Slashdot Mirror
Old-school Wi-Fi Is Slowing Down Networks, Cisco Says
alphadogg writes "The early Wi-Fi standards that opened the world's eyes to wire-free networking are now holding back the newer, faster protocols that followed in their wake, Cisco Systems said. The IEEE 802.11 standard, now available in numerous versions with speeds up to 6.9Gbps and growing, still requires devices and access points to be compatible with technologies that date to the late 1990s. But those older standards — the once-popular 802.11b and an even slower spec from 1997 — aren't nearly as efficient as most Wi-Fi being sold today. As a result, Cisco thinks the 802.11 Working Group and the Wi-Fi Alliance should find a way to let some wireless gear leave those versions behind. Two Cisco engineers proposed that idea last week in a presentation at the working group's meeting in Los Angeles. The plan is aimed at making the best use of the 2.4GHz band, the smaller of two unlicensed frequency blocks where Wi-Fi operates."
and i mean the ones that sell the same device over many years like a game console. PS3, xbox 360, wii u, nintendo 3ds, etc
and then you have something like printers. sure it's only $100 or $250 but no one wants to buy a new printer just to buy a new wifi router
5GHz-capable equipment is everywhere. Most of the point of having a 2.5GHz network is to talk to the legacy devices that cannot do 5GHz. Making a wifi network for legacy devices that only supports non-legacy devices seems a bit contradictory to me.
Finally! A year of moderation! Ready for 2019?
Isn't this properly a matter for the ITU, FCC and analogous bodies to deal with?
I have a router which I can set to 802.11n only mode, which is fine for my purposes and devices. By setting this, do I eliminate the problem?
You can operate in a less efficient "mixed mode" or go full on whatever the latest is. Is it the signal itself that's at issue? They want to do away with your neighbor's 802.11b network somehow by having the latest laptops not support it? Or is this an excuse not to include support for older standards in their latest routers?
How much do those old chips costs them these days, pennies?
If you put in Cisco equipment your wired network speed WILL speed up.
Since Cisco can't follow standards well and puts wifi systems that are constantly broken your wireless traffic will go WAY down.
Sorry... the use of Cisco in many big complexes is because so many I.T. managers have to get the most expensive equipment. I've personally used Ubiquity and MicroTik equipment and they are more reliable.
Excepting noise, is there a reason you can't implement 802.11 and a new protocol at the same time? Similar to the 2.4 and 5Ghz dual band devices?
15 years at 2.4ghz then 15 years at 2.8 ghz switch back and forth forever problem solved.
Now where is my shotgunning(using two internet connections as one)?
And where is a mesh network worth a damn?!?!?!
Shit, I'm just happy when I don't get some shitbag parent's group calling me up whining that the school wifi is giving their children brain tumors.
Seriously, we had a concerned group delay our deployment by months and added a $30,000 safety report on to the tab. The leader of this group has wifi at her home, and both her elementary age children have their own cell phones.
What's wrong with the current system, where we use multiple letters? The answer is it's not just technical problem with unnecessary signals filling the airwaves, it's a sales problem. Customers don't grasp the differences between letter versions (a/b/g/n) so they purchase the one with the most letters, perpetuating the filling of the limited bandwidth available.
It'd be nice of the channel allocation could be expanded in the U.S. to include 12 and 13. Also reduce the channels from 13 (802.11g+) to just 4 slightly overlapping channels.
Research has shown that slightly overlapping in many cases can work without much interference.
Research has also shown that even using non-overlapping channels can still show interference with each other.
All the newer, faster equipment supports the 5GHz band. Use a dual-radio access point, and set aside the 5GHz band for n/ac only. Run legacy devices on 2.4GHz. Use different network names for 2.4 and 5GHz so that people put their newer stuff on 5GHz.
Easiest way to do this is have "networkname" and "networkname_fast". People whose devices support 5GHz will probably use the fast one. Those with only 2.4GHz-only devices won't even see the "fast" one and use the regular one. Everyone should be (relatively) happy.
5GHz has been a godsend for WiFi performance. Sure, it doesn't penetrate as far as 2.4GHz, but in managed setups this is wonderful. Spend a little bit more on additional access points and have MUCH better performance.
....should find a way to let some wireless gear leave those versions behind
So... similar to how pretty much most/all modern routers give you the option to switch between 'a/b/g/n' mode, or enable just 'n', or just 'ac'? And like how they let you choose to use the 2.4GHz band or 5GHz or both, or...? It seems to me that there really isn't a technical problem here, just a user education issue of TELLING them that there may be a speed benefit to turning off standards they aren't using anyway.
So default to OFF for the older protocols.
eg. I have a 5GHz access point for my devices that support it, and a 2.5GHz access point for those that don't. I'm able to set my 6GHz band to N-only and my 2.5GHz band to G-only because all the devices I have on it support G. I'm able to effectively disable A/B support and speed up my network.
Start shipping routers with A/B disabled, and make it an easy checkbox in the forced setup to enable "legacy" devices.
No need to drop the functionality entirely is there?
I'm out of my mind right now, but feel free to leave a message.....
Not commenting about the wireless issue, but are people here worried that Cisco Systems holds a strong monopoly market position in enterprise networking gear? Why is this issue never talked about?
802.11b should be the first to go, but not 802.11a. Even though it didn't get good industry support, 802.11a is great. People instead adopted 802.11g, which is not 5 GHz like 802.11a, but it had better compatibility with 802.11b.
I was pleasantly surprised when I learned that my Samsung Galaxy S III supports 802.11a. I took my 802.11a AP out of storage and returned to wireless.
At some point in the near future I'll be purchasing 802.11ac equipment and putting my a network to bed. My two 802.11a adapters are PCMCIA, and laptops don't have that anymore, so I'll be generating three pieces of fairly useless eWaste.
With 5GHz you get more non-overlapping channels (12 vs 3) along with the benefit (if you live in an apartment building) of not having to worry about conflicting with other apartments because the signals are absorbed by the walls.
So the "old school" wireless is holding things down- Damn I am sorry to hear it.
I will consider upgrading once I can get more then 3/4 of a megabit to my home.
What's wrong with the current system, where we use multiple letters? The answer is it's not just technical problem with unnecessary signals filling the airwaves, it's a sales problem. Customers don't grasp the differences between letter versions (a/b/g/n) so they purchase the one with the most letters, perpetuating the filling of the limited bandwidth available.
Yes, and can you blame them? When you have an industry that blames ALL problems on the user and tells them tough shit when they're product is incompatible and tough shit returning it, the user is going to do everything they can to have a product that is compattible with their expensive devices.
So, in short, these people can shut up and start bitching at the business proactices of their asshole members.
Every router I have ever seen has an option for "n only" or "a only" or whatever band only.
Just turn off the older standards. Done and done. Some people may want to maintain compatibility with legacy devices. That should be their choice.
I have an iBook - I always liked the look of the thing when it came out and around 2005 when it was no longer the current model, I bought a grey&white 366mhz, 10gb HDD iBook and the matching curve-shaped bag via eBay
Its had intermittent periods of use as and when I needed an extra machine, and although now 14 years old, with RAM upgraded to 392mb, an aftermarket battery giving 7 hours on a charge and OSX 10.3.9 installed, it still works. HOWEVER - it has an original Apple Airport card (probably worth more than the laptop & bag put together...) and these dont work with WPA2 or with any 802.11n router - they just wont connect.
So its just become a curiosity on the shelf - a machine with only one USB port is hopelessly compromised by using an external Wifi adapter.
I have been a user for about 10 years. This ends Feb 2014. The site's been ruined. I'm off. Dice, FU
And they want them in all your Things.
Cisco is a company with its own interests at heart. In fact, the executive leadership's interests at heart. They want more and more money but they have to convince you there is something inadequate about what you are using now in order to sell it to you.
Back in the earlier dot-com bubble days, no convincing was needed. Money-spending-executives (much like gadget buying housewives) bought into the notion that buying new tech will somehow translate into more money in their pockets.
Right about now, tech has lost its magic in that arena. People dislike upgrades. They are expensive and do not promise much of value because now people increasingly understand what they are buying where before they didn't.
Cisco says "you need faster networks!!!" Businesses are asking "oh really?" Sorry Cisco, but your glory days are soon to be behind you. More importantly, we're about to see a kind of technology revolution where experience is more important than certifications. Certifications are little more than brand endorsements these days anyway and HR departments everywhere are wising up to that fact as well.
Cisco, you need a new game. I doubt you will come up with any. Your products demand standards compliance which means just about anyone will be able to replace you. Well, that is unless you can convince people to buy your expensive patented technology right? I guess your best bet is to get new standards adopted using your expensive patents. Otherwise you will have to compete with other beige-box sellers out there.
That's what I was thinking. Either that, or sales are down so much thanks to the spying debacle that they're having to push hard for new revenue, even if the new equipment doesn't/won't carry backdoors. 2013 was looking like a banner year for Cisco, up until August; they're almost back to 2012 share price now.
Thanks to the War on Drugs, it's easier to buy meth than it is to buy cold medicine!
E.G.-> In Windows 7, I remove 6 clients + protocols I don't use listed below (no home LAN is how I get away with it, single system only, & thus, I only have to use ONLY IPv4 for the internet, as it's all I require here):
---
1.) Client For Microsoft Networks
2.) File & Printer Sharing
3.) QoS Packet Scheduler
4.) IPv6 (typically I don't ever use it)
5.) LinkLayer Topology Discover Mapper I/O Driver
6.) LinkLayer Topology Discovery Responder
---
(I.E.-> I cut all 6 of those out here, for reasons of efficiency... &, yes, it works!)
* Doing that cuts down on cells/packets/frames in the network connectivity chain sent-received & processed, thus, raising efficiency of my networking - no questions asked for MUCH the same reasons you yourself note doing in your hardware/router.
APK
P.S.=> Between THAT, plus:
---
A.) Tuning the IP stack for BOTH speed & security @ the registry level
B.) LIMITING JavaScript on most ALL sites (via Opera's "By Site Preferences" - NO "NoScript" required really... &, I limit it globally for "ALL sites", & ONLY make exception sites to use it on sites that demand data access to databases to function fully, e.g. shopping/banking online)
C.) Using a custom hosts file (for the reasons noted in this link -> http://mobile.slashdot.org/com... that some malware maker/advertiser/inferior competitor immediately downmodded, with NO valid technical justifications on the topic as to why - lol, figures: E.G.-> Adblock's inferior, & is about to get NUKED by ClarityRay, Ghostery or Request policy are also inferior giving you FAR less in features or blocking malicious content, & hosts shore up DNS faults...)
---
The combination of ALL OF THE ABOVE does the rest for BETTER overall speed & efficiency online...
... apk
I thought that's what greenfield mode is for in 802.11n.
Cisco should have heard about that mode...
Going out on a limb here (at risk of getting modded down or worse my butt flamed in front of all my friends) but someone wrote there was a time when RF was new and FCC carved out spectrum for various services. Then along comes the computer people, "we need wireless!" But everything was taken, except 2.4GHz that was given to ISM and microwave ovens. Kind of like land grabbing in early 1800s, by end of that century all the good stuff was taken. And everything that is licensed-free wireless is all put in 2.4GHz. Don't have a choice unless you get licensed services meaning Part 97 amateur radio but mostly limited as it is perceived as old school (i.e. operators are senior retired people) and cannot use it for business and entertainment. But most spectrum belongs to the big boys that bought lots of it from FCC so they can deploy all the stuff made in China to operate in their spectrum, and sell use of it to people (and many get screwed with data caps or charged lotsa bux when exceeding data limits).
mfwright@batnet.com
I can typically see a dozen or so neighbors' wifi networks at 2.4GHz. Probably 2/3 are 802.11n, the rest g, no b. I used to run on g, and it worked ok except for the far edges of my house, but when my neighbors started upgrading from g to n (or maybe b to n:-), the airwaves were getting too crowded and I kept getting knocked off the network when I was in the room I usually used my laptop in. Eventually I bit the bullet and got an 802.11n router to get a bit more power and range, as well as switching channels, though there were almost as many people on 6 and 11 as on 1. Now my connections are pretty reliable, except for one tablet that has a wimpy radio.
The one other thing that's changed is that almost all the nearby wifi want authentication (even if it's only WEP.) Almost none of the b access points used it, many of the g versions did, and all of the n access points have authentication enabled on them. It's kind of frustrating, because every couple of years my DSL has a problem, and in the past I could borrow a neighbor's wifi until I got it fixed.
Bill Stewart
New Fast-Compression-only CPR http://preview.tinyurl.com/dy575ks
Fast and old school
I can see a dozen or so of my neighbors' wifi networks. About 2/3 are running N, 1/3 running G, no B. I have a couple of 802.11b devices in my "old electronic junk" bin, but it's not like they're powered up. And unless you're somewhere that has smart-meters running 802.11b, or some other antique or retro gear, you probably won't have 802.11b running either.
But all of the devices know how to fall back to that protocol, and maybe some of them will, at least with weak signals over long distances.
Bill Stewart
New Fast-Compression-only CPR http://preview.tinyurl.com/dy575ks
My HP Laser Printer is running just fine after a decade. It doesn't have wifi, just ethernet and USB, though I think there was a wifi printer of the same generation. It usually sits in the same room as the wifi router. But Wifi uses channels, so if you've got an old 802.11b-only printer and want to keep it on the air instead of hanging it on an ethernet, you've probably got an old wifi router sitting around by now, so put it and the printer on one channel and your fast gear on another channel (or on 5 GHz, where fast stuff belongs.) If you can get your printer and router to use Channel 14, that's probably best, because it's not officially supported in the US so there's usually nothing else on it.
And there's nothing wrong with 802.11g, though yeah, any 802.11b is worth retiring.
Bill Stewart
New Fast-Compression-only CPR http://preview.tinyurl.com/dy575ks
That's an especially good time to deploy some old router that it can connect to so you can use it at home, on a different channel than your main wifi, though for roaming use you might need a USB hub.
Bill Stewart
New Fast-Compression-only CPR http://preview.tinyurl.com/dy575ks
That is interesting that wireless products are apparently required to support back to 802.11 1997 and b out of the box. I have seen that on my gear but didn't know it was mandated. Anyway, one of the first steps I take when deploying a new AP is to log in and, after disabling WEP and WPA1, change a dropdown box from b/g/n to g/n.
This should eliminate all the legacy traffic, surely?
"Nine times out of ten, starting a fire is not the best way to solve the problem." - my wife
Ya, I'm no captain of industry and would consider myself pro-consumerist over pro-profiteer, but what's wrong with "Good Enough"? Most people have zero need for 6Gbps. Yes, most. Most people aren't downloading massive files over public networks nor does it matter if they get instant access to the newest viral craze on Youtube.
For most people 802.11b is good enough. Upgrading is too resource intensive when the cost of continuing the status quo is ZERO DOLLARS.
I equate this "issue" with Dell complaining that no one is buying their OctoCore 3GHZ 16GB dual-Video machines that support 4 monitors. Sometimes, old tech is good enough. Don't take that away.
It's called running your hardware in an exclusive mode. I'm not sure what other crappy access points everyone there is using, but my Linksys E2500 in it's Wifi settings has an option for operating solely in an 802.11N mode while throwing legacy compatibility to the wind. I've never enabled it due to compatibility reasons, but the option is very much there. So if Cisco is complaining about A/B/G revisions of wireless slowing down networks, then start selling hardware that's N or AC-only by default and make sure it's clearly listed on the box, the product listing, and the instruction manuals. Cisco's trying to create a problem that doesn't exist if you know what you're doing.
The Amarri pray for god, the Caldari pray for profit. the Gallente pray for peace, but the Minmatar pray their ships hol
My laptop still have that build in 802.11b and whats wrong with the nice reliable 10Mbps ?
if they want faster - they can buy me a new laptop !!
What? I actually read the article. The 54g I got in 2002 had '802.11b only', '802.11g only', and '802.11 b&g' as its three available modes.
What's new here?
Oh, and multicast still sucks over 802.11n, it still falls back to the base symbol rate - is that what they're talking about? Don't try to run PulseAudio over multicast if you don't have IGMP snooping on your switches, or you're gonna have a bad time!
My God, it's Full of Source!
OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
CCNA and all that jazz....
Cisco WiFi gear is "meh". Toss it and get Ruckus instead. Even Ubnt and Mikro can't touch Ruckus.
In our office and campus environment, we load up on access points in open office areas so you are never more than 30 feet from an AP in open air. 802.11an is the preferred protocol. But in my house, I have lots of plaster walls, ceilings, etc. I don't fell like wiring up an AP in each room, so 802.11g is my preferred protocol. There is nothing wrong with 2.4Ghz in my house. There is very little interference from my neighbors, as they are at least 30 feet beyond my walls and I can allocate non-adjacent channels. It's far desirable to a 5Ghz frequency that will be cut by 2/3 when it passes through the first wall. Sure, I could upgrade to 802.11gn, but I easilly get 30M to my AP, and my FiOS is only 10M so why bother? My servers and other things that matter are all wired anyway.
No way, not going to let them update their backdoors...
There's no VALID technical computer related justification why my post's IMMEDIATELY been downmodded - period!
I suspect the downmodder's a/an:
---
A.) Malware maker/botnet master
B.) Advertiser
C.) Creator of an inferior competitor (ala AdBlock/Ghostery/Request Policy, possibly even DNS)
---
Addtionally?
Yes - I am ON TOPIC too, since the topic's all about efficiency of networking & custom hosts files raise that, a LOT... period!
* :)
(I mean, how stupid can the chump who downmodded my post BE in doing such a rephensible unjustifiable effete & ineffectual downmod be for Pete's sake?)
APK
P.S.=> Funniest part's that the FOOL doing the BOGUS unjustifiable downmod really just doesn't get it:
Others see my post anyhow since most here browse WELL BELOW the bogus default moderation threshold... so it's seen regardless of the bogus downmod that was applied to it with NO validity...
(... & what's in it IS dead solid truth + UNDENIABLE facts from me, no b.s. ...)
So the bogus COWARDLY "hit & run" downmods?
They only make me STRONGER, showing that cowardly worm detractors don't have SQUAT vs. my statements in my post (period) - & I know it. THEY know it, as does anyone else reading with 1/2 a brain... apk
The title says it all.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
"What tuning do you recommend in this case?" - by tepples (727027) on Tuesday January 28, 2014 @08:55PM (#46096663) Homepage
I can't fit it in here (/. complains of too few characters per line when I attempt to post the VERY "generic" .reg file content)
So - Write me for the .reg files to merge AFTER you backup the section in the registry noted) at this email address:
apk4776239@hotmail.com
There's 2-3 small .reg merge files I'll send in reply in a single attached .zip file so you can examine them internally once they're extracted into 3 small individual .reg files, & lookup the settings used also (always a good idea for safety, for starters) prior to merging them (AFTER you backup your original TCPIP registry tree settings for safety as well).
However - 1 is "GUID/CLSID" dependent (on your network connection as that is the ONLY minor part that varies system to system) & that's easily identified using regedit.exe for examining that prior to merging it into YOUR registry though!
(Again - That's EASILY seen + edited into the one I send you that will have "CLSID" in its title to easily identify that IT is the one to modify for your unique system)
I lastly also even disable the "performance counter" generation for TCPIP as well (along with 42 other areas in the OS for the same reasons noted here).
I do that since the settings DO help for both speed & security (& I actually TESTED that much after applying them, so, why bother continue to generate those when gains were apparent, you know?)
Sorry for the delayed reply - /. delays my posting & reposting from 2-5 hours between posts!
(The reason? Not sure, but it's been happening lately since I use AC posts (which is NOT normal here, but I have a "funny feeling" WHY they're doing that to me... lol!))
APK
P.S.=>
"I don't see how it'd work for households with more than one person" - by tepples (727027) on Tuesday January 28, 2014 @08:55PM (#46096663) Homepage
Lastly, per my subject-line above: They won't IF the systems are networked together (Client for MS Networks + File + Printer Sharing needed there) but will if "standalone" machines that aren't hooked together.
(It's why I said "why I can get away with it" having no LAN here locally, & only a single system)...
... apk
Time Warner is the problem for the most part. My LAN link of a quadzillion gigabytes is nice to be sure and if you decide you need a wireless fileserver for all the internets of things in your house might be useful but the problem is Conchita and Ramesh over at Time Warner who both don't care that you're paying $140/month for an internet connection 1/20th of that speed and, the fact that having it available 80% of the time at all is fine.
That REALLY works just as I stated http://mobile.slashdot.org/com... where I GIVE PEOPLE MORE THAN WHAT THEY JUST WANT, but rather WHAT THEY NEED nowadays online especially (in more speed, security, reliability, & even anonymity they aren't getting from competitors), so IF I'm 'wrong', then I don't WANT to be 'right' - as I know I'm doing the RIGHT thing.
* QUESTION - Have YOU done the same? Has my cowardly detractor?? Doubt it.
APK
P.S.=>
"what did you expect?" - by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 28, 2014 @08:34PM (#46096533)
See my subject & 1st sentence (1st of all) & what did I expect?
2 things:
---
1.) VALID disproval of my points here -> http://mobile.slashdot.org/com...
So, i.e.-> IF you're going to downmod my post, have valid grounds to do so on the topic at hand with valid technical info that disproves my points1
(Not bs downmods & NO computing technically valid reasons for the bogus downmod: That doesn't disprove my points in the least since I use concrete, verifiable, & undeniable FACTS + truth - which aren't disprovable & thus a downmod is unjustifiable)
---
2.) People with balls to try the above vs. off-topc trolling crap + unjustifiable downmods - pretty simple.
So IF they want to VALIDLY "shut me up"? Then, they have to SHUT ME DOWN, & disprove my points, making ME "eat my words" (hasn't happened yet & NEVER will).
(There've been some who did try & failed when I TRASHED their "objections" & overcame them since they were off topic or completely 'off' technically - no "detractor troll" even *TRIES* anymore & resorts to effete unjustifiable downmods instead)
... apk
Surge suppressors in his instance cost more then new modems, to get one strong enough to handle lightning, even UPS'es don't handle lightning well. Plus the "slowdown" on the data recheck takes forever even with the best of the surge protectors.
You'll have optical fiber to your house soon enough if you don't already, but it won't help, because your equipment is just as likely to be fried by ground surge through the mains as from a phone line into the network.
It's the industry standard.
Why are we still talking about this? Just go buy some new Cisco stuff and be quiet.
A mild experiment, all you smart boys. Not the older ones that may have experienced it, what is an antenna? And why would you have one connected to a TV, and why in a tv menu would you have an option for antenna input. Never heard of OTA?
Certainly not the FCC. These are unlicensed bands, they don't care what you do with them (which is the whole point of unlicensed bands).
Not requiring a license is not the same thing as not caring what you do.
The company I work for has 1500 B radio handheld bar code scanners. At $3500.00 a piece hell will freeze over before they get replaced.