Tag: WLAN

  1. Homepage
  2. WLAN
Enterprise Wi-Fi Enterprise WLAN IDC Wi-Fi Wi-Fi 6 Wi-Fi 6E Wireless Network WLAN
Strong Growth of Enterprise WLAN Market in 2023 Q1 

The International Data Corporation (IDC) Worldwide Quarterly Wireless LAN Tracker has reported that between the first quarter of 2022 and Q1 of 2023, the Enterprise Wi-Fi market has grown by 43%. 

What’s Behind the Growth of the Enterprise WLAN Market?

The driving force behind the Enterprise WLAN market growth is in part down to the easing of component shortages. 

There has also been a significant demand for the upgrades and expansions that come with Wi-Fi 6 and Wi-Fi 6E. 

You can find further details on this in IDC’s latest market report. 

Wi-Fi Market Back With a Vengeance

Previously, the right business to be in might have been as a service provider or consumer Wi-Fi. But we’ve come a long way since 2020, and from just last year even. The IDC reports that the consumer Wi-Fi segment has decreased by 8.8% for the quarter year-on-year.

The enterprise Wi-Fi market however is back and booming and showing itself to continue to grow year-on-year. 

The IDC’s recent report showed that the Enterprise Wi-Fi market grew by 43% in Q1 for 2023 (year on year). This sector is worth a huge 2.8 billion dollars. 

Is the Growth of Enterprise WLAN Market Down to Wi-Fi 6?

Of the Enterprise WLAN sector revenue, Wi-Fi 6 made up 78.6%. 

In addition to that, the adoption of Wi-Fi 6E is up by 14% from that last quarter of 2022. This continued growth has taken a 10.4% share of the AP market in Q1 of 2023. 

Cisco Expands Market Dominance

At the end of the first quarter of 2023, Cisco continued to take their Enterprise Wi-Fi market share with 47.1%. Their revenue has risen 62.7% year on year – Their Enterprise Wi-Fi revenue for this quarter was 1.3 billion US dollars. 

Also doing well in the Enterprise Wi-Fi market is HPE_Aruba (Aruba Networks). They have grown by 39.5% year on year for Q1 of 2023. The IDC reports they have a market share of 16%. 

You can check out how other vendors are doing by heading to the IDC website here. 

by admin
15 Views0
Radio Frequency RF WLAN
Myth Buster: WLAN’s and Radio Frequency

Have you ever wondered about certain myths about radio frequency that seem to pervade the WLAN world? Then this could be the blog for you. We certainly come across a lot of people who have a particular mindset when it comes to wireless networks and how they work. 

In this blog we’re going to take a look at some of the common beliefs people hold about radio frequency and dispel the myths. 

Do higher frequencies travel as far as lower frequencies? 

Yes. A common misconception is that higher frequencies don’t travel as far as lower frequencies, but this is not the case. Regardless of frequency, RF signals travel the same distance. The confusion comes from it seeming at a surface level that lower frequencies travel further.

But actually it’s due to attenuation. In space, a high frequency gamma ray with a frequency of approximately 1020 Hz (1 nanometer wavelength) can travel billions of miles, even lightyears, from neutron stars here to us on earth. Regardless of frequency, there is no attenuation of the radio wave so it travels an equal distance.

Here on earth, the distance RF goes (or is heard) is determined by how much is absorbed or attenuated. We need to take into account what the radio waves have to go through.

So when we’re thinking about longer wavelengths (lower frequency):
– There are less wavelengths to get through an object
– Less wavelengths are therefore absorbed
– The signal is less degraded

For these reasons, lower frequencies appear to go further.

Just to confuse things a bit further – Here’s an inconsistency with the above. In terms of 2-way radio, it’s a commonly known fact that UHF frequencies (450-470MHz) work better in an indoor environment than VHF (150MHz). But didn’t we just say that lower frequencies appear to travel further because less are absorbed? Yet here we are saying this type of higher frequency works better indoors.

In terms of size, the wavelength for VHF frequencies are about 6 feet and the wavelength of UHF frequencies are about 2 feet.

In an indoor environment, things like windows and doors are generally larger than the UHF wavelength and smaller than the VHF wavelength. This means that the attenuation for UHF is less.

What’s interesting is that if you increase the frequency, for example to 900MHz, the even shorter wavelength begins to have an increase in attenuation from things that are not windows and doors attenuating the signal more than the smaller frequency.

The UHF at 450MHz is the optimum frequency for an indoor environment.

For the tech geeks out there that are thinking – Hang on, what about UHF radios having higher gain antennas than VHF? Whilst that is indeed true, the dB gain difference isn’t enough to explain why the UHF does so much better indoors.

So let’s go back to where we started. It is a misconception to say that lower frequencies travel further than higher frequencies. However, it is true that higher frequencies (smaller wavelengths) are attenuated more than lower frequencies. It is also true that designing antenna systems that can receive higher frequencies at a greater distance is somewhat more challenging.

Does Free-Space Path Loss Increase with Frequency?


Not necessarily, despite common beliefs. If you are using a Free-Space Path Loss (or FSPL) calculator, it will assume that you are maintaining the same wavelength proportionally sized antenna as you lower the frequency. In other words, you are changing only the frequency so just one variable. You are not changing the antenna size.

When you lower the frequency, you aren’t seeing that the antenna is also getting bigger at the same time.

Decreasing the frequency whilst not increasing the size of the antenna would mean that the dB gain would decrease accordingly and the overall system gain would remain the same.

If you adjust both the frequency and the antenna size correctly then the FSPL stays the same.

However, there are scenarios where FSPL can increase with frequency. In the real world, buildings and other structures in free space will absorb more energy for higher frequencies as we’ve said above. Higher frequencies have smaller wavelengths and more attenuation. When buildings are in the path, path loss can increase with frequency.

Can increasing output power be a solution?


Many people think that increasing output power can never be a solution and that you must match your AP to client power.

Actually, an AP’s receiver us usually better than a client device. In addition to this, the MRC (maximal ratio combining) means that you should be able to allow for at least 3dB better radio receiver which can also mean 3dB more AP radio transmitter to balance things out.

Did you know that it’s actually okay to have asymmetrical MCS rates with downstream being higher than upstream? (the Modulation Coding Scheme helps us engineers to understand data rates and evaluate RF environments).

In a typical WLAN, users will be doing more downloading than uploading. Having a higher average MCS rate for users, they will be quicker to get on and off the wireless network, which increases the overall performance.

In most cases, it’s okay to have AP power at 15-17dBm.

In terms of Point-to-Point links, you could find that turning up the power is an easy way to boost performance. In addition, Mesh backhaul links between AP’s could benefit from higher power by increasing the average MCS rates between them. 

What is this not going to solve? Poor design and holes in coverage. You also need to bear in mind potential co-channel interference and being a good neighbour. We’re not saying turn up the power to crazy levels, but generally turning up the power by a few decibels could help your network. 

Does Wi-Fi 6E have more frequency space (1200MHz) than other unlicensed bands?

Let’s talk about the 60GHz band. One 802.11ad / 802.11ay channel has more RF bandwidth than combining all of the 900MHz, 2.4GHz, 5GHz, Wi-Fi 6E and 24GHz bands.

If you double the RF bandwidth will it double the throughput?

This is not always the case. You might find that the physical baseband layer (PHY) doubles but the actual throughput is less likely to do so. 

If you narrow the channel by half, then the Signal to Noise Ratio (SNR) increases by 3dB – Possibly even more if there are other sources of interference. An improvement of 3dB in SNR generally means an increase of 1 to 2 MCS rates.

It’s also true in reverse. If you double the RF bandwidth the SNR will be reduced by 3dB, generally reducing the MCS rate by 1 or 2. 

So, doubling the RF bandwidth doesn’t automatically mean you double the throughput but likely somewhere in-between. 

Throughput will only be doubled if full MCS rates are maintained either way and:

  • The link is strong
  • There is extra SNR beyond what is needed for the maximum MCS rate

Imagine an outdoor Point-to-Point scenario where the RF bandwidth was reduced from 40MHz down to 20MHz. By narrowing the RF bandwidth, the SNR increased and interference was reduced. The MCS rate increased which made up for the throughput that was lost from narrowing the RF bandwidth – In essence, increasing the throughput by reducing the RF bandwidth. Interesting!

by admin
15 Views0
Ethernet Cables Wi-Fi Wi-Fi 6 Wi-Fi 6E Wi-Fi 7 Wireless Network
What If Wi-Fi Had Never Happened?

Isn’t it the most frustrating thing when you hit a Wi-Fi deadspot? No connection, nothing, no matter how many times you re-load the page. In this age of working from home and taking the internet with you wherever you go, it’s hard to imagine a time or place when you couldn’t quickly check your emails or have a scroll through Instagram. 

But did you know that Wi-Fi very nearly didn’t happen in the first place? Wi-Fi almost hit its very own deadspot – And wouldn’t that have changed our lives as we know it! Let’s get to the root of Wi-Fi and see how wireless internet came about.

When was Wi-Fi officially launched?

Just over 23 years ago, on the 25th September 1999, Wi-Fi was officially launched. If you think about the fuss that’s made over a new product launch from Apple, then you might have expected the launch of Wi-Fi itself to be a rather flashy affair. 

In reality, it was a bit Big Bang Theory-esque – A convention centre in Atlanta housing 8 technophiles ready to open their jackets to reveal polo shirts emblazoned with the made-up word Wi-Fi. And all in front of a crowd of just 60 people. 

Some of the biggest tech companies, and some smaller ones too, backed the launch enthusiastically. Even the likes of Apple, Dell and Nokia could never have imagined that they were backing such a huge global phenomenon with incredible economic, social and cultural impact across the world. 

It was the summer of ‘99

Think back to the summer of 1999, if you can. The working world was mostly using wired networks via Ethernet cable. LAN’s (Local Area Networks) connected desktop computers at a rate of 10 Mbps. 

Meanwhile, those trying to send emails from home did so to the sound of a modem trying to connect to another modem via repurposed telephone infrastructure. Dial up internet and 56 Kbps dial up modems clanked and clanged their way online. Arguments were had over who needed to use the computer and who needed to use the telephone. 

There were products for WLAN’s (Wireless Local Area Networks) but these were predominantly just for businesses. The IEEE (Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers) official wireless standard specification for these wireless products was 802.11. Not only were these products expensive, they were also 5 times slower than their wired equivalent. 

Despite there being a specified wireless standard, this unfortunately didn’t mean that one standards compliant wireless product would be compatible with another. This was largely due to the fact that there were different ways of interpreting the specification. 

These weaknesses meant that some companies looked elsewhere and chose to support other rival technology alliances – Each with their own aim of becoming the actual standard. 

Wi-Fi’s rival – HomeRF

One of these rival specifications was developed by a consortium of other technology giants – Compaq, Hewlett-Packard, IBM, Intel and Microsoft. Their WLAN ‘HomeRF’ was aimed at consumers (rather than businesses) and was backed by over 80 other companies. In comparison to the other standard, the HomeRF products were not only cheaper but could also communicate with each other. 

With a name like HomeRF (short for Home Radio Frequency) it arguably had a catchier name that IEEE 802.11. They didn’t just have their eyes on the consumer market – They also had big plans for expansion and higher speeds for the business market. 

Despite all of this, the second generation of the IEEE standard, 802.11b was heading steadily for its final approval at the end of September. By the end of the year, there were products due to ship from company 3Com (later acquired by HP along with Compaq). Their products were based on the newer, faster standard and set for release before 1999 ended. 

At the time, networking firm 3Com formed WECA (Wireless Ethernet Compatibility Alliance) bringing together 5 strong advocates for IEEE. Their aim was to make sure that any products using the pending second generation standard would all be compatible with each other. 

Originally tipped to be named ‘FlankSpeed’, connectivity as we know it today was trademarked as Wi-Fi. There began the establishment of the rules by which wireless products could be deemed ‘Wi-Fi Certified.’

What if Wi-Fi had not won out against HomeRF?

Wi-Fi won the wireless standard race, but what if HomeRF had in fact taken the lead? There are ways that all might not have worked out as it has. 

If the second generation standard 802.11b had been delayed, then HomeRF may have been able to sneak ahead. It was only due to a compromise between WLAN industry pioneers (and foes) Lucent Technologies and Harris Semiconductor that meant there was no delay. 

What if FlankSpeed was only available at work?

So what if WECA had decided only to focus on business connectivity? That was a discussed possibility. ‘Go anywhere’ connectivity almost wasn’t on the table. And what if ‘FlankSpeed’ had been chosen over ‘Wi-Fi’? 

A big chunk of today’s workforce rely on being able to bring work home with them. And not just home – What about coffee shops, airports, on the daily commute sitting on the train? Nowadays we tend to take work with us wherever we go. 

Had we been using FlankSpeed at the office and HomeRF at home, this would have made things very difficult for anyone working from home. And you can forget about coffee-shop-working and catching up on emails waiting for a plane – It’s possible neither of these public access options would exist. Zones that were not home and the office would have been a no-go (or NoHO) for working online. 

And if you’re wondering about FlankSpeed and Smartphones – That would have been a no as well. The mobile world of online connectivity disappears into the mist, out of grasp. 

Would it have been beneficial to have more than just one wireless standard? 

The benefits of having a singular focus on just the one standard meant that there was more scope for innovation and cost reduction. 

Even if FlankSpeed or HomeRF had gone forth alongside Wi-Fi, it couldn’t have ever become as cheap to run or prevalent and globally penetrating as Wi-Fi. 

Having a universal standard means that retail stores, public spaces and anywhere where we would now expect to be able to connect, could roll it out uninhibited. Had this not been the case, the ability to stream video whilst sipping a coffee or connect to emails whilst sitting on the train may not be available. 

Thinking on a global level, those living in emerging market countries like Nigeria, rely on free Wi-Fi hotspots to be able to connect to the rest of the world. Remote islands like the Bahamas also rely on Wi-Fi to get support following adverse weather conditions like hurricanes. In this way, Wi-Fi provides critical connections all over the world.  

HomeRF folded in 2003 – So how did Wi-Fi succeed so quickly? 

As with all well-laid plans, it’s all in the preparation and timing. With the announcement of the name Wi-Fi and the promise of certified interoperability from WECA, companies investing in this new wireless standard had the assurance that their products would all work together. 

In 2000, 86% of Wi-Fi devices were used for business. Wireless connection in businesses was big business in itself, with chipmakers and PC companies quickly hopping off the fence to support and join Wi-Fi. This led tech giants Microsoft and Intel to jump ship from HomeRF to Wi-Fi. Wireless for business soared in popularity ahead of in the home, which gave Wi-Fi chip volume a boost. This in turn led to closing the cost gap between that and HomeRF, leading it to fold in 2003. 

Since then, over the past 2 decades the Wi-Fi Alliance and IEEE have worked together to represent, guide and oversee Wi-Fi and its subsequent standards. 

The IEEE committee continues to roll-out new standards, and the WI-Fi Alliance makes sure that certified products can communicate with each other. 

So the next time you hit a Wi-Fi deadspot, or find that the Wi-Fi is down in your favourite coffee shop – Stop and breathe. Count your blessings that you can take your work with you wherever you go (mostly) and that you can largely connect via Wi-Fi wherever you need it. 

by admin
13 Views0
Business Wi-Fi Wi-Fi Wi-Fi Advice Wi-Fi Design Wi-Fi Installation Wi-Fi Interference Wi-Fi Site Survey
The Fundamentals of a Wireless LAN

We were going to call this blog ‘WLANs for Dummies’ but that seemed a bit harsh so we settled on the fundamentals of a wireless LAN instead.

A wireless LAN, or WLAN, might seem complicated on the surface but actually it really just follows simple laws of physics. If you can understand these and follow them, then there shouldn’t be any reason why you can’t achieve high performance and scalability for your WLAN.

If you can understand the basics of wireless physics, then you can start to plan your WLAN for a successful deployment. It will also help you to troubleshoot an existing WLAN exhibiting issues.

How Does Data Travel Through a WLAN?

First things first – Let’s look at wave properties.

Data transmits, or travels, from one point to another – e.g. between wireless access points – via electromagnetic waves. This energy travels at the speed of light and operate at different frequencies.

The frequencies of these electromagnetic waves are defined by how many periodic cycles are completed by second.

For example:

How is Frequency Measured?

As we said above, frequency is how many wave cycles are completed per second. This is measured in Hertz. A 2Hz waveform is 2 completed wave cycles in a period of 1 second.

How Does Frequency Affect a WLAN?

A phenomenon called Free Space Path Loss is something that causes signal loss when a waveform travels from one point to another. This is what affects how well data travels across a wireless network.

Different wavelengths (frequencies) experience difference signal loss. The lower the frequency, the longer the wavelength, and the longer the wavelength, the further it can travel before signal gets lost.

For example, 2.4GHz have longer wavelengths than higher frequencies like 5GHz.

How is Wi-Fi Signal Loss Measured?

We measure the energy that is associated with received wireless signals in Decibels (dB). We can also measure loss of signal in this way.

Decibels are logarithmic. On the linear domain, when you add decibels it grows exponentially and when you subtract decibels it reduces exponentially.

The 3dB rule

Every 3dB change, there is a doubling of energy (if increasing) or a halving of energy (if decreasing).

As a ratio, this would look like:

If we had the wireless signal energy at
1:10dB

Then doubling it would be
2:13dB

Remembering this rule can help with both analysing the energy associated with wireless signals as well as predicting it.
Similarly, if you add or subract 10dB, it changes by a factor of 10.

The Relationship Between Frequency and Wireless Signal

Let’s take a look at 2.4Ghz and 5GHz frequencies or waveforms. 5GHz is a higher frequency, so has more wavelengths in a given time period. 5GHz has more wireless signal loss (attenuation) than 2.4GHz, and thus is better for high-density areas. 2.4GHz has less wavelengths in a given time period and is better suited for wider coverage. Bear this in mind when you are planning or troubleshooting a wireless network.

How is Wireless Signal Affected by Different Materials?

In an ideal world, you would have a clear line of sight between your wireless points. In reality, this is rarely the case and you will often find things that get in the way and stop the wireless signal from traversing effectively across your network.

Different materials will affect wireless signals and attenuation in different ways.

Materials such as concrete will cause more attenuation of wireless signal than wood.

In scenarios where wireless signals can propagate (the action of spreading) normally, there is no interference from other materials. However, there are some things that can alter the propagation of a wireless signal, causing it to behave differently and potentially become unreliable.

For example, a WLAN environment with metal surfaces may encounter unpredictability with wireless signal due to it reflecting off the metal.
Wireless signal can also be absorbed by certain materials like water or people, causing the signal to falter.

Being mindful of materials during the WLAN planning stage can help ensure the environment doesn’t hinder your wireless network and you have reliable connectivity results.

Co-Channel Interference

Different materials aren’t the only thing that can interfer with wireless signals.

Due to the 2.4GHz and 5GHz frewuency bands being unlicensed, there are no restrictions on people when extending wireless networks with access points.

This means that they can become crowded as well as channels not being assigned efficiently. Both of these issues can cause co-channel interference.

When planning your WLAN it’s important to take these issues nito consideration and plan your wireless network accordingly so as not to risk problems with wireless signal later down the line.

You want your WLAN to be as effective and efficient as it can possible be, which takes planning and wireless network knowledge.

Whilst the 2.4GHz is popular due to its propagation qualities due its waveforms passing through materials like walls more easily and reaching end users at a long distance. This however has meant that its become crowded with competing devices such as cordless telephones, baby monitors and bluetooth devices. This saturation can cause problems with your wireless signal.

In comparison, the 5GHz spectrum has greater availability and relaxed transmission power giving it more flexibility when it comes to wireless networks.

The 2.4GHz band has only 3 channels without any overlap, whereas the 5GHz has 24. This is another reason why the 5GHz band is favoured for high-density WLAN environments.

Understanding Frequency Channels

To ensure you can maximise the performance and scalability of your WLAN, you need to understand how these channels operate and use that knowledge to avoid co-channel interference.

Let’s take an Access Point as an example. An AP will have a specific bandwidth through which it will transmit and receive signals to and from other points. The channel assigned to the AP will be appropriate for the centre frequency of the first 20MHz channel used by the AP.

This bandwidth is specifically the frequency range over which the data signals are transmitted. Peak transmission and power is spread over the range of that bandwidth, with it dropping off at the edges.

These edges are then at risk of meeting other nearby wireless networks and are prone to interference from the ‘noise’ of these other networks.

It’s important to use what you know about channels to prevent the reduction of wireless signal speed and loss of scalability of your wireless network.

In order to minimise interference between neighbouring access points, choose to assign them with non-adjacent channels. Following this will make it easier to scale your network. If you don’t follow this principle, you will likely encounter problems with latency and throughput.

The best way of reducing interference when assigning WLAN channels is to carry out a Wi-Fi site survey. This involves analysing the noise levels across the spectrum so you can make informed decisions for your wireless network.

Call The Experts

If this all sounds a bit complicated, then why not give us a call here at Geekabit? We have Wi-Fi expert engineers working out of Hampshire, Cardiff and London who can take care of all your Wi-Fi woes.

From Wi-Fi site surveys, to planning and installation, we’ve got your WLAN covered. GIve us a call or drop us an email to see how we can help keep you and your business connected.

by admin
503 Views0

© 2019 GEEKABIT LTD | UK WI-FI CONSULTANT | WI-FI EXPERTS FOR BUSINESS | WI-FI HELP LONDON, CARDIFF, HAMPSHIRE | WI-FI ASSISTANCE HAMPSHIRE