<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" ?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:s="http://www.techrepublic.com/search" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"  xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
<channel>
    <title><![CDATA[Discussion on Enterprise 802.11n: it appears the fog maybe be clearing ]]></title>
    <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-258041]]></link>
    <atom:link rel="hub" type="application/rss+xml" href="http://pubsubhubbub.appspot.com/" />
    <atom:link rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" href="http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-258041/rss" />

    <description><![CDATA[]]></description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <lastBuildDate>2013-05-18T15:43:46-07:00</lastBuildDate>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[RE: Enterprise 802.11n: it appears the fog may be clearing]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-258041-2468145]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[thanks for the information...__________________cutie_tech123Did you know there is a new cool and intimate new sushi place in Rome which offers high quality Japanese foods for eating or take-away, and offers great hand-made cakes and free wifi to all customers? http://naoko-sushi-roma.blogspot.com/]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-258041-2468145]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[kathy@...]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Thu, 03 Apr 2008 18:15:40 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[My pleasure]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-258041-2464353]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[Cisco instructor and protocol analyst.  I am very glad to meet you.  Now I know where to go with my questions. Reason being is that I also am employed as a network field engineer for Orange Business Services.If you have any other questions I would be more than happy to try and help.  Also if you or your students have any topics that they would like to see discussed, please let me know as well.]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-258041-2464353]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[Michael Kassner]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Sun, 30 Mar 2008 19:46:47 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[Thanks - great information]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-258041-2464332]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[Thanks for the great explanation, clarification, and articles.  Sorry it took so long to respond - Spring Break from everything!  Since I am a Cisco Networking Academy instructor, and a retired protocol analyst and specialist, I like to keep ahead of my students. I know they will ask me this same question when we get to wireless.  You saved my neck and give me support.  Trying to locate some of the minute details about protocol changes gets harder and much more time consumming.  Keep up the great information so we can keep our students and engineers up-to-date.]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-258041-2464332]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[JimTeach]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Sun, 30 Mar 2008 17:36:39 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[More sense than earlier comparisons]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-258041-2457105]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[In two or three paragraphs, you have summarized about 6 much longer articles that took me 12 times as long to read (and madeless sense in the long run)Thank you!]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-258041-2457105]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[anne.powel@...]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Thu, 20 Mar 2008 19:44:37 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[&quot;...effectively convey some sense of all the subtle improvements...&quot;]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-258041-2457073]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[This is exactly what I found early on in my reading of your article. I was thinking that you had created a concise and easy-to-understand list of changes in 802.11n. Thanks for the explanations.]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-258041-2457073]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[seanferd]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Thu, 20 Mar 2008 18:13:51 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[Great question, thanks]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-258041-2456406]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[I believe you are correct in that the intent of both processes is the same. How it is achieved and the sophistication is where they appear to be different. First, I hope it is OK to maybe clear up a small point. All radio communications use half duplex transmission unless different and non-interfering frequencies are used. It is the nature of the beast so to speak; you can?t send and receive at the same time. The problem with wireless is that the data throughput rate normally associated with half duplex gets worse in the 802.11 wireless realm with the addition of management overhead. That is not directly considered a duplex problem, but the real world results are the same in that data throughput is less than what could be expected in a half duplex wired link. I found in my notes some information from Cisco about the TCP sliding window: ?A TCP sliding window provides more efficient use of network bandwidth than PAR because it enables hosts to send multiple bytes or packets before waiting for an acknowledgment.In TCP, the receiver specifies the current window size in every packet. Because TCP provides a byte-stream connection, window sizes are expressed in bytes. This means that a window is the number of data bytes that the sender is allowed to send before waiting for an acknowledgment. Initial window sizes are indicated at connection setup, but might vary throughout the data transfer to provide flow control. A window size of zero, for instance, means &quot;Send no data.&quot;In a TCP sliding-window operation, for example, the sender might have a sequence of bytes to send (numbered 1 to 10) to a receiver who has a window size of five. The sender then would place a window around the first five bytes and transmit them together. It would then wait for an acknowledgment.The receiver would respond with an ACK = 6, indicating that it has received bytes 1 to 5 and is expecting byte 6 next. In the same packet, the receiver would indicate that its window size is 5. The sender then would move the sliding window five bytes to the right and transmit bytes 6 to 10. The receiver would respond with an ACK = 11, indicating that it is expecting sequenced byte 11 next. In this packet, the receiver might indicate that its window size is 0 (because, for example, its internal buffers are full). At this point, the sender cannot send any more bytes until the receiver sends another packet with a window size greater than 0.?As for the Block-ACK that originated with 802.11e (QoS protocol), it was one of many enhancements to try and minimize several problems of delay, jitter, and trying to guarantee bandwidth for real-time applications being sent over a wireless link. The Block-ACK is similar to the TCP sliding window approach, but as far as I know it is not as sophisticated. I am not sure, but I do not believe that it has the ability to adjust the amount of data frames being sent per burst like the TCP sliding window. I have linked two very well written articles about 802.11e, the CommsDesign article goes into a great depth explaining the actual process. As a small aside, if at all interested CommDesign and their associated websites are a treasure-trove of information. http://www.newlogic.com/products/802_11_wireless_abg/mandating_qos_in_wireless_lans.pdfhttp://www.commsdesign.com/article/printableArticle.jhtml;jsessionid=IKELPRA11KUPGQSNDLOSKH0CJUNN2JVN?articleID=17000388]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-258041-2456406]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[Michael Kassner]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Thu, 20 Mar 2008 08:06:44 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[Well, I have no documentation...]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-258041-2456246]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[... but I can tell you of my experience. I get considerable throughput on my 802.11n network, to the point that it is faster than the connection to my service provider, so I don't feel that I'm being &quot;held back&quot; by my own equipment.]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-258041-2456246]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[Timbo Zimbabwe]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Thu, 20 Mar 2008 06:18:45 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[Is Block ACK the same as Windowing?]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-258041-2456157]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[Some good information.  It seems that 802.11a/g used half duplex transmission by the 1:1 Message/ACK ratio.  Is the Block ACK in 802.11n the same as sliding windows except at a lower layer?]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-258041-2456157]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[JimTeach]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Thu, 20 Mar 2008 04:40:45 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[RE: Enterprise 802.11n: it appears the fog maybe be clearing]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-258041-2456077]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[Fascinating]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-258041-2456077]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[adrianb@...]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Thu, 20 Mar 2008 01:26:55 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[Enterprise 802.11n: it appears the fog may be clearing]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-258041-2455538]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[article rootMessage was edited by: Beth Blakely]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-258041-2455538]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[Michael Kassner]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Wed, 19 Mar 2008 09:43:49 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
             

    <item>
        <title><![CDATA[Is it a complete package yet?]]></title>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-258041-2455539]]></link>
        <description><![CDATA[This post covered the sophisticated firmware incorporated in 802.11n enterprise equipment. Is there any additional interest in learning how &quot;smart antennas&quot; and &quot;multiple radio mesh networking&quot; will add even more weight to 802.1n networks as the eventual replacement for wired networks?]]></description>
        <guid><![CDATA[http://www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-258041-2455539]]></guid>
        <dc:creator><![CDATA[Michael Kassner]]></dc:creator>
        <pubDate>Wed, 19 Mar 2008 09:43:49 -0700</pubDate>
    </item>
    </channel>
</rss>

