Helping the Lone Operator in the Vast Frontier

Abstract

While the networking literature is replete with work on managing and operating networks-from the specifics of protocols to the design of management tools and architecturesthere is comparatively little work on planning a network to be rolled out. In part this is because the task of network planning typically falls to carriers (for backbones) and cloud providers (for datacenters), which have the resources and the control to meet their specific needs. Here we consider network planning in situations that are quite different: resource poor and highly constrained.Frontier networks are often planned by lone operators, and while these networks are small in size, they are large in number: they individually serve relatively few users but in aggregate serve millions of users. The key challenge here is the mismatch between the resources of these small operators and the complexity of their network planning. In this paper we detail the difficulties in this context, building on our team's first-hand knowledge of many networks of this type. We then present our initial efforts at frontier network planning, discuss next steps, and outline several open problems.

A Realistic Open-Data-based Cost Model for Wireless Backhaul Networks in Rural Areas

“…In [7] a WISP backhaul optimization model is formulated in order to minimize the energy consumption. Examples of real use cases include [8] which describes the WISP planning in a rural region of Northern California; [9] where it is discussed the implementation of a WISP in mountainous areas in Pakistan; and [10] where there is an economic study of a WISP in a specific district in the state of Kerala in India. These studies, however, differ from ours in the simplicity of their economic model, which does not consider user demand, detailed CapEx/OpEx aspects, or the network backhaul design, which does not include network reliability planning.…”

Towards a Socio-Technical Framework for Bridging the Digital Divide in Rural Emergency Preparedness and Response

“…The lack of economic incentive for commercial broadband providers to deploy in rural areas has forced communities to take charge of their broadband connectivity. Thus, we have seen a plethora of technologies deployed through community initiatives, including cellular networks [13], TVWS [24,25] and microwave/WiFi mesh [26][27][28][29]. This organic growth of community-owned and operated networks has increasingly been considered the most viable path forward to rural broadband [15].…”