Steve Jobs' Vision of Widespread Free Public Wi-Fi Guest Networks Yet to Take Hold

[Tech198]

How many 'Visions' can this guy have ? ?

Stay off my network u cronies !!

 

[unplugme71]

2) is handled by the security of the modem/router. As far as I know the guest networks in Airport routers have zero access to other networks and can easily be configured to disallow guests from even connecting to other guests. Whether there are exploits has yet to be seen, but if they are on different networks I doubt this would be easy (or even possible).

3) may be configurable depending on modem/router, the bandwidth available to the modem is often much greater than the bandwidth actually purchased by the customer (i.e., it isn't actually shared bandwidth).

4), 5), 6) are all being handled by some ISPs already. For instance, if you have Comcast you can already log into guest networks in other customers' modems that support it (it's opt-out and limited to modems that support wifi). Presumably 7) would be handled more/less in this way, but it is really up to the ISP's billing department to keep track of and is of little interest to us here.

There is no answer to 1) yet that I'm aware of (operating much like cell towers operate). But there would also have to be enough wifi points available to make it even practical to rely on. Additionally, 8) may be an issue with older modems/routers who can barely handle the network as it is. However, it would only be implemented with compatible modems so this issue would likely never be a problem (unless your shiny 2014 model modem/router is actually broken or something). And like 7), it is really more of an internal thing for the ISP to figure out.

----------





It would be trivial to have guest network set up on a separate IP address if it is built into the modem. The only potential issue is the limited number of IP v4 addresses, which would be less of an issue if more websites supported IP v6 (although tunneling would make this much less of an issue, but I don't know if you can tunnel v4 over v6—my knowledge of this is more limited, so don't quote me on it).

Yes Comcast offers it but you must login through Comcast's system. I'm talking about having a global - 1 all system. Meaning all ISPs tie into it.

 

[Dorje Sylas]

Given what we know about the NSA and FBI, do you really want to connect to a government wifi network?

Given what we know about Private companies security flaws do you want to connect to a Private cooperate network you don't control?

I think you confuse Municipal for Federal government.

 

[ellsworth]

This is another example of Steve Jobs syndrome that I find myself falling victim to. Comcast is doing this and the whole nation is up in arms. Apple will do it and it's a wonderful world. Funny how that works.

As someone mentioned before, I once had my wifi open for both my neighbors. They were old little ladies so I really didn't mind and it didn't seem to slow me down at all. Would be nice to be able to walk around downtown or it's connecting neighborhoods and have access to free wifi. Starbucks does it, why can't we?

 

[VulchR]

BT in the UK already does this sort of thing - if you get broadband at home, you can join up to a service in which you make your router available to BT guests, which gives you privileges to access routers of other people who join the service. BT handles security via a log-on routine. It works reasonably well - there is even a map of available routers on the BT app for this service.

Now if we could just have place-to-place transmission that would bypass the ISP providers completely, communities could pay for public WiFi...

 

[jedifaka]

Huh?

It seems inconsistent to be paid for the device and its software but to expect the enabling infrastructure - the network - to be free.

Apple gets paid for the phone, but the carrier should work for free? How much network capacity can you build for free, anyway?

 

[tooloud10]

Lots of people don't seem to understand some very basic things about this approach:

1) It doesn't affect your security. It's not on your network. It's on your ISP's network.
2) It doesn't affect your data usage or speeds. It affects your ISP's data usage and speeds.
3) Your ISP doesn't provide unlimited speeds on the Guest network. Typically it's limited to 512kbps or 1Mbps.

Honestly, when I think about it, it kind of seems stupid to have every house on the block buying their own Internet connection when they could just stick a hotspot or two every few hundred feet and make you pay to log in. Think of the infrastructure that we could do without if everyone didn't demand a 50M pipe into their house.

 

[steve333]

There will be a brain cancer epidemic within 10-20 years

 

[Rocketman]

What is the issue?

Do we need routers configured from the factory to do this, and if so where can I buy 10?

Do we need scripts or websites to tell luddites how to implement this, and if so someone, somewhere simply do that.

I have always configured all my routers to allow password free access on the basis that the most evil person imaginable would have to be within 150-300 feet of me to accomplish their access to my network of web browsing devices. Blah!

There are entire towns that install wifi stations all over the place, not to mention McDonald's, Starbucks, motels, etc.

BTW every motel and hotel on the planet should install Ethernet in every room.

To bottom line this, JUST DO IT.

Rocketman

 

[Internaut]

We have something similar in the UK. BT uses the Home Hub routers they supply with their FTTC* broadband product to fill in gaps in their hotspot network. At home, I have two SSIDs: my WPA protected SSID and the FON ID that any member of the public can use. Free? If you have a BT or EE/Orange account, it's free to use. Some of the other ISPs (Virgin, I think) do similar.

*FTTC - Fibre To The Cabinet, giving speeds if 40-80mbps.

Edit: Oh, VulchR beat me to it.

 

[4614429]

Comcast has apparently been rolling out a similar system. It's a completely separate network which in theory shouldn't even affect your bandwidth because they allot bandwidth independent of your connection (the pipe is already bigger than your purchased bandwidth). I'll grab an article about it at random for convenience.

There will always be some effect on your personal internet connection, even if it is marginal. A modem, along with every device we'll ever use, is really just a tiny computer. If you increase load on that computer, its performance will change.

There's a reason why ISP-provided Wi-Fi modem/router combos don't usually work well. It's because they're the cheapest model the ISP can supply without it actually crapping out all the time, of course, but it's also due to that device having to do several things at once at all times, namely providing your phone line, your IPTV, your internet AND NOW also a unified hotspot connection.

I'm of the opinion that if the quality of these devices does not change, this feature will never be popular. Especially not with power users.

Then again, if these devices were REALLY GOOD, no one would purchase a dedicated router from a third party brand I mentioned earlier any more.

The world of home networking is a strange market, because in the last couple of years with all those smartphones, tablets and internet streaming services, cable modem / internet systems haven't really changed along with it.

Fiber optic connections on the other hand...

 

[s2mikey]

Lots of people don't seem to understand some very basic things about this approach:

1) It doesn't affect your security. It's not on your network. It's on your ISP's network.
2) It doesn't affect your data usage or speeds. It affects your ISP's data usage and speeds.
3) Your ISP doesn't provide unlimited speeds on the Guest network. Typically it's limited to 512kbps or 1Mbps.

Honestly, when I think about it, it kind of seems stupid to have every house on the block buying their own Internet connection when they could just stick a hotspot or two every few hundred feet and make you pay to log in. Think of the infrastructure that we could do without if everyone didn't demand a 50M pipe into their house.

Totally agree with your last paragraph. Just the other day at our village planning board meeting I said it'd be nice to have a "village wifi" setup that each resident paid a small amount into via their tax bill. Of course, you could opt out but why would anyone? Seems like a great idea. We'd get to dump cable company wireless routers too. It's about time!

 

[SuperMatt]

I keep my network open. If you notice somebody is really abusing it, you can see their MAC address, and ban it.

 

[spicynujac]

A few years ago, free and open WIFI was ubiquitous. Then cable and ISP companies started freaking out and shipping their modems with a password enabled (usually a 10 digit number, which can be easily hacked, so it doesn't provide security, just keeps 99.9% of people off of a network). The vast majority of people (again, probably 99%+) never change the default settings on their wifi, and so almost all home networks are locked down now, just as they were mostly free before. This move was entirely due to the American fear that a capitalistic cable company might lose a paying customer.

To all the silly people saying "this could never work" it already works in the USA in non-residential settings (I'd say well over half of all the restaurants, grocery stores, Home Depot/Lowes, auto repair, libraries, parks, etc.) have free wifi that I can use anonymously and somehow we don't have an epidemic of child pornography or whatever scapegoat reason to fear free wifi. And it is currently working residentially in many countries overseas.

The only reason I don't currently run free wifi is that my Tomato router doesn't support 2 networks and I don't want to open mine up to let the neighbors torrent movies. Not because it's illegal to torrent movies, but because I pay for the cheapest tier of service and that would bring my download to a crawl.

I'm glad Steve was in favor of free, open wifi, but I really wish he pushed it more. I never knew this was an issue of his, and if you ask the typical American, he is probably afraid it will allow people to "hack" you if you do it or some other nonsense. There is a lot of misinformation on this topic and if Steve or another trusted party had pushed it, we could have a lot more available wifi today. Although I think we are heading there. It seems that a new store or restaurant adds wifi all the time.