Wireless LAN Technologies
802.11 and HiperLAN/2 are the most common standards for
wireless LANs. Examine each of these standards.
802.11
The IEEE 802.11 standard specifies a common medium access control (MAC) and several physical layers for
wireless LANs. The initial 802.11 standard became available in 1997, but
wireless LANs didn't begin to proliferate on a large scale until 2001, when
prices fell dramatically. The IEEE 802.11 working group actively continues to
enhance the standard to improve the performance and security of wireless LANs.
note
 |
The 802.11 standard specifies use of an infrared light physical
layer; however, no products on the market today comply with this version of the
standard. |
802.11 MAC Layer
The 802.11 standard specifies a single MAC Layer, which
provides a variety of functions that support the operation of 802.11-based
wireless LANs. The MAC Layer manages and maintains communications between 802.11
stations (radio network cards and access points) by coordinating access to the
shared air medium. Often viewed as the brains of the network, the 802.11 MAC
Layer directs a particular 802.11 Physical layer, such as 802.11a, 802.11b, or
802.11g, to perform the tasks of sensing the medium, transmission, and receiving
of 802.11 frames.
Before transmitting frames, a station must first gain access to
the medium, which is a radio channel that stations share. The 802.11 standard
defines two forms of medium access: distributed
coordination function (DCF) and point coordination function (PCF). DCF is
mandatory and based on the CSMA/CA (carrier sense multiple
access with collision avoidance) protocol. With DCF, 802.11 stations
contend for access and attempt to send frames when there is no other station
transmitting. (See Figure 5-9.) If
another station is sending a frame, stations wait until the channel is free.

As a condition to accessing the medium (see Figure 5-9), the MAC Layer checks the value of its network
allocation vector (NAV), which is a counter resident at each station that
represents the amount of time that the previous frame needs to be sent. The NAV
must be 0 before a station can attempt to send a frame. Prior to transmitting a
frame, a station calculates the amount of time necessary to send the frame based
on the its length and data rate. The station places a value representing this
time in the duration field in the header of the frame. When stations receive the
frame, they examine this duration field value and use it as the basis for
setting their corresponding NAVs. This process reserves the medium for the
sending station.
An important aspect of the DCF is a random back-off timer that
a station uses if it detects a busy medium. If the channel is in use, the
station must wait a random period of time before attempting to access the medium
again. This ensures that multiple stations wanting to send data don't transmit
at the same time. The random delay causes stations to wait different periods of
time and avoids all of them sensing the medium at exactly the same time, finding
the channel idle, transmitting, and colliding with each other. The back-off
timer significantly reduces the number of collisions and corresponding
retransmissions, especially when the number of active users increases.
With radio-based LANs, a transmitting station can't listen for
collisions while sending data, mainly because the station can't have its
receiver on while transmitting the frame. As a result, the receiving station
needs to send an acknowledgement (ACK) if it detects no errors in the received
frame. If the sending station doesn't receive an ACK after a specified period of
time, the sending station assumes that there was a collision (or RF
interference) and retransmits the frame.
For supporting time-bounded delivery of data frames such as
video, the 802.11 standard defines the optional PCF where the access point
grants access to an individual station to the medium by polling the station
during the contention-free period. Stations can't transmit frames unless the
access point polls them first. The period of time for PCF-based data traffic (if
enabled) occurs alternately between contention periods.
An access point polls stations according to a polling list,
then switches to a contention period when stations use DCF. This process enables
support for both synchronous and asynchronous modes of operation. No known
wireless NICs or access points on the market today, however, implement PCF.
An issue with PCF is that not many vendors support it in their
products. As a result, it's generally not an option available to users. Future
products, however, might support PCF in order to offer quality of service (QoS)
mechanisms.
The following sections summarize primary 802.11 MAC
functions.
Scanning
The 802.11 standard defines both passive and active scanning,
whereby a radio NIC searches for access points. Passive scanning is mandatory
where each NIC scans individual channels to find the best access-point signal.
Periodically, access points broadcast a beacon, and the radio NIC receives these
beacons while scanning and takes note of the corresponding signal strengths. The
beacons contain information about the access point, including SSID and supported
data rates. The radio NIC can use this information along with the signal
strength to compare access points and decide on which one to use.
Optional active scanning is similar, except the radio NIC
initiates the process by broadcasting a probe frame, and all access points
within range respond with a probe response. Active scanning enables a radio NIC
to receive immediate response from access points, without waiting for a beacon
transmission. The issue, however, is that active scanning imposes additional
overhead on the network because of the transmission of probe and corresponding
response frames.
Stations set to ad hoc mode form are what the 802.11 standard
refers to as an independent basic service set. In this mode, one of the stations
always sends a beacon, which alerts new stations of the network presence. The
responsibility of transmitting the beacon is based upon each station waiting for
a beacon interval to expire and an additional random time. A station transmits a
beacon if after the beacon interval and random time the station does not receive
a beacon from another station. This distributes the responsibility for sending
beacons among all stations.
Authentication
Authentication is the process of proving identity, and the
802.11 standard specifies two forms: open system authentication and shared key
authentication. Open system authentication is mandatory, and it's a two-step
process. A radio NIC initiates the process by sending an authentication request
frame to the access point. The access point replies with an authentication
response frame containing approval or disapproval of authentication indicated in
the status code field in the frame body.
Shared key authentication is an optional four-step process that
bases authentication on whether the authenticating device has the correct WEP
key. The radio NIC starts by sending an authentication request frame to the
access point. The access point then places challenge text into the frame body of
a response frame and sends it to the radio NIC. The radio NIC uses its WEP key
to encrypt the challenge text and then sends it back to the access point in
another authentication frame. The access point decrypts the challenge text and
compares it to the initial text. If the text is equivalent, the access point
assumes that the radio NIC has the correct key. The access point finishes the
sequence by sending an authentication frame to the radio NIC with the approval
or disapproval. Many hackers know how to break through shared key
authentication, however, so it's not a good idea to depend on it for a high
level of security.
Association
When authenticated, the radio NIC must associate with the
access point before sending data frames. Association is
necessary to synchronize the radio NIC and access point with important
information, such as supported data rates. The radio NIC initiates the
association by sending an association request frame containing elements such as
SSID and supported data rates. The access point responds by sending an
association response frame containing an association ID along with other
information regarding the access point. Once the radio NIC and access point
complete the association process, they can send data frames to each other.
WEP
With the optional WEP enabled, the wireless NIC encrypts the
body (not the header) of each frame before transmission using a common key; and
the receiving station decrypts the frame upon receipt using the common key. The
802.11 standard does not specify a key distribution method, which makes 802.11
wireless LANs vulnerable to eavesdroppers. The 802.11i version of the standard,
however, is improving 802.11 security by incorporating 802.1x and stronger encryption into the standard.
RTS/CTS
The optional request-to-send and clear-to-send (RTS/CTS)
function allows the access point to control use of the medium for stations
activating RTS/CTS. With most radio NICs, users can set a maximum frame-length
threshold for when the radio NIC activates RTS/CTS. For example, a frame length
of 1,000 bytes triggers RTS/CTS for all frames larger than 1,000 bytes. The use
of RTS/CTS alleviates hidden node problems (where two or more radio NICs can't
hear each other and they are associated with the same access point).
If the radio NIC activates RTS/CTS, it first sends an RTS frame
to an access point before sending a data frame. The access point then responds
with a CTS frame, indicating that the radio NIC can send the data frame. With
the CTS frame, the access point provides a value in the duration field of the
frame header that holds off other stations from transmitting until after the
radio NIC initiating the RTS can send its data frame. This avoids collisions
between hidden nodes. The RTS/CTS handshake continues for each frame, as long as
the frame size exceeds the threshold set in the corresponding radio NIC.
Power Save Mode
The optional power save mode that a user can turn on enables
the radio NIC to conserve battery power when there is no need to send data. With
power save mode on, the radio NIC indicates its desire to enter a sleep state to
the access point through a status bit located in the header of each frame. The
access point takes note of each radio NIC wanting to enter power save mode and
buffers packets corresponding to the sleeping station.
In order to still receive data frames, the sleeping NIC must
wake up periodically (at the right time) to receive regular beacon transmissions
coming from the access point. These beacons identify whether sleeping stations
have frames buffered at the access point and are waiting for delivery to their
respective destinations. The radio NICs having awaiting frames will request them
from the access point. After receiving the frames, the radio NIC can go back to
sleep.
Fragmentation
The optional fragmentation function enables an 802.11 station
to divide data packets into smaller frames. This is to avoid needing to
retransmit large frames in the presence of RF interference. The bit errors
resulting from RF interference are likely to affect a single frame, and it
requires less overhead to retransmit a smaller frame rather than a larger one.
As with RTS/CTS, users can set a maximum frame-length threshold for when the
radio NIC activates fragmentation. If the frame size is larger than the
threshold, the radio NIC breaks the packet into multiple frames, with each frame
no larger than the threshold value.
802.11 Physical Layers
Several 802.11 Physical layers satisfy a variety of application
requirements. The following sections provide a summary of each of the 802.11
Physical layers.
Initial 802.11
The initial 802.11 standard ratified in 1997 includes frequency hopping spread spectrum (FHSS) and
direct sequence spread spectrum (DSSS)
physical layers operating in the 2.4-GHz band with data rates of up to 2 Mbps.
FHSS transmits a wideband signal that spans the entire 2.4-GHz band. It's
possible to tune FHSS access points to as many as 15 different hopping patterns
that don't interfere with each other, which enables up to 15 FHSS access points
to effectively operate in the same area.
Because the current version of 802.11 FHSS has only a maximum
data rate of 2 Mbps, not many companies sell FHSS solutions for an indoor
wireless LAN. Much faster 802.11a, 802.11b, and 802.11g wireless LANs are now
available. Also, FHSS doesn't interoperate with any of the other 802.11 physical
layers. FHSS does, however, provide a very solution for outdoor,
point-to-multipoint systems. This is because FHSS is more resilient to the RF
interference that might be present in outdoor environments.
802.11 DSSS also operates only up to 2 Mbps, but it
interoperates with the newer 802.11b physical layer. As a result, a user having
an 802.11 DSSS radio NIC in her laptop can interface with an 802.11b access
point. This situation is unlikely, however, because 802.11 DSSS radio NICs are
not sold anymore.
802.11a
Toward the end of 1999, the IEEE released 802.11a, which
defines operation in the 5-GHz band using Orthogonal Frequency Division
Multiplexing (OFDM) with data rates up to 54 Mbps. Products, however, didn't
become available until 2000, primarily because of the difficulties in developing
circuitry in the 5-GHz band.
802.11a operates up to 54 Mbps in the 5-GHz band using OFDM
with a range up to 100 feet depending on the actual data rate. 802.11a access
points and radio NICs just became available in late 2001; therefore, the
installed base of 802.11a wireless LANs today is relatively small as compared to
802.11b. Because of this, carefully consider interoperability issues that might
result if you choose to deploy 802.11a networks.
A strong advantage of 802.11a is that it offers the highest
capacity because of 12 separate, non-overlapping channels. This makes it a good
choice for supporting a high concentration of users and higher-performance
applications, such as video streaming. In addition to outperforming 802.11b
systems, 802.11a has greater capacity than 802.11g.
Another advantage of 802.11a is that the 5-GHz band is
uncrowded, which enables users to achieve higher levels of performance. Most
interfering devices, such as microwave ovens and cordless phones, operate in the
2.4-GHz band. With less potential for RF interference, the deployment of a
wireless LAN is less risky.
A potential issue of 802.11a is limited range, mainly because
of operation in the higher frequency 5-GHz band. At 54 Mbps, you'll have a range
less than 100 feet in most facilities. This requires a greater number of access
points to fully cover a facility, as compared to an 802.11b system.
If you compare the operation of 802.11b and 802.11a, however,
an 802.11a user has a higher data rate at the same range as an 802.11b user
until the 802.11a user loses connectivity. The 802.11b user, however, can
continue operating at lower data rates—1 or 2 Mbps, for example—at longer ranges
than 802.11a.
A definite problem is that 802.11a and 802.11b/g are not
compatible. For example, a user equipped with an 802.11b radio card can't
associate with an 802.11a access point. The opposite scenario also applies.
Vendors are solving this problem by introducing multimode radio cards that
implement both 802.11a and 802.11b.
An 802.11a modulator converts the binary signal into an analog
waveform through the use of different modulation types, depending on which data
rate is chosen. With 6-Mbps operation, for example, the PMD uses binary phase
shift keying (BPSK), which shifts the phase of the transmit center frequency to
represent different data bit patterns. The higher data rates, such as 54 Mbps,
employ quadrature amplitude modulation (QAM) to represent data bits by varying
the transmit center frequency with different amplitude levels in addition to
phase shifts.
802.11b
Along with 802.11a, IEEE ratified 802.11b, which is a
higher-rate extension to the initial direct sequence standard in the 2.4-GHz
band—with data rates up to 11 Mbps. 802.11b access points and radio NICs have
been available since 1999; therefore, most wireless LANs installed today are
802.11b compliant.
A significant advantage of 802.11b is its relatively long-range
properties. With 802.11b, you can achieve a range of 300 feet in most indoor
facilities. The superior range allows the deployment of wireless LANs with fewer
access points to cover a facility as compared to 802.11a.
A disadvantage of 802.11b is that you're limited to three
non-overlapping channels in the 2.4 GHz band. The 802.11 standard specifies 14
channels (only channels 1 through 11 are available in the U.S.) for configuring
access points; but each channel occupies roughly one third of the overall
2.4-GHz band while transmitting a signal. Most companies utilize only channels
1, 6, and 11 to ensure access points don't interfere with each other. This
limits overall capacity of 802.11b, which makes it most suitable for supporting
medium performance applications, such as e-mail and web surfing.
Another disadvantage of 802.11b is the potential for RF
interference from other radio devices. For example, a 2.4-GHz cordless phone
severely interferes with an 802.11b wireless LAN, which significantly reduces
the performance for users. Microwave ovens and other devices operating in the
2.4-GHz band can also cause interference.
802.11b uses DSSS to disperse the data frame signal over a
22-MHz portion of the 2.4-GHz frequency band. This results in greater immunity
to RF interference as compared to narrowband signaling, which is why the FCC
deems the operation of spread spectrum systems license free.
The 802.11b modulator converts the spread binary signal into an
analog waveform through the use of different modulation types, depending on
which data rate is chosen. For example with 1-Mbps operation, the PMD uses
differential binary phase shift keying (DBPSK). This isn't really as complex as
it sounds. The modulator merely shifts the phase of the center transmit
frequency to distinguish a binary 1 from a binary 0 within the data stream.
For 2-Mbps transmission, the PMD uses differential quadrature
phase shift keying (DQPSK), which is similar to DBPSK except four possible phase
shifts that represents every two data bits. This is a clever process that
enables the data stream to be sent at 2 Mbps while using the same amount of
bandwidth as the one sent at 1 Mbps. The modulator uses similar methods for the
higher 5.5-Mbps and 11-Mbps data rates.
802.11g
IEEE ratified the 802.11g standard in 2003, which is compatible
with 802.11b and increases performance up to 54 Mbps in the 2.4-GHz band using
OFDM.
A strong advantage of 802.11g is that it's backward compatible
with 802.11b. Companies with existing 802.11b networks can generally upgrade
their access points to become 802.11g compliant through simple firmware
upgrades. This provides an effective migration path for wireless LANs. An issue,
however, is that the presence of 802.11b client devices within an 802.11g
environment requires protection mechanisms that limit the performance of the
overall wireless LAN. The problem is that 802.11b devices can't understand when
802.11g devices are transmitting because of a difference in modulation types. As
a result, both types of devices must announce their impending use of the medium
using a commonly understood modulation type.
The disadvantages of 802.11b, such as potential for RF
interference and limit of three non-overlapping channels, still apply to 802.11g
because of operation in the 2.4-GHz band. As a result, 802.11g networks have
capacity constraints as compared to 802.11a.
|
When deploying a wireless LAN, companies must make a decision
on whether to use NICs and access points designed to operate in the 2.4-GHz or
5-GHz band —or both. Not too long ago, the choice of frequency band was easy,
when only 2.4-GHz (802.11b) products were available. Now, 802.11b and 802.11g
products are both available that operate in the 2.4-GHz band, while 802.11a uses
the 5-GHz band. This can cause confusion when designing a wireless LAN, so take
a look at what is necessary to consider when making this critical decision.
When assessing the pros and cons of 2.4-GHz and 5-GHz systems,
be sure to first define requirements. This provides a solid basis for defining
all design elements. Without firm requirements, you'll be making the choice on
flimsy ground.
The following are requirements for consideration when deciding
between 2.4-GHz or 5-GHz solutions:
-
Geographical Location—
Consider the geographical location of where the wireless LAN will operate. A
2.4-GHz wireless LAN has regulatory acceptance throughout most of the world;
however, the use of 5 GHz for wireless LANs is somewhat limited. For example,
the U.S. allows operation of 5-GHz wireless LANs, but other countries do not.
Your location might require you to use the 2.4-GHz band regardless of other
requirements.
-
Performance— The 5-GHz bands
have much greater spectrum available. Each of the 12 non-overlapping channels in
this band has 20 MHz of bandwidth. This means significantly better performance
as compared to the 2.4-GHz band. The entire 2.4-GHz band is 80 MHz wide, which
allows only three non-overlapping channels. If high performance is an important
requirement, lean toward the 5-GHz band.
-
Facility Size— As frequency
increases, range generally decreases. As a result, 5-GHz systems generally have
less range than ones operating in the 2.4-GHz band. The selection of a 5-GHz
wireless LAN could require a greater number of access points, which can result
in higher costs. As a result, you might benefit by deploying 2.4-GHz systems in
larger facilities unless high performance is critical. Keep in mind, however,
that 5-GHz systems might have equal or even better range in some situations.
-
RF Interference— 2.4GHz
wireless LANs can experience interference from cordless phones, microwaves, and
other wireless LANs. The interfering signals degrade the performance of an
802.11b wireless LAN by periodically blocking users and access points from
accessing the shared air medium. If it's not possible to reduce potential
interference to an acceptable level, consider deploying a 5-GHz system, which is
relatively free from interfering sources. There are some 5-GHz phones now on the
market, but it's much more possible to avoid this interference because of the
many non-overlapping channels that 802.11a offers.
-
Interoperability— 2.4-GHz and
5-GHz systems are not directly compatible, and few users and access points
operate in the 5-GHz band. Consequently, it might be best to deploy a 2.4-GHz
solution if you have little control over the NICs that users have in their PDAs
and laptops. This applies mostly to universities and public wireless LAN
hotspots. Your application might require you to implement 2.4 GHz to support the
more common 802.11b-equipped users.
Vendors, however, offer dual-band radio NICs and access points,
which reduces interoperability problems. Someone equipped with a dual-band radio
NIC can associate with either a 2.4-GHz (802.11b/g) or 5-GHz (802.11a) access
point. As a greater number of users begin equipping their devices with the
dual-band radio NICs, the interoperability issue will diminish.
-
Security— Security of the
wireless LAN is of great concern to most companies. By minimizing the
propagation of radio waves outside the controlled area of a facility, a wireless
network is more secure because of the reduction of the potential for
eavesdropping and denial of service (DoS) attacks. As a result, 5-GHz systems
can provide enhanced security over 2.4-GHz systems because of less range.
In most cases, you'll probably determine that 2.4 GHz is the
way to go for common office applications. 2.4-GHz products are certainly
inexpensive and capable of supporting most application requirements. Some
situations, how ever, benefit from the use of 5 GHz, such as densely populated
environments and multimedia
applications. |
Wi-Fi
The Wi-Fi Alliance, which began its work known as the Wireless
Ethernet Compatibility Alliance (WECA), is an international nonprofit
organization focusing on the marketing and interoperability of 802.11 wireless
LAN products. The Wi-Fi Alliance is the group that pushes the term Wi-Fi to
cover all forms of 802.11-based wireless networking, such as 802.11a, 802.11b,
802.11g, or whatever becomes available in the future. Wi-Fi Alliance is also
behind Wi-Fi Protected Access (WPA), the
stepping stone between the much-criticized WEP and the 802.11i security
standard.
The Wi-Fi Alliance has three main goals:
-
Promote Wi-Fi certification worldwide by encouraging
manufacturers to follow standardized 802.11 processes in the development of
wireless LAN products.
-
Market Wi-Fi certified products to consumers in the home, small
office, and enterprise markets.
-
Test and certify Wi-Fi product
interoperability.
What Wi-Fi Means
Wi-Fi certification is a process that assures interoperability
between 802.11 wireless LAN equipment, including access points and radio cards
complying with a variety of form factors. In order to qualify for obtaining
Wi-Fi certification for products, a company must become a member of the Wi-Fi
Alliance.
The Wi-Fi Alliance follows an established testing program to
certify that products are interoperable with other Wi-Fi certified products.
After a product successfully passes every test, the manufacturer is granted the
right to use the Wi-Fi Certified logo on that particular product and its
corresponding packaging and manuals.
Wi-Fi certification is meant to give consumers confidence that
they are purchasing wireless LAN products that have met multivendor
interoperability requirements. A Wi-Fi logo on the product means that it has met
interoperability testing requirements and definitely works with other vendors'
Wi-Fi–certified products.
Wi-Fi Protected Access
802.11 WEP doesn't provide enough security for most enterprise
wireless LAN applications. Because of static key usage, it's fairly easy to
crack WEP with off-the-shelf tools. This motivates IT managers to use stronger
and more dynamic forms of WEP.
The problem to date, however, is that these enhanced security
mechanisms are proprietary, making it difficult to support multivendor client
devices. As a result, the Wi-Fi Alliance took a bold step forward to expedite
the availability of effective standardized wireless LAN security by defining WPA
while promoting interoperability. With WPA, an environment having many different
types of 802.11 radio NICs—such as public hotspots—can benefit from enhanced
forms of encryption.
WPA 1.0 is a snapshot of the initial, unratified version of
802.11i, which includes Temporal Key Integrity Protocol (TKIP) and 802.1x mechanisms. The combination of these two mechanisms
provides dynamic key encryption and mutual authentication, something much needed
in wireless LANs.
For authentication, WPA 1.0 uses a combination of open system
and 802.1x authentication. Initially, the
wireless client authenticates with the access points, which authorizes the
client to send frames to the access point. Next, WPA performs user-level
authentication with 802.1x. During this, WPA 1.0
interfaces to an authentication server in an enterprise environment. WPA 1.0 is
also capable of operating in what's known as pre-shared key mode, if no external
authentication server is available, such as in homes and small offices.
The 802.11i standard is backward compatible with WPA 1.0;
however, 802.11i also includes an optional Advanced Encryption Standard (AES)
encryption. AES requires coprocessors not found in most access points today,
which makes AES more suitable for new wireless LAN installations. The newer WPA
2.0 includes AES.
HiperLAN/2
HiperLAN/2, which stands for High Performance Radio LAN, is a
wireless LAN standard developed by the Broadband Radio Access Networks (BRAN)
division of the European Telecommunications Standards Institute (ETSI).
HiperLAN/2 defines an efficient, high-speed wireless LAN technology that fully
meets the requirements of Europe's spectrum regulations.
HiperLAN/2 has a physical layer that is similar to IEEE's
802.11a, which operates at up to 54 Mbps in the 5-GHz band using OFDM. A major
difference with HiperLAN/2 is the use of a connection-oriented protocol with
time division multiplexing as the basis for supporting data transfer between
users. This method of transmission is efficient for multimedia applications
including voice and video.
HiperLAN/2 Enhancements
The similarities between 802.11a and HiperLAN/2, however, stop
at the MAC Layer. While 802.11a uses CSMA/CA to transmit packets, HiperLAN/2
uses Time Division Multiple Access (TDMA). A problem is that CSMA/CA causes
stations to wait for an indefinite period of time, which is referred to as
asynchronous access. With this mode of operation, there are not any regular time
relationships associated with medium access. As a result, there's no guarantee
of when a particular station will be able to send a packet. The lack of regular
access to the medium draws down the efficiency of the system, which is not good
for supporting voice and video information.
The use of TDMA in HiperLAN/2, however, offers a regular time
relationship for network access. TDMA systems dynamically assign each station a
time slot based on the station's need for throughput. The stations then transmit
at regular intervals during their respective time slots, making more efficient
use of the medium and improving support of voice and video applications.
HiperLAN/2 has a number of attractive features as compared to
802.11. The first, and probably most important, is higher throughput. Both
802.11a and HiperLAN/2 boast maximum data rates of 54 Mbps, but this doesn't
represent the actual rate that information flows between the station and the
access point.
The true usable maximum throughput of HiperLAN/2 is 42 Mbps,
while the maximum usable throughput of 802.11a is only around 18 Mbps. This puts
HiperLAN/2 well ahead of 802.11a in terms of performance of each access point.
A unique feature of HiperLAN/2 technology is the ability to
interface with other high-speed networks, including 3G cellular, asynchronous
transfer mode (ATM), and other Internet protocol-based networks. This can be a
real advantage when integrating wireless LANs with cellular systems and
WANs.
Is HiperLAN/2 a Threat to 802.11?
Despite bold predictions of mass production and deployment of
HiperLAN/2 products during the second half of 2002, not many, if any HiperLAN/2
products are currently available for consumer purchase. In fact, exhaustive
searches on the Internet reveal no HiperLAN/2 products available to consumers.
HiperLAN/2 doesn't seem to be moving forward at any discernable pace.
Much of this has to do with regulatory issues and big
supporters pulling out of the HiperLAN/2 movement. In addition, the 802.11h Task
Group has been working on revisions to 802.11 that make it more suitable for
deployment in Europe, which is where HiperLAN/2 could dominate if anywhere.
Essentially 802.11h is 802.11a with two additional European
features. The first of these is Transmit Power Control (TPC), which enables
automatic controls for keeping transmissions from interfering with other nearby
systems. The second feature is Dynamic Frequency Selection (DFS), which allows
the station to listen to the airspace before picking a channel. This is also an
interference avoidance mechanism that the ETSI requires for operation within
Europe.
802.11 currently has a definite lead in the worldwide market as
the top choice for wireless LAN deployments. This makes 802.11 the only
alternative for wireless LAN deployments today. Combined with the absence of
HiperLAN/2 products, it's doubtful that HiperLAN/2 will catch up and become the
dominant player in the wireless LAN market