Hi lml,
I fail to see what new information Brodskey brings to the table, other than perhaps putting some perspective on the markets involved and how they may look to either fend each other off, or co-opt one another. He juxtaposes the adjacent pieces of this jigsaw puzzle, the WLAN mob against the 3G syndicate, and suggests that they may coexist in some way. Which they probably will.
In much of the other reading I've done lately on this subject it begins to appear that WLAN/WiFi is slated to be the heavy lifting component of the larger Wireless Access/MAN/WAN that will support high-volume data flows at high speeds, while in a quasi-integrated sense, 3G will be used as a utility whose purpose may ultimately be to to support management and administrative functions.
This would be analogous to the way the PSTN is used today to transport voice/data, while a second, overlay network - Signaling System No. 7, or SS7 (which is actually an out of band packet network that sits on top of the PSTN) - is in charge of link creation and tear down, as well as authentication, billing, security, and so on.
Why this cozy relationship? Don't know for sure, but I have some ideas. It seems to me that the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) has done fine for itself in accomplishing many of these same goals in the past without the help of 3G or the PSTN's SS7 and Intelligent Network Database infrastructure (IN/AIN). So, why this new-found sense of amicability in the genre of Rodney King's "Why can't we just get along?"
I think some of it has to do with a majority of the larger vendors' common ownership of pieces of both platform (to wit: Peter's comment about Jacobs' willingness to install .11 when needed), and not just a hint of the "Art of War" being played out. And it's not just the vendors, themselves, who are influencing the situation. The service providers have a say in the final outcome, too, as we've begun to see now with VZ's and SBC's entry onto the scene.
Interestingly (to me, at least), while the 3G side of the equation may be top-heavy with strategists who, out of fear, need to co-opt the WiFi'ers, the WiFi'ers, on the other hand, in their own chaotic way simply evolve unchecked, keeping the opposition off gaurd.
Granted, there will need to some semblance of structure and order established very soon with regard to directory services, authentication, billing, security, etc., since this machine is moving forward very fast. This is something that 3G offers now in the motif of the Bell-head model, already.
In contrast, the IETF's prescriptions would have these functions performed somewhat differently, decentralizing much of them and placing them at or closer to the edge, consistent with the NetHead model, and to accommodate this would require some additional time. The problem becomes compounded considerably if we add voice to the mix, where Voice over IP would be supported by a 802.xx WAN, So, maybe it's only a matter of using what is available today in order to bring products and services to market as soon as possible. I seem to recall this sort of thing happening at least once or twice in the past ;)
You may want to take a look at the following writings on this subject. One is an MIT paper, the other a white paper billing/tariffing/rating vendor, Am-Beo.
While I don't think either of these has the end-game nailed down, just yet, they at the very least highlight some of the critical issues that need to be addressed, going forward:
Wireless Internet Access: 3G vs. WiFI
Sloan School of Management
William Lehr, Lee W. McKnight
ebusiness.mit.edu
WI-FI AND 3G – A BRIDGE OR A BARRIER?
Author: Anthony Behan, VP Market Development
Am-Beo Ltd. Ireland
am-beo.com
----------
FAC |
