A comparison of wi-fi and wimax with case studies - Florida State ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

application, its biggest opponent will be 3G. Or if Wi-Fi wants to take broad area wireless network as the goal, the WiMax is blocking its way. Compared to 3G, Wi-Fi is faster, but the signal is not as stable. And compared to WiMax, Wi-Fi is slow, has small-coverage and is unreliable. In this difficult situation, Wi-Fi should not keep thinking its killer application or try to occupy market share of other wireless technologies. The future of Wi-Fi should be cooperation not competition. Since Intel integrates Wi-Fi with laptop computers, it speeds up the demand of wireless access. The laptop has come into the main stream in the IT industry. People can carry their PC with them, but they cannot carry the ADSL. Therefore, it is the reason why a wireless network is desirable. Generally, most people believe that businessmen are the one who need wireless access everywhere. However, the major Wi-Fi users or the potential users should be home workers and students. Observing the behavior patterns, it is easy to find out that people want to get rid of annoying wires and use the Internet access in different rooms at home, and students need to access the Internet for information, online games or entertainment in different indoor hotspots at any time. Another important fact from the behavior patterns is there is no killer application for Wi-Fi. People access the Internet for enjoying ubiquitous service not just for a single purpose. Thus, with the new coming standard IEEE 802.11n, Wi-Fi should focus on how to get involved to meet the demands of home users and students. That means to provide ubiquitous access. Therefore, the next problem is if the ISP (Internet Service Provider) wants to build the public Wi-Fi network. Is it possible and what are the issues behind it? This topic will be discussed in chapter five. 36
4.1. The background of IEEE 802.16 CHAPTER FOUR 4. IEEE 802.16, Wireless MAN The IEEE 802.16 standard is the second generation of BWA (Broadband Wireless Access). The standard group was formed in 1998 and its purpose was to develop an air- interface standard for BWA. At the beginning of the project, the group focused on a LOS-based (Line of Sight) point-to-multipoint wireless broadband system operated in the 10 GHz – 66 GHz band. The complete standard was finished in December 2001. The evolution of IEEE 802.16 can be split into four stages: 1. Narrowband wireless local-loop systems, 2. First-generation line-of-sight broadband systems, 3. Second-generation non-line-of-sight broadband systems, and 4. Standards-based broadband wireless systems. [50][60] Narrowband wireless local-loop systems The First system is related to the wireless voice telephony. The WLL systems (Wireless Local-Loop) were successful in many developing countries such as China, India and Brazil. There are two major technologies used in these WLL systems digital-enhanced cordless telephony (DECT) and code division multiple access (CDMA). To stay competitive, WLL systems started to join the Internet service market in 1993. In February 1997 AT&T developed a wireless access system for 1900 MHz PCS (Personal Communications Service) and ended the service in December 2001 due to high costs and poor take-rate. During the same time, some small companies focused on wireless internet service. These WISP (Wireless Internet Service Provider) companies set up the system in license-exempt bands, 900 MHz and 2.4 GHz and needed customers’ permission to install antennas either on the rooftop or top of the building. At this time the range, capacity, and speed were limited. [50][87] – [90] First-generation line-of-sight broadband systems Since wired internet service can provide higher and more stable service, wireless systems needed to evolve to be competitive. There are two major systems called local multipoint distribution systems (LMDS) and multichannel multipoint distribution services (MMDS). LMDS mainly supported SOHO (Small Office, Home Office), business centers, and small corporations. This system only had short success in the late 1990s. MMDS was once used to provide wireless cable broadcast video service in rural areas where no cable TV service was available. When satellite TV came out, the wireless cable business crashed. The operators sought an alternative way to use this band (2.5 GHz). In September 1998 FCC relaxes rules for the MMDS band to allow two-way communication. After these changes in regulations some companies such as MIC WorldCom and Sprint, bought licenses to use the MMDS spectrum and began to develop high 37
Page 1 and 2: THE FLORIDA STATE UNIVERSITY COLLEG
Page 3 and 4: TABLE OF CONTENTS List of Tables…
Page 5 and 6: 5. Case study…………………
Page 7 and 8: LIST OF FIGURES Figure 2-1 The Evol
Page 9 and 10: LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS Abbreviation
Page 11 and 12: PSS Portable Subscriber Station 89
Page 13 and 14: CHAPTER ONE 1. Introduction The cel
Page 15 and 16: Table 1-1 Cont. 802.3an 2006 10GBAS
Page 17 and 18: 2.1. Introduction CHAPTER TWO 2. 3G
Page 19 and 20: 2.3. Development 3G has been in dev
Page 21 and 22: 2.5. Conclusion WAP (Wireless Appli
Page 23 and 24: IEEE 802.11n is the newest standard
Page 25 and 26: Table 3-3 Cont. 10 2.457 X Y Y Y Y
Page 27 and 28: 3.3.1.2. PLCP and PMD The physical
Page 29 and 30: Noise Codes). The most powerful con
Page 31 and 32: Figure 3-5 CCK Modulation HR-DSSS P
Page 33 and 34: other problem is inter-carrier inte
Page 35 and 36: Tab ble 3-5 OFDDM Modulaation and D
Page 37 and 38: and contains DSSS, CCK, PBCC (Packe
Page 39 and 40: 3.3.2. MAC Layer 3.3.2.1. Introduct
Page 41 and 42: Virtual channel sensing he other me
Page 43 and 44: SIFS (Short InterFrame Spacing) Fig
Page 45 and 46: Figure 3-20 WEP Frame and Operation
Page 47: 3.4.2. MIMO (Multiple-Input/Multipl
Page 51 and 52: The working groups of WiMax Forum a
Page 53 and 54: Table 4-1 Thee Basic Datta of IEEE
Page 55 and 56: Figure 4-1 The Layer Structure of I
Page 57 and 58: codes ( (CTC) and low densityy pari
Page 59 and 60: 4.3.1.2.2. AAS (Advanced Antenna Sy
Page 61 and 62: Best-effort service (BE) This schem
Page 63 and 64: Encryption Figure 4-4 PKM Protocol
Page 65 and 66: 4.3.2. IEEE 802.16e-2005, the newes
Page 67 and 68: transmiission, the aadjacent cellls
Page 69 and 70: the uplink bandwidth periodically f
Page 71 and 72: Figure 4-7 Coverage and Capacity fo
Page 73 and 74: CHAPTER FIVE 5. Case study This cha
Page 75 and 76: increased bandwidth, fixed connecti
Page 77 and 78: Figure 5-3 Landis Green Figure 5-4
Page 79 and 80: Table 5-2 Xirrus XS-3700 AP Technol
Page 81 and 82: • Automatic Tx power selection
Page 83 and 84: Table 5-4 Cont. 71
Page 85 and 86: 5.1.3. Analysis The FSU wireless ne
Page 87 and 88: since the January 2006. The populat
Page 89 and 90: Table 5-5 Parameters of WLAN and Me
Page 91 and 92: Table 5-6 Features of Nortel Wirele
Page 93 and 94: • -101 dBm typical @ 1 Mbps Recei
Page 95 and 96: Operating environment specification
Page 97 and 98: uilding density, high population de
Page 99 and 100:
epeater r is developping and it wil
Page 101 and 102:
Figure 5-17 WiBro Features The data
Page 103 and 104:
Figure 5-19 U-RAS Premium Figure 5-
Page 105 and 106:
In KT’s recent report, 60% of sub
Page 107 and 108:
Figure 5-21 An Example Application
Page 109 and 110:
Name Parameters Standard Table 5-10
Page 111 and 112:
WiFly used Wi-Fi to cover 60% of th
Page 113 and 114:
BIBLIOGRAPHY [01]. IEEE 802.11 offi
Page 115 and 116:
[37]. Sun, Y.; "Bandwidth-efficient
Page 117 and 118:
[88]. Mineno T.; Babji T.,"Issues a
Page 119 and 120:
[117]. Yun Z.; Yuguang F., "Securit
Page 121 and 122:
Network Operations and Management S
show all

A comparison of wi-fi and wimax with case studies - Florida State ...

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?