Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Europe to decide if 6 GHz is shared between Wi-Fi and cellular networks

theregister.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 250 posts

Re: Europe to decide if 6 GHz is shared between Wi-Fi and cellular networks

#121

Post by crote »

vlovich123 wrote: post #81
crote wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's exactly why it should be used for wifi! 2.4GHz is completely unusable in urban environments, because you're getting interference from two dozen neighbours. And everyone has a poor connection, so their "handy" nephew will turn up the transmission power to the maximum - which of course makes it even worse. 6GHz barely makes it through a concrete wall, so you're only receiving your own AP, so you have the whole b…

Doesn’t 6ghz have essentially the same penetration as 5ghz and thus in a few years will have all the same problems as people shift to 6ghz?

6GHz has worse penetration than 5Ghz, but the difference is indeed not as pronounced as it is compared to 2.4GHz.

The main benefit is going to be the additional frequency space. 5GHz effectively has 3ish channels, and 6GHz adds another 3-7 to that. Combine it with band steering and dynamic channel allocation, and you and all of your close neighbours can probably all get your own dedicated frequency.

Re: Europe to decide if 6 GHz is shared between Wi-Fi and cellular networks

#122

Post by itopaloglu83 »

arghwhat wrote: post #55
itopaloglu83 wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And why does it need to be reserved exclusively for them? Can’t they be just another user of a well established standard or do they want to abuse the crap out of it?

They are trying to improve service by avoiding noise. Something few realize is that all wireless technologies are, in effect, time-share: Every device on the channel, router/tower included, take turn to talk while everyone else shuts up and listens. If other types of devices also use your channel, you'll have to shut up and wait for airtime even longer. Having WiFi and cellular co-exist mean that they are both fighti…

They don’t need a frequency channel dedicated to them just to improve reception inside a stadium or an airport.

Tell me what stops them from using the exact same technology they use for WiFi calling? They just want to own the means the people connect to the internet and be a tax on everyone.

Re: Europe to decide if 6 GHz is shared between Wi-Fi and cellular networks

#123

Post by matt-p »

stego-tech wrote: post #101

Multiple things can be true simultaneously. For instance: * The reach for 6GHz by mobile service providers is straight-up greed, as Wi-Fi is a threat to their business expansions towards monopolization * Wi-Fi is incredibly overcrowded, and a shift to 6GHz will not solve the underlying issues causing the crowding in the first place (mobile device density, over-reliance on Wi-Fi instead of running ethernet to capable…

We gave WiFi 800Mhz in the 5Ghz band and we said the same thing at the time 'this is the last we'll need'. That's 10x as much as in 2.4ghz and at a higher frequency.

I remember a lot of people at the time getting really upset about how wasteful that was. Just saying.

Re: Europe to decide if 6 GHz is shared between Wi-Fi and cellular networks

#124

Post by throw0101d »

Bombthecat wrote: post #77
fguerraz wrote: post #60

This is just corporate greed! I live in a EU country in an apartment and 5GHz is completely crowded and pretty much unusable because of DFS (making your WiFi AP unexpectedly stop to do a complete scan and choose a new channel), so 6GHz is the only stable, high bandwidth option here, and we need more channels so that most peopole chan switch to it. The cellular networks operators can have that shitty 5GHz part of the…

And you think the same problem wouldn't exist with 6ghz? It will be as crowded as 5

> And you think the same problem wouldn't exist with 6ghz?

Yes.

5 Ghz has 12x 40MHz channels, 6 Ghz has (in the US/CA where it is basically 'fully unlocked' for Wifi) 29x 40Mhz channels. It's the difference between 500Mhz worth of total bandwidth and 1200Mhz: over double.

* https://www.everythingrf.com/community/what-frequency-band-d...

* https://spectrum.potatofi.com

* http://www.potatofi.com/posts/spectrum-viewer/

And given attenuation increases as frequencies goes up, your neighbours' signals won't travel as far as the lower frequency bands, which helps with localization.

We just have to hope that vendors don't ship 80 or 160Mhz channels by default for residential devices, which will potentially eat up bandwidth (though Wifi 7 makes Punctured Transmission / Preamble Puncturing mandatory, where previously it was optional). Though even if they do, 6Ghz has more 160Mhz channels than 5Ghz has 80Mhz ones (7 vs. 6).

A 1x1 40Mhz using 802.11ax will give you a max PHY of 287Mbps:

* https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/support/articles/000...

* https://superuser.com/questions/1619079/what-is-the-maximum-...

Even if you half that, it's (IMHO) probably sufficient for the vast majority of online activities. And if you have a 2x2 client you double it anyway.

Re: Europe to decide if 6 GHz is shared between Wi-Fi and cellular networks

#125

Post by vlovich123 »

crote wrote: post #121
vlovich123 wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Doesn’t 6ghz have essentially the same penetration as 5ghz and thus in a few years will have all the same problems as people shift to 6ghz?

6GHz has worse penetration than 5Ghz, but the difference is indeed not as pronounced as it is compared to 2.4GHz. The main benefit is going to be the additional frequency space. 5GHz effectively has 3ish channels, and 6GHz adds another 3-7 to that. Combine it with band steering and dynamic channel allocation, and you and all of your close neighbours can probably all get your own dedicated frequency.

That’s true. I hadn’t realized that 6ghz has 500mhz of extra spectrum over 5ghz and also doesn’t have to contend with DFS.

Re: Europe to decide if 6 GHz is shared between Wi-Fi and cellular networks

#126

Post by matt-p »

vntok wrote: post #97
matt-p wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But your home NAS should be on ethernet? Who would buy a NAS and then not wire it in?? The point here is that only devices like a TV, mobile, tablet or laptop should be on WiFi and it's pretty hard to notice the difference between say 50Mbps and 500Mbps on any of those except maybe if you are moving files around on your laptop.

> But your home NAS should be on ethernet? Who would buy a NAS and then not wire it in?? Your smartphone is not talking to your NAS over Ethernet.

I think you'll find downloading files to your phone from a NAS is like 0.01% type behaviour.

Re: Europe to decide if 6 GHz is shared between Wi-Fi and cellular networks

#127

Post by freehorse »

craftkiller wrote: post #107
vlovich123 wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Doesn’t 6ghz have essentially the same penetration as 5ghz and thus in a few years will have all the same problems as people shift to 6ghz?

I count approximately twice as many channels available on 6ghz than 5ghz, so even if we ignore the penetration differences between 5 and 6ghz, the 6ghz band is still better. Plus this isn't a "pick one" type of scenario (especially with MLO), 5ghz + 6ghz is 3x as many channels as 5ghz alone. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_WLAN_channels

> I count approximately twice as many channels available on 6ghz than 5ghz

Isn't this mostly arbitrary? Eg what frequency range one defines channels over and thus how many channels? Eg in the wikipedia link that "6GHz" goes up to ~7.1GHz. Because otherwise channels seem to be more or less spread centered 20MHz apart in each case.

Re: Europe to decide if 6 GHz is shared between Wi-Fi and cellular networks

#128

Post by friendzis »

craftkiller wrote: post #102
Bombthecat wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And you think the same problem wouldn't exist with 6ghz? It will be as crowded as 5

There is significantly more spectrum available for wifi in the 6ghz band than in the 5ghz band, so even if we moved everything off of 5ghz and ignored the attenuation benefits of 6ghz, we'd still have significantly less congestion on 6ghz than 5ghz wifi. In my apartment, my laptop can see ~50 wifi networks, we need some spectrum elbow-room to spread that out. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_WLAN_channels

"significantly" is 50%, but still nowhere near 1 channel per network even if all networks cooperated.

Re: Europe to decide if 6 GHz is shared between Wi-Fi and cellular networks

#129

Post by bmacho »

liotier wrote: post #43
Xenoamorphous wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe in English. In Spanish (and we’re a bunch, the native Spanish speakers) I guarantee that if you say “América” you’re referring to the continent. The country is “Estados Unidos” (United States) or its abbreviation, EEUU. And its citizens, “estadounidenses”, not “americanos”.

> estadounidenses And in French the inhabitants of "les Etats-Unis" are "Etats-uniens". I've taken the habit of referring to them as USAians, which often gets negative reactionsand remains rare - but I find it is the most accurate demonym and I'll keep pushing it. I look forward to the world inventing demonyms for the citizens of the European Union, because at least it will mean that our emerging national body is get…

> I look forward to the world inventing demonyms for the citizens of the European Union, because at least it will mean that our emerging national body is getting mindshare !

USA is a country and EU is not

Re: Europe to decide if 6 GHz is shared between Wi-Fi and cellular networks

#130

Post by supertrope »

matt-p wrote: post #126
vntok wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> But your home NAS should be on ethernet? Who would buy a NAS and then not wire it in?? Your smartphone is not talking to your NAS over Ethernet.

I think you'll find downloading files to your phone from a NAS is like 0.01% type behaviour.

iCloud backups are something normal people do each time they plug in their phone.
Post reply on HN