Wireless Ethernet - Term Paper Example

 Wireless Ethernet I. Abstract The paper discusses the IEEE 802.11 wireless Ethernet standard and its later iterations, from 802.11, a to b, g and to n. The history of the technology is explored, taking off from traditional wired Ethernet, and discussing the similarities and differences of wireless Ethernet from traditional wired Ethernet. The paper moves on to a discussion on the relationship of the wireless Ethernet standards and implementations to the OSI networking model, with emphasis on situating the standards elements themselves within that OSI framework (Lin 1-4; Kopp; Black Box Corporation). From there the paper discusses the wireless Ethernet standard as it relates to the physical layer, the data link layer, and the application layer of the OSI stack (6test; Defoenet). The general applications of the technology are then discussed, followed by an exploration of the future and the expected future developments in related technologies to wireless Ethernet (Gilsinn 1-11; Heegard et al. 3-9). II. Technology's General History Wireless Ethernet is the designation for technology that is officially termed as Wireless LAN or WLAN. In the literature, this corresponds to the IEEE 802.11 standard. WLANs lend themselves to being a standard that has substantial overlaps in similarity with the Ethernet standard, for LANs, including that systems that fall under the WLAN 802.11 standards can be plugged into traditional Ethernet LANs with great ease. Moreover, such 802.11 standards LANs lend themselves to quick translations between the IEEE 802.11 wireless standard and IEEE 802.3 Ethernet standards. This is the reason why the 802.11 standard is also referred to in the scholarly literature as Wireless Ethernet. Wireless Ethernet is the common designation term for the WLAN 802.11 standard (Lin 1-4; Kopp) The similarities between traditional Ethernet and wireless Ethernet translate to similarities in the physical and logical topologies of the two, further strengthening the historical roots of Wireless Ethernet as the informal designation of what is officially known as WLAN under the 802.11 standard. In the Wireless Ethernet standard, the network hub also forms the part of the center of the network, and this is a wireless radio transmission point that beams the data signals to the rest of the network. This is known as the central wireless Access point or AP. Physically, wireless Ethernet networks are star topologies, while logically the topology is that of the bus topology. That all of the nodes in this system make use of the same frequency when talking to the hub reinforces its similarities with the traditional Ethernet, in that the different nodes have to wait for their turn in order to establish communication with the host. The idea is that just as in traditional Ethernet, in wireless Ethernet there is the route where all of the nodes in the network will have to wait for others to finish before they can establish connection via the wireless network through to the hub. Om the other hand, that the wireless AP transmits data via radio waves, the radio waves travel into all directions surrounding the AP, even as there are limitations to the distance of effective communication between node and hub. This effective communication range is somewhere between 10 feet and 100 feet. The blocking of the radio signals, via phenomenon known as interferences, caps the length of effective transmission. Meanwhile, eavesdropping has been a widely-used security breach protocol, not helped by the fact that even though data is transmitted in signals in wireless Ethernet networks, the encryption is only 40-bits, and in the technology world such an encryption is very vulnerable (Lin 1-2). The reality is that the 802.11 wireless Ethernet standard has branched out historically into several variants each with its own set of characteristics. These variants are the 802.11a standard, the 802.11b standard, and the 802.11g standard, all the way to 802.11n standard. Wi-Fi for wireless fidelity has come to be known as the common word for what is in essence WLAN, or as is called in this paper, wireless Ethernet (BestofMedia Team). It is worth noting that the wireless Ethernet standard first started as 802.11 standard that had limitations in terms of the speed, at that time in the initial implication of Wireless Ethernet being pegged at a cap of 2 Mbps. The first Wireless Ethernet too had support for a different set of protocols as far as encoding was concerned, and this were FHSS for Frequency hopping spread spectrum, and DSSS for direct sequence spread spectrum. This was changed in 802.11b, the first standard that truly gained traction, with the speed caps increased to 11 Mbps, and the encoding standard standardized to DSSS over FHSS. This 802.11b represented the smoothing over of the initial differences in the key stipulations of the standard that were the norm in the initial implementations and products that supported the original Wireless Ethernet standard, without the letter suffixes after 802.11. DSSS was chosen for its superior qualities relating to the ability to resist degradation from interferences, as well as the ability of the data to be recovered sans the need for the data to be transmitted again, a potential bottleneck. On the other hand, where the 802.11b standard was limited in its speed to 11 Mbps, the newer 802.11a standard was able to achieve speeds of up to 54 Mbps, about five times the speed of the 802.11 standard, which it was able to achieve from operating at a higher frequency, 5.8 GHz, in comparison to 802.11b standard. The other differences between this standard and the 802.11b standard is that 802.11 is characterized by shorter transmission distances limitations, as well as the use of an encoding scheme that is neither DSSS or FHSS, but is known as OFDM, for Orthogonal Frequency-Division encoding (Black Box Corporation; Gilsinn 1-11; Heegard et al. 3-9). On the other hand, where 802.11b was concerned, its real heir and progeny is the 802.11g standard, owing to the backward compatibility that was possible from the latter to the former, by virtue of the use of the same encoding technology DSSS, and the use of the same frequency (Gilsinn; Heegard et al.). The upgrade is in speeds of transmission, from 11 Mbps to 54 Mbps, bringing this up to par with the 802.11b standard in terms of transmission speeds. There is a standard known as Super G, which doubles the transmission speed to 104 Mbps, but suffers from not being a true IEEE standard. The true IEEE standard that improves on all these is the 802.11 standard, which improves transmission speeds to 600 Mbps, able to operate at both 2.4 GHz and 5 GHz, and had support for antennas known as MIMO, for multiple input multiple output (Black Box Corporation). III. Relationship to the OSI Model The OSI model confirms the network stack as consisting of seven layers, and interconnecting and internetworking nodes require different network layers being able to communicate with one another. This means sharing standards and protocols across the different layers in an OSI stack, from the physical layer all the way to the application layer, a total of seven layers making up the OSI stack (Mitchell). The different protocols used for Wireless Ethernet have their corresponding OSI model layer protocols in order for the communication to properly work. The Wireless Ethernet protocol shares with traditional wired Ethernet the same OSI counterparts in the physical layer and the data link layer, all the way to the applications layer in a loose fashion. In many of the references, the discussions on media access control as well as the sense method on the physical sense all center on the use of Wireless Ethernet protocols and technology tweaks on the physical and data link layer. The graphic below illustrates the location of the wireless Ethernet stack in the physical and MAC layers (Lin 1-4; Gilsinn 1-11). Image source: Gilsinn slide 8 IV. Physical Layer The physical layer elements of the wireless Ethernet as discussed under the 802.11 standards in the preceding sections comprise mostly of the network cards and wireless transmitters, the hubs and related physical elements. The implementation of successive iterations of the 802.11 standards, from a to b, g and n, all require changes in the corresponding hardware transmission and receipt physical infrastructure, together with physical tweaks in the components in order to realize higher frequencies, higher data transmission rates, and the like (6test; Defoenet; Lin 1-4; Gilsinn 1-11; Heegard et al.). Below is a diagram depicting the placement of the wireless LAN 802.11 standards in the physical layer of the OSI model: Image source: 6test.edu.cn In the graphic above, the WLAN, together with the general architecture management overview, are shown to be occurring or being situated in the same layer, and the diagram essentially shows how the first two OSI layers have been effectively standardized for ease of communication among devices and ease of manufacturing in the presence of common specifications for the standard hardware (6test; Defoenet). V. Data Link Layer The previous discussions on MAC and access control, as well as topologies on both the logical and physical aspects of the topology of traditional Ethernet and wireless Ethernet standards all relate back to the data link layer of the OSI. This data link layer discussion is relevant in so far as trying to understand the network topology differences and similarities between traditional Ethernet and wireless Ethernet or WLANs, and in being able to grasp how improvements in transmission speeds and length of transmission tie back to the strengths and limitations inherent in the data link layer implementations of wireless Ethernet. It is to be noted that the physical addressing that is inherent in the MAC addressing scheme, an aspect of the data link layer, find their home in the data link layer. The literature tells us in turn, that it is the data link layer implementations of the WLAN standards that spell the difference between among the performance tweaks and improvements achieved in successive iterations of the 802.11 standard, through a, b, g and n iterations of the technology. Wireless Ethernet matters most in the areas of the interface of the radio transmitters with the hubs, as well as in the radio receivers also acting out the role of network interface hardware, correlating to the network interface cards in the traditional wired Ethernet implementations. These are the physical layer components of the network, The MAC layer comprises what is essentially a substantial portion of the data link layer (6test; Defoenet). The discussions on the access control determination are aspects of the data link layer discussions (Heegard et al. 7-9). VI. Applications Layer (Loose Interpretation) In a loose interpretation of the application layer of the OSI, what passes for the wireless Ethernet presence is the ubiquity of the Wi-Fi logo in restaurants and the general awareness of the user with regard to the presence or absence of wireless Internet signals for one's use. There are user interfaces in the operating systems that give users control on what wireless Ethernet networks to subscribe to, as well as control over network passwords, and indicators on network signal strength and distance, among others (6test; Defoenet). These can all be construed as forming part of that part of wireless Ethernet networks that can be found in the uppermost layer of the OSI model, the applications layer. From an internetworking point of view, individual users can plug their devices into the wireless Ethernet networks via the use of user interfaces on the layer of the OS user interfaces (Heegard et al. 3-5; Kopp). VII. General Areas of Application of the Technology As can be gleaned from experience and from the literature, wireless Ethernet has found massive adoption and continuing adoption in the areas of extending Internet access across larger distances and across different devices (Kopp; Gilsinn 1-11). The common element in the extension on-going is the widespread availability of data services that in turn are used in connection with access devices and means of tapping into the wireless Ethernet networks making use of physical layer elements such as the routers and wireless data transmitters. As long as access devices, such as phones and laptops, have the radio hardware to receive the data transmission and to converse with the wireless AC via the radio transmitters, then participation and communication through the networks are possible (Kopp; Lin 1-4). VIII. The Future of the Technology It is clear that successful future iterations of wireless Ethernet standards will take into consideration the current limitations of the technologies and the standards, as well as possibilities made available by the advancements in manufacturing, in the capabilities o the components, and the trends towards larger bandwidths in more places, and at larger distances. This means, in the concrete, being able to specify transmission speeds and distances that are orders of magnitude improvements over even the latest 802.11n specifications, by virtue partly of the improvements in the physical layer components capabilities (Black Box Corporation). Moreover, in the area of security, the weaknesses and the vulnerabilities inherent in the ability of other devices to eavesdrop and listen in on the communication across a wireless Ethernet network calls for improving encryption methodologies. Improved encryption, together with faster speeds of transmission and longer distances for transmission, would improve the usability and desirability of wireless Ethernet moving forward. Meanwhile, increases in bandwidth also implies that future iterations of the technology can leverage rising bandwidths to improve transmission speeds and reliability, reduce the bottlenecks, and make the wireless Ethernet networks more secure and powerful (Kopp; Gilsinn 1-11; Heegard et al. 3-5). IX. Conclusion Wireless Ethernet has evolved in step with its massive and global adoption, replacing wired Ethernet in many instances and use cases. That development reflects the rapid shifts in computing paradigms away from fixed networks towards computing making use of mobile devices accessing networks and the Internet in wireless fashion. The evolution of the standard to accommodate faster transmission speeds at longer and longer distances is also a testimony to the flexibility of the wireless Ethernet standard to accommodate advances in the technology (Gilsinn 1-11; Kopp). Works Cited 6test. “6.1 Structure of the Data-Link Layer”. n.d. Web. 26 November 2012. Black Box Corporation. “Black Box Explains...Wireless Ethernet Standards...”. Black Box Network Services. 2012. Web. 26 November 2012. BestofMedia Team. “Wireless Ethernet: 802.11a to 802.11g”. Tom's Hardware. 15 September 2011. Web. 26 November 2012. Defoenet. “The Data Link Layer- Layer 2”. DeFoenet.cdm. n.d. Web. 26 November 2012. Gilsinn, James. “Synopsis on Wireless Ethernet (IEEE 801.11)”. National Institute of Standards & Technology. October 4, 2001. Web. 26 November 2012. Heegard, Chris et al. “High Performance Wireless Ethernet”. IEEEE Communications Magazine. March 11, 2001. Web. 26 November 2012. Kopp, Carlo. “Wireless Ethernet- The Next Generation”. Air Power Australia. March 2001. Web. 26 November 2012. Lin, Zhangxi. “Wireless Ethernet”. Texas Tech University. 2012. Web. 26 November 2012. Mitchell, Bradley. “OSI Model- Open System Interconnection Model”. About.com Wireless Networking. 2012. Web. 26 November 2012. Read More