Feeds

Intel asks China to drop local WLAN spec

1 June deadline

  • alert
  • submit to reddit

Security for virtualized datacentres

Intel is still hoping to persuade China to block a move to mandate a local wireless LAN standard on 1 June and allow it to continue selling its Centrino platform there after that date.

Speaking to reporters in Taipei today, Intel CEO Craig Barrett said: "We haven't changed our basic position. We will sell our Centrino mobile technology up until 1 June. Hopefully, we'll get the issue resolved before then."

Said "issue" is the Chinese government's insistence that companies who want to sell WLAN equipment in China must follow its own Wired Authentication and Privacy Infrastructure (WAPI) standard.

WAPI was published last May in a bid to address the Chinese government's concerns that existing WLAN security standards were insufficiently strong. WAPI was to have become effective on 1 December 2003. However, lobbying on the part of the US government persuaded the Chinese to put back the deadline to June this year.

Locally mandated specifications are one thing, but the Chinese government is demanding that foreign firms to partner with companies on a pre-selected list of 24 local manufacturers in order to obtain the import permits they will need to sell WLAN kit in China.

Both requirements have proved too much for Intel, which in March said it would stop selling WLAN products ahead of the 1 June deadline. Intel believes China should satisfy itself with the 802.11 set of standards. "I am a firm believer that international standards allow more rapid movement of technology," said Barrett today.

Wi-Fi chipmaker Broadcom shares Intel's view, but Atheros, Linksys and Texas Instruments have said they will comply with China's WAPI requirement.

The Wi-Fi market is currently worth around $3bn. China accounts for a tiny fraction of that, but its WLAN arena will grow to $520m by 2005, analysts predict.

"China is such a strategic market," said an official of the state-backed group behind WAPI last month. "I think Intel should calm down." ®

Related stories

China tells Intel to calm down over Wi-Fi
Intel won't play by China's Wi-Fi rules
US chip biz tells China to ditch local WLAN standard
China Wi-Fi encryption rights holders named

Secure remote control for conventional and virtual desktops

More from The Register

next story
Brit telcos warn Scots that voting Yes could lead to HEFTY bills
BT and Co: Independence vote likely to mean 'increased costs'
Phones 4u slips into administration after EE cuts ties with Brit mobe retailer
More than 5,500 jobs could be axed if rescue mission fails
Radio hams can encrypt, in emergencies, says Ofcom
Consultation promises new spectrum and hints at relaxed licence conditions
Blockbuster book lays out the first 20 years of the Smartphone Wars
Symbian's David Wood bares all. Not for the faint hearted
'Serious flaws in the Vertigan report' says broadband boffin
Report 'fails reality test' , is 'simply wrong' and offers ''convenient' justification for FTTN says Rod Tucker
This flashlight app requires: Your contacts list, identity, access to your camera...
Who us, dodgy? Vast majority of mobile apps fail privacy test
Apple Watch will CONQUER smartwatch world – analysts
After Applelocalypse, other wristputers will get stuck in
prev story

Whitepapers

Providing a secure and efficient Helpdesk
A single remote control platform for user support is be key to providing an efficient helpdesk. Retain full control over the way in which screen and keystroke data is transmitted.
Top 5 reasons to deploy VMware with Tegile
Data demand and the rise of virtualization is challenging IT teams to deliver storage performance, scalability and capacity that can keep up, while maximizing efficiency.
Reg Reader Research: SaaS based Email and Office Productivity Tools
Read this Reg reader report which provides advice and guidance for SMBs towards the use of SaaS based email and Office productivity tools.
Security for virtualized datacentres
Legacy security solutions are inefficient due to the architectural differences between physical and virtual environments.
Secure remote control for conventional and virtual desktops
Balancing user privacy and privileged access, in accordance with compliance frameworks and legislation. Evaluating any potential remote control choice.