802.11n Wi-Fi standard finally approved
Finally, the Draft will now be taken off this logo.
As predicted last month, the IEEE has finally approved the 802.11n high-throughput wireless LAN standard.
Finalization of the new wireless networking standard--which is capable of delivering throughput speeds up to 300 megabits per second (and even higher)--took exactly seven years from the day it was conceived, or six years from the first draft version. The standard has been through a dozen or so draft versions.
News of the ratification broke via a blog post displaying an e-mail sent by Bruce Kraemer, longtime chairman of the 802.11n Task Group, to task group members. There has been no public announcement yet. Update 5:49 p.m. PDT: A press release has been issued.
(The 802.11n Task Group is part of the 802.11 Working Group, which oversees WLAN (wireless local-area network) standards. Task group members include the majority of Wi-Fi chipmakers, software developers, and equipment OEM vendors. Meru Networks, one of the members, posted the blog that broke the news.)
It's likely, however, that final approval of the standard will be publicly announced by September 15, the date when Meru Networks puts on a public Webcast to provide answers about the ratification.
According to the Wi-Fi Alliance, the group that tests and certifies wireless products to ensure their interoperability, all existing Wi-Fi Certified Draft N wireless products will still work with the final standard.
802.11n offers much higher speeds than the previous, already-ratified 802.11g, which caps at only 54Mbps. Due to the compelling higher speed, most wireless vendors haven been offering 802.11n-based (also known as Wireless-N) products during the past six years and calling them Draft N products. Now the Draft is no more.
According to the Wi-Fi Alliance, most, if not all, of the existing equipment can be upgraded to the final specification via a firmware update. Finally, all future wireless networking products will be compatible with today's products that have been Wi-Fi-certified.
Dong Ngo is a CNET editor who covers networking and network storage, and writes about anything else he finds interesting. You can also listen to his podcast at insidecnetlabs.cnet.com. E-mail Dong. 
There is nothing really hard about this process other than fighting over whose IP gets into the standard, but that alone can drag the process out for years...
...and as the Capt stated, if you are getting to party around the globe and your products are already in the market, then what motivates you to complete?
Criticize all you like but being an engineer is a hard life; I'm glad the working group members get to take a vacation.
...and it's not even streaming from my soon-to-be-faster internet yet.
Where have I heard that before? :)
Still, great to see!
it's called business partnership. How many hardware companies are out there?
netgear, linksys, dlink,sysco, etc.... and the list is growing.
Don't worry kid you can still troll.
Prove it....no just forget it. The sad fact that people like you try to turn this article into yet another pathetic excuse to start some irrational Apple vs Microsoft debate serves as proof that you have no legitimate reasons or facts to back up your statements.
Speaking of "terrible reputations"...the negative, hypocritical, and stereotypiccally arrogant attitude stupid Apple fanbois like you are known for isn't something many would brag about.
Too many competing signals at that frequency range(other wireless routers/AP's, phones, microwaves, etc), lots of management traffic, the receivers on both ends need to filter out duplicate packets, weather conditions, etc.
The best part of N is its MIMO which actually thrives in an environment with lots of obstacles, but in your typical home network you are not going to see a massive performance increase in the LAN, and certainly not when you are connecting to node outside your LAN.
802.11n is faster, yes, but the key enhancement is the longer range. In typical environments with reflections and walls we can expect the range to become over three times what it was with 802.1g for the same effective speed.
And why does this matter? It means that whenever you are in a street trying to get a free signal you will have approximately ten times as many available access points in a low rise area, and about thirty times more if you count buildings (since you will be reaching signals from higher floors).
So while today getting a decent open wireless network signal from a good samaritanian that intentionally left his or her WiFi AP open today is a matter of luck (I have a success rate of about 20% in areas of dense population), when 802.11x becomes widespread you will be almost certain to find an open hot spot almost everywhere. And this would change the environment completely. You will never need a data plan anymore. You will have guaranteed connectivity in any populated area for free. And that's a worthy revolution.
Most of this country doesn't live stacked on top of one another, and most people know at least enough to protect their account and aren't willing to blindly share considering how many malicious types there are out there.
If and when we do see widespread wi-fi, it will be because there's finally enough demand for it to make it a worthwhile venture, and provided by someone who has the incentive to make it a worthwhile service instead of just a crapshoot.
"Free" and "guaranteed", logically enough, just don't tend to go together.
I am however not happy the writer either does not understand the words used or thinks we are not very intelligent by the statement ?which is capable of delivering throughput speeds up to 300 megabits per second (and even higher)?. Let us face it ?capable of delivering throughput speeds up to 300 megabits per second? is a statement of a limit so what does ?(and even higher)? tell us? What is the real limit? I know I would be interested in knowing the real limit.
If you have a crappy 6Mbps cable connection, you aren't getting over that obviously when you are getting data from the Internet.
Too many competing signals at that frequency range(other wireless routers/AP's, phones, microwaves, etc), lots of management traffic, the receivers on both ends need to filter out duplicate packets, weather conditions, etc.
The best part of N is its MIMO which actually thrives in an environment with lots of obstacles, but in your typical home network you are not going to see a massive performance increase in the LAN, and certainly not when you are connecting to node outside your LAN.
- by Neo Con September 13, 2009 10:46 PM PDT
- Yawn.
- Like this Reply to this comment
-
(36 Comments)