular
handset, for that matter) these issues need to be dealt with properly
if a BWA solution is to gain the community support it needs.
3.3 Three business models
Broadly speaking, community BWA can be implemented
in three ways:
3.3.1a—as a totally outsourced solution,
using licensed or unlicensed frequency bands, where a supplier
installs all the necessary network infrastructure and CPE, and
then simply bills each user in the same way as any other ISP.
In terms of risk, convenience and ongoing service management,
this is our preferred route, provided that the service quality
is up to scratch.
3.3.1b—as a franchised self-managed solution,
probably in an unlicensed frequency band, where the supplier provides
the physical infrastructure and a "blueprint" for technical
and financial management, and then leaves the community to run
the service for individual users on a day-to-day basis. Although
this might give greater scope for offering not-for-profit pricing
levels, it would also expose us to higher risks and involve significant
ongoing technical and contractual responsibilities.
3.3.1c—as a totally self-managed solution,
almost certainly in an unlicensed frequency band, whereby the
community creates a workable business plan, commissions the best
available suppliers to provide the key networking and CPE components,
and then runs the service. This approach is enjoying some success
in projects such as Edenfaster in Yorkshire, and in the Scottish
Highlands and Islands. While clearly the most labour-intensive
from the community operator's point of view, it also theoretically
offers the best chance of building a completely customised solution.
3.4 Our supplier shortlist
After extensive investigations—including
consultation with a similar campaign group in a community on the
other side of the Thames Valley—we narrowed our BWA supplier
search to two possible unlicensed options. (We rejected a licensed
solution largely on grounds of end-user cost, but also because
we felt the unlicensed alternatives operated on a more appropriate
scale and would work more closely with us to meet our particular
local needs.) Our two shortlisted options were:
3.4.1 Invisible Networks
Cambridgeshire-based Invisible Networks (IN)
are currently rolling out turnkey wireless broadband ISP services
(ie local infrastructure, backhaul, ISP, CPE, management and support)
to villages around Cambridge. The company has also recently expanded
its operations to include a group of six villages on the South
Coast. IN is well known to the East of England Development Agency
(EEDA), and many of the IN-enabled villages are taking part in
an EEDA-sponsored community broadband competition. IN offer solutions
using all three business models outlined in Section 3.3 above
and, more importantly, can demonstrate proven, working services
for exactly our kind of community.
3.4.2 Alvarion and/or Alvarion resellers
Alvarion is an equipment manufacturer rather
than a solution provider, but there are a growing number of Value
Added Resellers who claim to offer a more turnkey approach. Going
this route would involve a suite of BWA products called BreezeACCESS
II, and while these are not as well proven in community applications
as the IN technology, Alvarion claim that the end result would
be superior in terms of flexibility, performance and future-proofing.
They have a number of small to very large scale networks up and
running around the world to support these claims—but as
far as we can tell, they have little or no experience of working
with community groups, and they certainly do not offer a full
ISP service on the back of their infrastructure.
3.4.3 Our final choice
We have chosen to go to the next stage with
Invisible Networks. They look the best choice because:
(a) they offer a complete and proven end-to-end
managed solution;
(b) they provide better-than-ADSL broadband
at a competitive price;
(c) their service is strongly community-focused;
and
(d) as their name suggests, their infrastructure
is to all intents and purposes "invisible".
SECTION 4
4.1 How will our wireless solution work?
Although things are still very much at the pre-planning
stage, we have a fairly clear picture of the technical and financial
model we will be buying into, and of the roll-out schedule we
will be following.
4.1.1 Technical model
Internet connectivity will be provided by a
2Mbit/s leased line, upgradeable according to demand, which will
terminate at a hub at suitable premises near the centre of Blewbury.
End-customer access to the leased line will be via a network of
radio nodes, using the IEEE 802.11b protocol, also known as WiFi,
operating in the licence exempt 2400MHz band. The radio nodes
will be connected to each other and to the leased line hub using
a mixture of WiFi backbone and BT private leased baseband circuits.
Links from Blewbury to the surrounding villages will be made using
WiFi in point-to-point mode.
4.1.1a The WiFi nodes will consist of small
access point hardware positioned inside lofts of the houses of
a selected group of customers, with two antennas attached to their
existing TV aerial pole where possible. The majority of customers
will not have nodes in their houses, and will access local nodes
by means of a small desktop unit about the size of a paperback
book. A small proportion of customers are likely to be outside
the area that can be covered economically by the network of access
nodes. However, most of these will be able to obtain service by
installing an external TV-style antenna at about chimney height.
4.1.2 Financial model
From our point of view, the finances are extremely
simple: each user just pays a set-up fee and monthly charge as
they would with any other ISP, ie
| Service | Set-up fee
| Monthly fee |
| Standard | £199
| £29.99/£23.99* |
| Premium | £299 | £45.00/£36.00*
|
| | |
*Lower monthly price is for 15 months paid in advance. All
prices include VAT.
4.1.2a The set-up fees are relatively high (compare BT's
standard ADSL connection fee of £60 + £80 for a broadband
modem) but they include all the basic equipment a user needs and
reflect the real cost of setting up a community wireless network
from scratch. In order to open up the service to the widest possible
user base, we are applying for Regional Development Agency funding
to reduce the set-up fees to a more manageable £99, or even
less.
4.1.2b To support long term community needs, a small
proportion of all monthly charges will be paid into a locally
managed fund. When sufficient capital has built up, the community
as a whole will have a say in how the money is spent—perhaps
on a new community server, or perhaps to subsidise high-speed
internet access for local youth clubs.
4.1.3 Roll-out
We envisage a two-phase roll-out of the service: Phase one
covering Blewbury, Upton and the Astons, and Phase two (depending
on demand) extending the network to East and West Hagbourne, Chilton
and South Moreton. Assuming the required number of customers (75)
sign up to the scheme by 31 March, we hope to have the Phase one
network up and running by late summer.
The entire network can be constructed with off-the-shelf
technology, and provides an exciting glimpse of what can be achieved
here and now for rural communities like ours.
CONCLUSION
Of the eight months we have spent campaigning for rural broadband
so far, at least six have been wasted in the pursuit of ADSL-based
solutions which were never designed for the countryside, and which
in the light of our experience we believe will never offer rural
internet users anything other than "too little, too late".
(As if to prove our point, BT has recently announced the results
of two trials designed to extend the reach of ADSL into "fringe"
or rural areas—one of which is half as fast and the other
twice as expensive as their standard urban service.)
At the very least, then, we hope that this case study will
help the Committee, Government agencies and campaign groups like
ours avoid similar time-wasting with technologies and deployment
strategies which by their very nature are unlikely ever to offer
cost-effective, long term solutions for the vast majority of rural
communities.
A new perspective
If there is one thought we would wish the reader to take
away from this report, it is this: that the most important pre-requisite
for rural broadband provision is not just a change of technology,
or a change of strategy, but a change of mindset. Specifically,
the countryside needs to reject the market `ideology' long fostered
by BT and the cable companies, which first casts rural communities
as the poor relations of cities and towns, and then seeks to fob
them off with whatever technological crumbs are left from their
richer cousins' tables. As long as rural internet users accept
this second-class status, and the second-class solutions and timescales
that go with it, they will never get the broadband services they
deserve.
Instead, we need to recognise that the geographic and economic
imperatives of the rural economy demand a completely fresh approach
to broadband provision, and that so-called `alternative' technologies—specifically,
wireless technologies—are in fact the best chance we have
of filling a yawning gap in the market quickly and cost-effectively.
This is not only because the newer technologies can offer rural
customers better performance and value than technologies designed
for urban environments; it is also because the entrepreneurial
opportunities in the fledgling wireless broadband market are far
greater than those in the semi-monopolistic cable and DSL markets.
These opportunities, and the myriad commercial responses they
have inspired and will continue to inspire, are far more likely
to generate the energy and drive required to bring broadband to
rural areas, than any monolithic, top-down corporate approach.
We therefore hope and believe that Government will do all
it can to encourage this grass-roots response, allowing innovators
around the UK to deliver new kinds of broadband solution, through
a new kind of marketplace, that can better meet the unique challenges
and opportunities that our rural communities collectively represent.
Blewbury Broadband Campaign Group
27 February 2003
| 
