Introduction To Mobile Computing

Mobile Computing is an umbrella term used to describe technologies that

enable people to access network services anyplace, anytime, and anywhere.
Ubiquitous computing and nomadic computing are synonymous with mobile
computing. Information access via a mobile device is plagued by low
available bandwidth, poor connection maintenence, poor security, and
addressing problems. Unlike their wired counterparts, design of software for
mobile devices must consider resource limitation, battery power and display
size. Consequently, new hardware and software techniques must be
developed. For example, applications need to be highly optimized for space,
in order to fit in the limited memory on the mobile devices. For Internet
enabled devices, the good old TCP/IP stack cannot be used; it takes too
much space and is not optimized for minimal power consumption. Given the
plethora of cellular technologies that have emerged in such a market, it
becomes extremely difficult to provide support for inter-device
communication.

A new hardware technology solution, Bluetooth, has been proposed to

overcome this barrier. Any device with a Bluetooth chip will be able to
communicate seamlessly with any other device having a similar chip
irrespective of the communication technologies they might be using. For the
sake of explanation, an analogy can be drawn between the Java Virtual
Machine and Blue tooth.

In the recent past, cellular phone companies have shown an interesting

growth pattern. The number of customers has been steadily increasing but
the average airtime per user has slowed to a constant. To increase the user
average connect time, many cellular providers have started providing data
services on their networks which entices the user to use the mobile device
for both voice and data communication. Typical data services include chat,
e-mail, Internet browsing. An example of this type of service is SMS (Short
Message Service). It is a data service in a GSM cellular network that allows
the users to send a maximum of 160-character message at a time (similar to
paging). Inherently, this service is not feasible for browsing, checking e-mail
or chatting. GSM networks provide another service called GPRS (General
Packet Radio Service) that allows information to be sent and received across
the cellular network.

There has also been a recent effort defining common standards for providing
data services on hand-held devices. WAP (Wireless Application Protocol) and
KVM (Kilobyte Virtual Machine) deserve a mention here. WAP is a protocol
suite that comprises of protocols tailored for small devices. WAP has been
developed by the WAP Forum [ www.wapforum.org] and runs over an
underlying bearer protocol like IP or SMS. In the WAP model, a service
provider operates a WAP gateway to convert Internet content to a
miniaturized subset of HTML that is displayed by a mini-browser on the
mobile device. Companies like Nokia, Ericsson and Motorola have already
developed WAP enabled phones. As of now, these phones are available and
functional mostly in Europe.

HTML, the de-facto Internet language, is not optimized for these devices.
Handheld devices are characterized by small display sizes, limited input
capabilities and limited bandwidth. The HTML document model consisting of
headers, titles, paragraphs, etc, does not work well for a 10 row by 15
character wide screen. Keeping in mind the memory constraints of the
mobile device, the browser should not be heavy (i.e. the markup language
should not be too detailed). Alternative markup languages that have been
proposed include HDML (Handheld Device Markup Language -- a prevalent
standard), WML (Wireless Markup Language -- WAP brainchild) and
Compact HTML . Details about these standards can be obtained from w3c
site . Curious readers can also subscribe to the mailing list www-
mobile@w3.org. The popular mini-browser in the market right now is
UP.browser from phone.com [www.phone.com]. The browser has been
licensed to many cellular phone manufacturers like Motorola, Ericsson, Sony
and Toshiba.

Considertaion Of Data Link Layer

The data link layer is the second layer in the OSI (open systems
interconnection) seven-layer reference model. It responds to service
requests from the network layer above it and issues service requests to the
physical layer below it.

The data link layer is responsible for encoding bits into packets prior to
transmission and then decoding the packets back into bits at the destination.
Bits are the most basic unit of information in computing and
communications. Packets are the fundamental unit of information transport
in all modern computer networks, and increasingly in other communications
networks as well.

The data link layer is also responsible for logical link control, media access
control, hardware addressing, error detection and handling and defining
physical layer standards. It provides reliable data transfer by transmitting
packets with the necessary synchronization, error control and flow control.

The data link layer is divided into two sublayers: the media access control
(MAC) layer and the logical link control (LLC) layer. The former controls how
computers on the network gain access to the data and obtain permission to
transmit it; the latter controls packet synchronization, flow control and error
checking.

The data link layer is where most LAN (local area network) and wireless LAN
technologies are defined. Among the most popular technologies and
protocols generally associated with this layer are Ethernet, Token Ring, FDDI
(fiber distributed data interface), ATM (asynchronous transfer mode), SLIP
(serial line Internet protocol), PPP (point-to-point protocol), HDLC (high level
data link control) and ADCCP (advanced data communication control
procedures).

The data link layer is often implemented in software as a driver for a

network interface card (NIC). Because the data link and physical layers are
so closely related, many types of hardware are also associated with the data
link layer. For example, NICs typically implement a specific data link layer
technology, so they are often called Ethernet cards, Token Ring cards, etc.
There are also several types of network interconnection devices that are said
to operate at the data link layer in whole or in part, because they make
decisions about what to do with data they receive by looking at data link
layer packets. These devices include most bridges and switches, although
switches also encompass functions performed by the network layer.

Data link layer processing is faster than network layer processing because
less analysis of the packet is required.

Channel Allocation In Mobile Computing

Channel allocation deals with the allocation of channels to cells in a cellular

network. Once the channels are allocated, cells may then allow users within
the cell to communicate via the available channels. Channels in a wireless
communication system typically consist of time slots, frequency bands
and/or CDMA pseudo noise sequences, but in an abstract sense, they can
represent any generic transmission resource. There are three major
categories for assigning these channels to cells (or base-stations). They are

 Fixed Channel Allocation,

 Dynamic Channel Allocation and
 Hybrid Channel Allocation which is a combination of the first two
methods.

Fixed Channel Allocation

Fixed Channel Allocation (FCA) systems allocate specific channels to specific
cells. This allocation is static and can not be changed. For efficient operation,
FCA systems typically allocate channels in a manner that maximizes
frequency reuse. Thus, in a FCA system, the distance between cells using
the same channel is the minimum reuse distance for that system. The
problem with FCA systems is quite simple and occurs whenever the offered
traffic to a network of base stations is not uniform. Consider a case in which
two adjacent cells are allocated N channels each. There clearly can be
situations in which one cell has a need for N+k channels while the adjacent
cell only requires N-m channels (for positive integers and m. In such a case,
k users in the first cell would be blocked from making calls while m channels
in the second cell would go unused. Clearly in this situation of non-uniform
spatial offered traffic, the available channels are not being used efficiently.
FCA has been implemented on a widespread level to date.

Dynamic Channel Allocation

Dynamic Channel Allocation (DCA) attempts to alleviate the problem

mentioned for FCA systems when offered traffic is non-uniform. In DCA
systems, no set relationship exists between channels and cells. Instead,
channels are part of a pool of resources. Whenever a channel is needed by a
cell, the channel is allocated under the constraint that frequency reuse
requirements can not be violated. There are two problems that typically
occur with DCA based systems.

 First, DCA methods typically have a degree of randomness associated

with them and this leads to the fact that frequency reuse is often not
maximized unlike the case for FCA systems in which cells using the
same channel are separated by the minimum reuse distance.
 Secondly, DCA methods often involve complex algorithms for deciding
which available channel is most efficient. These algorithms can be very
computationally intensive and may require large computing resources
in order to be real-time.

Hybrid Channel Alloction Scheme

The third category of channel allocation methods includes all systems that
are hybrids of fixed and dynamic channel allocation systems. Several
methods have been presented that fall within this category and in addition, a
great deal of comparison has been made with corresponding simulations and
analyses [Cox, Elnoubi, Jiang, Katzela, Yue, Zhang]. We will present several
of the more developed hybrid methods below.
Channel Borrowing is one of the most straightforward hybrid allocation
schemes. Here, channels are assigned to cells just as in fixed allocation
schemes. If a cell needs a channel in excess of the channels previously
assigned to it, that cell may borrow a channel from one of its neighboring
cells given that a channel is available and use of this channel won't violate
frequency reuse requirements. Note that since every channel has a
predetermined relationship with a specific cell, channel borrowing (without
the extensions mentioned below) is often categorized as a subclass of fixed
allocation schemes. The major problem with channel borrowing is that when
a cell borrows a channel from a neighboring cell, other nearby cells are
prohibited from using the borrowed channel because of co-channel
interference. This can lead to increased call blocking over time. To reduce
this call blocking penalty, algorithms are necessary to ensure that the
channels are borrowed from the most available neighboring cells; i.e., the
neighboring cells with the most unassigned channels.

Two extensions of the channel borrowing approach are Borrowing with

Channel Ordering (BCO) and Borrowing with Directional Channel
Locking (BDCL).

 Borrowing with Channel Locking was designed as an improvement over

the simpler Channel Borrowing approach as described above [Elnoubi].
BCO systems have two distinctive characteristics [Elnoubi]:
1. The ratio of fixed to dynamic channels varies with traffic load.
2. Nominal channels are ordered such that the first nominal
channel of a cell has the highest priority of being applied to a call
within the cell.

The last nominal channel is most likely to be borrowed by neighboring

channels. Once a channel is borrowed, that channel is locked in the co-
channel cells within the reuse distance of the cell in question. To be
"locked" means that a channel can not be used or borrowed. Zhang
and Yum [Zhang] presented the BDCL scheme as an improvement
over the BCO method. From a frequency reuse standpoint, in a BCO
system, a channel may be borrowed only if it is free in the neighboring
cochannel cells. This criteria is often too strict.

 In Borrowing with Directional Channel Locking, borrowed channels are

only locked in nearby cells that are affected by the borrowing. This
differs from the BCO scheme in which a borrowed channel is locked in
every cell within the reuse distance. The benefit of BDCL is that more
channels are available in the presence of borrowing and subsequent
call blocking is reduced. A disadvantage of BDCL is that the statement
"borrowed channels are only locked in nearby cells that are affected by
 the borrowing" requires a clear understanding of the term "affected."
This may require microscopic analysis of the area in which the cellular
system will be located. Ideally, a system can be general enough that
detailed analysis of specific propagation measurements is not
necessary for implementation.

Hybrid Channel Alloction Scheme Continue...

A natural extension of channel borrowing is to set aside a portion of the

channels in a system as dynamic channels with the remaining (nominal)
channels being fixed to specified cells. If a cell requires an extra channel,
instead of borrowing the channel from a neighboring cell, the channel is
borrowed from the common "bank" of dynamic channels. An important
consideration in hybrid systems of this type is the ratio of dynamic channels
to fixed channels. Analysis by Cox and Reudlink [Cox - 1973] showed that
given ten channels per cell, an optimum ratio was 8 fixed channels and 2
dynamic channels. In general, the optimum ratio depends upon the traffic
load [Zhang]. In addition to BDCL, a second channel allocation method was
presented by Yum and Zhang [Zhang]. Referred to as Locally Optimized
Dynamic Assignment Strategy (LODA), this method is best described as a
purely dynamic channel allocation procedure as opposed to a hybrid method.
In this strategy there are no nominal channels; all channels are dynamic.
When a given cell needs to accommodate a call, it chooses from among the
bank of available channels according to some cost criteria. The channel with
minimum cost is assigned. In a general sense, the cost is a measure of the
future blocking probability in the vicinity of the cell given that the candidate
channel is assigned. A more detailed description of the cost function will be
addressed below.

Dynamic Channel Reassignment

Similar to the goals of dynamic channel assignment is the process of

Dynamic Channel Reassignment (DCR). Whereas a DCA scheme allocates a
channel to an initial call or handover, a DCR system switches a cell's channel
(that is currently being used) to another channel which is closer to the
optimum according to frequency reuse or other cost criteria. Thus, for
example, a user communicating with channel n may be switched to channel
m during the middle of her/his call if channel m is a more efficient use of the
available bandwidth from a frequency reuse point of view. Philosophically,
DCR is equivalent to DCA.
Simulation and Comparison of Channel Allocation Schemes

A great deal of work is available comparing various realizations of channel

allocation schemes [Cox, Elnoubi, Jiang, Katzela, Yue, Zhang]. In comparing
performance, typical system metrics include blocking probability of new calls
and blocking probability of handover calls. These metrics are written as
functions of offered traffic (where the traffic may be written in a variety of
forms). It is generally assumed that a blocked new call is preferred over a
blocked hand-off call. The idea being that with a blocked hand-off, users are
forced to terminate communication in the middle of their session. If this
blocking happens at a particularly inopportune time, the results could be
disastrous (e.g., business partners cut off in the middle of a vital
negotiation). In the case of a blocked new call, at least the business
negotiation hasn't started and the involved parties aren't interrupted.
Blocking probability is an important metric throughout the field of queueing
theory and in the case of M/M/1 queues, the Erlang-B formula is often used
for analysis of blocking probability. Because blocked calls can be very
disconcerting, systems are typically designed to have blocking probabilities
of no more than 1% or 2%. This is consistent with the assumption of small
offered traffic loads.

Hybrid Channel Alloction Scheme Continue...

Cox and Reudink were the first researchers to present published

comparisons of different channel allocation schemes. Their comparison was
based on simulation of an outdoor vehicular wireless communication system
[Cox - 1971, Cox - 1972, Jakes]. The simulation divided a region into a grid
of square cells. The movement of vehicles had a two dimensional normal
distribution with 0 mean and 30 mph standard deviation in each of the two
orthogonal directions. Poisson arrivals were assumed for the rate of calls per
vehicle and call durations were assume to have a truncated normal
distribution (truncated on the left at zero) with a "mean" 90 seconds (true
mean of 103.5 seconds).

Cox and Reudink's study considered uniform and non-uniform distributions

of spatial traffic. In the uniform case, all cells had approximately the same
call arrival rate while in the non-uniform case, some cells had a significantly
higher call arrival rate. With both the uniform and non-uniform spatial
distributions, fixed channel allocation schemes were optimally matched so
that the cells with the greatest numbers of calls had the greatest number of
channels to deal with those calls. In both cases of uniform and non-uniform
traffic, results showed that for low blocking probabilities, dynamic channel
allocation schemes could handle more calls than fixed channel allocation
schemes. More specifically, in the case of uniform traffic, the DCA approach
outperformed the FCA approach when the blocking probability was lower
than 10%. At a blocking probability of 1%, the DCA approach could handle
over 10% more calls than the FCA approach. In the case of non-uniform
traffic, the DCA approach outperformed FCA for blocking rates up to 60%. At
a blocking rate of 1%, DCA could handle almost 70% more calls per cell than
FCA. Cox and Reudink performed another comparison involving dynamic
channel reassignment in [Cox - 1973]. In this hybrid procedure, the total
number of available channels is broken into two groups: fixed and dynamic
channels. When a cell requires a channel, it first searches for an available
fixed channel that is preassigned to the cell. If none of the fixed channels
are available, a dynamic channel is searched for from the common bank of
dynamic channels. If this search is in vain, the call is blocked. When users
who were assigned fixed channels end their calls, these freed fixed channels
are then assigned to users in the same cell who are currently using dynamic
channels. This frees the dynamic channel for future use and ensures that a
large number of channels being used are the optimally-spaced, fixed
channels. Results from Cox and Reudink's study of dynamic channel
reassignment showed that channel use was increased by over 60%
compared to fixed channel allocation for a blocking rate of 1%. This result
corresponds to uniform offered traffic.

Zhang and Yum compared four channel assignment

 Fixed Channel Assignment (FCA),

 Borrowing with Channel Ordering (BCO),
 Borrowing with Directional Channel Locking (BDCL) and
 Locally Optimized Dynamic Assignment (LODA).

With respect to uniform offered traffic, their results showed that BDCL had
the lowest blocking probability followed by BCO, LODA and FCA. With non-
uniform offered traffic, the relative performance of the four methods was the
same with the exception that in this case, LODA performed better than BCO.
It makes sense that the ordering for BDCL, BCO and FCA was as found.
Indeed, BDCL was specifically designed as an improvement over BCO and
BCO was designed as an improvement over FCA [Zhang, Elnoubi]. The fact
that the performance of LODA varies under uniform versus non-uniform
traffic is rather interesting however. The reason behind this phenomenon is
that LODA provides optimal channel allocation only in local regions. Given
non-uniform traffic which consists of dense regions in certain local areas,
LODA will accommodate these regions of high traffic offering. However, in a
global sense, the LODA algorithm will not necessarily provide the optimal
allocation. With uniform offered traffic, LODA does not have any regions with
peak traffic to optimize; i.e., no local regions within which the benefits of
LODA can be realized. Furthermore, with respect to the entire region, the
optimization is generally not optimal in a global sense. The result is that with
uniform traffic, LODA does not have any advantage to offer over BCO. From
the previous discussion we see that one general result of all of the
comparisons is that dynamic channel allocation outperforms fixed channel
allocation for low blocking rates (below 10% in most cases). Blocking rates
above 1% or 2% are generally not tolerated. This is generally an accepted
guideline throughout the telecommunications industry and we will adhere to
this design constraint as well.

Common Principle Of Channel Allocation

The large array of possible channel allocation systems can become

cumbersome. However, all channel allocation methods operate under simple,
common principles. Throughout this report we have touched on three points
which an efficient channel allocation scheme should address:

1. Channel allocation schemes must not violate minimum frequency reuse

conditions.
2. Channel allocation schemes should adapt to changing traffic
conditions.
3. Channel allocation schemes should approach (from above) the
minimum frequency reuse constraints so as to efficiently utilize
available transmission resources.

As the first requirement suggests, all channel allocation schemes adhere to

condition 1. From a frequency reuse standpoint, a fixed channel allocation
system distributes frequency (or other transmission) resources to the cells in
an optimum manner; i.e., common channels are separated by the minimum
frequency reuse distance. Thus, a fixed channel allocation scheme perfectly
satisfies condition 3 as well. However, a fixed allocation scheme does not
satisfy condition 2.

Philosophically, any dynamic channel allocation scheme will meet the

requirements of all of the above three conditions to some degree. At the
system architecture level dynamic channel allocation schemes may differ
widely, but fundamentally, their only difference is in the degree to which
they satisfy condition 3. Different DCA schemes attempt to satisfy condition
3 (in addition to conditions 1 and 2) by approaching the minimum frequency
reuse constraint arbitrarily closely, and by doing so in as short a time period
as possible. The above three conditions point to the fact that design of
dynamic channel allocation schemes falls within the general class of
optimization problems. Furthermore, since we can always assume that the
available number of base stations is finite and the transmission resources
will always be countable (due to FCC requirements if nothing else) then our
problem can be reduced to the subclass of combinatorial optimization
problems. As with all combinatorial optimization problems, there will exist a
solution space and a cost function [Aarts & Korst]. A typical element of the
solution space could be a particular layout of frequency channels among the
base-stations. The cost function can be loosely characterized as the
difference between the frequency reuse of an arbitrary solution and the
frequency reuse of the optimized solution. The error associated with a non-
optimized cost is realized as a future increased blocking probability or an
otherwise unwarranted lack of channel availability. It is typically assumed
that the solution to the wireless dynamic channel allocation problem is NP-
complete [Yue, Cox - 1971]. The definition of np-completeness follows from
the conjecture made in the late 1960's that there exists a class of
combinatorial optimization problems of such inherent complexity that any
algorithm, solving each instance of such a problem to optimality, requires a
computational effort that grows superpolynomially with the size of the
problem. In the case of dynamic channel allocation, the complexity is
generally attributed to the required inclusion of cochannel interference in
any analysis of dynamic channel allocation schemes [Yue]. The author is
aware of one published article to date offering an analytical method
(approximate) for calculating the performance of dynamic channel allocation
[see Yue]. Recently, several approximation techniques have been proposed
as methods for solving condition 3 of the dynamic channel allocation
problem. In particular there has been interest in applying simulated
annealing techniques [Duque-Anton] and neural network methods [Chan,
Kunz, Funabiki] to dynamic channel allocation.

eless Lan

A wireless LAN or WLAN is a wireless local area network, which is the

linking of two or more computers without using wires. WLAN utilizes pread-
spectrum or OFDM modulation technology based on radio waves to enable
communication between devices in a limited area, also known as the basic
service set. This gives users the mobility to move around within a broad
coverage area and still be connected to the network.

For the home user, wireless has become popular due to ease of installation,
and location freedom with the gaining popularity of laptops. Public
businesses such as coffee shops or malls have begun to offer wireless access
to their customers; some are even provided as a free service. Large wireless
network projects are being put up in many major cities. Google is even
providing a free service to Mountain View, California and has entered a bid
to do the same for San Francisco. New York City has also begun a pilot
program to cover all five boroughs of the city with wireless Internet access.

 
History Of Wireless Lan

In 1970 University of Hawaii, under the leadership of Norman

Abramson, developed the world’s first computer communication
network using low-cost ham-like radios, named ALOHAnet. The
bi-directional star topology of the system included seven
computers deployed over four islands to communicate with the
central computer on the Oahu Island without using phone lines.

"In 1979, F.R. Gfeller and U. Bapst published a paper in the IEEE
Proceedings reporting an experimental wireless local area network using
diffused infrared communications. Shortly thereafter, in 1980, P. Ferrert
reported on an experimental application of a single code spread spectrum
radio for wireless terminal communications in the IEEE National
Telecommunications Conference. In 1984, a comparison between Infrared
and CDMA spread spectrum communications for wireless office information
networks was published by Kaveh Pahlavan in IEEE Computer Networking
Symposium which appeared later in the IEEE Communication Society
Magazine. In May 1985, the efforts of Marcus led the FCC to announce
experimental ISM bands for commercial application of spread spectrum
technology. Later on, M. Kavehrad reported on an experimental wireless PBX
system using code division multiple access. These efforts prompted
significant industrial activities in the development of a new generation of
wireless local area networks and it updated several old discussions in the
portable and mobile radio industry.

The first generation of wireless data modems was developed in the early
1980's by amateur radio operators. They added a voice band data
communication modem, with data rates below 9600 bit/s, to an existing
short distance radio system, typically in the two meter amateur band. The
second generation of wireless modems was developed immediately after the
FCC announcement in the experimental bands for non-military use of the
spread spectrum technology. These modems provided data rates on the
order of hundreds of kbit/s. The third generation of wireless modem [then]
aimed at compatibility with the existing LANs with data rates on the order of
Mbit/s. Several companies [developed] the third generation products with
data rates above 1 Mbit/s and a couple of products [had] already been
announced [by the time of the first IEEE Workshop on Wireless LANs]."
"The first of the IEEE Workshops on Wireless LAN was held in 1991. At that
time early wireless LAN products had just appeared in the market and the
IEEE 802.11 committee had just started its activities to develop a standard
for wireless LANs. The focus of that first workshop was evaluation of the
alternative technologies. [By 1996], the technology [was] relatively mature,
a variety of applications [had] been identified and addressed and
technologies that enable these applications [were] well understood. Chip
sets aimed at wireless LAN implementations and applications, a key enabling
technology for rapid market growth, [were] emerging in the market.
Wireless LANs [were being] used in hospitals, stock exchanges, and other in
building and campus settings for nomadic access, point-to-point LAN
bridges, ad-hoc networking, and even larger applications through
internetworking. The IEEE 802.11 standard and variants and alternatives,
such as the wireless LAN interoperability forum and the European HIPERLAN
specification [had] made rapid progress, and the unlicensed PCS
[ Unlicensed Personal Communications Services ] and the proposed
SUPERNet, later on renamed as U-NII, bands also presented new
opportunities."

On July 21, 1999, AirPort debuted at the Macworld Expo in New York City
with Steve Jobs picking up an iBook supposedly to give the cameraman a
better shot as he surfed the Web. Applause quickly built as people realized
there were no wires. This was the first time Wireless LAN became publicly
available at consumer pricing and easily available for home use. Before the
release of the Airport, Wireless LAN was too expensive for consumer use and
used exclusively in large corporate settings.

Originally WLAN hardware was so expensive that it was only used as an

alternative to cabled LAN in places where cabling was difficult or impossible.
Early development included industry-specific solutions and proprietary
protocols, but at the end of the 1990s these were replaced by standards,
primarily the various versions of IEEE 802.11 (Wi-Fi). An alternative ATM-
like 5 GHz standardized technology, HIPERLAN, has so far not succeeded in
the market, and with the release of the faster 54 Mbit/s 802.11a (5 GHz)
and 802.11g (2.4 GHz) standards, almost certainly never will.

In November 2006, the Australian Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial

Research Organisation (CSIRO) won a legal battle in the US federal court of
Texas against Buffalo Technology which found the US manufacturer had
failed to pay royalties on a US WLAN patent CSIRO had filed in 1996. CSIRO
are currently engaged in legal cases with computer companies including
Microsoft, Intel, Dell, Hewlett-Packard and Netgear which argue that the
patent is invalid and should negate any royalties paid to CSIRO for WLAN-
based products.
enifits Of Wireless Lan

The popularity of wireless LANs is a testament primarily to their

convenience, cost efficiency, and ease of integration with other networks and
network components. The majority of computers sold to consumers today
come pre-equipped with all necessary wireless LAN technology.

The benefits of wireless LANs include:

 Convenience: The wireless nature of such networks allows users to

access network resources from nearly any convenient location within
their primary networking environment (home or office). With the
increasing saturation of laptop-style computers, this is particularly
relevant.

 Mobility: With the emergence of public wireless networks, users can

access the internet even outside their normal work environment. Most
chain coffee shops, for example, offer their customers a wireless
connection to the internet at little or no cost.

 Productivity: Users connected to a wireless network can maintain a

nearly constant affiliation with their desired network as they move
from place to place. For a business, this implies that an employee can
potentially be more productive as his or her work can be accomplished
from any convenient location.

 Deployment: Initial setup of an infrastructure-based wireless network

requires little more than a single access point. Wired networks, on the
other hand, have the additional cost and complexity of actual physical
cables being run to numerous locations (which can even be impossible
for hard-to-reach locations within a building).

 Expandability: Wireless networks can serve a suddenly-increased

number of clients with the existing equipment. In a wired network,
additional clients would require additional wiring.

 Cost: Wireless networking hardware is at worst a modest increase

from wired counterparts. This potentially increased cost is almost
always more than outweighed by the savings in cost and labor
associated to running physical cables.

Disadvantage Of Wireless Lan

Wireless LAN technology, while replete with the conveniences and
advantages described above, has its share of downfalls. For a given
networking situation, wireless LANs may not be desirable for a number of
reasons. Most of these have to do with the inherent limitations of the
technology.

 Security: Wireless LAN transceivers are designed to serve computers

throughout a structure with uninterrupted service using radio
frequencies. Because of space and cost, the antennas typically present
on wireless networking cards in the end computers are generally
relatively poor. In order to properly receive signals using such limited
antennas throughout even a modest area, the wireless LAN transceiver
utilizes a fairly considerable amount of power. What this means is that
not only can the wireless packets be intercepted by a nearby
adversary's poorly-equipped computer, but more importantly, a user
willing to spend a small amount of money on a good quality antenna
can pick up packets at a remarkable distance; perhaps hundreds of
times the radius as the typical user. In fact, there are even computer
users dedicated to locating and sometimes even cracking into wireless
networks, known as wardrivers. On a wired network, any adversary
would first have to overcome the physical limitation of tapping into the
actual wires, but this is not an issue with wireless packets. To combat
this consideration, wireless networks users usually choose to utilize
various encryption technologies available such as Wi-Fi Protected
Access (WPA). Some of the older encryption methods, such as WEP
are known to have weaknesses that a dedicated adversary can
compromise. (See main article: Wireless security.)

 Range: The typical range of a common 802.11g network with standard

equipment is on the order of tens of meters. While sufficient for a
typical home, it will be insufficient in a larger structure. To obtain
additional range, repeaters or additional access points will have to be
purchased. Costs for these items can add up quickly. Other
technologies are in the development phase, however, which feature
increased range, hoping to render this disadvantage irrelevant. (See
WiMAX)

 Reliability: Like any radio frequency transmission, wireless networking

signals are subject to a wide variety of interference, as well as
complex propagation effects (such as multipath, or especially in this
case Rician fading) that are beyond the control of the network
administrator. In the case of typical networks, modulation is achieved
by complicated forms of phase-shift keying (PSK) or quadrature
amplitude modulation (QAM), making interference and propagation
 effects all the more disturbing. As a result, important network
resources such as servers are rarely connected wirelessly.

 Speed: The speed on most wireless networks (typically 1-108 Mbit/s)

is reasonably slow compared to the slowest common wired networks
(100 Mbit/s up to several Gbit/s). There are also performance issues
caused by TCP and its built-in congestion avoidance. For most users,
however, this observation is irrelevant since the speed bottleneck is
not in the wireless routing but rather in the outside network
connectivity itself. For example, the maximum ADSL throughput
(usually 8 Mbit/s or less) offered by telecommunications companies to
general-purpose customers is already far slower than the slowest
wireless network to which it is typically connected. That is to say, in
most environments, a wireless network running at its slowest speed is
still faster than the internet connection serving it in the first place.
However, in specialized environments, the throughput of a wired
network might be necessary. Newer standards such as 802.11n are
addressing this limitation and will support peak throughputs in the
range of 100-200 Mbit/s.

Wireless LANs present a host of issues for network managers. Unauthorized

access points, broadcasted SSIDs, unknown stations, and spoofed MAC
addresses are just a few of the problems addressed in WLAN
troubleshooting.

rchitecture Of Wireless Lan

All components that can connect into a wireless medium in a network are referred to as
stations. All stations are equipped with wireless network interface cards (WNICs). Wireless
stations fall into one of two categories: access points and clients.

 Access points

Access points (APs) are base stations for the wireless network. They transmit and
receive radio frequencies for wireless enabled devices to communicate with.

 Clients

Wireless clients can be mobile devices such as laptops, personal digital assistants, IP
phones, or fixed devices such as desktops and workstations that are equipped with a
wireless network interface.
Basic service set

The basic service set (BSS) is a set of all stations that can communicate with each other.
There are two types of BSS: independent BSS and infrastructure BSS. Every BSS has an
identification (ID) called the BSSID, which is the MAC address of the access point
servicing the BSS.

 Independent basic service set

An independent BSS is an ad-hoc network that contains no access points, which

means they can not connect to any other basic service set.

 Infrastructure basic service set

An infrastructure BSS can communicate with other stations not in the same basic
service set by communicating through access points.

Extended service set

An extended service set (ESS) is a set of connected BSSes. Access points in an ESS are
connected by a distribution system. Each ESS has an ID called the SSID which is a 32-byte
(maximum) character string. For example, "linksys" is the default SSID for Linksys routers.
Types Of Wireless Lan

Peer-to-peer

A peer-to-peer (P2P) allows wireless

devices to directly communicate with
each other. Wireless devices within
range of each other can discover and
communicate directly without
involving central access points. This
method is typically used by two
computers so that they can connect
to each other to form a network.

If a signal strength meter is used in

this situation, it may not read the
strength accurately and can be
misleading, because it registers the
strength of the strongest signal,
which may be the closest computer.

802.11 specs define the physical

layer (PHY) and MAC (Media Access
Control) layers. However, unlike
most other IEEE specs, 802.11
includes three alternative PHY
standards: diffuse infrared operating
at 1 Mbit/s in; frequency-hopping
spread spectrum operating at 1
Mbit/s or 2 Mbit/s; and direct-
sequence spread spectrum operating
at 1 Mbit/s or 2 Mbit/s. A single
802.11 MAC standard is based on
CSMA/CA (Carrier Sense Multiple
Access with Collision Avoidance).
The 802.11 specification includes
provisions designed to minimize
collisions. Because two mobile units
may both be in range of a common
access point, but not in range of
each other. The 802.11 has two
basic modes of operation: Ad hoc
mode enables peer-to-peer
transmission between mobile units.
Infrastructure mode in which mobile
units communicate through an
access point that serves as a bridge
to a wired network infrastructure is
the more common wireless LAN
application the one being covered.
Since wireless communication uses a
more open medium for
communication in comparison to
wired LANs, the 802.11 designers
also included a shared-key
encryption mechanism, called wired
equivalent privacy (WEP), or Wi-Fi
 Protected Access, (WPA, WPA2) to
secure wireless computer networks.

Bridge

A bridge can be used to connect

networks, typically of different
types. A wireless Ethernet bridge
allows the connection of devices on
a wired Ethernet network to a
wireless network. The bridge acts as
the connection point to the Wireless
LAN.

Bluetooth is an industrial specification for wireless personal area networks

(PANs). Bluetooth provides a way to connect and exchange information
between devices such as mobile phones, laptops, PCs, printers, digital
cameras, and video game consoles over a secure, globally unlicensed short-
srange radio frequency. The Bluetooth specifications are developed and
licensed by the Bluetooth Special Interest Group.

Uses

Bluetooth is a standard and communications protocol primarily designed for

low power consumption, with a short range (power-class-dependent: 1
meter, 10 meters, 100 meters)[1] based on low-cost transceiver microchips
in each device.
Bluetooth enables these devices to communicate with each other when they
are in range. The devices use a radio communications system, so they do
not have to be in line of sight of each other, and can even be in other rooms,
as long as the received transmission is powerful enough.

Maximum Permitted Power Range

Class
(mW/dBm) (approximate)

Class 1 100 mW (20 dBm) ~100 meters

Class 2 2.5 mW (4 dBm) ~10 meters

Class 3 1 mW (0 dBm) ~1 meter

It has to be noted that in most cases the effective range of class 2 devices is
extended if they connect to a class 1 transceiver, compared to pure class 2
network. This is accomplished by higher sensitivity and transmitter power of
the Class 1 device. The higher transmitter power of Class 1 device allows
higher power to be received by the Class 2 device. Furthermore, higher
sensitivity of Class 1 device allows reception of much lower transmitted
power of the Class 2 devices. Thus, allowing operation of Class 2 devices at
much higher distances. Devices that use a power amplifier on the transmit,
have improved receive sensitivity, and highly optimized antennas are
available that routinely achieve ranges of 1km within the Bluetooth Class 1
standard.

Data Rate
Version
 

Version 1.2 1 Mbit/s

Version 2.0 + EDR 3 Mbit/s

WiMedia Alliance
53 - 480 Mbit/
(proposed)

In order to use Bluetooth, a device must be compatible with certain

Bluetooth profiles. These define the possible applications and uses of the
technology.
List of applications

More prevalent applications of Bluetooth include:

 Wireless control of and communication between a mobile phone and a

hands-free headset or car kit. This was one of the earliest applications
to become popular.
 Wireless networking between PCs in a confined space and where little
bandwidth is required.
 Wireless communications with PC input and output devices, the most
common being the mouse, keyboard and printer.
 Transfer of files between devices with OBEX.
 Transfer of contact details, calendar appointments, and reminders
between devices with OBEX.
 Replacement of traditional wired serial communications in test
equipment, GPS receivers, medical equipment, bar code scanners, and
traffic control devices.
 For controls where infrared was traditionally used.
 Sending small advertisements from Bluetooth enabled advertising
hoardings to other, discoverable, Bluetooth devices.
 Seventh-generation game consoles—Nintendo Wii, Sony PlayStation 3
—use Bluetooth for their respective wireless controllers.
 Dial-up internet access on personal computer or PDA using a data-
capable mobile phone as a modem.
 Receiving commercial advertisements ("spam") via a kiosk, e.g. at a
movie theatre or lobby

Bluetooth vs. Wi-Fi in networking

Bluetooth and Wi-Fi have slightly different applications in today's offices,

homes, and on the move: setting up networks, printing, or transferring
presentations and files from PDAs to computers. Both are versions of
unlicensed spread spectrum technology.

Bluetooth differs from Wi-Fi in that the latter provides higher throughput and
covers greater distances, but requires more expensive hardware and higher
power consumption. They use the same frequency range, but employ
different multiplexing schemes. While Bluetooth is a cable replacement for a
variety of applications, Wi-Fi is a cable replacement only for local area
network access. Bluetooth is often thought of as wireless USB, whereas Wi-
Fi is wireless Ethernet, both operating at much lower bandwidth than the
cable systems they are trying to replace. However, this analogy is not
entirely accurate since any Bluetooth device can, in theory, host any other
Bluetooth device—something that is not universal to USB devices, therefore
it would resemble more a wireless FireWire.

Bluetooth

 
 

Bluetooth exists in a many products, such as phones, printers, modems and

headsets. The technology is useful when transferring information between
two or more devices that are near each other in low-bandwidth situations.
Bluetooth is commonly used to transfer sound data with phones (i.e. with a
Bluetooth headset) or byte data with hand-held computers (transferring
files).

Bluetooth simplifies the discovery and setup of services between devices.

Bluetooth devices advertise all of the services they provide. This makes
using services easier because there is no longer a need to setup network
addresses or permissions as in many other networks.

Wi-Fi

Wi-Fi is more like traditional Ethernet networks, and requires configuration

to set up shared resources, transmit files, and to set up audio links (for
example, headsets and hands-free devices). It uses the same radio
frequencies as Bluetooth, but with higher power output resulting in a
stronger connection. Wi-Fi is sometimes called "wireless Ethernet." This
description is accurate, it also provides an indication of its relative strengths
and weaknesses. Wi-Fi requires more setup, but is better suited for
operating full-scale networks because it enables a faster connection, better
range from the base station, and better security than Bluetooth.

Computer requirements
 
 

 
 

A personal computer must have a Bluetooth adapter in order to be able to

communicate with other Bluetooth devices (such as mobile phones, mice and
keyboards). While some desktop computers already contain an internal
Bluetooth adapter, most require an external Bluetooth dongle. Most recent
laptops come with a built-in Bluetooth adapter.

Unlike its predecessor, IrDA, which requires a separate adapter for each
device, Bluetooth allows multiple devices to communicate with a computer
over a single adapter.