Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Pentagon and Wi-Fi Deal Reached

Posted by Hemos on from the making-things-work dept.

byteCoder writes "CNet reports that the US Military and the Wi-Fi manufacturers have struck an agreement on reducing the interference on military radars by Wi-Fi equipment. Basically, future wireless equipment will detect the presence of military radar and not transmit over the top of it. Additionally, as part of the compromise, defense officials will endorse the doubling of the number of allowed wireless frequencies--thus opening more spectrum to wireless users (as long as the FCC and Congress agree)."

7 of 120 comments (clear)

  1. Win-Win by Gallifrey · · Score: 3, Insightful

    This is a great example of a win-win scenario. Seems perfectly reasonable to me and the results can benefit everyone. More frequencies, more channels, easier to cover a building, etc...

  2. Should be interesting by jcoy42 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I live just over a mile from DMAFB, and I can't help but wonder how well my in-house wireless will react to this. I'm less than 300 ft. from a road military vehicles frequent, although presumably without radar turned on.

    Perhaps it's time to grab an 802.11g access point before they are all military radar friendly. Or will the long term result be a ban on non-friendly access points?

    I suppose time will tell. It has a habit of doing that.

    --
    Never trust an atom. They make up everything.
  3. Re:Mixed results? by lucifuge31337 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    the military getting into consumer products, seems bad in general

    WHAT? Do you live in a cave?

    TONS of consumer technology has its roots in military-developed technology. You wouldn't be able to waste your time on /. if it weren't for a military research project.

    --
    Do not fold, spindle or mutilate.
  4. Re:Who wins? by eXtro · · Score: 2, Insightful
    Other people have mentioned that police radar isn't in military bands. There are laws against polluting the spectrum, so legally nobody should be building transmitters that emulate military radar. Since these are military frequencies there are most likely additional laws prohibiting it.


    Somebody will argue that this still opens the door to purposely jamming signals, which is true, but if you're willing to break the law there are already a lot of ways to do it.

    --

    Chris Kuivenhoven is a thief, beware

  5. Re:Just what I've always wanted by djrogers · · Score: 2, Insightful

    It's already quite trivial to overload a WiFi AP and make it useless. Much more money and effort would have to go into creating something to 'mimic' a military radar system than is currently needed to blast the 2.4GHz spectrum with noise.

    --
    Think outside the... Hey, where'd the friggin' box go?
  6. Re:Investigate Best Buy! by jamesangel · · Score: 2, Insightful
    Did it occur to anyone else that the military have probably thought about this and there is more to the article than just the blurb?

    Perhaps the Slashback story could read: 'US Military agree to technology restriction which makes their enemies impossible to defeat. Luckily, some guy on Slashdot notices!'

    hmph.

  7. Re:win? bah, don't dance with the Devil by billn · · Score: 2, Insightful

    How long before Corporation A decides to get into a price war with Corp B, and sees the military radar detection as a cost savings removal?
    Also, how many customers will give a rats ass about some military Radar? They will demand full power.

    Did you even read the article?

    This is an FCC bandwidth allotment issue, in the 5ghz range. Compliance with this agreement will be required in any device intended for the market. If Corporation A wants to have it's license to manufacture devices in that spectrum yanked, hey, more power to them.

    --
    - billn