Randall Shimizu wrote:
----- Original Message ----
From: Andrew Lentvorski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
<...>
I can believe the better QoS, because that's just protocol design.
Greater bandwidth, I *might* believe, but I'm a bit skeptical.
Especially better bandwidth combined with better range.
I don't buy the better range other than from unpolluted radio spectrum.
WiMax is limited by the FCC to the same power levels as WiFi for
omnidirectional transmission, and the most transmissive frequencies are
within delta of the 2.4GHz band (2.3GHz and 2.5GHz).
<rearranged to undo bottom post>
Wimax Qos is better because it relies on guaranteed bandwidth. 802.11 relies on
a class of service.
Wimax Qos
(http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&ct=res&cd=1&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ieee802.org%2F1%2Ffiles%2Fpublic%2F802_architecture_group%2Fpresentations%2F802-QoS.ppt&ei=mpItR6W3GYG-pgTw_N2RBQ&usg=AFQjCNGNjfZD9gMOx9el80jAC3RiaZK_iA&sig2=150l2CMnHWbmxIdjZX-noQ>
)
In my reply, you will note that I said that I can believe better QoS
because that is protocol design. 802.11 is a lousy protocol for QoS,
and it looks like 802.16 has done a better job.
Of course, everybody is going to want to run TCP/IP over it and will
waste all that nice QoS design, but that's a different problem ... ;)
What I *don't* believe is better range and better bandwidth than 802.11.
And I still haven't seen any technical explanations for why that is so.
-a
--
[email protected]
http://www.kernel-panic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/kplug-list
