COMMENTARY--I don't know about you, but for the last five years, the roaming capabilities of my various wireless phones have left much to be desired.
Many times, for example, I've been traveling in a car or train where the person next to me is yapping away and I'm getting enough signal for my phone to acknowledge its native network, but not enough to make or receive a call.
Each time I ask myself "Why can't my phone switch to that guy's network? Who set the stupid threshold on my phone to wait until hell freezes over before it roams? Why can't it tell me what networks it does see, and give me the option to switch to one of them manually?" The cell phone industry's dirty little secret, I am told, is that cell phones are capable of such options. But the wireless carriers won't sell a phone if such options are enabled. (If you're in a position to blow the whistle on this, let me know.)
So imagine my skepticism about recent news revealing a wireless world where we can roam seamlessly from 802.11-based wireless LANs to GPRS-based wireless WANs and back again (depending on which signal is stronger). A sub-par precedent for cell-phone roaming isn't the only thing that keeps me from holding my breath on this news. More problems lurk in the proprietary technologies that many of the 802.11 vendors are trying to hook you on now. Perhaps compounding these problems is the likelihood that without a standard for roaming between network types, mileage is likely to vary wildly from one implementation to the next--even if the individual LAN and WAN connections are standards-compliant within themselves.
The allure of proprietary features
When I hear that companies like Nokia are working on products that do this sort of roaming, and wireless service providers like VoiceStream are working to handle the service end, I want to be the first to try them, even as I doubt that the quality of service will meet my expectations. For example, what if there are two competing vendors of wireless LAN service in an airport? If I'm barely within range of my native 802.11 service but deep in the heart of a foreign one, will my combo 802.11/GPRS device default to the slower GPRS network? Will I have a choice? Probably not--if cell phones are any indication.
Another problem is the seductive allure of proprietary features--extensions to the 802.11 standards--that won't work everywhere an 802.11 network exists. Since standards for higher speed and security are still in development, many vendors are already filling the void with proprietary solutions. Wireless Ethernet Compatibility Alliance (WECA) marketing director Brian Grimm calls these solutions "pre-standard implementations."
To deal with the 802.11's security, or more importantly, its lack thereof, Cisco's 802.11 offerings have a proprietary authentication feature called LEAP. This proprietary wireless LAN version of the Extensible Authentication Protocol ensures that only authorized people are accessing your wireless LAN. The problem is that once you pick LEAP, Cisco is your only choice for equipment. I found this out recently when the network manager of one of the wireless LANs that I frequently access decided to deploy LEAP. I had to throw out my Lucent wireless LAN cards and replace them with Cisco Aironet 350 cards. Fortunately, the Aironet Card comes with a client utility that allows me to set up different profiles for different locations and wireless networks. I have two profiles: one for the LEAP-based network that I access, and another for the plain vanilla 802.11b network that doesn't even have wireless encryption enabled. Now, I only wish that it could roam seamlessly between the two without having to be switched manually.
Look before you LEAP
While my notebook computers have been retrofitted to accommodate the change, my PocketPC-based iPaq PDA wasn't so lucky. For months I struggled to get that darn thing onto a wireless LAN. I tried wireless cards from all sorts of vendors; none worked. But then at NetWorld+Interop, the Symbol Technologies folks said to me, "Here, try one of our compact flash-based 802.11b cards. We guarantee you it will work." Work it did. I was amazed. One of the reasons it worked, I think, was because the card included an idiot-proof installation wizard tuned for PocketPC. Smart people, those Symbol guys. The other cards I tried had nothing of the sort. I had to manually load and configure the drivers. Of course, now I'm back to square one with my PDA. Symbol's cards don't work on LEAP-based networks. What a drag.
LEAP is one of those pre-standards that WECA's Grimm talks about. According to Grimm, the forthcoming 802.11i standard will solve the same problem, but will not be compatible with LEAP.
Another example of a potentially addictive proprietary feature is SMC's Turbo Mode products which, theoretically, operate at 72 mbps. That's 18 mbps faster than 802.11a's official maximum rating. (The more popular 802.11b's maximum is 11 MBPS.) I'm not sure how the SMC folks achieved this, and I'm not sure that it matters. It's proprietary. If you go out and buy SMC's wireless LAN gear, enable its Turbo Mode, and fall in love with it, you're stuck with SMC.
Not that this is a bad thing, as long as you understand the cost of deploying something proprietary versus something standard. As I have often maintained, sticking with standards puts you in control. If you become dissatisfied with a vendor's product for any reason, standards give you the option to switch providers at minimal cost. But the minute you start relying on proprietary features--be it the file formats of your Office suite, a non-standard protocol for Web services, or a wireless security or performance feature--you are putting the vendors of those proprietary features in control of your IT.
"Fortunately," says Grimm, "some pre-standard products can be upgraded once new wireless standards are ratified." For example, the firmware on cards with proprietary security solutions will more than likely be flashable to be upgraded to 802.11i. Proprietary Quality of Service solutions hopefully will be upgradeable to the standard that addresses QoS--- 802.11e. Upgrading between different radio types is a different story, however. For example, going from the 802.11b (which runs at 11Mbps and operates in the 2.4 Ghz range) to the more power hungry 802.11a (54Mbps, 5.15 Ghz), to the equally fast, but less power hungry 802.11g (54Mbps, 2.4 Ghz) may not be so easy.
No matter what the case, it helps to know what standards are around the corner, and exactly if and how the vendor of your hardware is going to help you bridge those gaps, and what the cost will be. That way, you can avoid any lock-ins that put them in control down the road. If they don't have the answer you're looking for, take your business elsewhere.
Do my roaming recollections ring any bells? Have proprietary features ever tempted you? Which ones? E-mail me or TalkBack below.
Stay focused: Sign up for Tech Update Today, the daily e-mail newsletter for those who need to know.
