Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

802.11n Should Be Finalized By September

Posted by Soulskill on from the speedy-process dept.

adeelarshad82 writes "It's probable that the 802.11n standard will finally be approved at a scheduled IEEE meeting this September, ending a contentious round of infighting that has delayed the standard for years. For the 802.11n standard, progress has been agonizingly slow, dating back almost five years to 2004, when 802.11g held sway. It struggled throughout 2005 and 2006, when members supposedly settled on the TGnSync standard, then formed the Enhanced Wireless Consortium in 2006 to speed the process along. A draft version of 802.11n was approved in January 2006, prompting the first wave of routers based on the so-called draft-n standard shortly thereafter."

14 of 104 comments (clear)

  1. Compatibility with Draft-N by nsteinme · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Will the final version be (backwards?) compatible with Draft-N routers and wireless cards?

    --
    call me FOSS im the boss with the sauce and the source
    1. Re:Compatibility with Draft-N by Darkness404 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I would think that it would have to be, otherwise no one will use the real standard due to backwards compatibility. Most probably the draft version of N will be about the exact same as the final version of N.

      --
      Taxation is legalized theft, no more, no less.
    2. Re:Compatibility with Draft-N by ByOhTek · · Score: 5, Informative

      Or Draft-N will be a subset of N such that N compliance implies Draft-N compliance.

      --
      Self proclaimed typo king, and inventor of the bear destroying coffee table (patent not pending).
    3. Re:Compatibility with Draft-N by tlhIngan · · Score: 5, Informative

      Will the final version be (backwards?) compatible with Draft-N routers and wireless cards?

      Quite likely, actually. As long as your wireless devices are WiFi Draft N capable. There are two "waves" of Draft N devices (2.5, if you want to go technical). The first was released sometime around 2006 or so, and they were early revision Draft N, the ones that everyone basically said "Avoid at all costs" because of incompatibilities, interference, etc. These are most likely NOT going to work with 802.11n. The "half" wave came shortly after, where we had a flood of 802.11g routers with "extended range" and "MIMO" - they are basically early revision N wireless except re-badged as working with 802.11b/g, and using the N bits to give better range and speed.

      Then in late 2007/2008, came what we know currently as Draft N, when the WiFi Alliance (no relation to IEEE - the WiFi Alliance is a consortium of manufacturers to ensure interoperability) decided to start testing and approving devices based on the final draft spec. These will have the WiFi logo with Draft N in it, being approved for Draft N "standard" and compliance. Part of the requirement was that it was firmware upgradable to 802.11n when it finally came out. Whether or not a firmware upgrade will come out, though is another question.

      Depending on how the WiFi Alliance holds out, they may require that all WiFi-N devices must support Draft N. Or they may just say "screw you all" and make them incompatible.

      The IEEE is the stadnards body behind the spec, 802.11 being the wireless part, 802.3 being Ethernet, etc. They write the spec. Thus, standards compliance includes 802.11b/g/n, which are documents on how these devices are to work.

      WiFi is a trademark of the WiFI Alliance, so technically, calling 802.11? devices "WiFi" is incorrect, as only tested an approved devices carry the WiFi trademark stamp. They approve devices after doing interoperability testing, figuring out that consumers would be best served if devices actually interoperate (and thus everyone can sell more). Thus they created the WiFi trademark, and the approval stamps you see WiFI A, WiFi-B, WiFi G, WiFi Draft N, and soon, WiFi N.

    4. Re:Compatibility with Draft-N by The+Archon+V2.0 · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I would think that it would have to be, otherwise no one will use the real standard due to backwards compatibility.

      Since I've seen Draft-N devices from different companies that had a bloody hard time talking to each other, I have to ask: If it is Draft-N backwards compatible, WHOSE implementation of Draft-N will it be backwards compatible with?

    5. Re:Compatibility with Draft-N by Bakkster · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Which is, of course, the mistake of releasing, producing to, and buying products based on a draft of a standard: there's nothing standard about it.

      Trying to get compatibility to the draft could prove difficult, depending on the changes. If it isn't there, that's what you get for buying non-compliant hardware. Typical early-adopter penalty.

      --
      Write your representatives! Repeal the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics!
    6. Re:Compatibility with Draft-N by ColdWetDog · · Score: 4, Funny

      and it worked brilliantly.

      Oh don't worry about that. We'll just fix that in the final spec.

      Yours truly

      IEEE 802.11N technical committee

      --
      Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
  2. Re:Hooray, I guess? by Darkness404 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    However, 802.11n has a much larger range than 802.11g. So while you might not use all the speed, the fact that you can get a much better connection everywhere in your house makes it a better standard.

    --
    Taxation is legalized theft, no more, no less.
  3. Re:California Budget by JCSoRocks · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Seriously. I don't remember how long it took but it always seemed like a/b/g came along fairly quickly. Then n was rumored for a while, then it was finally "drafted" and I got all excited and figured it was only 6 months or a year from being final.... not so much. Here we are 3 and a half years later and I still haven't bothered to buy something based on n because I've been burned too many times by things that don't quite meet the official spec.

    --
    You are using English. Please learn the difference between loose and lose; they're, there, and their; your and you're.
  4. Re:IEEE FAIL! by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Since 2004.

    Trouble is, with something like Wifi, where much of the value lies in ubiquity and interoperability, there really isn't a "forward" to move toward without a standard(official, informal consensus, or de-facto standard + clones).

  5. Oh goody by piphil · · Score: 5, Funny

    Oh goody. Now I can get dropped connections from twice the distance!

  6. Yay by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    now i can finally use the technology that i've been using for the past 3 years!

  7. Great news by arugulatarsus · · Score: 4, Funny

    Now maybe some networking companies can start releasing wireless N products.

    On another note, imagine how much the nerd herd is going to have to work to sell a netowrk product now.
    Chuck: "OK, you can get this router which is a draft N, but this new N product will do everything the draft N product does for 20$ more"
    Client: "All these letters confuse me and make me belligerent. Can't we only use one letter? "
    Chuck: "Ok, howabout N?"
    Client: "Why not something simpler, like A, A is the best you know."
    Chuck: "Just give me 150$ for the router a 75$ for an extended warranty."
    Client: "Here you go, I am easily parted from my money."

  8. Re:Hooray, I guess? by Darkness404 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Perhaps I'm missing something, but don't iPhones only support B/G wireless networks? That would mean you would be only getting the G signal...

    --
    Taxation is legalized theft, no more, no less.