|
Inside the Digital Den
December 2000
Faster freedom
Ethernet-speed WLANs come home
Maury Wright, Editor-in-Chief
In "Loosely coupled" (April), I recounted my experience using a wireless LAN (WLAN) in my home. I was bullish on the technology back then and have since become even more convinced that wireless is the one LAN technology that can pervade the home. WLANs are simpler than Ethernet, powerline, or phoneline LANs to install, and they offer the ultimate in flexibility.
Not long after I wrote the April article, I swapped my 1.6-Mbit/sec system for an 11-Mbit/sec WLAN product based on the IEEE 802.11b standard. We've covered these confusing WLAN standards extensively, so please search our archives if you need a refresher.
The 802.11b standard wasn't specifically intended for home use, and in fact targeted enterprise applications and even WLAN deployment in public hot spots like airports. Last spring, however, several vendors announced 802.11b products that targeted consumers. Generally speaking, these products forego some optional features that are most useful in enterprise WLANs with multiple wireless cells and enhanced corporate security requirements.
Apple led the way with its AirPort family of 802.11b products. The $299 wireless base station includes both an Ethernet interface to connect with a broadband modem or Ethernet LAN, and a modem for dial-up ISP access. AirPort PC Cards sell for $100.
|
I've become even more convinced the wireless is the one LAN technology that can pervade the home. |
|
I haven't tested an AirPort product, but my email tells me than many non-Apple customers have bought the products for use with Intel-based PCs. Apple's configuration software runs only on the Mac, but evidently you can find configuration software for PCs on the Internet. The Apple product so far lacks Wi-Fi certification from WECA (the Wireless Ethernet Compatibility Alliance), although that certification will likely come.
The Apple product is based on Lucent Technologies' WLAN technology, and I turned to Lucent's Orinoco product when the time came to upgrade my WLAN. The Orinoco family includes both enterprise and consumer products, and Lucent has long been among the leaders in WLAN products.
Lucent's RG-1000 Residential Gateway includes an Ethernet interface, an internal modem, and Network Address Translation (NAT) capabilities that allow multiple PCs to share a broadband or dial-up Internet link. The RG-1000 generally retails for less than $350 or less than $450 bundled with one PC Card for a client computer. Additional PC Cards sell for around $175.
My motivation to upgrade my wireless LAN had nothing to do with Internet access. The Proxim Symphony system I had used for months did everything I asked in terms of Internet access. And I don't think the 1.6-Mbit/sec rate the Proxim WLAN provided within my network was ever a bottleneck for Internet activities. My cable modem hits higher peak rates, but tangles elsewhere on the Internet generally reduce data rates to well under 1 Mbit/sec anyway.
With the Symphony product, however, I often found myself going back to a 10-Mbit/sec Ethernet connection on my notebook when I needed to synchronize files with my desktop system. I hoped that an 802.11b product would come close enough to the Ethernet rate that I'd never need to swap back to a wired LAN and a tether near a hub.
I'll go ahead and say up front that the transition has been a success, although not totally trouble-free. I haven't tried to quantify the rate I achieve on file transfers, but the Orinoco product comes close to standard Ethernet speeds. Only applications with really large files or real-time streams would require a wired LAN instead of an 802.11b connection, and in such instances the wired LAN of choice would be 100-Mbit/sec Ethernet.
Not so smooth
The start of my relationship with the RG-1000, however, was rocky. I received a kit including the gateway and one client PC Card. The kit included an installation CD with software for both the client system and the RG-1000. The installation software for the RG-1000 has to be run from a wirelessly connected system that in my case would be my notebook PC.
The hardware connections were quite simple. I used a Cat-5 cable to connect the RG-1000 to an Ethernet hub that in turn connects to a WatchGuard router and my broadband modem. I uninstalled the Proxim software on the notebook and installed the Orinoco client software. The only tricky part came when I had to physically examine the RG-1000 for an ID number that I in turn entered in the client configuration, thus allowing the client and gateway to identify one another and communicate securely.
I then proceeded to the prescribed gateway configuration process. The software installed with no problem, but each time I tried to run it, only half of the opening menu would display before my system would freeze. To this day, I've still never been able to run that configuration software on my notebook. Presumably, my notebook's 24 Mbytes of DRAM are insufficient, although nothing in Lucent's literature would indicate that to be a problem.
In an attempt to make the RG-1000 super simple to install, Lucent created the Java-based configuration software with almost no flexibility. In fact, it requires the user to install a Java virtual machine, if they don't have one, just to run the configuration software. The first version only allowed two choices—a dial-up or Ethernet Internet connection. Lucent has stuck with the Java-based configuration utility, but has added some badly needed flexibility, such as allowing knowledgeable users to opt for whether the RG-1000 acts as a simple transparent network bridge or whether it performs NAT.
Lucent would be wise to look at what Proxim offers with Symphony in terms of configuration utilities. A neophyte can choose a typical configuration, while an experienced user can control many options. Moreover the simple Windows-based software can run on the humblest PC.
In my case, I had to install an ISA-based PC-Card adapter and all the Orinoco software on a desktop system in order to run the configuration software. Once I got the unit configured to use the Ethernet port for the Internet connection, things went smoothly.
Good move
Generally, I've been very happy with the 802.11b WLAN, although the range is far less than specified. The Lucent specs quote a range of 150 meters in an open environment for 11-Mbit/sec rates, noting that the connection will step down to lower speeds to support greater range. I get a strong signal and the 11-Mbit/sec rate in any room in my house plus my back patio. In experiments, however, I've found the maximum range to be about 150 feet. At that distance outside my house, the WLAN steps down to 2 Mbits/sec. At intermediate distances, the system will work at 5 Mbits/sec, but for full-speed operation I have to be within 50 to 70 feet of the base station.
Lucent offers an external antenna that's supposed to increase the range and therefore maximize the data rate, but that accessory sells for nearly $100. I look forward to having a WLAN integrated into my notebook so that a more capable antenna can be built right into the clamshell case.
I would recommend 802.11b as the technology of choice for home LANs right now. Moreover, any products that carry the Wi-Fi logo should interoperate seamlessly. Still, I have my eye on some impending developments that will likely lead to more WLAN experiments next year. At the high end, expect 802.11a WLANs to ship with support for a digital-video-capable rate of 54 Mbits/sec.
In addition, HomeRF-compliant products are now shipping from Proxim, Intel, Cayman, and others. These products still max out at 1.6 Mbits/sec, but they bear watching for two reasons. First, the HomeRF spec includes provisions for supporting voice on the WLAN. And second, HomeRF has an upgrade to 8 Mbits/sec rates planned for next year. Stay tuned.
Author information
Maury Wright is the Editor-in-Chief of CommVerge. You can reach him at maury-wright@home.com.
| 
