Slashdot Mirror
Wi-Fi Alliance's Wi-Fi EasyMesh Certification Aims To Standardize Mesh Networks (pcworld.com)
The Wi-Fi Certified EasyMesh program that the Wi-Fi Alliance announced today promises to do for mesh networks what the Alliance has long done for wireless networking gear in general: Assure consumers that they can build out wireless home networks without worrying if one brand of device will be compatible with another. From a report: The emergence of mesh networking somewhat undermined that effort, because every manufacturer pursued its own path. Wi-Fi is still Wi-Fi, so you don't need to worry that your smartphone, or media streamer, or home security camera will connect to your wireless router, regardless of brand. But if you buy a Linksys Velop router today, for example, you can buy only Linksys Velop access points if you want to expand your network to cover more areas of your home later. EasyMesh promises to bring to mesh networks the same interoperability assurances that conventional routers have long offered.
If they don't screw it up with ghost patents, this could be in every vehicle, phone and IOT dohickey. Making the net more open.
Gets posted.
the Alliance has long done for wireless networking gear in general: Assure consumers that they can build out wireless home networks without worrying if one brand of device will be compatible with another.
Isn't this what the standard, i.e. IEEE, does?
What does WiFi alliance add to the table? Why hasn't IEEE standardized this already? What am I missing?
The problem is that it has become a buzzword and now every kid with a specsheet wants it, even when totally inappropriate for their network setup. Yes, it's cool tech, but no, it really does not beat the performance of a few normal APs connected with wires. So just lay that line to the attic and forget about "mesh". It's not better in normal circumstances. And when it is a good idea you need a little more knowledge than "plug and pray" to make it work properly anyway, standards or no.
It's pretty basic the problem.
The "mesh" part of it simple, it's just like the internet... you connect on layer 1 and 2 and you let some software handle the layer 3 routing.
The issue is with 802.11 and the FCC.
First, which is software only you need to put something like 802.11 enterprise (with a key for each client) together and make that ubiquitous.
After that, you need more bandwidth, there's tons of it available near 2.4ghz.
You also need to use accelerometers, transistors and antenna arrays (inside the phone/laptop/iPad) to do proper beamforming. That's just picking an antenna based on snr and using the gyroscope and accelerometer to maintain which antenna to use because it's cheaper battery wise than using the radio(s).
Seriously, if work was really work this would already be done. They are just wasting everyone's fucking time until they can make them stupid enough to get them in a "program".
That's funny, because the IEEE already standardized 802.11s for mesh networking in 2012. Is this a new amendment for the same thing, or simply a certification process? The article gives no clue.
The single most annoying issue with WiFi providers today is the need to "Accept the Terms" and/or acknowledge their greatness (and generosity) before the WiFi actually works. From Amtrak, to college-provided networks, to supermarkets, to dental offices, all seem intent on following the same awful example, which is, apparently, suggested by every lazy lawyer out there.
Worse, the processing of these consent-pages takes up valuable time and bandwidth — instead of using the brief WiFi availability to check my e-mail, the phone wastes time (and bandwidth) downloading the fancy "Sign In" pages with multiple pictures, CSS', redirects (and even the entire jquery.js in some of them).
Though it is not by itself a technology problem, I think, any WiFi-related "initiative", that does not address it, is a waste of time...
In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
With the layer 2 key you jackass, it's just a memory location.
because i worked so hard on it just to find out you were fucking kidding it and even though i fixed every problem you still didn't fucking fix it nor did you pay me you pieces of fucking shit are so god damned glory filled and rich that you don't even understand what it is like to not have infinite money. and then you are arrogant enough to say you are fighting capitalism from your fucking private jet.
fuck you.
The single most annoying issue with WiFi providers today is the need to "Accept the Terms" and/or acknowledge their greatness (and generosity) before the WiFi actually works.
Which is why I almost never use such systems. I've got plenty of data on my cell phone and can use it more places. Usually faster and more secure too.
If you have to go more than one hop using a radio, it may work most of the time but there will be outages, brown outs, and rebooting equipment. No way that even works as the number of nodes reaches 10 or more. My experience has been with consumer grade access points however. YMMV
And yet, only in 2015, you were rather a fan of "Municipal WiFi"
Nice attempt to put words in my mouth but I've never said anything of the sort. You would see that if you bothered to follow the link you provided and actually read it. I've argued in the past that communities should have the RIGHT to install such telecom systems for their citizens if they want to, particularly in cases where the local telecom monopoly isn't providing the level of service they desire. I simply think it should be treated as a utility like water or electricity and communities should have the right to roll their own if the market isn't doing it for them.
What would you suggest for seamless handoff between APs?