Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Can 802.11 Become A Viable Last-Mile Alternative?

Posted by Hemos on from the making-it-for-the-last-mile dept.

NikiScevak writes "As telco's around the world move from government hands to private investors the incentive for them to create compeition at the wholesale DSL level drops dramatically. The CSIRO in Australia are investigating the use of Wireless LAN technology 802.11b as a means through which to provide alternative broadband access, achieving range of up to 7km with standard components."

6 of 195 comments (clear)

  1. 802.11 will never be a last mile alternative by CmdrTaco+(editor) · · Score: 0, Troll
    I believe 802.11 and other similar forms of wireless will never be a viable last mile alternative. Similarly, very few people use cell phones exclusively. The inherent flakiness of wireless tech, real or imaginary, will keep most people from making the jump.

    Major reasons why 802.11 and its variants will not solve the last mile problem (soon):

    1. No agreement on standards (802.11, 802.11b, 802.11c, bluetooth, etc)
    2. 2.4 GHz is already full and prone to interference
    3. Security (though walking through a neighborhood and cracking the wireless encryption does sound appealing)
    4. Whatever else I can't think of at the moment :)

    It also has to do with the psychology of being connected to the "grid" so to speak. People feel so much more secure knowing they are connected to a tangible object- look at broadcast TV vs. cable, cell phones vs. lan line phones, etc.

  2. Great... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Troll

    Now all we need are the 3lee7 h4x0rs drive-by-DOS'ing.

  3. Re:Bad if you do this on a large Scale? by jmauro · · Score: 1, Troll

    Radio waves and light are the same thing. They should work exactly the same.

  4. Re:Ugh.... by sh!va · · Score: 1, Troll

    802.11 is about as secure as your wired LAN or any other unencrypted traffic flying out of your computer. Security is an end-to-end argument and it does not behoove the protocol to make any security guarantees (neither ethernet nor 802.11 do this).
    I've had enough about people saying how insecure 802.11 is just because someone can sniff your packets. Its the same for any shared medium (think ethernet or the internet backbone). So if you are paranoid about your security, encrypt all the traffic that is flying across the wire.

  5. uhhh ... death-penalty for children by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Troll

    There are only 3 countries in the whole world with death-penalty for children : Iran, saoudi-arabia, and the united states ... isn't it time the US abolishes fundamentalism ?
    The US, moral worldleader ? urgh ...

  6. Re:Irrational by lfourrier · · Score: 0, Troll

    Even if I don't disagree with you, I'm surprised that such a "communist" and "anti-american" view has such a high moderation rating.
    Perhaps US slashdotter are still asleep.