Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : The *NEW* Frank Coluccio Technology Forum -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Frank A. Coluccio who wrote (14717)	4/22/2006 8:28:20 AM
From: Peter Ecclesine	Respond to of 46821

Hi Frank, >>While going through it I could not help but see the similarities to dynamic bandwidth allocation schemes and just a touch of the collision avoidance found in Ethernet's CSMA/CD/CA schemes.<< IEEE 802.11 Carrier Sense Multiple Access/Collision Avoid has continued sharing work to do, especially with Government users. Three of the PHYs have explicit Clear Channel Assessment (.11 FH, DSSS and CCK) and the OFDM ones do not standardize Energy Detect. In 802.11h, 5 GHz Operation in Europe, we did not specify how to detect radars, just how to stop operating on a channel in which radars have been detected. One of the larger questions for 802.11y Contention Based Protocol is what to measure, and what to do about Government users, as all FCC Part 90 stations are equally obligated to resolve 'interference' - there is no first in time right among Part 90 stations. Dynamic bandwidth allocation is only permitted if every station has a 'reasonable' opportunity to transmit. A Contention Based Protocol may choose not to have admission control nor priority, as they are not legal in the band, so on what basis is bandwidth allocated? We shall see ;-) petere