Wireless LAN Questionaire

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windows.networking.wireless,comp.os.ms-windows.networking,comp.os.linux.networking,alt.internet.wireless (More info?)

Hi all,

I am investigating Wireless LANs, and as part, I am trying to get
peoples awareness on the subject matter.
I have published a questionnaire at:

http://www.davewilding.co.uk/wifi-index.asp

The questionnaire will only take 5 minutes and all information will be
treated confidentiality.

Anyone can answer this questionnaire, and if you have any comments
please e-mail me on:
bencooper@ureach.com

THANKS IN ADVANCE!
13 answers Last reply
More about wireless questionaire
  1. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windows.networking.wireless,comp.os.ms-windows.networking,comp.os.linux.networking,alt.internet.wireless (More info?)

    Hi.

    Took the Questionnaire
    One remark No one can Use 802.11i
    I.e useless choice.

    Jack (MVP-Networking).

    "Vidual" <vidual_eye@hotmail.com> wrote in message
    news:b11da1f8.0406231744.5ed2da3d@posting.google.com...
    > Hi all,
    >
    > I am investigating Wireless LANs, and as part, I am trying to get
    > peoples awareness on the subject matter.
    > I have published a questionnaire at:
    >
    > http://www.davewilding.co.uk/wifi-index.asp
    >
    > The questionnaire will only take 5 minutes and all information will be
    > treated confidentiality.
    >
    > Anyone can answer this questionnaire, and if you have any comments
    > please e-mail me on:
    > bencooper@ureach.com
    >
    > THANKS IN ADVANCE!
  2. Archived from groups: alt.internet.wireless (More info?)

    Actually, 802.11i is essentially done, and will be tested by Wi-fi Alliance
    under the WPA2 suite. Maybe no-one is using it at this moment, but it will
    be available. I'd remove "802.11" from the list, since virtually no-one
    deploys a 2 Mbps 802.11-only network, and a/b/g imply 802.11.

    "Cat" <cat5e@mail.com> wrote in message
    news:uouMLMZWEHA.2544@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
    > Hi.
    >
    > Took the Questionnaire
    > One remark No one can Use 802.11i
    > I.e useless choice.
    >
    > Jack (MVP-Networking).
    >
    > "Vidual" <vidual_eye@hotmail.com> wrote in message
    > news:b11da1f8.0406231744.5ed2da3d@posting.google.com...
    > > Hi all,
    > >
    > > I am investigating Wireless LANs, and as part, I am trying to get
    > > peoples awareness on the subject matter.
    > > I have published a questionnaire at:
    > >
    > > http://www.davewilding.co.uk/wifi-index.asp
    > >
    > > The questionnaire will only take 5 minutes and all information will be
    > > treated confidentiality.
    > >
    > > Anyone can answer this questionnaire, and if you have any comments
    > > please e-mail me on:
    > > bencooper@ureach.com
    > >
    > > THANKS IN ADVANCE!
    >
    >
  3. Archived from groups: alt.internet.wireless (More info?)

    gary wrote:

    > since virtually no-one
    > deploys a 2 Mbps 802.11-only network, and a/b/g imply 802.11.

    What have you been smoking?
  4. Archived from groups: alt.internet.wireless (More info?)

    On Thu, 24 Jun 2004 02:46:38 GMT, "gary" <pleasenospam@sbcglobal.net>
    wrote:

    >Actually, 802.11i is essentially done, and will be tested by Wi-fi Alliance
    >under the WPA2 suite. Maybe no-one is using it at this moment, but it will
    >be available. I'd remove "802.11" from the list, since virtually no-one
    >deploys a 2 Mbps 802.11-only network, and a/b/g imply 802.11.

    Sure they do. 802.11 frequency hopping (instead of direct sequence)
    is still sold by Breezecom/Alvarion as Breezeaccess II:
    http://www.alvarion-usa.com/RunTime/Products_2020.asp?tNodeParam=9
    Sorry, I can't supply a list of existing FH networks.


    --
    Jeff Liebermann jeffl@comix.santa-cruz.ca.us
    150 Felker St #D 831-336-2558
    Santa Cruz CA 95060 AE6KS
  5. Archived from groups: alt.internet.wireless (More info?)

    Explain yourself, please.

    "Rôgêr" <abuse@your.isp.com> wrote in message
    news:gr-dnR8mpLM41UfdRVn-ug@pghconnect.com...
    > gary wrote:
    >
    > > since virtually no-one
    > > deploys a 2 Mbps 802.11-only network, and a/b/g imply 802.11.
    >
    > What have you been smoking?
    >
  6. Archived from groups: alt.internet.wireless (More info?)

    I should have omitted "a" from the list, that was a finger-check. What else?

    "Rôgêr" <abuse@your.isp.com> wrote in message
    news:gr-dnR8mpLM41UfdRVn-ug@pghconnect.com...
    > gary wrote:
    >
    > > since virtually no-one
    > > deploys a 2 Mbps 802.11-only network, and a/b/g imply 802.11.
    >
    > What have you been smoking?
    >
  7. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windows.networking.wireless (More info?)

    "Cat" <cat5e@mail.com> wrote in message news:uouMLMZWEHA.2544@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
    > Took the Questionnaire
    > One remark No one can Use 802.11i
    > I.e useless choice.

    Probably this has a purpose... responders who checked it, are weighted down :)

    By the way - in all multiple choices question, if you checked a radio button by mistake,
    it's impossible to clear it.
    --
  8. Archived from groups: alt.internet.wireless (More info?)

    I know the hardware is still available, and still deployed in legacy
    networks, but I'd be surprised to find that any significant number of units
    is being sold. My bet is that almost all new wifi equipment sales are b/g.
    For that reason, there doesn't seem to me to be a lot of point to including
    802.11 FH in a survey of how people use wifi today.

    "Jeff Liebermann" <jeffl@comix.santa-cruz.ca.us> wrote in message
    news:iavkd01g4quoi6jnefh99fedqfimi66m4o@4ax.com...
    > On Thu, 24 Jun 2004 02:46:38 GMT, "gary" <pleasenospam@sbcglobal.net>
    > wrote:
    >
    > >Actually, 802.11i is essentially done, and will be tested by Wi-fi
    Alliance
    > >under the WPA2 suite. Maybe no-one is using it at this moment, but it
    will
    > >be available. I'd remove "802.11" from the list, since virtually no-one
    > >deploys a 2 Mbps 802.11-only network, and a/b/g imply 802.11.
    >
    > Sure they do. 802.11 frequency hopping (instead of direct sequence)
    > is still sold by Breezecom/Alvarion as Breezeaccess II:
    > http://www.alvarion-usa.com/RunTime/Products_2020.asp?tNodeParam=9
    > Sorry, I can't supply a list of existing FH networks.
    >
    >
    > --
    > Jeff Liebermann jeffl@comix.santa-cruz.ca.us
    > 150 Felker St #D 831-336-2558
    > Santa Cruz CA 95060 AE6KS
  9. Archived from groups: alt.internet.wireless (More info?)

    On Thu, 24 Jun 2004 15:20:52 GMT, "gary" <pleasenospam@sbcglobal.net>
    wrote:

    >I know the hardware is still available, and still deployed in legacy
    >networks, but I'd be surprised to find that any significant number of units
    >is being sold. My bet is that almost all new wifi equipment sales are b/g.
    >For that reason, there doesn't seem to me to be a lot of point to including
    >802.11 FH in a survey of how people use wifi today.

    You will lose your bet depending on how you define "significant".
    Unfortunately, I don't have current sales figures.

    There are a substantial number of FH and propietary networks operating
    on 2.4GHz. There are also a bunch of non-802.11 protocols operating.
    Granted they are not as popular as the 802.11b/g, but they are all too
    common. Many small towns have centralized wireless systems based upon
    some protocol or product that was installed before commodity wireless
    became fashionable. Perhaps an email to Alvirion will connect you
    with someone that can give you deployment figures for BreezeAccess II
    FH system. Be sure to include the older SA-10 and AP-10 radios.
    We're still running a bunch of those. Here's one sample WISP system:
    http://www.wireless-telecom.com/WISP_Rollout.htm
    There are also a considerable number of the older Raytheon (Raylink)
    FH radio systems still operating. If you're sharing a 1.5Mbit/sec DSL
    line, 2MBits/sec wireless is usually sufficient.

    Some minor drivel:
    1. When direct sequence spread spectrum meets frequency hopping,
    frequency hopping always wins. That's one reason that FH is still
    being sold.
    2. Metricom/Ricochet/Aerie, Bluetooth, and Zigbee are all frequency
    hoppers.


    --
    Jeff Liebermann jeffl@comix.santa-cruz.ca.us
    150 Felker St #D 831-336-2558
    Santa Cruz CA 95060 AE6KS
  10. Archived from groups: alt.internet.wireless (More info?)

    "Jeff Liebermann" <jeffl@comix.santa-cruz.ca.us> wrote in message
    news:m3tld01f0ia0gc2p2qvvrt0r8vflnm522k@4ax.com...
    > On Thu, 24 Jun 2004 15:20:52 GMT, "gary" <pleasenospam@sbcglobal.net>
    > wrote:
    >
    > >I know the hardware is still available, and still deployed in legacy
    > >networks, but I'd be surprised to find that any significant number of
    units
    > >is being sold. My bet is that almost all new wifi equipment sales are
    b/g.
    > >For that reason, there doesn't seem to me to be a lot of point to
    including
    > >802.11 FH in a survey of how people use wifi today.
    >
    > You will lose your bet depending on how you define "significant".
    > Unfortunately, I don't have current sales figures.
    >
    > There are a substantial number of FH and propietary networks operating
    > on 2.4GHz. There are also a bunch of non-802.11 protocols operating.
    > Granted they are not as popular as the 802.11b/g, but they are all too
    > common. Many small towns have centralized wireless systems based upon
    > some protocol or product that was installed before commodity wireless
    > became fashionable. Perhaps an email to Alvirion will connect you
    > with someone that can give you deployment figures for BreezeAccess II
    > FH system. Be sure to include the older SA-10 and AP-10 radios.
    > We're still running a bunch of those. Here's one sample WISP system:
    > http://www.wireless-telecom.com/WISP_Rollout.htm
    > There are also a considerable number of the older Raytheon (Raylink)
    > FH radio systems still operating. If you're sharing a 1.5Mbit/sec DSL
    > line, 2MBits/sec wireless is usually sufficient.

    Yes, but this survey is clearly about wifi protocols, which by definition
    are 802.11 standards-related only. The proprietary protocols are all
    irrelevant. I would be interested to get numbers on pure 802.11 deployment
    and sales, but not enough to spend a lot of effort. And yes, it does depend
    on what you mean by "significant". Since a hypothetical bet costs me no real
    money, I'll bet that b/g sales for this year far outstrip pure 802.11 sales,
    whether you measure in dollars, or units moved.

    >
    > Some minor drivel:
    > 1. When direct sequence spread spectrum meets frequency hopping,
    > frequency hopping always wins. That's one reason that FH is still
    > being sold.

    Depends on what you mean by "win". What characteristics are you saying are
    optimized? Range? Insensitivity to interference? Insensitivity to echo?
    Maximum sustainable bitrate? Mobility support? I'm not a hardware or DSP
    engineer, so I won't presume to argue the details. But I do know more than
    one wifi engineer who would debate this claim, especially when stated as a
    sweeping generalization.

    > 2. Metricom/Ricochet/Aerie, Bluetooth, and Zigbee are all frequency
    > hoppers.

    Again, these don't appear to apply to the survey in question, as none of
    them are based on 802.11.

    >
    >
    > --
    > Jeff Liebermann jeffl@comix.santa-cruz.ca.us
    > 150 Felker St #D 831-336-2558
    > Santa Cruz CA 95060 AE6KS
  11. Archived from groups: alt.internet.wireless (More info?)

    On Thu, 24 Jun 2004 16:49:44 GMT, "gary" <pleasenospam@sbcglobal.net>
    wrote:

    >I'll bet that b/g sales for this year far outstrip pure 802.11 sales,
    >whether you measure in dollars, or units moved.

    Of course. 802.11b/g probably outsell all other technologies in unit
    volume and probably dollars sold. I was just commenting on the
    possibility that there were some other "minor" technologies that you
    may be ignoring.

    >> Some minor drivel:
    >> 1. When direct sequence spread spectrum meets frequency hopping,
    >> frequency hopping always wins. That's one reason that FH is still
    >> being sold.

    >Depends on what you mean by "win". What characteristics are you saying are
    >optimized? Range? Insensitivity to interference? Insensitivity to echo?
    >Maximum sustainable bitrate? Mobility support? I'm not a hardware or DSP
    >engineer, so I won't presume to argue the details. But I do know more than
    >one wifi engineer who would debate this claim, especially when stated as a
    >sweeping generalization.

    Well, we're a bit off the topic, but...

    In general (there are exceptions), if you place an FH (frequency
    hopper) and a DS (direct sequence) in the same airspace (about 3ft
    apart), the FH will slow down somewhat while the DS radio will come to
    a screeching halt. I've seen several reports claiming either minimal
    interference or none betweeen 802.11b (DSSS) and Bluetooth (FHSS). My
    testing shows that Bluetooth continues to shovel data while 802.11b
    performance drops like a rock. I've also done the same test using
    Breezecom SA-10/AP-10 FH radios versus Linksys WAP11 access points for
    WISP (wireless ISP) service. FHSS keeps working while DSSS just
    stops.

    Doing the same tests with OFDM modulation (802.11g) vs Bluetooth
    resulted in some rather interesting oddities. As long as the access
    point (DWL-900AP+v2) could be forced to stay in the 802.11g OFDM mode
    (or the proprietary pre-802.11g 22Mbit/sec mode), the Bluetooth
    interference to 802.11g was rather minimal. However, the basic
    algorithm for 802.11g is that when faced with an "unknown" signal, it
    assumes that it's an 802.11b radio and reverts from 802.11g ODFM to
    802.11b DSSS operation. As soon as it switches to DSSS, Bluetooth
    causes sustantial interference, and DSSS traffic stops.

    See:
    http://rfdesign.com/images/archive/0900McCune90.pdf
    I know it's 900MHz, not 2.4GHz, but the technology is the same.
    Here's another:
    http://www.toolworx.com/pdf/DSSS%20vs%20FHSS.pdf
    Here's a quote from above:
    "In the face of noise in the channel and loss of bandwidth,
    DS may abruptly stop working, whereas FH will continue to
    degrade gradually to no bandwidth."

    If you want more details, test results (if I can find them),
    explanations of what I think is happening, and predictions of the
    imminent demise of wireless as we know it, just ask.

    >> 2. Metricom/Ricochet/Aerie, Bluetooth, and Zigbee are all frequency
    >> hoppers.
    >
    >Again, these don't appear to apply to the survey in question, as none of
    >them are based on 802.11.

    I know. I just tossed it in to demonstrate the FHSS isn't totally
    obsolete and not used. Good luck on your survey.


    --
    Jeff Liebermann jeffl@comix.santa-cruz.ca.us
    150 Felker St #D 831-336-2558
    Santa Cruz CA 95060 AE6KS
  12. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windows.networking.wireless,comp.os.ms-windows.networking,comp.os.linux.networking,alt.internet.wireless (More info?)

    On Wed, 23 Jun 2004 22:32:33 -0400, Cat <cat5e@mail.com> wrote:
    > Hi.
    >
    > Took the Questionnaire
    > One remark No one can Use 802.11i
    > I.e useless choice.
    >
    > Jack (MVP-Networking).

    Maybe that is a trick question.
    But, "Security will become less of a concern in 2003"? (is that an old
    survey)

    > "Vidual" <vidual_eye@hotmail.com> wrote in message
    > news:b11da1f8.0406231744.5ed2da3d@posting.google.com...
    >> Hi all,
    >>
    >> I am investigating Wireless LANs, and as part, I am trying to get
    >> peoples awareness on the subject matter.
    >> I have published a questionnaire at:
    >>
    >> http://www.davewilding.co.uk/wifi-index.asp
    >>
    >> The questionnaire will only take 5 minutes and all information will be
    >> treated confidentiality.
    >>
    >> Anyone can answer this questionnaire, and if you have any comments
    >> please e-mail me on:
    >> bencooper@ureach.com
    >>
    >> THANKS IN ADVANCE!
    >
    >


    --
    David Efflandt - All spam ignored http://www.de-srv.com/
    http://www.autox.chicago.il.us/ http://www.berniesfloral.net/
  13. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windows.networking.wireless,comp.os.ms-windows.networking,comp.os.linux.networking,alt.internet.wireless (More info?)

    On Fri, 25 Jun 2004 06:27:18 +0000 (UTC), David Efflandt spoketh

    >
    >Maybe that is a trick question.
    >But, "Security will become less of a concern in 2003"? (is that an old
    >survey)
    >

    I found that rather odd too, so I had to disagree with the statement.
    Security will become more of a concern in the years to come, as the
    technology becomes more and more popular.

    Lars M. Hansen
    http://www.hansenonline.net
    (replace 'badnews' with 'news' in e-mail address)
Ask a new question

Read More

Wireless Networking Wireless Lan Wireless Networking