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

Long Range Wi-Fi – Pushing 2.4 GHz Wi-Fi to the limits (2019)

phidgets.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 67 posts

Re: Long Range Wi-Fi – Pushing 2.4 GHz Wi-Fi to the limits (2019)

#51

Post by inigyou »

neilalexander wrote: post #38
itopaloglu83 wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

With so much benefit we’re getting from wireless connectivity, one hopes that more frequency bands would be opened up, especially in the sub-1GHz range, to enable long distance connections. And it should be open to public use. Not yet another carrier frequency they will charge us an arm and a leg to use, some of the cell phone connectivity charges are insane, hundreds of dollars for low bandwidth iot sims.

It is immensely frustrating that there is so little unlicensed spectrum available vs the massive amounts of spectrum available to militaries and very rich network operators. Worse is that the unlicenced spectrum that is available is often so heavily encumbered with restrictions in many parts of the world. Wi-Fi HaLow for example, in ETSI regions, is limited to a paltry 14dBm EIRP in no wider than 2MHz channels and an…

The licensed spectrum is not empty. It is scarce because it is fully allocated! Chances are that most of the allocated users are not using it in a given geographical area, so there's space to argue about allocation policies, however.

You can also consider trying to get a license. Costs and probability of success vary widely, but you may as well find out what they are before complaining.

Some European hacker events get temporary licenses to run their walkie talkies and even their own 4/5G cellphone networks. I assume they are cheaper and easier to get than permanent licenses.

Re: Long Range Wi-Fi – Pushing 2.4 GHz Wi-Fi to the limits (2019)

#52

Post by inigyou »

ErroneousBosh wrote: post #44
neilalexander wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is immensely frustrating that there is so little unlicensed spectrum available vs the massive amounts of spectrum available to militaries and very rich network operators. Worse is that the unlicenced spectrum that is available is often so heavily encumbered with restrictions in many parts of the world. Wi-Fi HaLow for example, in ETSI regions, is limited to a paltry 14dBm EIRP in no wider than 2MHz channels and an…

> Worse is that the unlicenced spectrum that is available is often so heavily encumbered with restrictions in many parts of the world It's one of the great things about the UK. As long as you're not causing interference to anyone that's actually paying for a licence, you can pretty much do what you like.

Is it a practical thing as in they won't catch you, or does the law actually say that?

Re: Long Range Wi-Fi – Pushing 2.4 GHz Wi-Fi to the limits (2019)

#53

Post by inigyou »

CobaltFire wrote: post #4

They address that they were looking at the maximum unlicensed power. In HAM circles some people do use WiFi in an arguably legal manner by making the SSID their callsign and either making the network open or putting the password somewhere public. This is because you are not allowed to use public bands for encrypted communications (with a carveout for satellite control, for obvious reasons). I'm unsure what ranges can…

Are you sure you're not thinking of the authentication carveout? Remote control of repeaters and other devices can be authenticated, but not encrypted, AFAIK?

Re: Long Range Wi-Fi – Pushing 2.4 GHz Wi-Fi to the limits (2019)

#54

Post by inigyou »

DaSHacka wrote: post #20
CobaltFire wrote: post #4

They address that they were looking at the maximum unlicensed power. In HAM circles some people do use WiFi in an arguably legal manner by making the SSID their callsign and either making the network open or putting the password somewhere public. This is because you are not allowed to use public bands for encrypted communications (with a carveout for satellite control, for obvious reasons). I'm unsure what ranges can…

> In HAM circles some people do use WiFi in an arguably legal manner by making the SSID their callsign and either making the network open or putting the password somewhere public. And presumably also no SSL when browsing? Part of why I never really understood the appeal to getting a ham license. Things like no encrypted communications really limits the utility. Anything outside of talking to randoms on the open air,…

The purpose of the ham license is to experiment with radio technology itself. If encryption was allowed, all channels would be occupied at all times by encrypted data coming from people with more powerful transmitters than you, and then how would you make any test transmissions?

Re: Long Range Wi-Fi – Pushing 2.4 GHz Wi-Fi to the limits (2019)

#55

Post by inigyou »

fedpost wrote: post #24
DaSHacka wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> In HAM circles some people do use WiFi in an arguably legal manner by making the SSID their callsign and either making the network open or putting the password somewhere public. And presumably also no SSL when browsing? Part of why I never really understood the appeal to getting a ham license. Things like no encrypted communications really limits the utility. Anything outside of talking to randoms on the open air,…

I always find the anti-encryption arguments frustrating because all the digital modes are going to have data whitening anyway, and are therefore (if you are not aware of the exact protocol) indistinguishable from encrypted transmissions for all practical purposes. We already have a number of common systems that are basically encrypted because the codecs are proprietary. The actual mechanism preventing abuse is the re…

The difference between whitened data and encrypted data is that you can decode the whitened data if you have the correct receiver. Encryption uses a key so that you also need the correct key.

You may not have a receiver for say FT8 that I may be transmitting, but you're also transmitting in Morse code which I never learned. Nothing is stopping either of us from receiving the other's transmission if we want to.

I'm told there was been an explosion of digital modes and it is a real concern that if there are so many undocumented or hard to identify ones, it's effectively encryption. Perhaps a future rule change will address this.

Proprietary modes have never been illegal though. You can buy a receiver just like I can study morse code.

Re: Long Range Wi-Fi – Pushing 2.4 GHz Wi-Fi to the limits (2019)

#56

Post by inigyou »

ErroneousBosh wrote: post #45
DaSHacka wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> In HAM circles some people do use WiFi in an arguably legal manner by making the SSID their callsign and either making the network open or putting the password somewhere public. And presumably also no SSL when browsing? Part of why I never really understood the appeal to getting a ham license. Things like no encrypted communications really limits the utility. Anything outside of talking to randoms on the open air,…

> Things like no encrypted communications really limits the utility. How so?

Well they want to abuse ham radio spectrum to extend their home internet an extra kilometer, but they've just found out they can't, and that's annoying.

Which is for good reason. If everyone did that, it would be so congested that nobody could do that.

Re: Long Range Wi-Fi – Pushing 2.4 GHz Wi-Fi to the limits (2019)

#57

Post by ErroneousBosh »

inigyou wrote: post #52
ErroneousBosh wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Worse is that the unlicenced spectrum that is available is often so heavily encumbered with restrictions in many parts of the world It's one of the great things about the UK. As long as you're not causing interference to anyone that's actually paying for a licence, you can pretty much do what you like.

Is it a practical thing as in they won't catch you, or does the law actually say that?

It's not possible to investigate it, and there's no-one to report it to.

Ofcom have about two dozen engineers for the whole of the UK, none of whom are equipped to deal with it.

In general, though, in the UK if you're not making a nuisance of yourself the laws are pretty optional, and this is a pretty good example of it.

Re: Long Range Wi-Fi – Pushing 2.4 GHz Wi-Fi to the limits (2019)

#58

Post by ErroneousBosh »

inigyou wrote: post #56
ErroneousBosh wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Things like no encrypted communications really limits the utility. How so?

Well they want to abuse ham radio spectrum to extend their home internet an extra kilometer, but they've just found out they can't, and that's annoying. Which is for good reason. If everyone did that, it would be so congested that nobody could do that.

Why would you piss about using amateur radio for that when you can go 20-30km with cheap off-the-shelf microwave links?

Re: Long Range Wi-Fi – Pushing 2.4 GHz Wi-Fi to the limits (2019)

#59

Post by zoobab »

My personal record was between Nieuwport and Zeebruge, as there was line of sight between the 2 sites.

Made some diy wifi antennas: waveguide, yagi, etc...

Back in the day used Radiomobile software to calculate the link budget between the receiver and the transmitter.

Re: Long Range Wi-Fi – Pushing 2.4 GHz Wi-Fi to the limits (2019)

#60

Post by inigyou »

ErroneousBosh wrote: post #58
inigyou wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well they want to abuse ham radio spectrum to extend their home internet an extra kilometer, but they've just found out they can't, and that's annoying. Which is for good reason. If everyone did that, it would be so congested that nobody could do that.

Why would you piss about using amateur radio for that when you can go 20-30km with cheap off-the-shelf microwave links?

In which frequency band? 2.4GHz?
Post reply on HN