Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Microsoft Wireless Networking

Microsoft Sniffs Out Unused Wireless Spectrum 102

Posted by samzenpus
from the are-you-using-that? dept.
alphadogg writes "Microsoft researchers have designed a scheme for measuring whether licensed radio frequencies are actually being used so unlicensed devices can use it, something that may become necessary as demand for wireless applications grows. The architecture, called SpecNet, would sense and map where spectrum is being used and more particularly where it's not — so-called white spaces, according to a paper being presented next week at the USENIX Symposium on Networked Systems Design and Implementation in Cambridge, Mass."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Microsoft Sniffs Out Unused Wireless Spectrum

Comments Filter:
  • by Z00L00K (682162) on Sunday March 27, 2011 @02:47PM (#35631534) Homepage

    I can agree that it can cause quite a racket if the FCC ever gets a report of abused radio spectrum.

    And what looks like unused may not be unused at all but can actually be used for measurements, alarm systems or even remote detonations so you can't tell that it's unused by sniffing it.

    Something like the parking spot right outside your window that's empty when you are at home - that actually is used when you are at work by the maintenance company that happens to have an office in the building you live in.

  • by postbigbang (761081) on Sunday March 27, 2011 @03:33PM (#35631838)

    No, no, and no.

    1) you're not going reduce the demand for bandwidth, just like you're not going to make taxes go down, for long.

    2) the whole point of wireless is mobility, not fixed point-to-point multicasting. The 802.11a/b/g/n frequency allocation sucks, although the a/n that uses 5Ghz has more non-interfering channel allocations. But density is not in your favor no matter what wise-ass antenna you try to use. There's leakage and uncontrollable other-device-location that will always thwart your design. Some over come this, but it's an endpoint problem that's really not covered at all by this misadventure that Microsoft is embarking on, and

    3) You have no clue what it takes to do rural broadband, nor the problems of how twisted pair networking operates, over what kind of distances, and to what degree of external signal problems.

    Go fish.

  • by Opportunist (166417) on Sunday March 27, 2011 @04:32PM (#35632112)

    It's just like when a crook starts to give to charity. You automatically start to look for the reason because you're just not used to him doing something nice.

  • by jd (1658) <imipak&yahoo,com> on Sunday March 27, 2011 @05:15PM (#35632418) Homepage Journal

    I've probably lived in more rural communities in more countries than you could shake a stick at, so cut the wise-ass remarks. If I say I know damn well that you can get CAT6 to people's houses, then I suggest you start by asking how, not telling me that it can't be done. I won't say the problem's not solvable unless I've actually done the work to know it is solvable and have the engineering skills to know what the limits of theory are in practice. The people who get things done are not the ones who say it can't be done. The ones who get things done are the ones who establish IF, WHEN and HOW -- questions you utterly fail to ask.

    If you haven't asked those questions for each and every damn article you read and each and every post you reply to, you have failed.

As long as we're going to reinvent the wheel again, we might as well try making it round this time. - Mike Dennison

Working...