5 ms·

The answer is you don't have to maintain the network on your own, your users will help you do it for you. One example is this - https://network.mobile.rakuten.c

The answer is you don't have to maintain the network on your own, your users will help you do it for you. One example is this - https://network.mobile.rakuten.co.jp/area/rakuten-casa/ https://network.mobile.rakuten.co.jp/area/rakuten-casa/ it's a femtocell that is given away for nearly no cost to users and not only boosts network in your own house but also for people living near you.

croutonwagon 6y ago
But then you are reliant on a different carrier and network for yours to work. Most users home routers are garbage for latency and loss sensitive applications, of which voice would qualify. Not to mention the security implications from both angles. As an end user do you want random cell phone traffic egressing through your network. And that easily opens up the network to cell site spoofing moreso than they already are. A big reason LTE, GSM, evdo etc were successfull was because the full stack, from the backbone to endpoint/user was managed by the carrier. Offloading that to home users who actively put routers in between interference sources like windows, fridges, washers/dryers and then tey and extend their signal with repeaters is a questionable goal at best.
- harpratap 6y ago
  > But then you are reliant on a different carrier and network for yours to work. Why? You could easily enforce a policy that only who use your fiber network at home qualify for these femtocells. Considering that majority of backbone fiber is an oligopoly already, this wouldn't be an issue. > Most users home routers are garbage for latency and loss sensitive applications, of which voice would qualify. Do you have any source on this claim? IP network has become just as fast and resiliant as the pure teleco network (reason why 5G is based on IP in the first place). IP calls from Facetime, Google Duo, Skype, Zoom, Whatsapp and others work just as good as regular calls if you have decent coverage. And you can easily implement QoS for calls through your own network, which is what the old 3G/4G tech was already doing. > And that easily opens up the network to cell site spoofing moreso than they already are How common is WiFi spoofing in your experience? > A big reason LTE, GSM, evdo etc were successfull was because the full stack, from the backbone to endpoint/user was managed by the carrier The reason they had to do that was because IP stack wasn't good enough 2 decades or even a decade ago. Unless you are in a 3rd world country, IP network is just as good as 3G/4G stack today. > Offloading that to home users who actively put routers in between interference sources like windows, fridges, washers/dryers and then tey and extend their signal with repeaters is a questionable goal at best. Okay, you might want to revisit that thought couple of years from now :)
  - croutonwagon 6y ago
    Because in most of the country broadband providers and cell varieties are not the same. There are limited markets where verizon or att offer both broadband and cell service. And the other big cell carriers don’t have a broadband market. To your other point. Most gpon modems are arris or some other brand all in ones these days that carry voip converters/cable television and then normal tcpip traffic. They are bought to maximize profits and rental fees and not with packet forwarding in mind. There are acceptable levels of loss and latency on residential networks that don’t generally carry over to campus or business services. Add in they also run dns, dhcp and firewalling and often some “extra” parental controls and sometimes a vlan for guest access. It’s not the residnetial customers fault for the placement either. But most demarcs for telco and internet, even in new construction is in a utility room that is generally right next to other utilities. At least in single family homes. In apartments sure they may be better placed but still often next to the air handler. And give. The range of 5g, the first floor or two is all that matters.
petra 6y ago
But femtocells are very close to Wi-Fi[1], and owned by oligopolies. Where's the benefit in that ? [1]the biggest difference of 4G over WiFi is concentrated coordination , but this could be achieved for Wi-Fi too.

croutonwagon 6y ago

But then you are reliant on a different carrier and network for yours to work. Most users home routers are garbage for latency and loss sensitive applications, of which voice would qualify. Not to mention the security implications from both angles. As an end user do you want random cell phone traffic egressing through your network. And that easily opens up the network to cell site spoofing moreso than they already are. A big reason LTE, GSM, evdo etc were successfull was because the full stack, from the backbone to endpoint/user was managed by the carrier. Offloading that to home users who actively put routers in between interference sources like windows, fridges, washers/dryers and then tey and extend their signal with repeaters is a questionable goal at best.

harpratap 6y ago
> But then you are reliant on a different carrier and network for yours to work. Why? You could easily enforce a policy that only who use your fiber network at home qualify for these femtocells. Considering that majority of backbone fiber is an oligopoly already, this wouldn't be an issue. > Most users home routers are garbage for latency and loss sensitive applications, of which voice would qualify. Do you have any source on this claim? IP network has become just as fast and resiliant as the pure teleco network (reason why 5G is based on IP in the first place). IP calls from Facetime, Google Duo, Skype, Zoom, Whatsapp and others work just as good as regular calls if you have decent coverage. And you can easily implement QoS for calls through your own network, which is what the old 3G/4G tech was already doing. > And that easily opens up the network to cell site spoofing moreso than they already are How common is WiFi spoofing in your experience? > A big reason LTE, GSM, evdo etc were successfull was because the full stack, from the backbone to endpoint/user was managed by the carrier The reason they had to do that was because IP stack wasn't good enough 2 decades or even a decade ago. Unless you are in a 3rd world country, IP network is just as good as 3G/4G stack today. > Offloading that to home users who actively put routers in between interference sources like windows, fridges, washers/dryers and then tey and extend their signal with repeaters is a questionable goal at best. Okay, you might want to revisit that thought couple of years from now :)
- croutonwagon 6y ago
  Because in most of the country broadband providers and cell varieties are not the same. There are limited markets where verizon or att offer both broadband and cell service. And the other big cell carriers don’t have a broadband market. To your other point. Most gpon modems are arris or some other brand all in ones these days that carry voip converters/cable television and then normal tcpip traffic. They are bought to maximize profits and rental fees and not with packet forwarding in mind. There are acceptable levels of loss and latency on residential networks that don’t generally carry over to campus or business services. Add in they also run dns, dhcp and firewalling and often some “extra” parental controls and sometimes a vlan for guest access. It’s not the residnetial customers fault for the placement either. But most demarcs for telco and internet, even in new construction is in a utility room that is generally right next to other utilities. At least in single family homes. In apartments sure they may be better placed but still often next to the air handler. And give. The range of 5g, the first floor or two is all that matters.

petra 6y ago

But femtocells are very close to Wi-Fi[1], and owned by oligopolies. Where's the benefit in that ? [1]the biggest difference of 4G over WiFi is concentrated coordination , but this could be achieved for Wi-Fi too.