What is the Current Status of WiMAX? 239
PalletBoy asks: "I live in BFE (read 'remote') Pennsylvania where BroadBand is not available in any form save satellite, which is no good for price and latency reasons (curse my MMO addiction!). My big question is: what is the -actual- current status of WiMAX technology? Different sites have me believing different things and I can't find an exact answer to the question 'When will I be able to buy a WiMAX router and cards so I can remotely receive broadband?' When will WiMAX (802.16) be solidly standardized, out, and affordable? Or is it already there?"
I Was In Your Shoes (Score:5, Informative)
Re:I Was In Your Shoes (Score:4, Informative)
My only complaints have been the price of the hardware (Alvarion BreezeAccess II - $1200 from the ISP, or closer to $400 on eBay), and the fact that they tend to go down whenever lighting clobbers the mountain where their antenna is.
Cellphone data services? (Score:2)
Re:I Was In Your Shoes (Score:2)
This is in comparison to my brother's last job where the network engineers
Re:I AM in your shoes... (Score:2)
Re:I AM in your shoes... (Score:3, Informative)
I know there's nothing for me to see here. (Score:3, Funny)
Right Now! (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Right Now! (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Right Now! (Score:3, Informative)
what is funny is that the wimax forum was predicting shipping products in _2004_. then they bumped it up to 2005. it's now the latter part of 2005 and they still haven't even finished testing. every wimax vendor I have talked to says 1H 2006, some are even saying 2H 2006.
as for deploying this stuff yourself right now -- forget it. you need an FCC license to do so. maybe i
Re:Right Now! (Score:2, Informative)
Pre-Standard and Need Local ISP (Score:3, Informative)
Also, of course, you still need to have an ISP within earshot who's running the stuff. Some ISPs are planning to do licensed spectrum only, and some are planning to do unlicensed, and of course
Wi-Max (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Wi-Max (Score:2)
Funny. I thought Williamsport WAS remote PA.
Re:Wi-Max (Score:2)
Try some place like Renovo, or Snow Shoe.
Re:Wi-Max (Score:2)
Re:Wi-Max (Score:3, Interesting)
Meanwhile, DSL is NOT available where I live in relatively Suburban NJ (not rural) approximately 20 miles outside New York City. My house was built in 1995 and my parents' house was built sometime before 1895, and I would have expected that I could get it first.
For now I'm stuck paying out the ears for C
Re:Wi-Max (Score:2)
Re:Wi-Max (Score:2)
There was a brief time in the 1990s when neighborhoods and apartment buildings were served via fibre to the curb - with head-end equipment completely incompatible with DSL. The equipment works just fine with voice, the last mile or inch is nice cle
Re:Wi-Max (Score:3, Interesting)
Verizone has declared DSL dead. It's Fios now... Basically, nobody (or near enough to nobody for the sake of this conversation) is doing "extended reach" DSL or adding new DSLAMS. If you can get DSL now, great. If not, don't hold your breath. You options are Fios sometime in the next 10 - 20 years or WiMAX in the next 5.
One other option may be to find someone else who CAN get DSL and has line of sight to your house. Do a WiFi bridge. Offer them "free" internet for the use of thei
Re:Wi-Max (Score:2)
Set up your own ISP, and resell what you don't use.
Re:Wi-Max (Score:2)
Re:Wi-Max (Score:2)
Re:Wi-Max (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Wi-Max (Score:2)
Re:Wi-Max (Score:2)
Re:Wi-Max (Score:2)
Reminds me of DSL (Score:4, Interesting)
It's not just a matter of cards... (Score:5, Insightful)
You do have a few options though. Move, of course... Or, if there's demand in your area, start up an ISP or cooperative. If there isn't demand for at least 10 people, you now know why nobody is offering it in your area.
Sean
Re:It's not just a matter of cards... (Score:5, Informative)
No, it can provide high speed or long distance, but not both at the same time. For really large sectors that will be used in rural areas, expect 10Mbps or less total throughput.
Re:It's not just a matter of cards... (Score:2)
Re:It's not just a matter of cards... (Score:3, Interesting)
i have yet to see any equipment, pre-wimax or other, that boast 60 miles
right now we've got some motorala canopy, the docs says they do 10 miles with a reflector and 4 without (did anyway, they just updated them). in reality you're lucky to be doing 5 miles with a reflector, i'm sure the wimax crap will be the same (in the 5.7ghz band)
Licensed and Unlicensed Spectrum are possible (Score:2)
Ask Google? (Score:5, Funny)
MOD PARENT INSIGHTFUL! (Plus link) (Score:3, Informative)
http://www.intel.com/netcomms/events/wimax.htm [intel.com]
Re:Ask Google? (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Ask Google? (Score:2)
Re:Ask Google? (Score:4, Insightful)
Plus the thing about google is, all it does is find published articles, and most of it is marketing hype.
When you ask slashdot, you're asking because you want to know the geekly opinion, which is often quite a bit different, easier, and less annoying, than spending hours wading through internet fluff.
BFE MI (Score:4, Informative)
Even so, the earliest estimate for me is around 2 years until it is ready. Until then, it looks like Cingular will have its edge network in place, and it will be a likely alternative. Although it looks like it will be 8 months until the EDGe network is in place here.
Re:BFE MI (Score:2)
...and therefore you do not live in Butt-Fucking Egypt. You live near a major interstate freeway replete with offramps and everything. Hell, you probably have a gas station!
It is solidly standardized in fixed mode (Score:5, Informative)
What is at issue is whether service providers will set up in your area. This is a very complex issue where spectrum policy and licensing collide with equipment availability, local permits (for towers etc), the cost of the technology and competition from DSL and cable. I don't pretend to know how it will pan out, but 2006 will be the year that the market gets effectively tested.
The current work is around mobility which relates more to handsets and laptops. This not only in the unfinished 802.16e spec, but in Wimax and the IETF, since for mobility, the backhaul networks need to be standardized and this is outside the realm of the 802.16 working group. Mobility will take some time.
Standardized but not necessarily interoperable (Score:2)
Re:Standardized but not necessarily interoperable (Score:2)
It matters a lot less when the user or service provider owns both ends of the link and can thus verify interoperability ahead of time.
Interoperability labelling does matter in certain scenarios, but compare the timeline of Wimax interop testing against what happened in the Bluetooth Si
It's coming, Just a little bit longer (months) (Score:3, Interesting)
But you can't beat the pricing for that kind of mobility in broadband.
Speakeasy has a WiMax setup on the Space Needle in Seattle, but the range only covers the north side of downtown. They are planning on rolling out more too, but I've seen less proof.
www.clearwire.com
Re:It's coming, Just a little bit longer (months) (Score:2, Informative)
I haven't seen anything WiMax that's real. It's a marketing thing that's gotten out of hand.
On the other hand, I did get to play with Clearwire's gear, and it does actually work pretty well. Their TOS is evil though, read it carefully.
Move to Seattle or Philadelphia (Score:2, Interesting)
you're more likely to get high-speed service over your power lines out in farm country, IMHO.
Re:Move to Seattle or Philadelphia (Score:2)
I personally hope for the best in your endeavor to get broadband services that are compatible with existing licensed services. I sincerely hope that BPL or PLC never happens and that the current pilot programs go down in flames. Putting fiber on powerlines is cool, putting broadband RF on power lines is very uncool as it emits wideband RF radiation that can interfer with other communication services.
Re:Move to Seattle or Philadelphia (Score:2)
Nagging question about bandwidth (Score:5, Insightful)
As I understand, the promises about the speed of WiMax are based on top speed (i.e. 1 user). Multiple users will have to share the same radio frequency and their connection speed will be lower.
I remember reading that 4G cell phone network will (with much lower connection speeds) will require on the order of 500MHz of radio spectrum. To put this number in prospective FCC actions slices of 10MHz for billions of $.
I'm not an expert in radio communications, but I don't see how the numbers (promised connection bandwidth and available radio spectrum) would ever add up. Could someone explain?
Re:Nagging question about bandwidth (Score:2)
Right, but cell phones (and PCS and other phones, even though they distance themselves from `cell' phones) work by using lower power signals that only have to reach a tower a short distance away. Everything is broken up into `cells'.
So a person over here can be using X amount of b
Re:Nagging question about bandwidth (Score:2)
Also, communications are divided into packets, so you could be using the same frequency as somebody right next to you, but not necessarily at the exact same microsecond.
Re:Nagging question about bandwidth (Score:2)
See http://www.nextgencommunications.net/wisp/2005/07
Re:Nagging question about bandwidth (Score:2)
Re:Nagging question about bandwidth (Score:2, Informative)
Also important to understand is that the lower the transmit
Re:Nagging question about bandwidth (Score:2)
You actually want exactly the opposite. You want to reuse the same frequency as much as possible, so you want relatively short range.
By the way, don't you find it mindboggling that a tiny cell phone with the maximum output of 2W and omnidirectional ante
Re:Nagging question about bandwidth (Score:2)
That is grossly oversimplified.
If you reduce the frequency and keep the power (and gain of the antenna) constant, the amplitude of the signal will go up, but it's not really the amplitude that matters when picking up a signal. Really, it's the back
Re:Nagging question about bandwidth (Score:5, Interesting)
The bottom line with any wireless system is how well engineered it is.
The following techniques help a lot:
a) broadband suppliers give a 'contention ratio' somewhere between 20 and 50. In other words they assume you are only using it 1/20 to 1/50 of the time. So a single 2M radio link can handle 20-50 customers each with 2M and a 100M radio link can handle 1000-2500 people (in principle.)
b) directional antennas help a lot. So, if they stick up a mast with antennas pointing in different directions (adjacent antennas on different frequencies) then they'll get very little contention.
c) nodes that don't 'shout'; in other words if the nodes don't transmit at any more power than they absolutely need to; this minimises the distance that any interference is likely to occur at; permitting channel reuse.
d) add base stations, (particularly in conjunction with c) ) this mean that each base station can transmit and receive at lower power- this reduces the size of the coverage area, and you gain multiple times the users (since each node only uses up the bandwidth for a smaller distance).
e) use different channels (each channel has its own customers on)
f) node routing (in other words, instead of a customer sending a signal all the way to the base station, route it through another customer that is closer).
If you use all these techniques appropriately, the amount of bandwidth per user is constant, independent of the number of users, surprisingly.
BFE fo' life (Score:5, Informative)
Verizon Covers Almost All of PA (Score:4, Informative)
Look at the nationwide map. It looks like most, if not all, of PA is covered with Verizon wireless high speed intnernet ($59/month+regular cell - unlimited - 400Kbps-800Kbps with 2Mbps bursting).
http://www.verizonwireless.com/b2c/mobileoptions/
It may not be WiMax, but it gets the job done.
Also, if you can find someone within line of sight who has DSL or Cable modem, you can roll your own point to point wireless network pretty easilly, even with plain old 802.11a/b/g.
Re:Verizon Covers Almost All of PA (Score:2)
Not according to the Map (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Verizon Covers Almost All of PA (Score:2)
This message sent via WiMax (Score:5, Funny)
Re:This message sent via WiMax (Score:5, Funny)
Re:This message sent via WiMax (Score:2)
BFE, MS (Score:4, Informative)
Re:BFE, MS (Score:2)
Wait, you get a satellite to yourself? And shouldn't they be launching it, not installing it at your house?
Fixed vs. Mobile performance (Score:5, Informative)
There is Hope... BPL (Score:2, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Given upcoming oil issues... (Score:3, Insightful)
State of the WiMax (Score:5, Informative)
Also, there is really no unity on spectrum for WiMax stuff yet. For 802.11b, for instance, most devices today work in that 2.4Ghz band, so devices are all compatible. Not so much for 802.16, last I saw there were lots of frequencies that could be used, in both licensed and unlicensed spectrum spaces. And it's unlikely that a device you'll get will have antenna systems designed for every possible allowed 802.16 frequency... which I'd wager means that you will likely need to buy hardware that matches your vendor.
I think for the near term, you should see if you have either WCDMA or CDMA 1xEV-DO rev A data coverage in your area. EV-DO has decent bandwith, and DO rev A really reduces latency and increases reverse link bandwith. As a bonus, you should be able to use the service in most major populated areas... You might have to shell out bucks though. For DO rev A, Sprint and Verizon already own the spectrum, and are starting to roll out these services. The GSM folks are switching to WCDMA, but I don't know the state of their data services. My experience is that GPRS/EDGE doesn't have very good data rates in real life... youll want to stick with the 3G data standards.
Or, if you are lucky, you might find a smaller service provider that uses directional 802.11 in your area.. that might work reasonably well.
3 perspectives: Provider, User, Observer (Score:5, Informative)
In North America, the main deployments are expected to be in the 2.5GHz "wireless cable" bands, which are mostly licensed to Sprint, the IFTS (educational TV bands) mostly licensed to Catholic Archdioceses but now authorized for subleasing) and a band around 3.5GHz. Various bands around 3.2, 3.5 and 3.6GHz is also where other parts of the world are expected to deploy these services.
If you are a large provider, like Sprint, you had better get field trials underway by now, or your licenses may be in danger of expiring. And you will be negotiating with a handful of equipment manufacturers for a wholesale deal on equipment working on your licensed frequencies.
If you are a small ISP, you will probably have to look to the unlicensed 5.8GHz, and talk to Alvarion. I have not looked much at who else has equipment for that band. Be aware that the higher frequencies do not travel as far as 2.4GHz, so you may in fact be better off with high-end WiFi kit built from the ground up for outdoor use.
If you are a user, you need to shop around for a service provider, and let them worry about the right equipment.
(I work for a small wireless equipment house that makes low-bandwidth wireless systems for very long range, especially targeted to underdeveloped areas of the world. http://www.afar.net/ [afar.net])
Catch 22 (Score:2, Informative)
Deploying a broadband infrastructure takes lots of $$$. And where are the best places to recover your capitol expenses? The high population density areas (which by the way already have other forms of broadband already available (cable, DSL)).
The bottom line is that you have to already have access to broadband in order to get other forms of broadband.
I live in BFE Ohio and am resigned to the fact that I will need to
In Greenville SC ... (Score:3, Informative)
They have the wireless service spread over a 10 mile radius at $26.95 a month for 4Mb service.
They have this same service "morphed" into a free downtown Wifi network. (Basically taking the wimax modem and running it into a wireless router then installing repeaters every 300 ft downtown.)
It's building slowly but surely - it's not going to be for big cities - it will be rural broadband.
Re:In Greenville SC ... (Score:2)
Wireless ISP locater (Score:2, Informative)
I worked on an 802.16 project... (Score:2, Interesting)
Verizon is advertising WiMAX (Score:2, Interesting)
A female friend said he had a WiMAX... (Score:2)
Why is it that this wireless stuff gets fawning slavish attention from the
I'm not saying it is necessarily all bad, but to give adoring praise constantly
Direcway (Score:2)
WiMax hype (Score:2)
WiMax is a FIXED, POINT TO POINT multiple access protocol for backhaul, NOT end users. It's intended for linking 300 foot towers with line of sight to each other over a Metropolitan Area.
It's NOT something you're going to use for your laptop, or cellphone, or even at home. You're not going to buy a Linksys WiMax router any time soon.
Ugh!
--Mike--
Have Fixed Wireless in BF Michigan (Score:2)
Communications 536.6 kilobits per second
Storage 65.5 kilobytes per second
1MB file download 15.6 seconds
Subjective rating Not bad
I get service on par with DSL and have zero problems with latency. I have a few problems with Halo2 on Xbox live, but that is more due to Old Gamers Syndrome than it is connectivity.
I believe that I am running 2.4Ghz, because the owner of the ISP suggested that I run down to a 900Mhz phone, and n
$$$ poof (Score:2)
It might be better to get some people together and do some wifi link out to a location where you can get service. But that's a lot of work. But $500 can get you a power link.
Re:Verizon commercials (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Verizon commercials (Score:2)
Unless, as the original poster posited, its a broadband alternative where previously there was none. I'd call that pretty un-worthless but, hey, that's just me.
Re:Verizon commercials (Score:3, Funny)
But of course, since we all know that the only reason for getting BB is for playing WoW, right?
Grow up, get a real job, move out of your parents' basement.
Re:butt fuck egypt? (Score:3, Interesting)
Now- do you know what RFD stands for, as in Mayberry?
Re:butt fuck egypt? (Score:2)
Re:butt fuck egypt? (Score:2)
Re:butt fuck egypt? (Score:3, Informative)
Re:butt fuck egypt? (Score:2)
Which means "out in the middle of nowhere". I had heard that there was a city called "Bumfunk" or something similar but personally, I've never actually seen the city on a map so I am guessing someone was just joking with me.
It is a VERY common saying throughout the entire US. Don't know about our British friends across the pond, though.
Either Bum Fuck Egypt or Butt Fuck Egypt. (Score:3, Informative)
RFD stands for "Rural Free Delivery", which I believe was replaced by the term "Rural Route".
BUFF as a name for a B52 means "Big Ugly Fat Fucker".
Re:Completely offtopic, but... which OS does host (Score:2)
Re:AUA (Score:2)
Re:AUA (Score:2, Informative)
Main Entry: acronym
Pronunciation: 'a-kr&-"nim
Function: noun
Etymology: acr- + -onym
: a word (as NATO, radar, or snafu) formed from the initial letter or letters of each of the successive parts or major parts of a compound term; also : an abbreviation (as FBI) formed from initial letters : INITIALISM (the emphasis is mine)
Re:AUA (Score:2)
acronym Audio pronunciation of "acronym" ( P ) Pronunciation Key (kr-nm)
n.
A word formed from the initial letters of a name, such as WAC for Women's Army Corps, or by combining initial letters or parts of a series of words, such as radar for radio detecting and ranging.
I agree; millions don't (Score:2)
Re:where? (Score:2)
NAT is beautiful solution to address space & (Score:4, Informative)
NAT alone does improve security. It is far better than a direct connection. NAT alone will stop a lot of port scan worms and door knob testers(the bulk of the crud that attacks simple users like myself). It's like having a cheap U-Lock on your bike, sure you can pick it with a BIC, but most people don't know that and it keeps mooks from riding off on it. THis is why most broadband routers & modems these days have NAT, it's a good first step.
Double NAT, however, is a different story. Double NAT is more difficult to breach. I am not going to say it is foolproof but it takes some serious effort to get across and for the networks that I have set up with this solution the end users have seen a dramatic drop in successful attacks. The only thing that I have seen succeed are trojans.
Still, if you want to be secure, I did suggested http://www.ipcop.org/ [ipcop.org], a linux distro that uses ipchains/tables and is a fairly sophisticated firewall and I have found to be a reliable and cost effective alternative to PIX or Checkpoint. Sites I have installed this solution in conjunction with good AV have had no breaches and they still run 98.
Security is not just one thing. Like the bike example above, security is many things: not just locking the front wheel, but locking the frame and both wheels; locking it in a well lit and visible place; bringing it indoors when possible... security is a matter of practicing many layers of secure procedures across the board -- it's using a secure OS, strong passwords, using virus/spyware protection, using firewalls, intrusion detection, logging, etc.
For the average enduser, most of this doesn't make any sense and you can't expect them to get it right even some of the time. But you put an unpatched Win98 box behind double NAT, even single NAT, and you will see a dramatic reduction in exploitation.
That qualifies as an improvement in security.