
100Mbit Optical Wireless Network 55
Sven writes: "Victor will be releasing an
optical wireless LAN system for indoor use that achieves 100Mbit/s
speed. Being an optical system, a line of sight between stations
is required.
It will be released in Japan on July 27th. The hub costs
148,000 yen (US$1190), one node costs 49,800 yen ($400).
Get more details from their website
and from Pricewatch Japan.
If you don't grok japanese (gasp!), Cafeglobe.com's babelfish is your friend." We have an older story about building-to-building optical networks, but I think this is first inter-office optical LAN I've seen. Seems like this could be a secure way to do wireless LANs without the leakage of 802.11 - as long as you keep your blinds drawn.
Why? (Score:1)
Seriously, there are caveats with wireless optical and I cannot think of a really good reason to use this. I can think of some uses but no really good ones.
Re:Damm, that's expensive (Score:1)
As the article said this is technology where you don't "leak" all your network trafic.
Although it seems like a nice thing to have I don't see myself running something like that at home. I don't think it'll catch on for the home consumer where securing the local LAN from leaks isn't imperative.
// yendor
--
It could be coffe.... or it could just be some warm brown liquid containing lots of caffeen.
If it isn't IT then it's OT got it? (Score:1)
Looks pretty cool.... (Score:2)
This would be better for use in situations where copper isn't an option or convienent - not for true roaming clients. The tethered aspect of the recievers, along with the line-of-sight requirement, limits their use for a 802.11 replacement, IMHO. Beaming 100M to a table in the middle of a 1000 Sqft concrete floored room, with no walls nearby, is a definate use, though.
Not speaking Japanese... (Score:5)
It looks like they have a system with a 5 metre (16 ft) range. You mount a "base" unit on the ceiling, and then attach little satellite units to your computers. Communication is line of sight, and utilizes LEDs. The system can apparently find new or relocated nodes in an average of 5 seconds.
Am I the only one who sees no freaking point? Here's a comparison between this and 802.11b (aka AirPort [apple.com]):
Range
802.11b: 45 metres (150 ft)
Optical: 5 metres (16 ft)
Winner: 802.11b by a mile (at least, if you get a crazy antenna [slashdot.org]).
Reliability
802.11b: Bandwidth drops slightly when somebody uses the office microwave
Optical: You're booted from your Quake game every time that tall guy with big hair walks by your desk
Winner: 802.11b, by two frags
Cost
802.11b: Base station - $299. Satellite - $99.
Optical: Base station - $1190. Satellite - $400.
Winner: 802.11b, by about the cost of a new PC (and some long EtherNet cables).
Mobility
802.11b: Still works even if you run with your laptop.
Optical: Drops the connection every time your annoying office-mate bumps the cubicle wall [dilbert.com].
Winner: 802.11b can handle any move you make.
Security
802.11b: Shitty, unless you live in a Faraday Cage.
Optical: Shitty, unless you live in a windowless hole.
Winner: Tie. Use IPSec and/or SSH, and it won't matter if you're using RFC 1149 [landfield.com] or any other wireless network.
Bandwidth
802.11b: 11Mbps
Optical: 100 Mbps
Winner: Optical, until somebody stands in your line-of-sight.
Overall Score
802.11b, 4. Optical, 1.
In short, forget about optical unless you need 100 Mbps, can't string EtherNet cable, and don't mind if it goes down every time somebody walks by your desk. I'd say it would be good for LAN parties, except it's too expensive. I'd say it's good for trade shows and other temporary large gatherings of computers, except you just know the Microsoft guys would be throwing paper airplanes at the RedHat booth optical transmitter. I have no clue who would actually want this, other than a rich gadget freak.
If I were going to design my own optical networking gadget, it would be peer-to-peer, with each peer having multiple line-of-sight connections to neighbours. That way, if one is interrupted, packets are instantly rerouted through the other links. Unless a crowd of people is standing around your desk, you're fine. It would probably cost way too much, though. Until that gets cheaper, 100BaseT cables duct-taped to the floor, ceiling, and walls are the way to go for quick, cheap connectivity.
We have an older story about building-to-building optical networks, but I think this is first inter-office optical LAN I've seen.
First of all, I think you mean intra-office optical LAN. Second, sometimes, when you get an idea, and nobody else has done it, it means you're a genius. Sometimes, it means you're a moron.
Inter- vs. intra- (Score:2)
I've seen this error too many times lately. You mean intra-office, not inter-office. Intra = within, inter = between. Come on, I learned this in my third grade intramural sports league!
Lan parties + optical network = bad (Score:3)
8PM people start arriving at one of several locations, depending on who is the host (read: parasitic geeks) is for this paticular event. Generally the largest place is picked, if possible, but it's not always possible. Sometimes up to 8 people get crammed into a room the size of a medium bedroom. Card tables and whatever else can be found are set up to place monitors/keyboards on.
10PM about half the people have connected to the network and have their computers completely hooked up. The other half are running about eating food, talking, and goofing around, pulling antics. Those who have their systems up are assisting those less technically endowed.
12AM everyone is now connected, and the hubs are going crazy with activity. People are walking about, over wires, past chairs, squeezing through areas just barely big enough for two guys to get through and still keep their dignity. various foods, such as Dorritos, Dew, and pretty much anything else that can be spilled, are being eaten, while the containers are placed inches from their keyboard or mouse, since there is minimal space to be had. one or two people are streaming MP3's from other's computers and playing them, about a third of the people are conversing, while the rest are yelling at each other and joking about as they play various games. The lights are off in the room, so as to minimize monitor glare and heat. The general atmosphere is one of activity - maybe even confusion.
7AM about half of the attendees start to grow tired and find places on furniture or on the floor where they can sleep. The remaining half stay up and continue to play games.
9AM those still up decide it's time for breakfast, and head for a local diner
11AM those that went to the diner return, and the people that fell asleep are just waking up. The 'diner attendees' take the sleepinig positions that were recently vacated, and fall asleep, while the vacating sleepers pack up their systems and leave, possibly grabbing some files over the network quickly before the other computer is disconnected
I seriously doubt this type of environment would be conductive of optical networking, especially for the price. :) 802.11b would probably work, but it's by far cheaper to use cat5 and a normal hub, which nearly every self respecting geek has ownership of already.
-------
Caimlas
Re:Damm, that's expensive (Score:1)
Yeah, that's fair, but the hassle factor is still way high. Getting clear LOS from the hub to the node will be nigh-impossible in many buildings, and woe be the tall bastards who wanders through such a network. 8)
FWIW, you may as well install twisted-pair.
Still, if the range is any good, it maybe very cool for setting up temporary outdoor nets.
Re:Damm, that's expensive (Score:1)
Well gosh darn, I guess I'm not everyone. My home network consisting of (woo!) 3 boxen, dosen't need 100Mbit. The small online application development company I work for, with a 100Mbit net for 17 workstations and 13 servers, rarely sees utilization above 2-5%.
So yeah, I guess everyone *needs* 100Mbit. And you're right, almost everyone does *use* 100Mbits, but is that is only because a) 10Mbit equipment is dying out and b) people are influenced by the media and what everyone else is doing, not by what they actually need
It's kinda like saying everyone is buying 1.xG processors these days becuase they *need* all that processing power to render some HTML, or type up that letter to the grandkids, *not* because that's the slowest you can get. Are you starting to see the difference?
Some people need processors that fast, and some people need networks that fast, but the vast majority don't. The vast majority may as well save some $$$ and buy some twisted pair, rather spending stupidly large amounts of money on a rather pointless technology. I know that wireless is all the rage, but christ, wireless is cool because it *frees* you from having wires! This laser net is even more fragile and more annoying than a hardwired net.
Mork calling Orson come in Orson (Score:2)
[Faces of Wireless [ibm.com]]
How about holding off on who can build the fastest, neon lit, super-hyper-matic-vet-a-meat-a-veggie-matic, technology, and see who can build it correctly. Makes little sense to buy something so new, since 1) It hasn't been proven to be anything more than hype. 2) Assessments are not made to see how stable, secure, functional it is.
We've all seen so many `new technologies` this past year I don't think anyone could name em all, which shows a) They weren't that memorable b) Apparently the hype died c) somewhere along the line it wasn't the next best thing (now was it)
Re:Line of sight makes it nearly usesless (Score:1)
Re:Sleep (Score:1)
This is certainly not the FIRST (Score:1)
This sounds like an improvement of that system.
Re:About leakage (Score:2)
Dear Sir/Madam.
It comes to my attention that apparently you're insinuating that some BOFHs are idiots, and/or is the possibility that they somehow don't know about encryption. Is this correct ?
You'll be larted for this. With a very big, heavy and painful lart.
You don't seem to grasp the concept of being a BOFH. Maybe this [ntk.net] can enlighten you. And don't you DARE to do it again.
Re:Not speaking Japanese... (Score:1)
If you're using the 5 meter range optical system, you'll be sharing with everyone within 5 meters. Sure your roof will be full of repeaters/switches, but you'll be enjoying a much better bandwidth than with the 801.11b. The more crowded the office, the better performance gain.
Oh - if your building isn't ether-wired, you just have to tack on some (expensive) boxes, without having to start tearing the place apart.
Re:but... (Score:2)
Re:"Cafe Globe"'s babelfish? (Score:1)
Very limited use (Score:1)
Re:About leakage (Score:2)
I need one of these (Score:1)
I have been tring to network my block up for some time now. Unfortnally, they won't give me a permit to run fiber across the street. So, this would be a nice way to connect up some of the machines. Of course, I would have to put the unit(s) on the roof. (To avoid cars)
The only thing stopping me is the price, ouch. Maybe one day it will be reasonable. Are there gonna be Linux drivers :)
until (succeed) try { again(); }
Re:Ummm... practical application... anyone? (Score:1)
until (succeed) try { again(); }
but... (Score:3)
Top 10 things you hear in the optical LAN office. (Score:5)
9. The mail server is in my office so I can't take naps with the door closed now
8. Ya know, I heard that at night they hook up the security alarm to a dropped packet detector
7. Ahhhhhhg, I'm blinded by the bandwidth!
6. Is this air plenum or non-plenum?
5. No more naked web surfing
4. Hey hot stuff, your packets are falling on my crotch, ya wanna go out later?
3. Every time I sneeze the DHCP server assigns my nose an IP
2. Cool, I can build a router with a mirror, some gum, and 3 rubber bands.
1. Hey, would you move, you're blocking my bandwidth!
weather? (Score:2)
Granted, the government has some pretty awsome equipment for astronomy, satellite links and defense projects, but I don't think the FCC will be too keen on licensing that lasers of that power to the general public.
That will take a big laser (Score:1)
Wireless is a poor WAN infrastructure, there just isnt enough bandwith available in the bands which dont suffer much atmospheric loss... which is why satellites always will be a poor substitute for good old fiber.
Wireless is for LAN and low bandwith.
Re:That will take a big laser (Score:1)
Its too expensive for such simple use (Score:1)
You dont need all the dynamic discovery shit which drives the price for the japanese product way way up.
Hell you might be able to get professional point to point laser solutions cheaper than that...
Hard at these rates (Score:1)
Re:If it isn't IT then it's OT got it? (Score:1)
Re:wISP Tower feeds? (Score:1)
Re:Of course... (Score:1)
Fun With Optics (Score:1)
...no, not that, so get your finger off that moderating button...
Imagine what some paranoid PHB could do with a mirror-and-prism setup, intercepting the signals from the optical LAN. I don't trust copper and PHBs in combination; I certainly won't trust light and PHBs. The only good thing is that most PHBs aren't intelligent enough to 1) set this up or 2) read /.
cheaper in the long run (Score:1)
The best part of this technology IMHO is that you don't have to lease or license bandwidth from the FCC to use point-to-point, like you do microwave.
Suitable for office enviroments, not home. too bad (Score:2)
--CTH
--
Priorities (Score:3)
----------
Re:wISP Tower feeds? (Score:1)
Re:wISP Tower feeds? (Score:1)
Re:wISP Tower feeds? (Score:1)
wISP Tower feeds? (Score:2)
Donald Beckman
Wireless internet Broadband Products:
www.techsplanet.com/wlan [techsplanet.com]
Re: (Score:1)
There's not much of a point... (Score:1)
A note on 802.11 security (Score:1)
Re:Damm, that's expensive (Score:1)
Re:Damm, that's expensive (Score:1)
Re:Damm, that's expensive (Score:4)
The first time I ever set up Wireless LAN, I didn't turn on encryption. I left the thing running in my office, and was about the walk out the door when I realized that I was basically broadcasting sensitive data to whoever might want to listen. I promptly went back to my office and unplugged the thing, vowing to turn the encryption on the next day.
So, if you want the speed and security without running the wires, I can see where this product would be attractive. The price is a little stiff, but compare it to wire drops plus the cost of what could happen if somebody tapped into your network....
GreyPoopon
--
Line of sight NOT required (Score:1)
About leakage (Score:1)
And what's about the obvious leakage of this optical thing? "Hey dude, would you go one step beside, please? You interrupt the line of sight beween my workstation and the hub..."
Re:About leakage (Score:1)
Well, but you are right: Additionally to the typical BOFH - who is far too lazzy to setup encryption - there also is a group clueless baby-admins - who simply don't know that there is something like encryption and that crackers and worms are more than cock-and-bull stories...
Re:About leakage (Score:1)
intersection(set_of_clueless_baby_admins, BOFH) := empty.
Hmm... Didn't my clumsy English express this? Anyway:
context := WORLD - IT
(EXISTS bofh (is_naive(context, bofh) OR is_clueless(context, bofh))) != FALSUM
Of course... (Score:1)
"Press any key to begin."
Re:Damm, that's expensive (Score:1)
Yes. The manufacturers that want us to buy the chips.
Brain damage? (Score:1)
Re:Line of sight makes it nearly usesless (Score:1)
Ummm... practical application... anyone? (Score:1)
Optical WAN company feedback.. (Score:1)