I was wondering if there was any way around the intra-zone congestion issue, and whether a user (and possibly the wireless network that extends off of the user) could be moved to another LAN, once the first LAN was experiencing congestion problems. (And if not, I could not see a way to have a large, extended WiFi cloud without all users in the extended cloud basically competing for a single pool of shared bandwdith.)
As it turns out, 3 (or possibly 4) of WiFi channels/bands (whatever you call them in this space) can be used simultaneously without interference. This means then that (aside from using Jim Choate's Pringle's can) you can basically have an extended series of noninterfering (though connected) clouds without worry of interference (so long as you judiciously cycle wavelengths as you move from region to region).
Now I guess the question is, as users come on line, does the lack of a centralized "wavelength authority" mean significantly decreased performance, or is there some kind of self-regulation that will occur as, perhaps, users try one wavelength, find out its crowded, and then try another? (Or does some WiFi hardware automatically do this? Or, can it operate at 3 or 4 channels simultaneously, using multilink PPP or something equivalent?)
From: Jim Choate <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> CC: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Analysts Examine WiFi's Future (fwd) Date: Thu, 5 Dec 2002 16:48:24 -0600 (CST)http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,3973,747599,00.asp -- ____________________________________________________________________ We don't see things as they are, [EMAIL PROTECTED] we see them as we are. www.ssz.com [EMAIL PROTECTED] Anais Nin www.open-forge.org --------------------------------------------------------------------
_________________________________________________________________
Tired of spam? Get advanced junk mail protection with MSN 8. http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail
