"V" is for Bitchin

With very few letters left in the 802.11 alphabet  (they've actually started doubling up letters now with things like 802.11aa, ac, ad, and mb), one letter actually stands out, "V."

And 802.11v really has the potential of making things much better.

With WI-Fi the problem has pretty much always been client related. Most of the complaints IT staff get from users is dropped connections, crappy performance or just the inability to connect.  And having to support hundreds or thousands of clients, it's next to impossible to troubleshoot all these problems and provide users with consistent services. 

Our stuff helps quite a bit from the network side by providing more reliable and longer range signals that are customized for each client and can be automatically controlled to give stations more stable connectivity and performance at range.  But wouldn't it be even better if the network could tell the client what to do!

That's effectively what 802.11v does.

Dumbed down (consider the writer here who barely has a college degree), 802.11v is a wireless Network management standard that allows the configuration of client devices while connected to 802.11 networks. 

The proposed standard, expected to be completed in mid-2010, takes advantage of the existing infrastructure and Wi-Fi standards to help companies understand what kind of devices are being connected to the network and where. Specifically it promises to support stuff like:

• Controlling client roaming to help ease congestion during peak usage times (this allows smooth client transitions between APs, which can minimize congestion during busy times and boost performance of applications such as wireless voice over IP)
• Giving network admins the ability to gather network performance data from clients to see how the WLAN is running
• Timing synchronization (useful for when you're streaming multimedia to things like Wi-Fi speakers)
• Improving the battery life of mobile devices and improving the power drain from access points by having clients dynamically reduce and increase their own transmission levels as needed
• Real Time Location Services (RTLS) technology that provides a high-level of wireless client tracking
• Minimizing interference between Wi-Fi stations and APs by arbitrating transmissions

Dynamically dealing with wireless interference is perhaps one of the biggest benefits. Essentially the V-guys are advocating the use of "interference request" and "interference response" frames. Stations wiill use wireless management protocols like these to allow the exchange of operational data so each client knows about the conditions and topology of the network.  It also provides a "means" for stations to be aware of co-located interference - letting clients automatically manage RF parameters based on network conditions.  In others words, THAT'S BITCHIN.

You must give Cisco credit here. Long ago they created CCX (Cisco Compatible Extensions Program) - a scheme designed to allow their infrastructure products to communicate and control client behavior (not to mention make money by licensing this stuff). Early on, they recognized the necessity of this sort of client control and understood, that because of their bigness, they could get this done outside of the standards process and much more quickly.

So watch this space, 802.11v represents a major step forward (if and when it comes).  In the meantime, use the hell out of antenna-based beamforming to solve the rest of your Wi-Fi problems. :)

Comments

[Devin Akin]

Now you guys know that I love your people, your products and even the company's culture, but I have some SERIOUS issues with this statement:

"Ignore the smoke and mirrors from vendors promoting things like airtime fairness, interference shields, single channel Wi-Fi blankets and other obtuse concepts"

Air Time Fairness (ATF) is HUGELY important given the fact that 99% (or more) of today's deployments are a mixed bag of 802.11a/b/g/n clients. The Single Channel Architecture (SCA) is a well-established and proven technology that produces a high-performance and stable client environment. I know you're a vendor and you have to rag on your competitors here and there, but I think these two areas were the wrong place to pick a fight.

Think of it like this... When Cisco came out with ClientLink and started giving Ruckus a hard time about its implementation of TxBF, they quickly found out that they were, "barking up the wrong tree." (pun intended). Now you're on the other end of that stick. Meru's, Aerohive's, and Aruba's technologies are equally as important as the strengths exhibited by Ruckus (ease of use, TxBF, simple deployment, etc.)

Sure, 802.11v is important, but it doesn't and won't obsolete the technologies implemented by the aforementioned companies. All I'm saying is that presenting the facts (and hopes) of a new technology is fine, and dismissing the proven technologies of other vendors may lose you credibility in the eyes of your potential customer base.

I know Ruckus is well-known for, "speaking its mind plainly" and I'm much in favor of direct, no-holds-barred communication. I applaud Ruckus for this. I just wanted to point out that when you do that, continue to respect the achievements of those around you. :)

[David Callisch]

You're right. I got rid of the comment. It was short-sided and just stupid.