Feeds

Next-gen Wi-Fi groups vote for single spec

Final 802.11n proposal could be sent to IEEE next week

Beginner's guide to SSL certificates

The battle over the future of the next generation of the Wi-Fi standard appears to be over. The group formed by the original three contending specifications has agreed to adopt the fourth, later specification.

The upshot? A final 802.11n proposal will now be submitted to the IEEE standards-setting organisation, possibly as early as next week.

There's a caveat, of course. The so-called Joint Proposal (JP) team will spend today and tomorrow meeting to finalise the IEEE submission. There's still a chance that one or more participants may cause the process to stumble, but there certainly appears to be a willingness to drive it forward quickly.

The JP team was formed in the summer of 2005 by the groups behind the three main alternatives for the IEEE 802.11n Task Group's final standard proposal: TGnSync, WWise and MITMOT. The decision to work together to combine their various specifications ended some aggressive rivalry between the three camps, and TGnSync and WWise in particular.

Last October, however, Intel and a number of other companies drawn from all three groups, launched a fourth group - the Intel-backed Enhanced Wireless Consortium (EWC) - to make the 802.11n proposal more suitable for consumer electronics and mobile applications.

By December 2005, negotiations between the JP and the EWC had ended in an "85 per cent alignment" between the two specifications. Now, it seems, they're all the way there. Last night, JP members voted almost unanimously to adopt the EWC's specification. Some 40 companies voted in favour, and there were two abstentions. No one voted against the move.

802.11n is predicated on MIMO (Multiple Input, Multiple Output) techniques to boost bandwidth by an order of magnitude above the standard of today's Wi-Fi networks. The technique makes use of "multi-path" interference that might once have been minimised to drive up the network's range.

With a final proposal submitted by the IEEE Task Group, the specification should become a draft standard under the auspices of an IEEE Working Group before being finally ratified as a standard by the organisation. ®

Intelligent flash storage arrays

More from The Register

next story
TEEN RAMPAGE: Kids in iPhone 6 'Will it bend' YouTube 'prank'
iPhones bent in Norwich? As if the place wasn't weird enough
Consumers agree to give up first-born child for free Wi-Fi – survey
This Herod network's ace – but crap reception in bullrushes
Crouching tiger, FAST ASLEEP dragon: Smugglers can't shift iPhone 6s
China's grey market reports 'sluggish' sales of Apple mobe
Sea-Me-We 5 construction starts
New sub cable to go live 2016
New EU digi-commish struggles with concepts of net neutrality
Oettinger all about the infrastructure – but not big on substance
EE coughs to BROKEN data usage metrics BLUNDER that short-changes customers
Carrier apologises for 'inflated' measurements cockup
Comcast: Help, help, FCC. Netflix and pals are EXTORTIONISTS
The others guys are being mean so therefore ... monopoly all good, yeah?
Surprise: if you work from home you need the Internet
Buffer-rage sends Aussies out to experience road rage
prev story

Whitepapers

A strategic approach to identity relationship management
ForgeRock commissioned Forrester to evaluate companies’ IAM practices and requirements when it comes to customer-facing scenarios versus employee-facing ones.
Storage capacity and performance optimization at Mizuno USA
Mizuno USA turn to Tegile storage technology to solve both their SAN and backup issues.
High Performance for All
While HPC is not new, it has traditionally been seen as a specialist area – is it now geared up to meet more mainstream requirements?
Beginner's guide to SSL certificates
De-mystify the technology involved and give you the information you need to make the best decision when considering your online security options.
Security for virtualized datacentres
Legacy security solutions are inefficient due to the architectural differences between physical and virtual environments.