Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Networking Upgrades Wireless Networking IT

IEEE Approves Revision of Wireless LAN Standard 61

Posted by Soulskill
from the we-live-in-exciting-times dept.
An anonymous reader writes "IEEE announced the publication of IEEE 802.11-2012, which defines the technology for the world's premier wireless LAN products. The new IEEE 802.11-2012 revision has been expanded significantly by supporting devices and networks that are faster and more secure, while offering improved Quality of Service and improved cellular network hand-off. The standard's relevance continues to expand with the emergence of new applications, such as the smart grid, which augments the facility for electricity generation, distribution, delivery and consumption with a two-way, end-to-end network for communications and control."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

IEEE Approves Revision of Wireless LAN Standard

Comments Filter:
    • This is just a wrap-up standard formalizing a bunch of extensions to the previous standard, such as 802.11.n, so the patent situation is roughly the same as what it's been for 802.11 for the past years. Which is that, yes, there are patents on various things, though the situation is not 100% clear.

      There is a semi-standard licensing pool, the Via WiFi license pool [vialicensing.com], that claims to hold most of the relevant patents. But Netgear at least partly won its case [wikipedia.org] after they shipped some products that didn't pay to license the Via pool. But balancing that win, Australia's national research organization seems to be successfully claiming relevant patents [slashdot.org].

    • by GIL_Dude (850471)
      I don't have any way of knowing. Apparently the standard is copyrighted and you have to purchase a copy from the site (or have a subscription). Crazy that things that are supposed to be standards can't be viewed (legally) for free.
      • Crazy that things that are supposed to be standards can't be viewed (legally) for free.

        I have run into this situation many times. Most recently, while planning a satellite bar to deal with takeaway coffee and breakfast rolls, I was alerted by the local council that the exhaust requirements will have to be met according to some Australian Standard or I could find myself in contravention of my liquor licence. An inconvenience but fair enough I thought, until I attempted to view the regulations. I found that I had to pay to view the standard to ensure I wasn't breaking the law.

  • The published IEEE standard is only for paid subscription.
  • by CanHasDIY (1672858) on Monday May 07, 2012 @03:55PM (#39918953) Homepage Journal
    OK, so how, precisely, are we to adhere to IEEE standards when viewing the standard is FUCKING PAYWALLED?

    Seriously, folks, this culture of pay-to-play needs to be shut down. When you can't even read a fucking standard which will affect the entire industry without some asshole demanding payment, the system is broken.


    WTF ever happened to public domain?
    • Re: (Score:2, Informative)

      Yeah, however will you afford the 5 dollars to buy the pdf. Woe is you...

      • by ganjadude (952775)
        we have this thing called the internet, im sure if you look REALLY REALLY hard you can find the specs, there is this site, called http://www.google.com/ [google.com] , check it out
      • by X0563511 (793323)

        The amount is not the point of contention, and you know it. It's the principle of the thing. The internet is supposed to be built on open standards.

        • by Anonymous Coward

          Nobody ever said the Internet has to be built upon open standards, and strictly speaking, this is not an Internet standard. The guide is mainly meant for people who are building devices. Are you building a device? If so, $5 is probably nothing.

        • This just in: This isn't an Internet standard.

      • Yeah, however will you afford the 5 dollars to buy the pdf. Woe is you...

        Gee, I guess you're right; I mean, it's not like this sort of shit every becomes law, which you then have to pay a fucking fee to make sure you're not doing anything illegal, right?

        Wrong. [slashdot.org]


        Monetization of the standards by which all people are supposed to adhere to is fucking greed and nothing else, no matter how hard assholes and idiots try to rationalize it.

        • Your link was about access to public safety codes and had no citation about a private industry standard being forced through law. Yes, public safety codes should be free to access but they are in a completely different class to the latest WLAN standard of which no one is forced to implement or adhere to. Flawed comparison is flawed.

      • by sjames (1099)

        Send me a dollar!

        What's wrong, too rich for your blood? Cough it up big spender!

    • by sl4shd0rk (755837)

      OK, so how, precisely, are we to adhere to IEEE standards when viewing the standard is FUCKING PAYWALLED?

      Wait for a seeder? Just sayin...

    • by Trepidity (597)

      What's worse is that sometimes references to these standards are written into laws, meaning that you cannot even really read the law without paying some private organization for a copy of the standard, since it's impossible to determine what the law means without being able to read the standard it references.

    • by yuhong (1378501)

      Last time I checked, 6 months after publication it becomes open access and public via GetIEEE802.

    • by Thaelon (250687)

      This is what happens when you pretend information can be owned.

    • by tlhIngan (30335) <(ten.frow) (ta) (todhsals)> on Monday May 07, 2012 @06:11PM (#39920793)

      OK, so how, precisely, are we to adhere to IEEE standards when viewing the standard is FUCKING PAYWALLED?

      Seriously, folks, this culture of pay-to-play needs to be shut down. When you can't even read a fucking standard which will affect the entire industry without some asshole demanding payment, the system is broken.

      WTF ever happened to public domain?

      Actually, all IEEE 802 stadanrds are freely available. The reason you have to pay $5 right NOW is if you want it right now. If you want, you can wait 6 months and get it for free.

      The IEEE, like many other orgnaizations (including ISO) have paid standards, and most stndards require payment. It was just the popularity of 802.11 that the IEEE decided to open access to the 802 standard track for everyone. Of course, since the people who want the standard early are all the manufacturers trying to get a leg up on each other, the IEEE offers a brief exclusionary period so those who pay for early access get it. Everyone else too cheap to pay can wait (and delay their product by 6 months).

      Nothing at all unusual - Google does it with Android - want access to the latest Android code, and license "with Google"? You gotta join the OHA and sign a ton of agreements.

      About the only truly open standard spec I can remember is USB. Everything else is paywalled. IEEE's Get802 program is probably one of the few times the IEEE has opened up standards to public viewing - most other standards are closed paywall only.

      Heck, the PCI spec was supposed to be free and open (but paywalled) and some guy went to post them online under that thought. He was forced to remove it.

      Of course, just because it's in the standard doesn't make it free of patent agreements. 802.3 (Ethernet) is still patented, and implementing GigE means having to pay HP for use of auto-MDIX patents. And that's really what happens in standards committees - a lot of back and forth over who can get their patents in the spec. It's why Apple has trouble with nano-SIM (Nokia, RIM oppose it, because it means Apple would pay less in FRAND, even if Apple gives away nano-SIM for free). The best technical stuff rarely comes out of standards - it's all politicking on who can get their patents in, backroom deals, etc.

  • I paid the $5 (Score:5, Informative)

    by Rob from RPI (4309) <xrobau@gmail.com> on Monday May 07, 2012 @06:42PM (#39921167) Homepage

    It's not worth it. It's a high level overview, and it's only 38 pages. I care deeply about the changes in it, and this doesn't mention ANY of the new important things that was meant to happen (eg, better adhoc). So, it's a bit of a let down, actually.

    --Rob

Real Programmers don't write in FORTRAN. FORTRAN is for pipe stress freaks and crystallography weenies. FORTRAN is for wimp engineers who wear white socks.

Working...