|
DEFCON WiFi Shootout Winners Set A Land Record
|
Log in/Create an Account
| Top
| 161 comments
|
Search Discussion
|
|
|
|
The Fine Print:
The following comments are owned by whoever posted them.
We are not responsible for them in any way.
|
No really. (Score:5, Interesting)
by ItsIllak (95786)
on Wednesday August 04, @07:57AM (#9877550)
(http://www.kallisti.co.uk)
|
I don't get this. I've got a smallish house, but need two APs to cover
it. I guess I'm considerably less directional, but still?!
Maybe
these competitions could open up a second record of the largest
diameter of coverage achieved. Maybe measured at four opposite points. |
Re:No really. (Score:5, Interesting)
by 5m477m4n (787430)
on Wednesday August 04, @08:10AM (#9877620)
(http://www.haaspc.com/)
|
|
Some brands of APs have better range than others. I get pretty good
range from Linksys. Also, APs generally get batter range than wireless
routers. But sometimes it's nice having a smaller range, that way the
guy down the street can't hack your connection or hijack your cable
internet. |
|
[ Parent
]
|
- Re:No really. by gizmik (Score:2) Wednesday August 04, @08:19AM
- Re:No really. by Black Perl (Score:3) Wednesday August 04, @01:30PM
- Re:No really. by SlamMan (Score:2) Wednesday August 04, @10:49AM
- Re:No really. by selderrr (Score:2) Wednesday August 04, @09:30AM
- Re:No really. by carn1fex (Score:2) Wednesday August 04, @01:09PM
Re:No really. (Score:4, Interesting)
by Creepy (93888)
on Wednesday August 04, @03:43PM (#9882026)
(Last Journal: Wednesday May 05, @02:39PM)
|
well, if you're going with Linksys, you may have to use 3rd party firmware to boost the signals (info on third party firmware for Linksys info here
[linksysinfo.org]). The very common WRT-54G wireless router runs at
19mw and at that power, barely penetrates a hollow 2 foot wooden wall
with no insulation (and drops the signal periodically), at least from
my personal experience.
Installing Sveasoft, OpenWRT, or WiFi
box firmware allows you to boost the signal to 84mw. I've read to avoid
the full 84mw, as it can damage hardware in extended use, but I've also
read that this is still in the legal range for the device... even wireless A indoor/outdoor is 250mW. [dslreports.com] (and I think g is up to 4W).
|
|
[ Parent
]
|
- Re:No really. by tcgroat (Score:1) Thursday August 05, @01:23AM
- 2 replies
beneath your current threshold.
Re:No really. (Score:4, Interesting)
by DaHat (247651)
on Wednesday August 04, @08:11AM (#9877623)
(http://dahat.com/)
|
Might I suggest bring in a demo man to remove all of your walls and
anything else that may, depending on your location in the house be
anywhere near the line of sight of the signal that could conceivably
interfere with it?
I
have not RTFA, however if I remember last years competition right, the
competing antennas were on the side of a large hill or mountain
pointing down at a vehicle that was driving away. In such a case they
have far fewer obstacles then you do in your home. |
|
[ Parent
]
|
Re:No really. (Score:5, Informative)
by v1 (525388) <virtual1@pitne[ ]et ['t.n' in gap]>
on Wednesday August 04, @08:22AM (#9877693)
(http://vftp.net/)
|
Omnidirectional coverage is a bit harder to expand. You can't really
beat a 5/8 wavelength groundplane, and they're easy to make. (at lower
frequencies anyway, not sure about ghz)
Not
counting the ability to use amplifiers, you could think of wifi
coverage as light... put a 100w lightbulb in a field at night and how
far away can you be and stil read a book? Not very far probably... 30
feet maybe. Now, take that bulb and put it in a parabolic lens. Now
you've got a 100w flashlight. If the flashlight is pointed your way,
you'll get hundreds of feet. The better the lens and the sharper the
focus, the greater your range. Come up with a more fundamental
improvement (like a 100w laser?) and your range increases to a radical
distance that could easily be miles. But it still doesn't help the guy
standing 5 feet off to the side of the light though, he's in the dark.
Directional
and omnidirectional coverage are for totally different purposes, and
really can't be compared or mixed. There's no use in complaining about
your omni coverage when people are making improvements in directional
coverage - it's apples and oranges. |
|
[ Parent
]
|
Re:No really. (Score:5, Insightful)
by Mr Guy (547690)
on Wednesday August 04, @08:42AM (#9877803)
(Last Journal: Tuesday August 17, @09:07AM)
|
|
All this is true and valid, but it still doesn't fix the problem that
it's only marginally usefull, while people would pay big money for a
good way to repeat passed walls more cheaply than sticking another AP
wired to the LAN on the other side of it. |
|
[ Parent
]
|
Re:No really. (Score:5, Insightful)
by Lumpy (12016)
on Wednesday August 04, @08:47AM (#9877835)
(http://timgray.blogspot.com/)
|
Nahh, it's easy to significantly increse the coverage in a home without
much work. In many of the high-brow homes I help a friend of mine
install home automation and whole house multimedia I do the networking
on the side. One AP can easily cover most fo a 2000Sq foot home. but
you need to place the AP in regards to where it will be used most.
rule
1 - make it central to the house. If you use it mostly in your den at
the south end of the house then the AP will be in the celing, about 6
feet from the office in the hallway. if your home is larger, buying a
pair of low end aftermarket antennas and spreading out the antennas
makes a bigger difference. In one home i had the AP in the kitchen, 1
antenna 6 feet from that location and th eother 3 feet in the opposite
direction. Adding a 1 foot square piece of sheet metal about 1
wavelength away from the antenna in the direction of the outside wall
will also help in two ways. 1 to limit the external radiation to the
neighbors. (the best wireless security is to be sure they cant get a
signal) and 2 to reflect the signal back to the working area.
I
have covered houses of 4000 sq feet with 1 AP and 2 comp-usa grade
add-on antennas. no you will not get 100% in all areas of the home, but
you will not drop below 40% and some places like the bottom of the
closet in the basement guest bedroom do not need woreless coverage.
being
realistic about wireless coverage is the first step. the second step is
to use the 802.11 repeaters when you only absolutely have to.
but in a home for rich people... multiple AP'
s are not a viable option as it doesn't hand off seamlessly.
|
|
[ Parent
]
|
- Re:No really. by Jeff DeMaagd (Score:3) Wednesday August 04, @09:46AM
- Re:No really. by Anonymous Coward (Score:1) Wednesday August 04, @01:33PM
- Re:No really. by MixmastaKooz (Score:1) Wednesday August 04, @01:45PM
- Re:No really. by ttyp0 (Score:2) Wednesday August 04, @07:06PM
- Wifi IS GHz by elgatozorbas (Score:1) Wednesday August 04, @09:44AM
- Re:No really. by tiger99 (Score:2) Wednesday August 04, @08:37AM
- Re:No really. by TheSync (Score:2) Wednesday August 04, @08:47AM
- Re:No really. by Gordonjcp (Score:2) Wednesday August 04, @08:57AM
- Re:No really. by SEWilco (Score:1) Wednesday August 04, @12:42PM
- Re:No really. by cojsl (Score:1) Wednesday August 04, @01:13PM
- Re:No really. by rspress (Score:2) Wednesday August 04, @03:39PM
- Experience from N+I by blackrobe28 (Score:1) Wednesday August 04, @05:06PM
- Re:No really. by simontek2 (Score:1) Saturday August 07, @05:19AM
- 1 reply
beneath your current threshold.
|
Customers freaking out... (Score:5, Funny)
by mikael (484)
on Wednesday August 04, @08:14AM (#9877645)
(Last Journal: Monday July 05, @08:34PM)
|
|
Well, if someone parked outside my building, pointed a six foot dish at my office [akamai.net], and told me my wireless data needed encrypting, I'd probably freak out too.
|
|
Hawking their equipment? (Score:5, Funny)
by djcapelis (587616)
on Wednesday August 04, @08:14AM (#9877647)
(http://new.se.foml.inodetech.com/)
|
Am I the only one who find it amusing that these guys roll in on a
whim, break the record, win some stuff and immediately go hawk their
equipment?
Some good old hacking spirit right there...
|
|
Transfer speed (Score:5, Interesting)
by barcodez (580516)
on Wednesday August 04, @08:17AM (#9877666)
(http://www.thehumorarchives.com/)
|
|
I would be interested to know what kind of transfer speed they got at that distance.
|
- 1 reply
beneath your current threshold.
|
Help for rural areas? (Score:5, Interesting)
by grunt107 (739510)
on Wednesday August 04, @08:19AM (#9877679)
|
Althought the article does not mention it, it does not seem like the hardware used to accomplish this was all that advanced.
If
that is the case, their technology could be implemented in limited
population density areas, tying back to the somewhat larger urban areas.
Take for example Iowa. There are many areas over 30 miles from any town larger than 15-30k.
Surprisingly enough, these 'large' towns have cable/phone (DSL) access.
So
now the remote areas can be wifi attached to the bigger towns/cities
and get the faster access (although 11b is not screaming it is better
than modem). |
|
Reception enhancing device (Score:1)
by tezza (539307)
on Wednesday August 04, @08:26AM (#9877719)
|
|
They must have been wind assisted.
Seriously, at what stage does Planetary alignment, Solar Flares or wind
direction start to have a bigger effect than technology??
I did quite a few Elec Eng subjects as part of my degree, and this stuff seems mind boggling.
|
|
the horror! (Score:1, Funny)
by caino59 (313096)
on Wednesday August 04, @08:33AM (#9877755)
(http://cainsconsulting.net/ | Last Journal: Sunday January 11, @03:37AM)
|
This year they faced only the heat and the absence of bathrooms and fresh beer for miles around.
that's just a tragedy.
|
- 1 reply
beneath your current threshold.
|
Congrats to these kids (Score:5, Insightful)
by vbrookslv (634009)
on Wednesday August 04, @08:37AM (#9877779)
|
I was there in the front row at the awards ceremony at DC12. These kids
remind me of myself just a few years ago when I just picked up and
moved to Vegas. Wasn't even sure if I had enough money for gas (good
thing I was driving a Festiva @~45mpg). I guess this is a good case for
those who say that all kids today are slackers.
For those who do not know, this contest was held in (and
around) Vegas, when it was 110+ outside. These guys were dragging
equipment up the side of a mountain to get this link. For those who
would give these kids sh**, try dragging a 10ft dish(3.048 meters for
you metric weenies) several hundred feet up a mountain, and then
getting them aligned
55 miles apart, all in 110+f(43c) weather. There was no big 4x4's, they
drove dads busted-a** minivan from Ohio for this. Sure, NASA could
probably do better, but come'on, this was an amateur thing, and just
something cool to do. No big prizes (they won like a couple-hundred
bucks in Best Buy gift certs, and some gear).
If I had a had on, it would be off to these kids for some ingenuity and determination.
|
|
I'm in Ohio, and Miles are it... (Score:3, Funny)
by 192939495969798999 (58312)
on Wednesday August 04, @08:58AM (#9877936)
(http://www.devinmoore.com/)
|
|
Miles on the speedometer, miles on the road signs, and 55 mph is a
common speed limit, so that 55 mile record means I could drive about an
hour away and still get the signal, which in Ohio would be the complete
middle of nowhere! Of course, in Ohio it doesn't even matter where you
start from, if you drive for exactly one hour in the same direction at
55 mph you will be in the middle of nowhere. |
|
200mW Engenius cards (Score:1, Interesting)
by Anonymous Coward
on Wednesday August 04, @09:29AM (#9878153)
|
They must have been using this card
http://keenansystems.com/store/engenius_senao_200m w_pcmcia_card_with_mmcx_connectors_2511-cd-plus-ex t2.htm [keenansystems.com]
|
|
Tropospheric ducting (Score:4, Informative)
by Dan East (318230)
on Wednesday August 04, @09:58AM (#9878449)
(http://dexplor.com/)
|
When we start talking about setting and breaking distance records using
any type of RF, atmospheric conditions will undoubtedly play a factor.
A phenomenon known as Tropospheric Ducting
[whsmithnet.co.uk] can redirect a short wavelength signal back down to
earth, allowing further than line of sight communication.
While this would be great for setting communication record, it would not allow for long-term reliable communication.
Dan East
|
|
Partial sponsor (Score:5, Funny)
by Lawbeefaroni (246892)
on Wednesday August 04, @10:02AM (#9878488)
(http://prawnworks.com/girlish)
|
From the article:
Wired magazine helped sponsor the contest.
What's the word? Irony? Misnomer?
|
|
Interesting Guys (Score:5, Informative)
by HoldenCaulfield (25660)
on Wednesday August 04, @10:34AM (#9878795)
(Last Journal: Friday March 19, @09:40AM)
|
Being a former Cinci resident, I was a bit curious about these guys, and google-stalked them . . .
Looks like they all went to St. Xavier [jesuits-chi.org], a pretty well respected (in both athletics and academics) prep school.
Here's a picture [huddlestons.com] of Ben when he was a junior, winning a theater award for sound production.
Meng's got a website here
[qsl.net] that's a bit outdated, but considering the projects were from
his junior year in high school, rather impressive. Seems he was a HAM
radio guy.
Running out of time, the first link I found for Justin Rigling was this link
[aksteel.com]. One more connection to the guy, since I use to work for
AK Steel. The little blurb about the scholarship does make him sound
like a stereotypical geek (JETS, Science Olympiad, Robotics, Math, and
Photography clubs, etc etc). A bit of a contrast to his sister [aksteel.com]. Not exactly what you'd expect from the son of a steelmaker . . .
Okay, enough being a stalker . . .
|
|
Satellite Dishes and FCC Rules (Score:1)
by wayward (770747)
on Wednesday August 04, @11:05AM (#9879091)
|
Here's an article about using a surplus Primestar Dish to make an IEEE 802.11 wireless antenna
http://www.wwc.edu/~frohro/Airport/Primestar/Prime star.html [wwc.edu]
Here's another one. http://www5.cs.cornell.edu/~eckstrom/802.11a/prime star/ [cornell.edu]
As the first article notes, there are some FCC rules about antenna use
within the US. Would the Defcon product be within these limits? The
Wired article didn't seem to say. |
|
Anybody hacking lasers? (Score:3, Informative)
by WillWare (11935)
on Wednesday August 04, @12:13PM (#9879850)
(http://willware.net:8080/ | Last Journal: Saturday June 12, @02:30AM)
|
|
The only reason to go for wifi distance records is to build an indie
Ashcroft-proof internet. It should be possible to route IP packets over
inexpensive laser pointers for pretty large distances. I'm not aware
that much is being done with this. I found several instances of people
doing RS-232 over laser, but very little about IP over laser.
|
|
Ham record is 82 mi (Score:2, Informative)
by wsanders (114993)
on Wednesday August 04, @12:33PM (#9880089)
(http://www.wsanders.net/)
|
From QST magazine (http://www.arrl.org/news/stories/2003/12/10/3/):
"Amateurs
complete 82-mile two-way DSSS link on 2.4 GHz: ARRL High Speed
Multimedia (HSMM) Working Group member Ken Cuddeback, NT7K, reports
that his students at Weber State University in Ogden, Utah, recently
completed two-way direct-sequence spread spectrum (DSSS) communication
on 2.4 GHz over a distance of 82 miles. The WSU students--which include
one ham, Brandon Checketts, KG4NZV, and several prospective
licensees--broke the current world record of establishing a wireless
link on 2.4 GHz with DSSS (using IEEE 802.11b "Wi-Fi" protocol).
"Please join me in congratulating Ken and his students on this
fantastic accomplishment!" said ARRL HSMM Working Group Chairman John
Champa, K8OCL. Cuddeback says his students used PrimeStar dishes with
unamplified Cisco Aironet 350 cards in each laptop. "We set up a
NetMeeting session and transferred a 2.5 MB mp3 file successfully," he
said. The Cisco Wi-Fi cards run about 100 mW." |
|
Contest Info (Score:1)
by ASLRulz (696173)
on Wednesday August 04, @05:59PM (#9883470)
|
|
All, check out http://www.wifi-shootout.com/home.html for the winning
contest info (including GPS readings). We will be posting pictures
soon. |
|
Re:A snippet (Score:5, Interesting)
by agentforsythe (696066) <richard@ag e n t - s m i t h . net>
on Wednesday August 04, @08:00AM (#9877561)
(http://www.taylormadesolutions.net/)
|
"Then, when they established that record, they turned off their
amplifiers and broke the record for an unamplified connection at the
same distance."
does that mean that the connection wasn't actually established unamplified... merely maintained?
|
|
[ Parent
]
|
- Re:A snippet by ack154 (Score:2) Wednesday August 04, @08:07AM
Re:A snippet (Score:5, Informative)
by Alsee (515537)
on Wednesday August 04, @08:12AM (#9877631)
(http://slashdot.org/)
|
Because they didn't even max out the non-amplified distance. If you read the Slashdot blurb again it says They might have achieved an even greater distance, Justin Rigling said, "but there was no road left."
-
|
|
[ Parent
]
|
- Re:A snippet by ack154 (Score:2) Wednesday August 04, @08:15AM
- Re:A snippet by djcapelis (Score:3) Wednesday August 04, @08:12AM
- Re:A snippet by 0x0d0a (Score:3) Wednesday August 04, @08:40AM
- 1 reply
beneath your current threshold.
- Re:A snippet by ASLRulz (Score:2) Wednesday August 04, @05:52PM
- Re:A snippet by PAD-WiFi-Team (Score:1) Friday August 06, @03:20AM
- 1 reply
beneath your current threshold.
|
Re:Metrics is a Milestone away (Score:2)
by millahtime (710421)
on Wednesday August 04, @08:02AM (#9877576)
(http://millahtime.blogspot.com/ | Last Journal: Wednesday June 02, @11:20AM)
|
I cant see why miles are used. Is it to make the achieved distance look longer?
I
would guess it's because it's a competition held in the US. If you told
someone there how many feet, yards, or meters it was then most people
wouldn't really get how far that distance really it. |
|
[ Parent
]
|
|
Re:Metrics is a Milestone away (Score:1)
by kevmo (243736)
on Wednesday August 04, @08:03AM (#9877578)
|
|
It was in the United States. Miles were used for the same reason they
are used on road signs and in cars - it is standard here right now,
even if metrics is "better". |
|
[ Parent
]
|
- 1 reply
beneath your current threshold.
|
Re:Metrics is a Milestone away (Score:1)
by Marcus Green (34723)
on Wednesday August 04, @08:05AM (#9877588)
(http://www.jchq.net)
|
|
Apart from it being in the US where imperial (miles) is the standard. A
mile is slightly longer than a kilometer therefore the number of miles
is smaller than the same distance in Km. |
|
[ Parent
]
|
|
Re:Metrics is a Milestone away (Score:1, Insightful)
by Aadomm (609333)
on Wednesday August 04, @08:06AM (#9877591)
|
|
But kilometres are smaller than miles so surely the distance seems
shorter when displayed in miles. I think 55 miles is 88km.
That said, I agree that it would make more sense to give the result in
km.
. |
|
[ Parent
]
|
|
Re:Metrics is a Milestone away (Score:2)
by SpaceLifeForm (228190)
on Wednesday August 04, @08:19AM (#9877673)
|
|
Actually, that would be worse than kilometers.
1 mile = 1.609344 kilometers per Google.
They really should have reported it as 440.8 furlongs.
|
|
[ Parent
]
|
|
Re:Metrics is a Milestone away (Score:1, Funny)
by nebulus4 (799015)
on Wednesday August 04, @08:21AM (#9877686)
|
|
1 mile = 1.609344 kilometers or for those of you who are into microelectronics it's 1609344000000 nanometers.
|
|
[ Parent
]
|
|
Re:Metrics is a Milestone away (Score:5, Interesting)
by markov_chain (202465)
on Wednesday August 04, @09:12AM (#9878034)
|
I grew up in a metric society. I used to think metric units were
superior until I lived in the US for a while, and found myself doing
plenty of carpentry and DIY stuff where the most common units are
inches and feet. I think the subdivision of a foot into 12 inches is
fantastic; it allows one to easily divide dimensions into thirds,
something that's a PITA in the metric world. In addition, the canonical
subdivision of the inch into powers of 2 (1/2, 1/4, 1/8...) is
convenient as well.
Regarding
your point about doing without metric, note that virtually all building
materials come in imperial sizes. There is no need to know metric units
in that environment. |
|
[ Parent
]
|
|
Re:It's a fraud... (Score:1, Funny)
by Anonymous Coward
on Wednesday August 04, @10:05AM (#9878516)
|
not a fraud, just that you are stupid.
Read thre article instead of sounding like a turets victim spouting stupidity from your face.
Fresnel
means nothing in directed DISH communications.. they had approximately
200db of gain at BOTH ENDS plus there was a tiny issue of BEING ON A
FRICKING MOUNTIAN for the Z end.
wow, your immense stupidity is blinding... The stupidness field you are generating is destorying the minds that are around you.
|
|
[ Parent
]
|
- 1 reply
beneath your current threshold.
|
Re:It's a fraud... (Score:4, Informative)
by ASLRulz (696173)
on Wednesday August 04, @10:58AM (#9879018)
|
|
As one of the judges, I can provide the GPS coordinates and you can use
your favorite topo maps to determine if it is indeed possible. We will
be putting up images and data on the contest page as well as
www.adversarialsciencelab.net website sometime today. |
|
[ Parent
]
|
|
Re:Metrics is a Milestone away (Score:1)
by dukeisgod (739214)
on Wednesday August 04, @12:21PM (#9879959)
|
|
I cant see why miles are used. Is it to make the achieved distance look longer?
What "looks longer" 55 miles or 88 kilometers?
|
|
[ Parent
]
|
|
Re:Ummm Come on Timothy read the article. (Score:1)
by carbolic (616993)
on Wednesday August 04, @03:57PM (#9882158)
|
|
The link was amplified (600 mw) at that distance first, then they
switched to unamplified (30 mw) and still maintained a connection.
Also, antennas do not amplify signals, the can only increase gain
by shaping the beam pattern. The effect can be the same, though. |
|
[ Parent
]
|
|
| 15 replies
beneath your current threshold. |
DEFCON WiFi Shootout Winners Set A Land Record
All trademarks and copyrights on this
page are owned by their respective owners. Comments
are owned by the Poster.
The Rest © 1997-2004 OSTG.