Manage updates with the Download App
- Related Stories
-
A method to the iPhone madness?
June 29, 2007 -
Wi-Fi phones a no-go, Siemens says
June 27, 2007 -
Bringing public Wi-Fi to small-town America
June 5, 2007 -
Motorola waits on 802.11n approval
May 25, 2007 -
Wi-Fi Alliance to begin certifying 802.11n gear
May 16, 2007 -
Facing economic realities of muni Wi-Fi
May 3, 2007 - Related Blogs
-
802.11n draft standard closer to final approval
January 22, 2007
Originally developed to allow multiple computers to share access to the Internet, the Wi-Fi lure of "free spectrum, no strings attached," is driving every imaginable type of handheld device to embed the technology as users demand Wi-Fi access at home, in the workplace and in public venues. Yet as more and more content is poured into Wi-Fi networks, the technology is now struggling to keep pace.
Next generation Wi-Fi technology, 802.11n, is widely viewed as a panacea to the current limitations. A tremendous boost to Wi-Fi, 802.11n increases the capacity of the technology to hundreds of megabits per second (Mbps) from 54 Mbps today. This is achieved by ganging multiple Wi-Fi radios together in a single Wi-Fi device. At challenging locations where the higher data rates are not possible--for example, at the far ranges or in noisy environments--the extra Wi-Fi radios are used to strengthen the signal and extend its reach.
These all sound appealing except for a nagging blind spot--interference caused by neighboring devices that operate in the same unlicensed spectrum.
What's the problem with 802.11n?
Speed isn't a common Wi-Fi complaint. Reliability and consistent coverage are the real problems and interference is the culprit. For Wi-Fi to become the utility people expect at their fingertips, it must operate like a wire in the air.
Wi-Fi interference comes from a myriad of things such as neighboring Wi-Fi networks, microwave ovens, Bluetooth devices, cordless phones, even treadmills. This interference causes Wi-Fi to thrash, forcing down the data rate to the point where the only thing you can do is cruise the Web.
802.11n exacerbates this problem. With 802.11n there are now multiple Wi-Fi signals being transmitted in all directions, each of which can be interfered with before reaching their destination. The reverse is also true; multiple radios in each 11n device make it a more potent interferer than its predecessors.
Recent technical innovations, however, are proving to be effective in working around interference. Similar to an Internet router that picks the best path for every packet by monitoring the performance of all its available paths, a smart beam steering system monitors the radio frequency (RF) environment and adapts the direction and the shape of the transmit beam to avoid interference.
This technology focuses Wi-Fi signals (like a flash light) toward the intended destination and away from the direction of strong noise. By constantly picking the highest quality paths available, this transmits at the highest data rates reliably, avoiding transmission errors.
What's the Wi-Fi hurry?
Small and medium businesses have been looking to adopt Wi-Fi in a big way but haven't taken the plunge because of their concerns over Wi-Fi's reliability, cost and ease of use.
In a recent survey of more than 500 small and medium U.S. and European businesses, Forrester Research found that more than 52 percent had no plans to adopt Wi-Fi. Over 36 percent said reliability was the most important factor in their decision, or lack of decision, citing high cost as the second most important factor. This also explains why the current penetration of wireless LAN into the enterprise is only about 15 percent, according to the Dell'Oro Group.
Ironically, two of the major tenets of the Wi-Fi religion have been the technology's low cost and ease of use. But for businesses, Wi-Fi has been anything but cheap and easy.
Installing a single access point at home may be fairly straightforward, but installing a network of access points is not. IT staff members don't have the time to perform lengthy Wi-Fi site surveys and RF planning every time there's a change.
Automating the installation of Wi-Fi access points and the configuration of user devices is essential for moving Wi-Fi forward into the larger underserved swath of the enterprise market.
Propelled by devices like the iPhone, which effectively put a computer in your hand, Wi-Fi is poised to become the de facto onramp to all broadband wireless technologies at home, at work and in public venues. But Wi-Fi must move from a technology of convenience to a dependable and ubiquitous utility. Until then, it remains a prison of promises.
Biography
Selina Lo is president and CEO of Ruckus Wireless.
See more CNET content tagged:
IEEE 802.11n, interference, Wi-Fi, radio frequency, Wi-Fi network
32 comments
Join the conversation! Add your comment
By the way, as a speech you prolonged the lead-up to the problem for longer than most readers will pay attention. Is this gangling of frequencies something "new" - as in yesterday or today - or are you just writing this article for public relations purposes.
What was missing? Well, more about how your company and others are solving the interference problem. Your compay is solving the interference problems, right? Politicians tells about things that they wish would happen - engineers talk about what is happening, what can be done.
How was this a news story?
2) Please don't be ridiculous and say the iPhone is stupid. If you're going to make a blanket statement, at least give some evidence.
3) No one cares what you use. This has nothing to do with the story, or comments about the story.
All the flawless wireless networking in the world won't make a crap bit of difference if it represents a network security vulnerability, and it's not exactly news that WiFi leaves a lot to be desired in the security department. Free those data packets from a wire, and somebody, somewhere, will find a desire and the means to intercept and decode them.
Not that wires in and of themselves ensure security, but unlike WiFi, at least a network engineer knows where the wires go and what's connected to them in the enterprise.
In my small company (<10 people), we have WiFi. It's locked down reasonably well, it's for guest Internet access only, employees are prohibited from using it, and it's wholly separate in every way from the wireline network. It even has its own Internet access feeding it.
Paranoid? Maybe. But I'm not taking any chances, and again, I'd wager that neither are enterprise level companies who wouldn't risk employee use even by providing it for outside guests.
We run the transmitters at the lowest possible power setting and frequently check to insure our signal isn't usable outside of the building.
Nothing wrong with being paranoid. As Henry Kissinger said, "Even paranoids have enemies."
As for wireless. There are some protocols and tools that help with security, people just don't use them.
Nothing is uncrackable of course, a wired transmission can be just as easily(or easier if you think wired is more secure) hacked into.
My little crappy wireless router is set up where it would take a far larger amount of effort to crack then the gains would be worth. Which is my definition of security.
As I said, the problem is lazy and/or stupid people. Go on a wardrive through residential neighborhoods and you will be scared.
Wardrive though a business or government district and you will be terrified.
The problem is that so many people are too lazy or just don't know they should switch the defaults.
A large measure of security could be obtained if wireless router manufacturers forced users to change the default ID and password. And enforce strong passwords. If this happened you would see significant decreases in successful wireless attacks.
While security isn't as sloppy in days of yore (when an Orinoco WiFi card lashed to an antenna-rigged Pringles' Can could get you into a network from furlongs away), it is still, at base, sloppy. Default WiFi system settings are sloppy (e.g. the most popular ISP that I can almost count on completely while traveling has access points called "linksys"). Algorithms to encrypt the initial keys are sloppy. Long story short, for security, the whole blasted architecture is sloppy.
Fix that, and maybe, just maybe, WiFi will be more widely used. Until then, it's nice for public use, but I certainly wouldn't trust anything to it...
/P
It's "tenets", the root word is "hold", as in "things you hold to be true".
"Tenants" are found in apartments.
Better brush up on the words you use before you use them.
BWilde
Also, I don't know if you happen to come from the United States of America - if you do not, then I apologise for my assumption - , but people like me who are from United KIngdom, in general, and in my case England, in particular, think it smacks of an attitude that is not entirely "stereotypical" that you think you must be so superior that you feel you have the right to criticise other people for their actions when you have not even got your facts straight!
Another few prime examples:
1)George W Bush and his failed 'search' for the so called WMD's
2)His 'war on terror' to promote 'freedom and democracy', which is not having the desired effect but making things worse, by assuming everybody else must surely want to live like the americans, I mean they are a perfect people in a perfect country aren't they? So why woudn't they want to spread their idea of paradise.
p.s. Just in case you assume that because I have a username of 'Saladdin', that I am of middle eastern origin and/or of the same 'faith' as those lunatics who claim to be promoting 'Jihad' in the name of 'Allah', I would like to say that I am of no particular faith at all but my attitudes are mostly 'Christian' because of where I was born and how I have been brought up and the fact that most of my ancestors are actually traceable back to the thirteenth century (coincidentally, about the same time as the original 'crusades' that GWB's war is accused of copying) in mostly Scotland, Ireland and the north of England
3)The fact that even though 'some' Americans think they are speaking the same language (English) as the people like me, they are still spelling a lot of words wrong - like 'Color' which is correctly spelled as COLOUR, and 'Valor' which is correctly spelled VALOUR, and 'Thru' which is correectly spelled THROUGH, etc.
Phew! I did not really mean to get on MY high horse, but hey, 'such is life', and 'it takes all sorts to make a world' as my grandparents used to say when they were still alive.
Not only that but nearly all of the inadequate security features of WiFi actually reduce the reliability of the product by interrupting the packet flow. MAC Address filtering is about the only one that doesn't (hardly the most secure method of filtering out undesirables).
So yeah many of the reasons the author gives for businesses not adopting WiFi are true..
Of course being in the WiFi business is probably why she didn't include security as an issue - hardly the best way to promote your business in the day and age of CNN 'tards writing ridiculous articles about malware downing airplanes or being used as an internet weapon of mass destruction.
good reporter: no, how do you say it.. problema?
the story: iphones flying off the shelves these days, but nobody knows the real consequences of them. sources in AT&T, Microsoft, and ilovebees.com say that the mobile devices are driving away bees in droves with their radio signals.
Millions of americans watch. learn that cell phones bad for bees. also learn that smoking pot will make your pain go away, drug dealers advocate making pot use in hospitals legal.
Don't believe everything you see on tv or the net. real scienteists usually dont have the time or dont want to associate with reporters, so the media has to stick with those guys who went to *enter obscure school name here* because nobody else volunteers.
It just sounds rather untrue...
Ruckus is focusing only on the 802.11g radios at this point and so ignores the capabilities of the 5Ghz version of 802.11n that avoids interference and allows for robust data throughput in a home.
Best approach is select a Router for your home network that offers both the 2.4 & 5.8Ghz radios which will allow for the best of both worlds.
Not sure if Ruckus products will be able to 9or even want to) address a 802.11n platform (MIMO vs BeamForming).
Will wait and see.
Jacomo
And we have and ARE building an 802.11n system. Ironically, 802.11n will desparately need signal path selection to 1) avoid interferencee 2) ensure multi-path. With 802.11n there is now twice as much chance for intereference to cause problems and the multiple antennas on these systems are still crappy omnis.
This might help explain better:
<a class="jive-link-external" href="http://www.ruckuswireless.com/technology/whitepapers/80211n/" target="_newWindow">http://www.ruckuswireless.com/technology/whitepapers/80211n/</a>
She chose NOT to jump on the security bandwagon because it's been done to death. Everyone knows that security remains the biggest concern relative to implementation. But security doesn't speak to the user experience per se.
The biggest complaint we typically hear from users about Wi-Fi isn't security (yes they're concerned about it) but it's signal coverage and reliability. And we believe there are creative ways to solve these problems.
David Callisch
Ruckus Wireless
<a class="jive-link-external" href="http://news.com.com/Sun+says+Java+flaw+has+been+patched/2100-1002_3-6196493.html?tag=nefd.pulse" target="_newWindow">http://news.com.com/Sun+says+Java+flaw+has+been+patched/2100-1002_3-6196493.html?tag=nefd.pulse</a>
It is listed under the most discussed, however there is no talk back link on that page.
I listed this as spam so you could delete this comment after you turn it over to your web master.
Thanks.
Could you explain to me how it would be possible for Ms Lo's alleged 'misunderstanding of the progression of wireless technologies and the security and societal implications' to be affected by the use of a 'spell checker'?
After reading her article TWICE I could not make any comment about it because:
1) I do not have enough technical knowledge about the subject of her article to be able to dispute anything she wrote in it - unlike quite a few people posting their own comments.
2) I not only did not see any spelling or grammatical errors in her use of the English language in her article that I would feel bad enough to criticise her for, I actually did not see ANY at all.
3) I would also not be so rude as to call someone 'clueless', or criticise their spelling unless I was sure of my facts AND was good enough to give examples of the persons alleged errors! For clarification of my meaning just read my reply to 'Hardrada'!