Slashdot Mirror

Not sure if it is totally related to your effort, but the IEEE has a real nice standards site.

There is also a page there specifically set up for development of standards.

It includes:

Working Group Development
Writing the Draft
Ballottig the Draft
Final Approval
Publishing a Standard
Reaffirming the Standard

and has a link to IEEE Standard Forms.

Most of the implementations out there are based on the 5th draft of the standard.

Here's the standards process-at-a-glance: http://standards.ieee.org/resources/glance.html

The IEEE Wireless Standards Zone overview is here.

Recent news from the IEEE re: 802.11 is available here.

The IEEE Wireless Standards Zone overview is here.

Recent news from the IEEE re: 802.11 is available here.

Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers. The create technical standards. They certainly don't want a law that will unjustly limit the standards they can create/use.

...some exploding capacitors from a well known, reputable, trust-worthy manufacturer in Taiwan?

Maybe its just the light...?

I had a MSI K7T Turbo (MS-6330 v3 w/ ide-raid).

Never had any problems with it, but when I was selling it I (and the buyer) noticed the brownish leaks, just like in the photo linked in the article. Board still worked fine though, and from what I hear still does... now I wonder for how long though.

In the past there were problems with water freezing between the tiles due to the spacing between them. Turned out that if they spray the tiles with ScotchGuard(tm) it solved the problem. I remember seeing the commericals from 3M years ago with a can sitting on the nose of the shuttle. Looked, but haven't been able to find a good link on it, but here's one that references it.

My understanding here is that an EVA can't go that far like going under the shuttle to take a look. They are limited to work on the cargo bay. And I don't think the Canadarm can reach that far.

From a story on the IEEE website:

The ATMs were vulnerable, according to Lisa Gagnon, a bank spokesperson, because some ATM transactions require an exchange of data with other servers outside the ATM network. Those servers were unavailable because Slammer had found its way into the non-ATM part of the bank's network, despite a firewall between it and the Internet.


If I wasn't an AC, I'd be a karma whore.

• FireWire = Sony iLINK = IEEE 1392
• AirPort = IEEE P802.11's "b" standard
• AirPort Extreme = IEEE P802.11's "g" standard

What I mean is theya re talking about using the 802.11 protocol for communication on the Amateur Bands. This means they will use a Ham Band like 2m, 70cm or maybe the 1.2 GHz band. They are not going to be using the SAME band as WiFi uses.

What I'm worried about is that they're talking about implementing the 802.11b protocol, which is the annexe B of the 802.11 protocol. This annexe specifies the specific frequencies to use. If they want to implement 802.11 over their own freqs (2m, 70 cm, etc) they should not implement annexe B.

It's maibe just a typo or an honest mistake, but it may also mean that they don't what their doing...

GFK's

What I mean is theya re talking about using the 802.11 protocol for communication on the Amateur Bands. This means they will use a Ham Band like 2m, 70cm or maybe the 1.2 GHz band. They are not going to be using the SAME band as WiFi uses.

What I'm worried about is that they're talking about implementing the 802.11b protocol, which is the annexe B of the 802.11 protocol. This annexe specifies the specific frequencies to use. If they want to implement 802.11 over their own freqs (2m, 70 cm, etc) they should not implement annexe B.

It's maibe just a typo or an honest mistake, but it may also mean that they don't what their doing...

GFK's

This is the proposed schedule:

• January 2003 - Forward Draft 5.0 to Sponsor Ballot
• March 2003 - Resolve Comments from Sponsor Ballot and Recirculate to Sponsor Ballot Pool
• May 2003 - Submission to RevCom
• June/July 2003 - Estimated Final Approval of IEEE 802.11g

802.11i. That's also the task group for security enhancements. They are developing the Temporal Key Integrity Protocol (TKIP), it should be out any day. It's a hack-type thing on top of the current hardware which makes snooping WLANs a lot harder.

However, that's only a rest top. Good security will be achieved when the 802.11i standard is finalized, it'll be called the Wireless Robust Authentication Protocol (WRAP). It consists of the old 802.1x local area network authentication system (you ever see the tab which says 'authentication' when you browse your NICs settings in Windows XP?) for user authentication and AES for encryption.

btw, for those who haven't heard of 802.11g - it's a new standard for higher-speed transmission in the same 2.4GHz band. it promises 20+ Mbps (maybe even up to ~54Mbps), in contrast to the 11 Mbps of 802.11b.

it's interesting, though, that the standard is still in the draft stage, scheduled for ratification in mid-2003, and hardware manufacturers are already rolling out implementations. not surprising, given market conditions, but let's hope that any changes will be minor, and fixable in firmware. :)

see the P802.11 status report at IEEE for more details...

> A new WEP standared is needed (anyone know if one exists/in the works?)

The IEEE 802.11i Task Group is working on "[enhancing] the current 802.11 MAC to provide improvements in security", which includes resolving the WEP problem, among others.

And if you don't think that the IEEE has a standard for dealing with these numbers: http://grouper.ieee.org/groups/754/

I was going to moderate, but I couldn't let this pass. I don't know what "first" this Cape Cod spot claims, but Marconi's first trans-atlantic wireless radio transmission was in St. John's, Newfoundland, Canada. I know, because I live here, and my local IEEE section held ceremonies last year to commemorate the anniversary...

Oversensitive? Yeah, probably, but Newfoundland doesn't have many claims to fame, and this in one of them. To stay on topic, the others include the UNESCO world heritage sites in Lanse-aux-Meadows on the northern penninsula, and Gros Morne national park. Lanse-aux-Meadows was a summer home for viking visitors around the turn on the first millenium CE, and Gros Morne has an exposed section of really, really old rock from the earths mantle, something similar to Ayre's(sp?) rock in Australia, minus the funky colors.

Christopher

I love how everyone that posts to slashdot is an armchair expert in whatever they're posting about, be it tv demographics, marketing, computer security, whatever.
Uh, first of all, I hate to break it to you (no, I don't) but some of us *are* experts in TV demographics (see TwirlipOTM), marketing (no certain examples this thred, they turn up), computer security (well, that would be about five percent of /., which, btw, includes most everybody writing, implementing, hacking, or documenting the field), whatever.
Ya see, if you check the posts, you'll find fanwing comments from aircraft materials designers, media comments from Wil Wheaton, chip design comments from chip fab experts, and so on.
Kinda reminds me of a party I went to once when somebody got pissed at a comment I made while I was still working on wiring systems for missiles and fighter planes. Some dimwit got snotty and yelled at me, "what are you, a rocket scientist?" and a little cluster of engineers I knew all started laughing and said, "well, actually, yes, he is."
You wanta point that comment at me? Go ahead. My site should give you some of it. Otherwise, bio labs? Let's say that I started as an assistant helper guy at NYU Med Center and last did tech work at (among other places) the genetic engineering labs at Rockefeller University.
Hell, even the "what would they be doing with horses" guy sounds like he probably has some relevant tech background.

But even beyond all that, I don't know about you, but I come here to chat. If you care to tell me that the discussions here are even a tenth as off-base, ill-informed, or done by people without professional standing in the subjects being discussed as the appalling grunts and ego ballooning about football sure to be happening all around America this very day, then you simply aren't paying attention. Sure, we ramble; this is our off time. You want formal overviews? Go to the IEEE or APS.

And yes, I really am pissy today, aren't I?
Rustin

One thing that is clear is that Carmack made the most of acedemic research. His genius lies in the drive and ability to exploite what's out there.

It is a problem that they are researching to find out what attracts ants to electricity.

The Institute

Ars News Network

A 5 year old wired article very similiar to this story

IEEE seems to be good at sharing infromation, with a few small problems.See their terms and conditions [ieee.org] for yourself.

That link points to their web site copyright, and the other link you give is a "web publishing howto" with no relationship to their scientific and engineering publications.

If you want to know what their scientific publishing policies are, take a look at their copyright transfer form: like other scientific publishers, they require you to transfer your copyright to them and severely limit your own rights to reusing the content.

There are some publications (mostly peer-reviewed on-line journals) that are trying to break the stranglehold of such agreements. They don't require copyright transfer, but just ask you for a license that lets them republish your work to which you retain the copyright.

Peer review is part of active research and should be thought of as part of any research position. It keeps you up to date and sharpens your brain

It is and it does. But since publishers get the peer review for free, by far the most valuable part of scientific publishing, they should then not charge huge amounts of money for the publications themselves.

In particular, it is incomprehensible why a non-profit organization like the IEEE should charge anything significant for on-line access to their digital library, whose contents were created, reviewed, and edited almost entirely by volunteers, and whose creation is more than paid for already by the high charges for the print publications.

In fact, if you retained the copyright, competition would easily take care of price gouging in scientific publishing, since publishers that overcharge would face competition from publishers that don't and end up reprinting the same works.

The burden of clerical work is a different and unrelated issue. You should have an expert at digital publishing who can take your plain text, raw data and notes on equations, and turn them into decent looking papers on the web and on paper trough Apache, LaTex, DX and any other useful system. Secrataries should be up to this task. Anything else is wasteful of real research time.

Secretaries? Maybe there are still a few plush places that have those, but no real-world place has those anymore. Most researchers have administrative assistants, and they don't do typing or type setting.

In any case, that's besides the point. The point is that publishers often don't even do the type setting and layout anymore themselves either, which again raises the question of what they actually are charging all that money for.

IEEE seems to be good at sharing infromation, with a few small problems.See their terms and conditions [ieee.org] for yourself.

That link points to their web site copyright, and the other link you give is a "web publishing howto" with no relationship to their scientific and engineering publications.

If you want to know what their scientific publishing policies are, take a look at their copyright transfer form: like other scientific publishers, they require you to transfer your copyright to them and severely limit your own rights to reusing the content.

There are some publications (mostly peer-reviewed on-line journals) that are trying to break the stranglehold of such agreements. They don't require copyright transfer, but just ask you for a license that lets them republish your work to which you retain the copyright.

Peer review is part of active research and should be thought of as part of any research position. It keeps you up to date and sharpens your brain

It is and it does. But since publishers get the peer review for free, by far the most valuable part of scientific publishing, they should then not charge huge amounts of money for the publications themselves.

In particular, it is incomprehensible why a non-profit organization like the IEEE should charge anything significant for on-line access to their digital library, whose contents were created, reviewed, and edited almost entirely by volunteers, and whose creation is more than paid for already by the high charges for the print publications.

In fact, if you retained the copyright, competition would easily take care of price gouging in scientific publishing, since publishers that overcharge would face competition from publishers that don't and end up reprinting the same works.

The burden of clerical work is a different and unrelated issue. You should have an expert at digital publishing who can take your plain text, raw data and notes on equations, and turn them into decent looking papers on the web and on paper trough Apache, LaTex, DX and any other useful system. Secrataries should be up to this task. Anything else is wasteful of real research time.

Secretaries? Maybe there are still a few plush places that have those, but no real-world place has those anymore. Most researchers have administrative assistants, and they don't do typing or type setting.

In any case, that's besides the point. The point is that publishers often don't even do the type setting and layout anymore themselves either, which again raises the question of what they actually are charging all that money for.

It used to be that the IEEE would only complete OUI blocks (16M addresses). They charge $1650 for that, but now you can buy an "Individual Address Block" of 256 addresses for $550. For locally administrated addresses you don't have to pay anything, but of course you're not guaranteed that they are unique.

For more info, see the IEEE registration authority pages.

There's also a rule that you aren't allowed to use a new OUI until you've used up 90% of your existing allocation. But it's obviously not enforced, since Cisco has over 190 assigned OUIs (not including those of companies they've acquired), and I very much doubt that they've shipped 2.85 billion Ethernet ports.

I've never worked with IEEE. Give me some inside juice. The terms look beter than most on the surface.

Peer review is part of active research and should be thought of as part of any research position. It keeps you up to date and sharpens your brain, kind of like Slashdot but there are fewer trolls.

The burden of clerical work is a different and unrelated issue. You should have an expert at digital publishing who can take your plain text, raw data and notes on equations, and turn them into decent looking papers on the web and on paper trough Apache, LaTex, DX and any other useful system. Secrataries should be up to this task. Anything else is wasteful of real research time.

I've never worked with IEEE. Give me some inside juice. The terms look beter than most on the surface.

Peer review is part of active research and should be thought of as part of any research position. It keeps you up to date and sharpens your brain, kind of like Slashdot but there are fewer trolls.

The burden of clerical work is a different and unrelated issue. You should have an expert at digital publishing who can take your plain text, raw data and notes on equations, and turn them into decent looking papers on the web and on paper trough Apache, LaTex, DX and any other useful system. Secrataries should be up to this task. Anything else is wasteful of real research time.

Taken from the IEEE Project Status Page:

Designation: 1396
Sponsor: Computer Society/Microprocessors and Microcomputers
Title: Standard for Communication Bus (TELECOM Bus): Reference Models
Status: Withdrawn PAR. Standards project no longer endorsed by the IEEE.
Technical Contact: Gary A Nelson, Phone:708 304 0000, Email:gnelson@zynrgy.com
History: PAR APP: Mar 19, 1992
Project Scope: To provide a guide to the configurations and uses targeted for
the TELECOM Bus family of standards.
Project Purpose: To provide a firm background and overview to the environments
for which TELECOM Bus systems are envisioned.
Key Words: communication, bus, hybrid, switching, applications

IEEE Spectrum magazine has a similar article actually written by O'Keefe. One thing that concerns me with both of these articles is the lack of any mention of NASA's often forgotten role as the AERONAUTICS and Space Administration.

NASA's rather underfunded work with the SATS program has the potential to completely revolutionize air travel and even population distributions (better access to flights and less reliance on the few major hubs could mean more industry for smaller communities and some officials even predict a trend away from cities and suburbia to one of the 10,000 smaller and even rural centres with decent airports).

NASA's aeronautic programs have also recently supported the development of innovations like the Eclipse 500 low-cost microjet, which, if successfully introduced, could be one of the biggest technology stories of the last few years, with the potential to have a massive impact on society. (As an interesting aside, the Eclipse is heavily funded and managed by big players in the computer and software industries, the CEO is the former head of Symantec and the Paul Allen Group, and Bill Gates apparently owns a significant percentage - insert windows crash joke here).

Space is cool, but basic and applied research in aviation is at least as important and no one else really covers this mandate in the way NASA can and sometimes does. It would be a real pity if NASA simply becomes the National Space Agency (I guess they couldn't use the acronym though).

I wonder how long before we run out of letters to designate 802.11 standards...

802.11omega anybody? maybe we might need to grab some hirigana...

The IEEE Spectrum carried an article that provided more detailed information on Microsoft's Tablet PC specification. It also addressed some other form factors that were being independently advanced.

It discusses future plans for the system.

The tech is a phased array antenna, there was a good article about using it with 802.11 (notice there is no b) in the IEEE spectrum a while ago.

Consider it a sort of software antenna, you have a series of antenna that you can bias towards a particular direction. You then listen for incoming signals and use a processor to calculate environmental multipath (RF signals bouncing off buildings, etc.) and then fire off your signal so that the main signal and multipath reflections arrive at the reciever at the same time. Instant gain.

I'm skeptical on the reported max range but they should get a good amount. If you're sitting in the middle of a parabolic dish and so is your target, sure I expect that kind of increase in range, but in the real world...

First of all you weren't very clear about whether you knew that PCI already did this or not. Saying:

PCI goes a long way to do this, and most new devices have some sort of identification. Basically every model of every device from every manufacturer needs a unique ModelID which is easily retrievable according to the basic protocols of the bus in question.

makes it sound more like you were unaware of these capabilities with PCI and were proposing a peripheral bus that had these capabilities.

A "whole lot" of new manufacturers? Doing a quick grep of this reveals there to be ~6243 different vendor prefixes. A mere 0.0003721117 of the vendor prefix address space of ~16mil is being used. Now perhaps 16mil devices per vendor is a bit low in this day and age of pervasive networking, but they seemed to alleviate this problem quite well by allocating multiple prefixes to a vendor. If you would like to provide information to backup your claim of MAC addressing problems I would honestly be very interested in seeing it.

Comparing this to IP addressing is like comparing apples to oranges. Yes theoretically speaking there could be infinite companies producing infinite different hardware products. But in the real world it takes capital to start a company, and even more to bring a product to market. It doesn't seem to take so much of that hard earned cash to plug in another host to the internet though, now does it?

While I do agree with you about the size of the IP address space and the y2k problem being quite shortsighted, I really do not think this is relevent in this case? Yes IPv6 has a 128bit address, but that's because in the wonderful future eveything imaginable will have an IP address.

The only thing I was calling into question was you pulling the figure of 128bits out of thin air. Now this discsussion has just become totally irrelevent to the original question.

AFAIK no draft standards are available for purchase. 802, like most standards organizations, works hard to limit draft distribution outside the organization (and to stop companies that advertise "compliance" to a draft). Drafts are, by definition, unapproved by the organization. Since they change often, they can cause confusion; also, it is felt that interested persons can best improve the draft by becoming active in the standards organization itself. After all, anyone can attend a meeting; at the 802.11/.15/.18/.19 meetings a Wi-Fi LAN and server is installed, over which attendees can download draft standards to their laptops 'til their hearts are content.

The next meeting is November 10-15 in Kauai, Hawaii; the one following that is January 12-17, 2003 in Ft. Lauderdale, Florida.

The IEEE 802 standards that form the basis of the Wi-Fi Alliance (IEEE 802.11, .11a, .11b, etc.) are available for FREE download from the getieee web site, six months after they are published in pdf by the IEEE Standards Association.

From reading the paper (college access to IEEE publications sure is nice), the researchers outline two forms of reversible data embedding.

Type I simply embeds the data into the spectrum of the image and uses modulo addition as necessary to prevent overflow. Unfortunately, this causes "salt-and-pepper artifacts" because this sometimes affects the most significant bits in a pixel's representation.

Type II uses the traditional method of overwriting the least significant bits or high-frequency coefficients in the image (depending on image encoding).

What this paper does is describe a method that employs Type II encoding and saves the overwritten bits by compressing them and inserting into the embedded data stream. Unlike simple Type II encodings such as always using the lowest two bits, this paper varies the number of bits which are used in each byte. This value is determined according to their compressibility and other parameters in the image. By doing this, the paper obtains a more efficient tradeoff between storage and distortion.

The journal article is "Reversible data hiding" in IEEE Internation Conference on Image Processing, 2002, volume 2, pages 157-160 http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/servlet/opac?punumber=8 052

In case you didn't notice it, IEEE Spectrum published last December an article about the 13 servers and a possible attack against them.
Yes, a pure coincidence.

CapHaddock, from Spain.

What about some adventure in your own country? Another geek did this, and had many surprises.

I've done this at my work over the past few days and at least once a day "someone" logs in and leaves 30 minutes later. One was an Agere card and the others were d-link cards verified by checking the mac address here. I didn't have a packet sniffer on it but I found it interesting that the hits were that frequent here in Downtown Chicago.

Digital Radio Takes to the Road

Please see Digital Radio Takes to the Road specfically the section on IBOC (In-band/On-channel). Specifically see this figure which presents how the data is added to the current AM and FM channels.

Perhaps if you should research this technology before you comment on it? This technology uses the existing bandwidth allocated for radio by allowing existing radio stations to additionally broadcast their signal in digital in their current frequency allocation using much less bandwidth and with additional information like traffic conditions. "It was in this environment that the concept of in-band/on-channel (IBOC) digital audio broadcasting was born [see figure]. The idea was to create a terrestrial broadcasting system using a new digital signal that could be transmitted in-band alongside a broadcaster's existing analog signal. In theory, this would be ideal. It would require no extra allocation of spectrum, replicate the coverage of the existing services, and allow broadcasters to remain independent from one another--no need for combining audio programs as with Eureka." From the IEEE Spectrum

Take some of that money you're saving by not buying CD's and poney it up to those than can help.

Another example: When the IEEE dropped the ball with their author submission requirements I dropped my membership and joined EFF. It didn't matter that they eventually revised their requirements, it was clear (to me) that they were seriously out of touch with their members and I felt those dollars would be better spent by an organization that was actively working to change the DMCA.

Bob did a lot of datacomm science behind
the major modem advances that came out
of Bell Labs. See http://www.ieee.org/organizations/history_center/o ral_histories/transcripts/lucky.html for details.

"Quick fix will let one avoid interfering with the other"

By David Pescovitz
If we were just like computer systems, we would all need 24-hour life-support. If computer systems were just like us, they would handle their routine functions the way our bodies do -- automatically.

Speaking of the benefits of Open Source for high-risk missions, perhaps that Mars probe would have fared better if only management had chosen to use Perl with the freely available Math::Units module!

(Don't bother to answer, it's obvious.)

1. From http://www.aatl.net/publications/contran.htm
   • "The mechanics of blocked transmissions are easily understood. In general, it may involve simultaneous transmission from two aircraft or simultaneous transmission from an aircraft and ATC. These transmissions interfere with each other, "blocking" both signals. There is a widespread belief that such blocked transmissions would always be detected (i.e heterodyne heard by the pilot and/or ATC). An equally widespread belief, held by controllers, is that ATC transmissions are always heard. Neither is necessarily true. However, even if detected, it is often too late to do anything and aircrew and ATC are usually too busy managing events in progress."

   The person who has the mic keyed isn't going to hear anything, and thus won't know their transmission wasn't received. The whole point is to notice that a communications breakdown happened and correct it before something bad happens.

2. I tried to make it clear that -41.25 was the very top end of allowed emissions for UWB. When GPS frequencies are at stake, the limits are much lower.

   Read the slides at http://www.sss-mag.com/uwbslides.html -- that's the "first link" I referred to before.

   When referring to GPS frequencies, the FCC limit for indoor & handheld outdoor UWB devices is -75 dBm/MHz. GPR, wall imaging, and medical imaging systems are limited to -65, and thru-wall imaging and surveilance systems can go all the way up to about -53 dBm/MHz -- but only law enforcement, fire, and rescue organizations get access to that equipment.

   The IEEE Powerpoint presentation has some interesting information on noise floors -- you might want to read that.

I must note one thing, though... you'd make an excellent scare-monger. You've got the Star Trek-style technobabble down pat. Have you considered a position as a lobbyist? How about running for congress?

This is the end of this thread from my end, I've made my point. All the info is there for those who care to read it.