ippadmin/itpp-infrastructure
1
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull Requests Actions Packages Projects Releases Wiki Activity

Confirm Forefront map access posture

Browse Source
This commit is contained in:
root
2026-07-21 23:02:59 -04:00
parent 6035fc44b8
commit 34c91d52da
2 changed files with 3 additions and 2 deletions
Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files
.hermes/plans/2026-07-21_224054-forefront-broadband-map-plan.md
+2 -1
View File
@@ -303,6 +303,7 @@ Still needed before build:
2. Decision on whether to pursue FCC/CostQuest Fabric access. 2. Decision on whether to pursue FCC/CostQuest Fabric access.
3. Any Forefront coverage/install data when available. 3. Any Forefront coverage/install data when available.
4. Confirm temporary URL if/when deployed; default assumption remains `ops.itpropartner.com/forefront-broadband-map/`. 4. Confirm temporary URL if/when deployed; default assumption remains `ops.itpropartner.com/forefront-broadband-map/`.
5. No access protection is needed yet for the prototype.
### Phase 1 — FCC data proof-of-concept ### Phase 1 — FCC data proof-of-concept
@@ -474,7 +475,7 @@ Also keep canonical project note in:
2. Which Forefront data format will come first: coverage polygons, tower/AP/sector/customer/install/no-LOS data, or address-level serviceability list? 2. Which Forefront data format will come first: coverage polygons, tower/AP/sector/customer/install/no-LOS data, or address-level serviceability list?
3. Should business-only and residential-only services be shown separately when the source distinguishes them, or merged into one availability card? 3. Should business-only and residential-only services be shown separately when the source distinguishes them, or merged into one availability card?
4. What confidence threshold is acceptable for showing a provider as “available” versus “reported/possible”? 4. What confidence threshold is acceptable for showing a provider as “available” versus “reported/possible”?
5. Should the prototype remain unprotected as previously stated, or should Ops login be added once it is deployed? 5. No access protection is needed yet for the prototype; revisit only if the app later exposes sensitive Forefront/customer data.
--- ---
projects/forefront-broadband-map.md
+1 -1
View File
@@ -25,7 +25,7 @@ Temporary hosting, if needed: **Ops** — likely `ops.itpropartner.com/forefront
| Initial validation address | `927 Pierce Road, Red Oak, TX 75154` — geocoded via OpenStreetMap/Nominatim to `32.5177279, -96.7677135` | | Initial validation address | `927 Pierce Road, Red Oak, TX 75154` — geocoded via OpenStreetMap/Nominatim to `32.5177279, -96.7677135` |
| Desired fields | Include speed, technology, price, install fee, contract, order URL, phone number when available | | Desired fields | Include speed, technology, price, install fee, contract, order URL, phone number when available |
| Under-300 Mbps providers | Show grayed out / excluded, not hidden | | Under-300 Mbps providers | Show grayed out / excluded, not hidden |
| Prototype access protection | Not needed now | | Prototype access protection | No access protection needed yet |
| Manual sampled validation if provider sites block automation | Yes | | Manual sampled validation if provider sites block automation | Yes |
| Forefront source data format | Still needs specific format; Germaine answered yes but not which type. Accept polygons, tower/AP/sector data, or address-level serviceability list. | | Forefront source data format | Still needs specific format; Germaine answered yes but not which type. Accept polygons, tower/AP/sector data, or address-level serviceability list. |
| Additional plan-response confirmation | Internal first; Forefront layer yes; include available result details; under-300 Mbps services should be marked excluded | | Additional plan-response confirmation | Internal first; Forefront layer yes; include available result details; under-300 Mbps services should be marked excluded |