An 802.11 Router For 3G Internet Service

An anonymous reader writes "Possio AB has launched a Linux-based wireless access point that allows users to connect to the Internet through 3G (third-generation) mobile telephone networks, which carry Internet data at broadband speeds. According to the Swedish company, which has filed for a patent on local-to-cellular routers, the PX30 can bring broadband wireless Internet service to small sites such as cafes, temporary hotspots such as building and event sites, mobile hot-spots such as buses and limos, and hot-spots in locations without a wired backhaul alternative. It can also be used, Possio says, by mobile-only carriers wishing to offer broadband Internet service, and in data acquisition and remote management applications such as M2M (machine-to-machine) applications."

Comments

How is Routing Between Two Networks Non-Obvious

[HeelToe]

I don't get this - how can you file for a patent on routing between two networks? There's no way this is non-obvious to an engineer in the trade.

Jeez, I've done this with nat under linux to my Verizon Wireless 1x phone.

Patents are out of control.

Re:How is Routing Between Two Networks Non-Obvious

[Bongo the Monkiii]

They're trying to reel in this specific type of routing. I don't know that it will fly, but clueless judges on the bench have been known to rule on, oh, say, taking non-portable address spaces with you like a telephone number, so who knows.

Re:How is Routing Between Two Networks Non-Obvious

[Mr Rohan]

I don't get this - how can you file for a patent on routing between two networks? There's no way this is non-obvious to an engineer in the trade.

Without seeing their actual claims it's hard to know whether it should be obvious or not. Perhaps they are patenting the combination of hardware being used, rather than the idea. There are lots of legitimate existing patents that are "the application of this notion thats obvious in another field to a new domain".

The test of obviousness is an interesting one. Lots of things are obvious after the fact, the question for the patent lawyers is does that make them obvious before the fact or not.

Re:How is Routing Between Two Networks Non-Obvious

[SHEENmaster]

Just see if a competent engineer can work backward, generating the desired result from the claims without the rest of the patent. It would be a piece of cake to implement such trivialities as the SUID bit or swinging sideways without being told the solution, but it's much more difficult to create a light bulb without previously understanding how one works.

Re:How is Routing Between Two Networks Non-Obvious

[paul.schulz]

Agreed!

It took me less than 2 minutes to:
- plug the 3G PCMCIA card into my Fedora laptop
- 'dialup' (it presented as a serial modem)
- setup routing from the local LAN
- setup masquading and firewalling
- and let local users know that they could now
start browsing the internet!

Re:How is Routing Between Two Networks Non-Obvious

[Dharkfiber]

Actually, the original article that you linked to, I knee-jerked over as well. Please don't make the same mistake. The plaintiff in question in that case simply wanted a temporary route. I assumed people posting those articles would have enough klu to know the difference between a temp route and a permanent IP space move. Whats more, its not routing we are talking about but some sort of bridging or translation. Routing is IP only. We do not know if 3G actually uses IP addresses at all.

prior art = http://www.rauhauser.net/

[puzzled]

Please, please don't slashdot me, but I've been talking about this so called patented invention for some time and I've got one sitting right here. Feel free to contact me if you're a patent attorney with an axe to grind ...

Re:prior art = http://www.rauhauser.net/

[puzzled]

*Sigh*

Their patent application predates my work by about a year. But its still nonsense ... routers aren't patentable and most all routers change from one media type to another.

Let the junk patent busters loose on them ... I am highly motivated to clean up the Aircard/OpenSoekris stuff and make it available for free ... we'll let the market decide just how useful their patent is.

I Dunno

[Bongo the Monkiii]

Seriously, who needs broadband on the cell, and who's going to lug around a laptop for high speed access? What are you going to do, jerk to high quality pr0n on your local park bench?

Seriously though. High speed access may be neat for transferring large, high quality sound files, images, and even streaming video (boy, all those places that banned camera-enabled cells will love that), but I think the data / voice streams shouldn't intermingle. That way, if one gets hogged up by a lot of activity in a concentrated area, the other isn't adversly affected.

Re:I Dunno

[manabadman]

Read the article (or even the blurb). They aren't talking about a cell phone. Its more like a broadband router with 3G network support.

There are many instances where this would be helpful. For example mobile applications would be made possible by such a device. Think WiFi hotspots on trains, buses, and cars.

It would also be an alternative for persons that have no other broadband internet access available to them. Cell networks are easier and cheaper to roll out than physically wired networks, so it might give someone access to the internet that might otherwise be impossible.

Also think about all the possibilities for actual cellphones. Mix VOIP with broadband over cellphone, the right software, and voila, long distance, overseas calls for next to nothing. Maybe we could get video in addition to voice (after we figure out why we would want that)

The future of cellphone and WAN technology is bright. Try ot to be such a wet blanket.

Re:I Dunno

[gl4ss]

* but I think the data / voice streams shouldn't intermingle. That way, if one gets hogged up by a lot of activity in a concentrated area, the other isn't adversly affected.*

so.. what makes you think there's no priorisations and balancing?

Re:I Dunno

[Anonymous Coward]

I am using a GPRS (not 3G) cell phone w/ my linux laptop right now from my apartment, because we are on a long waiting list for DSL due to saturation in the local central office!

Also, what you describe IS exactly how modern cell data works. The packet traffic is handled in a best-effort fashion using a small number of channels on the wireless infrastructure (sometimes statically allocated and sometimes dynamically adjusted). Voice calls negotiate an appropriate QoS path as part of the call setup. Congestion of data should not impede voice unless that is what the provider wants (as a business decision).

Would be nice if these were useful around Japan

[timecop]

But it isn't gonna happen.
Since every existing 3G network (kddi, docomo's foma) are billed per packet/per second for each connection.

While Verizon is charging something like $90 a month for unlimited 1xEVDO in south california.

How's the situation with 3G data in Europe?
Is it all flat-rate as well?

Re:Would be nice if these were useful around Japan

[Anonymous Coward]

Verizon is $80 for unlimited, and it has been NATIONWIDE for over 18 months.

I have spent the past 3 years traveling the United States in a RV with my wife. We are on Verizon 24 horus a day at least 20 days a month... the other 10 das a month we use WiFi.

Sprint has similar pricing ($80/month), but they require a PCMCIA card and their network is not as reliable.

Verizon is more flexible, they allow you to use a phone or PCMCIA card (Kyocera 2235 telephone car kit has a rs232 port capable of 230Kbps, works with OpenBSD/Linux/MacOSX/Win/etc.).

Re:Would be nice if these were useful around Japan

[Smitty825]

Very few of Verizon's markets have greater than 144kbps.

In areas with Analog-only service, you won't get any data! (Which tends to be in areas that have extremely low population densities...in other words, you'll probably not spend much time in those areas.

With the exception of the above areas, just about everywhere in the US has CDMA One, which supports data rates of up to 14.4kbps. (Note, there was a 128kbps support added to the standard, but I don't think that any network supported that)

All of the major cities and highways are covered with "CDMA 2000 1xRTT" which will deliver a sustained transfer rate of about 50-80kbps depending on network congestion (burst up to 144kbps)

In San Diego & Washington, DC (with many more major cities coming online before the end of 2004), Verizon supports a standard called CDMA 1xev-do. This supports burst rates up to 2.4mbps, with sustained likely in the 300-500kbps range. (See Ars' review)

Re:Would be nice if these were useful around Japan

[thumperward]

3G in UK comes per-MB at 75 per month; 75 will get you unlimited access. Coverage outside of large towns is patchy, at least in Scotland.

For what it's worth I think this is awesome, patented or not (ain't no way I'm going to be sued for sticking a 3G card in my laptop and letting others share my connection). One more step towards an always-on-everywhere Internet connection.

- Chris

a nice idea but come on

[vmircea]

ok... I know that everyone likes broadband, and I think that this idea is pretty cool, but in all reality, being practical, you need to consider the fact that you generally won't need broadband on today's cell phones, but... in the future it will be useful, cell phones in the future may have the ability to stream video to a nifty little screen, or audio files, or who knows what, so setting up this technology as a framework for others to build on in the future is not a bad idea, it probably wont hurt anything... and another thing to consider is that as the services that cell phone providers offer increase, which is happening right now: 1. more and more people will use the services and 2. the features themselves will take up more bandwidth. So, for both of these cases, having a system like this will help. just my two cents

Re:a nice idea but come on

[np_bernstein]

Really? I can think of a lot of applications for this. How about live traffic updates for your car? Dynamically update the route when there's an accident. How about using your laptop on the beach? There are all sorts of uses....

Re:a nice idea but come on

[metalligoth]

but... in the future it will be useful, cell phones in the future may have the ability to stream video to a nifty little screen, or audio files, or who knows what

This is Insightful? My phone could do video and audio over the web in 2002, at three times the speed of dial-up. I live in Michigan, one of the USA, and everyone knows the USA are far behind everyone else when it comes to cellular phone technology. I'm sure people in Japan could do streaming video in 1999. Where do you live where you can't get a phone that gets streaming media over the web? Antarctica?

Sprint's 3G network not fully functional yet

[dethl]

Kinda hard to surf the net at the speeds mentioned in the article when carriers like Sprint haven't made 3G fully functional. I am still only able browse the web at a mere 5k or so, 10k bursts if I'm lucky.

Ridiculous

[ikekrull]

Connecting my Bluetooth GPRS phone to my Wi-Fi enabled mac laptop and adding a couple of routes would accomplish exactly this. Is this actually patentable?

How the hell is the trivial and obvious combination of widely available consumer technology patentable?

Will we need a patent license to plug a phone into a laptop, if the laptop has a Wifi card in it?

Will my zaurus w/GPRS card and built-in wifi be an infringing device?

I mean really, it's not like you need a pHD. to connect to two wireless networks at the same time on the same device.

Some Slashdotters probably have prior art.

[Jonathan Quince]

I have had this idea, and I am surely far from alone. There are probably people here who are handy with embedded Linux (or Windows CE, a la Microsoft's own home broadband routers) who have hacked together a similar device. With consumer-market PCMCIA cards that can handle the cellular end and mini-PCI 802.11 cards you can extract from most any home cable/dsl router, this is more of a hardware geek's weekend pleasure hack than a non-obvious, patentable invention.

Build one of these and mount it in your car, and you have Internet access for your laptop, PDA, and other gadgets when you hit the road. Run it on batteries and make a picnic basket or backpack that carries a wireless LAN wherever you go (power requirements shouldn't be huge, especially when the device is configured for use outdoors at very short ranges). The possibilities are endless. (Alas, I don't have the technical knowledge to build one myself.)

How can one say this is a new item?

[mcpata]

The article only states an NAT box which connects a 3G mobile (as modem). What makes it differ from a MS machine with a 3G mobile modem and enable Internet Connection Share? (Or the equiv on Linux, ppp on demand + MASQ)... strange!

Seattle company has similar product

[eggboard]

Possio was certainly first, but a company formed by ex-Monet Mobile (Burst) folks, including its founder, has a similar item in the U.S. called the Junxion Box. I wrote the first feature about it for The Seattle Times a few weeks ago. The Junxion Box can use 2G, 2.5G, and 3G cellular data networks. Junxion's technology allows interchangeable cell data PC cards from normal subscriptions -- its sort of generic hardware with simple drivers.

Speed Vs Coverage

[fembots]

Is broadband speed a pre-requisite for wireless services nowadays?

Personally I would rather be able to use the Internet from as many locations as possible, than having a broadband conenction via 3G only in the city central.

Is 1G or 0.2G (or whatever older technology) too expensive to implement mobile Internet?

Re:Speed Vs Coverage

[Lurk3r]

You could always walk around with a satalite dish strapped to your head.

other idea...

[mshultz]

I have absolutely no idea how this would be implemented realistically (or if it has, and I'm just an idiot), but I'd also be very impressed if there were a way to have a bridge go in the opposite direction... in other words, you'd be able to set up a miniature cellular tower that would be able to route everything through existing IP networks (through some kind of tunnel) onto the telecom carrier's voice or data network.

I know that this has sort of been discussed before, but what about on a much smaller scale? This would hopefully provide a seamless way to patch up holes in a wireless coverage area in a cost-effective way...

Verizon Wireless 3G data stupidity

[Anonymous Coward]

Verizon Wireless actually has a pretty good countrywide data setup (upto 150kbps), and will be deployin EVDO later this year (max 3mbps, typical 500kbps). The really funny thing is that their terms of service don't actually allow you to use it!

Unlimited NationalAccess/BroadbandAccess: NationalAccess and BroadbandAccess data sessions may be used with wireless devices for the following purposes: (i) Internet browsing; (ii) e-mail; and (iii) intranet access (including access to corporate intranets, e-mail and individual productivity applications such as customer relationship management, sales force and field service automation). Unlimited NationalAccess/BroadbandAccess is for individual use only and not for resale. Unlimited NationalAccess/BroadbandAccess cannot be used (1) for uploading, downloading or streaming of movies, music or games, (2) with server devices or with host computer applications, including, without limitation, Web camera posts or broadcasts, automatic data feeds, telemetry applications, automated functions or any other machine-to-machine applications, (3) as a substitute or backup for private lines or dedicated data connections. NationalAccess and BroadbandAccess data sessions automatically terminate after two hours of inactivity unless used with a Mobile IP-capable device. We reserve the right to deny or terminate service, without notice, to anyone who uses NationalAccess or BroadbandAccess in any manner prohibited above or whose usage adversely impacts our network or service levels. We also reserve the right to terminate service upon expiration of Customer Agreement term. BroadbandAccess kilobyte usage may not appear on your bill.

So don't use Windows update or virus definition updates (that would be an automated function). You can't use chat or newsgroups (not listed in i, ii or iii). Actually you can't use it all since "machine to machine applications" are prohibited which is pretty much what TCP/IP does. And you have to have a seperate working Internet connection anyway since you can't use this as a substitute (or a backup).

2 and 1 G cant be mobile internet

[JohnnyComeLately]

I was a network engineer for Sprint PCS during the launch of 2G and 3G. By definition, 2G is still a circuit switched data call. Laymans terms: You're using your cell phone as a modem. You're confined to dial up speed max, as you're actually just switching through the voice network, going through a modem bank (Sprint used 3Com Edgeservers) and then going out a dial up line. This isn't the "mobile Internet" you use with 3G.

In 3G, your connection's speed is managed by overhead signaling and your connection will vary by the resources available (as implemented by CDMA 2000). To the layman, you may get only a basic channel of 9.6k if there is a lot of traffic. However, during periods of less activity, you'll peak up around 60-80 as an average. You may see it hit around 100k/sec, but voice traffic takes priority and will quickly knock you back down (unless you live in the sticks, or surf at 3am...after the drunks have called for their ride home).

You mention Mobile Internet, so I'm thinking you're alluding to Mobile IP. Mobile IP is only implemented in 3G, and uses Home Agent, Foreign Agents, AAA servers (authentication, billing), Packet Data Server Nodes (PDSN) and Packet Control servers (PCF). To the layperson, these are tunnels within IP, using care of addresses, to manage a network connection that is changing its point of connection. In implementation, you could fire up your laptop in NYC, and drive to Southern California without changing IP address. This way your applications don't break.
I could post a thesis on this, but I'm currently sitting in a Software Engineering class (ignoring a slide show on Java Beans) so I'm gonna cut it short here.

Re:2 and 1 G cant be mobile internet

[Anonymous Coward]

Err, maybe in Sprint's network 2G is circuit switched. For the rest of us in the GSM world, GPRS has been giving us packet-switched data for a long time. Worldwide, the 2G/3G distinction has more to do with the modulation schemes and effective bitrate.

My basic 2 years old motorola gets 40-60 kb/s GPRS download speeds in practice around the world. More recent EDGE equipment can get up to a couple of hundred kilobits/s in upgraded cells. A real 3G scheme should reach towards megabits/s (though real users will probably still see something more like EDGE speeds except that there will be a lot more users at once before congestion sets in).

The problem is the processor... not the pipe

[EvanKai]

I have a Treo300 through Sprint and I love it. When I'm surfing with my phone, it is very slow... but when I connect using Scott Gruby's WirelessModem on my G4 laptop, I get transfer speed comparable to a 56K dial-up.

The difference in speed is the difference between the 33MHz Dragonball VZ in my Treo and the 800MHz G4 in my laptop. I've tried Treo600's and will be upgrading to a 610 when it's released. Moving up from a 33MHz to a 312MHz processor will make a huge difference.

Think about it. What would broadband do for a 33MHz Pentium?

the diff is to handoff from net2net

[JohnnyComeLately]

The difference is handing off. I can drive from Las Vegas to Southern Cali, and then up to San Fran, all while handing off from network to network.....all while my application and destination server have no idea I've changed network points of connection. This may not seem like a big deal for short duration apps, like Explorer or Mail, where you can just restart the application and renew your DHCP, but there are some apps where you don't want the session to break constantly. If you never leave a small area, yes, you'll never know the difference.

For a real good write up, go to IETF and read the white paper on Mobile IP. WiFi compared to MIP/3G is kinda similar to comparing oranges to limes. They're both citrus, but don't taste the same.