Centre for Appropriate Technology

Report on Remote Internet Services David Cook c/o Rio Tinto Shared Services GPO Box 207 Brisbane Qld 4001 david.cook@riotinto.com

Rio Tinto CAT Fellowship

Rio Tinto Shared Services GPO Box 207 BRISBANE QLD 4001 15th September 2006 Alyson Wright Centre for Appropriate Technology (CAT) 32 Priest St ALICE SPRINGS NT 0870 Dear Alyson, I am pleased to present my report in reply to your request of 4th of September for an analysis of solutions to supply internet solutions to remote communities. This report provides a brief overview and analysis of the services that are available, looking at each for their suitability for the demanding conditions and social and other constraints imposed in the proposed environment. Concluding, I’d like to thank your organisation for your continued engagement of Rio Tinto within the Fellowship program. I have found the experience to be thoroughly rewarding and will recommend it to fellow staff throughout my time with Rio Tinto. Yours sincerely David Cook

INTERNET SERVICES IN REMOTE COMMUNITIES An overview of issues, drivers and internet technologies

available for remote communities

Prepared for:

Centre for Appropriate Technology (CAT)

Submitted: 15 September 2006

Prepared by: David Cook

Executive Summary This report was commissioned to examine the provision of internet connectivity to remote communities. The research conducted includes connectivity to the device, which is the initial connection from the internet to a site or point of presence and the subsequent connection to whatever device it is that is accessing the internet. With this in mind, some assumptions have been made regarding the types of devices that may be connected in order to limit the scope of this report. The assumptions are based mainly around the devices being investigated in the sister project ‘$100 buck laptops’. This considered, the breadth of end point computing technologies is ever expanding and as it stands there are compatible technologies that are mentioned in this report which deem the technologies interoperable. The research methods used in compiling this report have primarily been the review of available literature regarding telecommunications, telecommunications in remote communities. This has included web sites, commercial and government sponsored reports, responses to reports, technical specifications and advertising and marketing collateral. In addition a number of people were interviewed for their views and particular expertise in the relevant social or technical context under investigation. The main conclusions of this report are as follows:

� The only commercially viable internet access solution available to the majority of communities is 2 way satellite. Providers have facilities available for open access that allow potential consumers to determine what types of access are available.

� Demand aggregation or centralising the bandwidth in a community is a good way to keep the use of internet services easily quantifiable.

� With demand transparent, both the community and in turn the commercial service provider will have an appropriate driver for installing terrestrial bandwidth.

� There needs to be more practical implementation of the Commonwealths Whole of

Government approach to service provision to ensure that existing services are used to their fullest potential.

� Most of the changes required to make an aggregated community access, user pays service model are modest if supporting community infrastructure can be put in place.

� Where no current infrastructure exists, wireless networking presents as the most effective way to deliver broadband bandwidth to residences in communities and associated outstations.

� Further to the conclusion above, the use of a mesh networking technology will make the end network more robust, reliable and resistant to many types of failure. The main exception to this is complete power loss in a community.

In relation to the conclusions above, the following recommendations can be made:

� Where internet access is required, continue with the use of 2 way satellite as it presents the most cost effective and commercially available option. Where any other broadband options are available they should be considered ahead of satellite.

� Where possible, attempt to aggregate community internet usage through a single point of presence in the community in order to deliver economies of scale and bandwidth.

� Where usage reaches a predetermined point, relevant stakeholders should approach Telstra to request terrestrial backhaul in order to deliver cheaper broadband services highlighted in the report. This point can only be determined on a case by case basis after consultation with Telstra.

� Relevant stakeholders should collectively approach and engage government on the delivery of essential government services such as health, education and social welfare and how they may be better delivered via the internet or internet based services.

� Investigate further through service providers such as Telstra the costs of billing community internet usage on the same basis as Telstra Wireless hot spots are now or through the extension of the functionality of the Country Calling Card.

� For communities considering providing computing assets and internet to private residences, install basic wireless infrastructure that matches the conditions, i.e. solar powered if required and durable.

� When installing the wireless network, determine the most appropriate and heavily supported commercial mesh technology in order to ensure that bandwidth is maximised and network redundancy retained.

These recommendations are entirely practical if a level of co-operation can be achieved amongst the relevant parties. In particular the prospect of implementing a usage system somewhat similar to Telstra wireless hotspots but using an extended Country Calling Card is realistic but requires some definition by the service provider and some sponsorship as it may not be commercially viable at its inception. This said the ease of use and popularity of both of these programs at the moment are good indicators of possible success. This same concept applies equally to other aspects of the research questions posed.

Table of Contents

1. INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................. 1

1.1 Authorisation and purpose .................................................................................................................... 1

1.2 Limitations .............................................................................................................................................. 1

1.3 Scope ........................................................................................................................................................ 1

2. RESEARCH APPROACH ................................................................................... 2

3. CURRENT SITUATION ....................................................................................... 3

3.1 Internet to communities ......................................................................................................................... 3

3.2 Intra-community networks .................................................................................................................... 6

4. SOLUTION ANALYSIS ....................................................................................... 8

4.1 Available Technologies – Internet to communities .............................................................................. 8

4.2 Available technologies – intra community .......................................................................................... 10 4.2.1 Wired networking .............................................................................................................................. 10 4.2.2 Wireless networking .......................................................................................................................... 11 4.2.3 Wireless mesh and (mobile) ad-hoc networks ................................................................................... 12

5. CONCLUSIONS ................................................................................................ 14

6. RECOMMENDATIONS ..................................................................................... 15

7. BIBLIOGRAPHY ............................................................................................... 16

9. APPENDIX A: ACRONYMS AND DEFINITIONS ............................................. 20

1

1. Introduction

1.1 Authorisation and purpose

This report has been commissioned by Rio Tinto as part of the CAT fellowship program, a

partnership between CAT and Rio Tinto where Rio Tinto staff work with CAT on defined

research projects in order to assist with developing sustainable livelihoods for remote and

Indigenous communities. The purpose of this report is to research the technologies that are

available in order to deliver internet services including but not limited to the World Wide

Web (WWW) and email. Each of the technologies will be examined from the following

viewpoints:

� Technical: including speed and environmental appropriateness

� Social: including the social, educational and economic capacity of the users

� Business/Commercial: including costs and maintenance

The report will also be used as an input into a ‘Bush Tech’ leaflet, a summary of findings and

a presentation to CAT staff on the findings and the project in general.

1.2 Limitations

The primary limitation of this research project has been the time available to conduct

thorough research. More time will enable an expansion on this paper through further visitation

and consultation with remote communities, commercial telecommunications providers,

territory/state and Commonwealth government agencies and other non-government

organisations. This said, the literature available from these organisations has made it more

than possible to determine the consensus opinion on many of the subjects raised by the

research questions.

1.3 Scope

As far as scope is concerned, the report will focus specifically on internet connectivity for

remote communities to the device. In essence this expands on previous research that has

typically been to a community centre and has not considered approaches to accessing the

internet from private computing resources. As projects like Inveneo (Inveneo 2005) and One

laptop Per Child (OLPC 2006) begin to become more of a reality, how intra-community

connectivity should be approached becomes more relevant and is therefore included also.

2

2. Research Approach

From the outset of conducting the research for this paper it has been understood that there are

a number of different contingent factors that would or could significantly affect the research

outcomes. As a consequence the research approach for this paper has drawn on a number of

sources in order to deliver a balanced view of the current situation and to determine solutions

to the particular constraints imposed by the proposed environment. At a high level the

following sources were used to determine the content of this report:

� One to one and group interviews, structured and unstructured

� Review of current localised and broader commercially available literature including

but not limited to:

o Websites

o Company product descriptions and advertising

o Various other marketing and information based content

� Review of public domain, government and organisation sponsored literature

o Government reports, in particular the RCICTS report (NT Government) and a

number of DCITA reports including the TAPRIC Action Plan

o Organisational reports and or responses to government reports such as the NFF

response to the RTI

� Scholarly reviewed academic literature

The approach taken has been to analyse and critically evaluate each of these sources in order

to find and remove political, organisational and commercial bias from the findings. The

resultant findings should subsequently represent the most appropriate information for future

needs.

From a practical standpoint, the analysis will break down the discussion into two main areas

surrounding the topic of internet connectivity. The initial discussion will be around the

delivery of internet services to the community, i.e. a single point of presence including

options, costs and other factors that would be relevant to the final decision. Secondly, there

will be discussion about aggregating that connectivity to the community on the basis that a)

the community is dispersed with computing units in residential homes and b) that there may

exist remote outstations that also require connectivity.

3

3. Current Situation It is clear that the digital divide is at its widest in remote Indigenous communities, this is

clearly demonstrated by the Australian Bureau of Statistics figures from the National

Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Social Survey (2002). The survey showed that

approximately half as many Indigenous households had accessed the internet in the previous

12 months than had non-Indigenous households at thirty and about sixty percent respectively.

In addition, the same survey also demonstrates that Indigenous people in remote communities

are about half as likely to have used the internet as their non-remote counterparts. Other

significant contributors were income quartile and educational level.

There have been a number of reports and initiatives in both the government and NGO sector

that have investigated the use of telecommunications and associated technologies in remote

areas. The most significant to date are (the):

� Regional Telecommunications Inquiry (Cth) also known as The Estens Inquiry � Remote Community Information and Communications Technology Solutions (NT

Government) � Telecommunications Action Plan for Remote Indigenous Communities (Cth) � Connecting our Communities (Cth) � Telecommunications Service Inquiry Report (Cth) � Indigenous Telecommunications Forum (2005) and associated report � Networking the Nation (Cth)

Many of these have delivered outcomes for use in remote communities whilst recognising the

sometimes restricted commercial and social context in which those initiatives must operate.

Of these, Connecting our Communities: Sustainable Networking Strategies for

Australian Remote Indigenous Communities, and the TAPRIC Action Plan by far represent the

most comprehensive responses to the issue of creating equitable internet and online access

solutions. In conjunction with the other telecoms action items proposed by TAPRIC, there is a

real possibility that an equitable, robust and relatively cost effective solution can be

implemented for remote communities.

3.1 Internet to communities

The most commonly used technology to deliver effective internet bandwidth to remote

communities is satellite. In many cases this is in fact the only viable option that will provide

the desired internet connectivity within commercial constraints and environmental, power and

other constraints experienced at the community. The uptake of two way satellite services in

particular has been reinforced by the actions arising from TAPRIC, namely the ‘Internet

4

Access Program’ which has been practically implemented with the Telstra 2-way satellite

offer to deliver broadband services to community centres. Considering what is commercially

viable and available now and into the immediate future, it is difficult to see the use of 2 way

satellite as the primary means of connecting communities to the internet, particularly for

broadband access changing. This said, the TAPRIC Action Plan (2002) and discussions with

Telstra representatives identify that the main constraints around internet bandwidth to remote

communities is the commercial viability of terrestrial backhaul infrastructure, something that

could be overcome with a demand aggregation model, perhaps supported by a managed

subscription service.

Another major issue would seem to be the lack of a co-ordinated approach being taken, for

the most part by agencies in delivering services in communities. Figure 1 provides a practical

example of this showing numerous satellite dishes located in a community north of Alice

Springs. One building has 3 satellite dishes and there are a number around town also. In

addition, an old tele-centre from the Networking the Nation (on left of picture) remains

unused with a satellite dish behind it.

Figure 1: Community Council Building and unused tele-centre

5

On discussion with the community CEO about options it was clear that the siloed approach

mentioned above was a primary cause of dissatisfaction with little or no co-operation between

agencies despite the Commonwealth Governments recent ‘Whole of Government approach’

initiative. (Regional Telecommunications Forum minutes 2005) During our discussion it was

clear that 3 dishes were not required, as were a number of computing resources and could be

better utilised elsewhere within the community.

As it stands in this particular community there is probably justification for some form of

shared internet access facility, initially sponsored by the primary users but offered on a

subscription or user pays basis. Connectivity is best illustrated by the following simplified

figure that shows numerous internet connections, all sponsored or owned by different

organisations or residents. Where internet connections do exist, evidence suggests that it has

been organised with the same siloed or fragmented approach.

Figure 2: Current internet connectivity for a small community

This problem is mirrored in much of the literature regarding internet connectivity and only

starts to be addressed by an approach such as that described in ‘Connecting our

6

Communities’. This said this is not the case for all communities with some communities not

having any internet connectivity and others qualifying under commercial terms to have a

backhaul connection commissioned by service providers.

3.2 Intra-community networks

Current initiatives and recommendations are abstracting the desire for Indigenous

communities to have access to private computing resources. In models suggested thus far

within Australia and in the scope of government thought, the primary access regime has been

suggested and is being implemented through community online access centres, tele-centres,

regional transaction centres and similar public access points. These centres represent a typical

lot size trade off decision with computing resources centralised in a community accessible

location in order to ensure the resources are maintained and easily supported and can provide

access to as many residents as possible at the lowest cost. The recommended intra-community

network is almost always based on a single point of presence to which the access centre

connects directly with no other private access points available. Referring to the figure below

from the report ‘Connecting our Communities’ we can see that although the option has been

considered, there has been little done within Australia to provision services for remote private

residences, at least as far as aggregating internet connectivity. As it stands, unless other

options are available through aggregated demand, a few individual residences and public

access centres are the only places in remote communities where satellite access is installed.

An aggregated demand model would allow for bandwidth to be shared effectively amongst

private residences where suitable infrastructure exists.

The figure on the next page represents a desirable physical solution that would require some

product enhancement on behalf of telecommunications providers in order to become a

practical system for remote communities. A number of these enhancements are described later

in this report.

7

Figure 3: Community Access Centre Model from ‘Connecting our Communities’

The companion research project to this paper regarding low cost personal computing

resources intends to challenge this abstraction and describe feasible methods of delivering

new technologies into community homes, thus creating the need for examining intra

community network connectivity. This paper will be limited to investigating the technologies

that are available to deliver network services to private dwellings in order to provide

alternatives to the online access centre model.

8

4. Solution Analysis

4.1 Available Technologies – Internet to communities

There are a number of internet technologies that are commercially available. This report will

focus on these technologies as they are the most likely to attract appropriate support and

investment for connectivity in remote communities. The available technologies will be

examined using a simple table which will consider:

� Availability and Appropriateness � Speed � Cost � Maintenance and Ease of use

All of the technologies included are commercially supported and stable technologies. This

said, many of them are simply not suitable or available for internet access in remote

communities due in most part to the infrastructure required to run them. The available

technologies are listed in table 1 and include a brief analysis of the appropriateness of each.

Table 1: Commercially available technologies

1. On very high end plans. 2. Dependant on distance from a DSL enabled exchange. Speed quoted is highest available ADSL 1 plan.

ADSL 2 is slowly becoming available. 3. Cabled internet or optics are not available in a majority of remote communities

Technology Availability and

Appropriateness

Speed

D/U

(Max/Kbps)

Initial

Cost

(max)7

Ongoing

Monthly

Cost

(max)7

Ease of use and

maintenance/support

Satellite

(1-way)

Available but upload may be inappropriate

512/56 $917.60 + travel

$49.95 - $79.95

Medium

Satellite

(2-way)

Highly appropriate

(8001) 512/128

$1398/ $1295 + travel

$68.50 - $479.95

Easy

Cable,

Optics,

Other

Not available3

17Mbps + NA6 $29.95 - $149.95

Easy

DSL and

derivatives

Sparsely available4

1500/2562 NA6 $29.95 - $129.95

Medium

ISDN Sparsely available4

128/128 NA6 $34.40 – $92.30

Medium

9

4. Are available in a few communities. ISDN generally available within 30 km of rural exchanges 5. With Commonwealth government Broadband connect 6. Not considered commercially viable in most cases 7. Pricing is list pricing and does not account for government or provider rebates or initiatives

The TAPRIC Action Plan (2002) discusses that the demand aggregation approach could be

supported by a business case to provide essential services to remote communities. By co-

ordinating a larger single point of presence located for example at a council office, numerous

agencies could share bandwidth costs and ‘spare’ bandwidth could be used by private

residences. The most appropriate approach would seem to be to:

1. Aggregate and determine community demand 2. Determine the size of the connection needed and decide on a carriage and bandwidth

solution with either: a. Terrestrial backhaul where available b. Satellite for communities with no other services

3. Approach government agencies responsible for ‘essential’ services to submit a business case for the installation of the point of presence (POP)

4. Develop solutions for effective, secure transmission of private (health, Centrelink) and public (Internet) information

5. Introduce a user pays service provision model for private use both in public places and in private residences

During personal interviews with a number of community and commercial organisations it

would appear that solutions similar to these have already been considered. The main obstacles

to date have been the co-ordination of government agencies to develop e-business solutions

that allow government business to be transacted via the internet. A co-ordinated approach to

this issue, either through Virtual Private Network (VPN) or secure e-business technologies

such as those used by online retailers should resolve this issue and allow for the effective

sharing of bandwidth. As an example, an interim step may be to identify computers that

specifically provide access to essential services and connect them via VPN to their

appropriate network. The technology to achieve this is mature, freely available and relatively

cost effective. In the longer term, government and public agencies should focus on ‘securing

the backend’ and make these same transactions available via public internet interfaces. Such

interfaces will also prove to be of use to non-remote communities. An example of such a

network showing secured computers is shown in figure 4.

In order to deliver bandwidth to private residences it is proposed that a system similar to the

Country Calling Card program or similar user pays system be used in order to deliver

metered internet access. Such a program, in conjunction with an interface similar to that is

10

used for Telstra wireless hot spots, would effectively allow people in private residences and

public access centres to access the internet on a prepaid basis. When partnered with an

appropriate computing solution such as the Inveneo remote community product, private

residences could access basic private services such as internet and email from their residence

and then use public access centres for more complicated applications such as graphics and

multimedia.

The use of such a centralised service has a number of benefits. Firstly, demand is aggregated

and is therefore more transparent to both the community and the commercial provider. As

more bandwidth is required, more satellite connections could be added until at some point it

becomes commercially viable to install a terrestrial backhaul to the community location. As

far as the technology required to facilitate such a service, bandwidth aggregating network

gateways have been widely available in both commercial and consumer markets. Secondly,

with some minor work done by service providers, a user pays subscription service would be

relatively easy to operate, almost in a similar vein to the Telstra wi-fi hotspot page. In

conjunction with an amended Country Calling Card program, services could be delivered in a

controlled manner to ensure the social and economical constraints often faced by Indigenous

people in remote communities are addressed, that is, the same factors which underpin the

success of that program and robust community telephones should achieve a similar positive

outcome with internet services.

4.2 Available technologies – intra community

At this point, the presumption is made that internet bandwidth is being delivered to a central

Point of Presence (POP) in the community. On this point there is little disagreement as it

allows for easier maintenance and is commercially more viable for both service providers

through an aggregated service model and also for those wanting to use the services as it

reduces the overall costs. In this sense the central POP presents as the most appropriate

installation for remote communities.

4.2.1 Wired networking

The structure and location of most remote Indigenous communities all but rules out the

installation of ground or suspended cabling as a commercially viable venture, in particular

where communities have additional outstations. The costs involved in the earthworks and

infrastructure to install and maintain a wired network in a hub community let alone an

11

outstation make it commercially unviable to consider a wired network where the

infrastructure does not already exist.

4.2.2 Wireless networking

The remaining choice for cost effective distribution of internet connectivity is through

wireless technologies. Through either directional or omni-directional transmission from the

central POP, any location with a receiving unit can gain internet access without installation

charges, presuming there is a suitably skilled person to mount and connect power to the unit.

Either way, the installation would be of similar complexity to that many home wireless users

undertake for metropolitan broadband, i.e. a self installation rather than requiring a technician

from a service provider to attend. The combination of Internet to and intra-community

connectivity is shown in figure 4.

Figure 4: Proposed network configuration (Internet connection housed at community

access centre)

The technologies for this type of networking are reasonably basic and are for the most part

based on the 802.11 series of networking standards. As far as standards go, 802.11 standards

are reasonably interoperable so there should be little issue with the use of different computing

hardware. In addition, 802.11 technologies can transmit sufficient distance to reach remote

12

outstations with directional antenna. Solar powered repeater stations or bridges could be used

to enhance and relay the signal where outstations or nodes are too distant..

4.2.3 Wireless mesh and (mobile) ad-hoc networks

Underlying 802.11 technologies there are a number of protocols that would allow for

redundancy of a wireless solution. Becoming increasingly popular are mesh or ad-hoc

networks where multiple paths exist around the network that can be used should a primary

path become unavailable. Figure 5 illustrates this. For example, the residence on the far right

of the picture may be the only residence within range of the HMAN network. However, all

other residences can use that residences antenna as an ad-hoc node to reach the HMAN and in

turn the internet.

Figure 5: Ad-hoc and mesh networks (University of Wollongong 2005) A good measure of the maturity of a technology is the number of different protocols available

to implement it. Analogous to the team building model, Form, Norm, Storm, Perform and

Adjourn, when new technologies are implemented there are a number of protocols developed

by different organisations with different views on what the protocol should achieve. There are

currently some seventy plus competing protocols from which the IEEE is developing the

802.11s wireless mesh network standard (Wikipedia 2006). This however should not be seen

as an impediment to the use of the technology. An example of wireless mesh networking in

practice is the MIT Roofnet system (MIT 2006). In addition, groups such as Informal

(Builderau 2004) and Inveneo are actively installing and trialling the use of mesh wireless

Residential Houses Community Centre LAN

HMAN

Ad hoc network

Outdoor Omni-directional Antenna’s

13

networks in similar contexts to the ones being investigated in this paper and the interest in the

technology is strong. The main advantages of the technology are:

� It is inherently reliable and based on the same multi/best path concept as the internet � The network is composed of multiple, low cost devices � Devices only need to transmit to the nearest node and therefore run on low power � The network is resilient, i.e. if one node failures data will find another route � Extra capacity can be added by adding extra nodes � The solution is adaptable to most situations including tunnels, ranges etc

The primary disadvantages of wireless mesh or ad-hoc wireless networks are:

� The relative immaturity of the standard � The loss of connectivity for large groups where single ‘important’ nodes fail � They rely on community participation to create a robust network environment, i.e. a

number of nodes are required to build enough bandwidth along a reliable path from the most distant node

� The number of nodes is a key determinant of the effective bandwidth of each node, i.e. nodes grouped together will have greater available paths and therefore effective bandwidth than distant or separated nodes

The use of mesh networking is clearly preferable to standard wireless networking as it allows

the network to adapt to the environment rather than dictate it. In addition, mesh networking

would allow for increased bandwidth intra community, thus allowing for the possibility of

technologies such as voice over internet protocol (VoIP). Where sufficient bandwidth is

available these technologies could also extend beyond the community.

14

5. Conclusions

The following conclusions regarding services to communities can be drawn from the above analysis and the available literature on this subject:

1. The only commercially viable internet access solution available to the majority of communities is 2 way satellite.

2. Demand aggregation or centralising the bandwidth in a community is a good way to

keep the use of internet services transparent. 3. With demand transparent, both the community and in turn the commercial service

provider will have an appropriate driver for installing terrestrial bandwidth. 4. There needs to be more practical implementation of the Commonwealths Whole of

Government approach to service provision to ensure that existing services are used to their fullest potential.

5. Most of the changes required to make an aggregated community access, user pays

service model are modest if supporting community infrastructure is put in place. The following conclusions regarding distributing services within communities can be drawn from the above analysis and the available literature on this subject:

1. Where no current infrastructure exists, wireless networking presents as the most effective way to deliver broadband bandwidth to residences in communities and associated outstations.

2. Further to conclusion 1, the use of a mesh networking technology will make the end

network more robust, reliable and resistant to many types of failure except for complete power loss in a community.

15

6. Recommendations In relation to the conclusions above, the following recommendations are made:

1. Where internet access is required continue with the use of 2 way satellite as it presents the most cost effective and commercially available option. Where any other broadband options such as ADSL are available they should be considered ahead of satellite on their merits.

2. Where possible, attempt to aggregate community internet usage through a single point

of presence in the community in order to deliver economies of scale and bandwidth. 3. Relevant stakeholders should contact service providers in advance to determine at

what point they would qualify for a commercially viable terrestrial backhaul service. The point is highly dependant on each individual community as it would require careful analysis of all infrastructure costs from the community to the nearest communication hub, not just the associated backhaul services.

4. Where usage reaches the predetermined point from the recommendation above,

relevant stakeholders should approach Telstra to request terrestrial backhaul in order to deliver cheaper broadband services highlighted in the report.

5. Relevant stakeholders should collectively approach and engage government on the

delivery of essential government services such as health, education and social welfare and how they may be better delivered via the internet or internet based services.

6. Investigate further through service providers (such as Telstra) the costs of billing

community internet usage on the same basis as Telstra Wireless hot spots are now or through the extension of the functionality of the Country Calling Card.

7. For communities considering providing computing assets and internet to private

residences, install basic wireless infrastructure that matches the conditions, i.e. solar powered if required, durable etc.

8. When installing the wireless network, determine the most appropriate and heavily

supported commercial mesh technology in order to ensure that bandwidth is maximised and network redundancy retained.

16

7. Bibliography Australian National University, 2002, Assessing the evidence on Indigenous socioeconomic

outcomes: a focus on the 2002 NATSISS, [Online] http://epress.anu.edu.au/caepr_series/no_26/mobile_devices/ch16s03.html, [Accessed 5 September 2006]

Builderau.com.au, 2004, Open-source Wi-Fi links remote communities, [Online]

http://builderau.com.au/news/soa/Open_source_Wi_Fi_links_remote_communities/0,339028227,339129863,00.htm, [Accessed 6 September 2006]

Department of Communication, Information Technology and the Arts, 2003, Media Release:

Better internet access for remote Indigenous communities, [Online] http://www.dcita.gov.au/Article/0,,0_4-2_4008-4_116681,00.html, [Accessed 5 September 2006]

Department of Communication, Information Technology and the Arts, (n.d), All about

TAPRIC, [Online] http://www.telinfo.gov.au/RIC/all_about_tapric, [Accessed 5 September 2006]

Department of Communication, Information Technology and the Arts, 2003, Connecting our

communities, [Online] http://www.dcita.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/15444/Connecting_Our_Communities.pdf, [Accessed 5 September 2006]

Department of Communication, Information Technology and the Arts, (n.d.), Indigenous

Telecommunications; Reports Homepage, [Online] http://www.dcita.gov.au/tel/Indigenous_telecommunications/reports, [Accessed 5 September 2006]

Department of Communication, Information Technology and the Arts, 2003, Online Council:

Joint Media Statement, [Online] http://www.dcita.gov.au/Article/0,,0_4-2_4008-4_116923,00.html, [Accessed 5 September 2006]

Department of Communication, Information Technology and the Arts, 2005, Report:

Indigenous Telecommunications Forum, [Online] http://www.telinfo.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/35905/Forum_Report.pdf, [Accessed 5 September 2006]

Department of Communication, Information Technology and the Arts, 2003, TAPRIC Action

Plan, [Online] http://www.dcita.gov.au/__data/assets/word_doc/12604/Telecommunications_action_plan_for_remote_Indigenous_communities_new.doc, [Accessed 5 September 2006]

International Development Research Centre Canada (IDRC), 2001, ‘Internet Access by

Remote Communities in Sarawak: The Smart School as a Demonstrator Application’, Information and Communication Technologies, [Online]

17

http://www.idrc.ca/panasia/ev-9808-201-1-DO_TOPIC.html, [Accessed 5 September 2006] Inveneo, 2006, ICT Solutions, [Online], http://www.inveneo.org/?q=solutions, [Accessed 5

September 2006] King, N., (TechLink P/L), (n.d), Backing Indigenous Ability Response Paper, [Online] http://www.dcita.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/40892/Neville_King_Techlink_Pty_Ltd.pdf#s

earch=%22techlink%20pty%20ltd%22, [Accessed 5 September 2006] National Farmers Federation, 2003, Response to the Regional Telecommunications (Estens)

Enquiry, [Online] www.telinquiry.gov.au/subs/nff.doc, [Accessed 5 September 2006] National Institute of Standards and Technology, 2006, Wireless and Ad-hoc networking links,

[Online] http://w3.antd.nist.gov/wctg/manet/adhoclinks.html, [Accessed 5 September 2006]

OLPC (One Laptop Per Child), 2006, [Online] http://wiki.laptop.org/go/Home, [Accessed 5

September 2006] Telstra Limited, (n.d.), Telstra Bigpond Satellite: About Page, [Online] http://my.bigpond.com/internetplans/broadband/satellite/about/, [Accessed 5 September 2006] Telstra Limited, (n.d.) Telstra Broadband Availability Finder, [Online] https://www.bigpond.com/internet-plans/broadband/availability/default.asp, [Accessed 5

September 2006] Telstra Limited, (n.d.) Telstra Broadband Connect, [Online] http://my.bigpond.com/internetplans/broadband/satellite/2_way_plans/bbc/default.jsp,

[Accessed 5 September 2006] Telstra Limited, (n.d.), Telstra Countrywide Indigenous Customer Service, [Online] http://www.telstra.com/countrywide/default.asp?sn=5&vp=4635, [Accessed 7 September

2006] Telstra Limited, (n.d.), Telstra Countrywide Regional Factsheet, [Online],

http://www.telstra.com/countrywide/default.asp?sn=5&vp=5233, [Accessed 7 September 2006]

Telstra Limited, (n.d.), Telstra FAQ Page: Satellite LAN gateway, [Online] http://bigpond.custhelp.com/cgi-

bin/bigpond.cfg/php/enduser/std_adp.php?p_faqid=5716&p_search_text=ethernet+gateway&p_created=1091772319&p_sid=OAcJ6JZh&p_lva=&p_sp=cF9zcmNoPTEmcF9zb3J0X2J5PSZwX2dyaWRzb3J0PSZwX3Jvd19jbnQ9MjImcF9wcm9kcz1_YW55fiZwX2NhdHM9JnBfcHY9MS5_YW55fiZwX2N2PSZwX3BhZ2U9MSZwX3BsYXRmb3JtPU4mcF9zZWFyY2hfdGV4dD1ldGhlcm5ldCBnYXRld2F5&p_li=&p_topview=1, [Accessed 5 September 2006]

18

Telstra Limited, 2003, Telstra Response to the Regional Telecommunications (Estens) Enquiry, [Online]

http://www.telstra.com/countrywide/default.asp?sn=5&vp=4705, [Accessed 5 September 2006]

Telstra Limited, (n.d.), 2-way satellite pricing page, [Online]

http://my.bigpond.com/internetplans/broadband/satellite/2_way_plans/, [Accessed 5 September 2006]

University of Wollongong, 2005, ‘Remote area communications system “could save millions”

’, [Online] http://media.uow.edu.au/news/2005/0801a/index.html, [Accessed 5 September 2006]

Wikipedia, 2006, The Childrens Machine ($100 laptop), [Online]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%24100_laptop, [Accessed 5 September 2006] Wikipedia, 2006, Wireless Mesh Networks, [Online]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wireless_mesh_network, [Accessed 7 September 2006]

19

8. Interview list Damien Smerdon: Deadly Mob Jay Gibson: Libraries and Knowledge Centres Co-ordinator (Santa Teresa and Titree) Lynn Moore: CEO, Arltarlpilta Community Council Rebecca Chewings: RTC, Atitjere Community Ron Saint: Telstra Country Wide Northern Australia *None of the interviews were requested to be or interpreted as the opinion of the organisation for which the interviewee worked.

20

9. Appendix A: Acronyms and Definitions

CAT Centre for Appropriate Technology

CEO Chief Executive Officer

DCITA Department of Communities, Information Technology and the Arts (Cth)

IEEE Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers: is an international not for profit, professional organisation for the advancement of technology related to electricity. (Wikipedia 2006)

NFF National Farmers Federation

POP Point of Presence

RCITS Remote Community Information and Communications Technology Solutions (Report 2003)

RTI Regional Telecommunications Inquiry (Report 2002)

TAPRIC Telecommunications Action Plan for Remote Indigenous Communities

TCW Telstra Country Wide

Wi-Fi Wireless Fidelity

WLAN Wireless Local Area Network

802.11 The Wi-Fi standard, denotes a set of WLAN standards developed by working group 11 of the IEEE LAN/MAN Standards Committee (IEEE 802). (Wikipedia 2006)