Arthur T Knackerbracket has found the following story:
D-Link and Redmond have put the paddles on 802.11af, charged the machine, and hit the button.
The 2013 amendment to Wi-Fi is an air interface for "white space" frequencies (from 54 MHz to 698 MHz in the USA; Europe and the UK use a more realistic 490 to 790 MHz), with a maximum per-channel 35.6 Mbps (16 channels can be bonded together to get nearly 600 Mbps).
It's primarily a point-to-point link service rather than a user-access technology, and so it doesn't interfere with TV transmissions, 802.11af uses a cognitive radio to sense other spectrum users, and a localisation database to keep track of broadcasters.
Data rate, however, isn't the main story: compared to 2.4 GHz, TV frequencies cover a lot of ground, and that's the angle D-Link and Microsoft are touting.
The standard is designed for links up to 1 km in range, the kind of reach that 2.4 GHz Wi-Fi can only manage with a cantenna.
The two want to use 802.11af for rural/regional services in underserved areas, with a phase-one pilot currently underway in the US.
Related Stories
Wi-Fi Alliance rebrands 802.11ac as Wi-Fi 5, picks 802.11ax as Wi-Fi 6
The Wi-Fi Alliance today announced a significant rebranding of the "802.11" Wi-Fi standards that have long served as a source of potential confusion for users: Going forward, the current 802.11ac standard will be known as Wi-Fi 5, while its successor 802.11ax will be known as Wi-Fi 6, establishing a generational terminology that — like Bluetooth 3, 4, and 5 — will be easier for customers to remember and understand.
[...] Today's announcement is significant not just because of its impact on currently popular Wi-Fi standards, but also on one that's been on the fringe: 802.11ad. Also known as WiGig, 802.11ad notably depends on an extra, 60GHz millimeter wave wireless antenna to boost speeds of compatible devices in the same room as the router. A handful of routers and devices, including wireless VR adapters, have adopted 802.11ad over the past year or two.
But the announcement makes clear that the Wi-Fi Alliance sees 802.11ax, not 802.11ad, as the next stage of Wi-Fi's evolution. 802.11ax has no need for the extra antenna, instead making more efficient use of the 2.4GHz and 5GHz bands already used by 802.11ac — err, Wi-Fi 5. Wi-Fi 6 promises up to 11 Gbps speeds across three or more devices, with a single Wi-Fi 6 device achieving up to 5 Gbps.
In a statement to VentureBeat, the Alliance explained how Wi-Fi 6 and WiGig will coexist:
"Wi-Fi 6 and WiGig, based on 802.11ad and eventually 802.11ay, will continue to evolve in parallel and remain strong complements to one another within the Wi-Fi portfolio of technologies. We fully expect some products to integrate Wi-Fi 6 and WiGig, which will remain a distinct brand to indicate products that support 60 GHz Wi-Fi for multi-gigabit, low-latency connectivity."
Also at Ars Technica, The Verge, and Tom's Hardware.
Related: Wi-Fi Alliance Approves 802.11ah "HaLow" Standard for the 900 MHz Band
D-Link Joins Hands With Microsoft to Give 'Super Wi-Fi' a Push
Intel to Cease Shipments of Current WiGig Products, Focus on WiGig for VR
(Score: -1, Flamebait) by Ethanol-fueled on Saturday November 26 2016, @11:13PM
2.4G, the same frequency used by microwave ovens, and it and its harmonics are used for wireless internet.
It's a Jewish conspiracy to keep you infertile.
(Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Saturday November 26 2016, @11:22PM
Meanwhile they're pumping blue pills and pornography into the West Bank settlements, eh?
🌻🌻🌻 [google.com]
(Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Saturday November 26 2016, @11:26PM
This radio scheme sounds ripe for software cheating abuse... and also very practical given the massive unused bandwidth recently devalued by over-the-air television's rapid decline. Cable was bad enough, but now with Netflix, et.al. the newspapers have a story to tell to broadcast TV. Broadcast television bandwidth has always been copious and underutilized, and now I think we can all agree that it is unlikely that we will ever have a need for 80+ broadcast channels in a single market area.
🌻🌻🌻 [google.com]
(Score: 3, Funny) by coolgopher on Sunday November 27 2016, @12:21AM
I mean, that's a standard that's WiFi AF...
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday November 27 2016, @10:14AM
Wow, another one that nobody uses any more in 3 years.
(Score: 2) by frojack on Sunday November 27 2016, @01:07AM
It's primarily a point-to-point link service rather than a user-access technology, and so it doesn't interfere with TV transmissions
Ok, so who precisely benefits from this, if not the consumer? And why does it matter who is using it, with regard to interference?
If it is in Digital TV space, and it keeps track of other users, that means it has very limited application. Because as it avoids one user, it is sure to step on another user somewhere along that 1 km in range. The only reason this works with regular wifi is due to the short range of regular wifi.
You don't need to avoid the guy two streets over when all you are interested in is 90 feet. But when you want a mile, you have to worry about a two mile diameter around each end of the link. The number of such links sounds like it could be pretty limited.
The whole thing sounds like a corporate spectrum grab to me.
No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
(Score: 2) by urza9814 on Thursday December 01 2016, @12:36AM
Only if it's an omnidirectional antenna, which may be why they say this is specifically designed for point-to-point links. In that case they can use directional antennas so you basically only need to worry about interference directly between the two points.
A lot of places have short range microwave links, often for moving data between two buildings on the same campus. If this is cheaper or more effective, that's a good market.
(Score: 2) by frojack on Saturday December 03 2016, @12:43AM
A lot of places have short range microwave links, often for moving data between two buildings on the same campus. If this is cheaper or more effective, that's a good market.
Except microwave is licensed and channels aren't free for the taking whether they are occupied or not.
This becomes a spectrum grab the minute one of these guys figures out that they are getting stomped on by the guy near by with a bigger pringles can. Expect lawyers. Then permanent allocation demands.
No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
(Score: 2) by urza9814 on Monday December 05 2016, @09:30PM
Why is the guy sending data to YOUR building? Because if he's sending data to his own building, there shouldn't be much interference since it seems to be directional and relatively short range. I just don't see there being enough demand for low power point-to-point wireless links to create those kinds of issues.
In fact, you can get the same range -- and orders of magnitude more -- with regular unamplified wifi. But people still manage to use Wifi just fine, there's occasional interference issues but it certainly hasn't had the kinds of problems you describe. And unlike wifi, this one isn't likely to be much use to the average home user, so you won't have entire apartment complexes packed full of the things broadcasting 24/7.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday November 27 2016, @08:38PM
wake me up when MS and dlink don't have anything to do with the story.