Using the New ANSI/TIA/EIA-606-A Label Standard as a Way to ...

May/June BICSInews 

advancing information transport systems 

advancing information transport systems 

September/October2007 

2006 

president’s message 43 

EXECUTIVE 

bicsi update 

DIRECTOR MESSAGE 6 

bicsi update 42 

course schedule 8 

course schedule 43-44 

standards report 46 12 

Volume 28, 27, Number 35 

Using the New ANSI/TIA/EIA-606-A Label Standard as a Way to Compete SS 14 

Determining the Appropriate Separation of Data and Power Cables SS 20 

So Many Wireless Standards to Choose From SS 26 

Connectivity: Wiring Trends in Optical Data Centers SS 35

Feature 

So Many Wireless 

Standards to Choose From 

A perspective on wireless standards and their applications. 

By joe bardwell 

You have probably heard the comment, “The nice 

thing about standards is that there are so many 

to choose from.” In the wireless data network 

marketplace this is an applicable statement. 

In the Wi-Fi world, the IEEE 802.11a/b/g standards 

are entrenched and IEEE 802.11n is emerging. In 

the cellular world, enhanced data Global System for 

Mobile Communications environment (EDGE), code 

division multiple access (CDMA), universal mobile 

telecommunications service (UMTS), and high speed 

packet data access (HSPDA) are potential “1000 pound 

gorillas” for high speed mobile connectivity. Soon the 

IEEE 802.22 ultrahigh frequency (UHF) standards may 

offer single transmitter solutions for coverage zones up to 

64 km (40 mi) and, don’t forget IEEE 802.16 worldwide 

interoperability for microwave access (WiMAX). 

Within information transport systems (ITS), the 

structured cabling marketplace has fully entered a new 

era. With it, two dramatic changes are confronting 

those of us who make a living creating today’s complex 

communications infrastructure. 

The first challenge is that essentially every customer 

who is installing cable for a wired data network is also 

cabling to support Wi-Fi access. While wall jack locations 

for wired Ethernet and telephone can be specified based 

on furniture and floorplan layouts, Wi-Fi access point (AP) 

locations can only be determined after a radio frequency 

(RF) engineer has performed a site survey. This means that 

you face a workflow challenge when pulling cable. You 

want to pull cable once but you’re faced with two different 

sets of specifications for cable drop locations. 

The second challenge is that the evolution of 

wireless data networking offers an alternative to wiring 

at some office, hospitality and government sites. As 

wireless technology continues to grow in capability 

and acceptance, the shift from a wired to a wireless 

infrastructure will continue to grow. If you are pulling a 

lot of cable today you are going to be pulling less cable 

in the years to come. Now is the time to watch, learn and 

plan for what will be a reasonably certain future. 

Within a five-year time frame you want to be 

positioned to deal with the wireless infrastructure with 

the same level of expertise that you deal with the wired 

infrastructure today. It is probable that you are going 

to expand your staff to include RF engineering and site 

survey design resources. Today you may expand your 

capabilities by partnering with a third-party RF design and 

survey contracting company either to provide capabilities 

you may not have in-house or to augment your current 

staff. In both cases, the challenge is to identify the 

evolving needs of your end-users, get the resources to 

meet those needs, and develop an active plan to meet 

those needs. 

This year marks a significant point of demarcation in 

the wireless network marketplace. Many technologies that 

were uncertain “futures” in the past few years have now 

become part numbers in manufacturer’s and distributor’s 

catalogs. It may be cliché, but it’s true, “the future is now.” 

A case in point is the Apple iPhone. Over 500,000 

units were sold immediately after it was released. What is 

significant is that a Wi-Fi and cellular multimode device, 

with audio, video, voice, and data transfer capabilities, has 

now made an impact into the marketplace. Convergence 

between voice, video and data is becoming an assumed, 

necessary aspect of daily life. Today (in some markets), you 

can buy a cell phone with monthly converged Wi-Fi and 

cellular service. When you walk into a hotspot the phone 

finds its way through the Internet, back to the provider, 

and roams off the more expensive cellular network onto 

the voice over Internet protocol (VoIP) Internet. No 

local VoIP gateway is required at the hotspot. In most 

cases, testing has confirmed that this technology does 

find its way through proxy servers and firewalls without 

requiring special configuration. Access to a converged 

communications infrastructure is becoming an assumed, 

necessary part of daily life. 

26 | advancing information transport systems | www.bicsi.org

Recall when touch-tone telephones arrived in the 

marketplace. Today, caller-ID, callback and other phone 

services are the status quo. Many of us remember the days 

of the “brick” mobile phone and car phone. Today it is 

surprising when someone does not have a cell phone and, 

in the business world, a Blackberry or other wireless PDA. 

In the future we will look back to the days (today) when 

localized hotspots limited the places where high-speed 

wireless data was publicly available. In the workplace, the 

complexity of computer and voice system portability will 

be a thing of the past. 

You need to have a solid perspective on wireless 

technology today and that perspective has to grow into a 

strong proficiency in the coming years. This discussion 

lays out some of the wireless standards that you are 

going to encounter. Let’s approach this from the 

standpoint of end-user application requirements and 

see the degree to which various standards, current and 

emerging, meet the needs. 

One way to categorize the various wireless 

communication standards is to compare and contrast 

the coverage range typically expected from a single base 

station transmitter. Diagram 1 shows how different 

standards provide service in the personal area network 

(PAN) range, through the local area network (LAN), 

wide area network (WAN), metropolitan area network 

(MAN), wide area network (WAN), and the global 

connectivity network. 

The Mobile User 

Anyone in cars, subways, work trucks, trains and airports 

need to stay in touch with their office and with coworkers, 

exchange documents, work orders, or other data, 

access databases to look up client information, equipment 

specifications, and other information. This may, or may 

not, involve the Internet and the World Wide Web. 

Consider package delivery companies, public service and 

law enforcement, and other groups that have internal 

requirements that probably do not demand the Internet. 

The first thing that must be considered is the geographic 

range spanned by the end-user community. An electrical 

contractor, limousine service or local delivery service may 

only require connectivity with a 50-mile radius of the 

office. Today, analog radio communications are common 

in this environment. 

In the emerging market there are some interesting 

alternatives. 3G cellular has the advantage of wide 

geographic scope with the downside of monthly 

subscription costs. You will see data rates growing from 

768 kb/s up to the 2 Mb/s range. Standards such as CDMA, 

EDGE, HSPDA, MediaFlo, and UMTS are part of the 

cellular space, providing data and voice communications 

with options for video. 

A company could purchase a WiMAX (IEEE 802.16e) 

base station and mount an antenna on their central 

building. While today’s WiMAX offerings are hard pressed 

to cover a five mile radius, the future has the potential for 

Diagram 1: As range increases (from left to right in the diagram) the power must increase, the receiver’s sensitivity must increase, or the bit-rate must decrease. 

PAN LAN MAN WAN GLOBAL 

802.15 

Bluetooth 

WUSB 

Wireless USB 

802.15.3a 

UWB 

(Ultra 

Wideband) 

802.15.4a 

Zigbee 

802.11 

Wi-Fi 

802.11b/g 

802.11a 

802.11n 

802.16a 

WiMax 

802.16e 

Nomadic WiMax 

3G Cellular 

EV-DO 

CDMA2000 

WRAN 

(Wireless 

Regional Area 

Network) 

802.22 

GSM 

EDGE 

UMTS 

HSPDA 

100 ft 

1mW-30mW 

wider coverage range. The advantage to WiMAX is that 

you own the system (one-time up-front cost) with the 

downside that the geographic scope is limited. Again, you 

get voice, data and video services using a laptop computer. 

There are no mobile WiMAX handsets in common use 

but the year 2009 may see that start to change. Several 

cellular carriers (including Sprint and AT&T) are starting to 

roll out WiMAX metro-area services in limited markets. In 

Australia, WiMAX is already in larger cities. WiMAX data 

rates are higher than 3G cellular but the range is smaller. 

The IEEE 802.11 Wi-Fi standards (IEEE 802.11b, g, a, and 

n) are unsuitable for central-radio service outdoors. A 

mobile Wi-Fi user must be relatively close to an AP radio to 

get high-speed service. We are talking under 305 m (1000 

ft). Add a little noise and interference in an outdoor Wi-Fi 

environment, and put in a requirement for VoIP or video 

and the range starts to drop below 122 m (400 ft) in some 

cases. This means that a large number of specialized Wi- 

Fi radios must be deployed over a metro area, truck yard 

or warehouse facility, corporate or educational campus, 

Indoor installations typically use 

power-over-Ethernet (PoE) to 

power wall- or ceiling-mounted 

APs. Concern for aesthetics and 

tamper-prevention indoors is 

much more significant than when 

installing outdoor equipment. 

Outdoor equipment often 

requires a 120 Volt alternate 

current power source and 

working with Type-N connectors 

and LMR-type cable is a skill 

set similar to, but not exactly 

like terminating ANSI/TIA/EIA- 

568-B Ethernet (e.g., you’ll 

need a Type-N crimping tool and 

coaxial cable stripper). The use 

of 38 mm (1-1/2 in] galvanized 

steel pipe for antenna masts 

up to 3 m (10 ft) in length is 

appropriate with 1.2 m (4 ft) 

being held securely at the base 

(with Unistrut or Y-brackets on 

the building exterior) and 1.83 m 

(6 ft) above the top attachment 

point. The rule-of-thumb is “1 

down, 2 up” meaning that 1/3 

of the mast length is attached 

to the building and 2/3 are 

free-standing.) 


or other outdoor area to provide consistent, high-speed 

outdoor coverage. The terms mesh router and wireless 

distribution system (WDS) refer to integrated systems of 

Wi-Fi APs used to provide outdoor Wi-Fi coverage. The 

radio technology is similar in these devices but the mesh 

router has more features and capabilities while WDS 

systems generally require manual configuration and lack 

many of the redundancy features in a wireless mesh. On 

the flip-side, a mesh router may carry a $3000 to $5000 

price tag while a WDS radio may be less than $2000 (and, 

sometimes, less than $1000). 

The Wi-Fi mesh or WDS 

provides throughput in the range 

of 20 Mb/s to 30 Mb/s (using 54 

Mb/s IEEE 802.11g or 802.11a 

modulation) and up to 60 Mb/s 

or more using IEEE 802.11n. 

These data rates fall off quickly 

beyond 500 ft from the Wi-FiAP. 

The new standard on the 

horizon (5+ years or more in 

the future) is called IEEE 802.22. 

This standard speaks to the 

transmission of high-speed 

data in the ultrahigh frequency 

(UHF) television frequencies 

that will be de-allocated by the 

FCC as part of the move to HD, 

digital television. IEEE 802.22 

may provide central-radio 

data connectivity with range 

similar to over-the-air broadcast 

television (e.g., 64 km [40 mi] 

or more). 

The Campus User 

There are two key 

distinguishing factors for the 

campus user. First, mobility is 

limited to a small area, perhaps 

less than a 1.6 km (l mi) 

radius from a central location. 

Secondly, throughput and quality 

requirements are generally much 

more demanding than those of 

a fully mobile user. In addition, 

the campus user will be moving 

in and out of buildings, and will 

probably have an office in one of 

the buildings. 

In this case there is an 

inherent downside to 3G cellular 

service. Unless a local repeater 

is installed to assure in-building 

coverage it is not unexpected to find that some offices, 

conference rooms, or other places indoors lack suitable 

coverage. The cell tower on the hillside may not be able 

to light up the entire indoor campus area. 

WiMAX may be a good solution from the standpoint 

of data rate and range; however, the availability of 

notebook computer WiMAX is very limited today. Intel 

has been talking about their commitment to mobile 

WiMAX for a number of years but we have yet to see 

HP, Dell, IBM, Fujitsu, or any other notebook computer 

SCT_Half_PageAdIsland.qxp 12/4/06 3:32 PM Page 1 

It’s already known 

as the easiest ever! 

New Megger SCT2000 

Structured Cable Tester 

The SCT2000 is the first tester to truly uncomplicate the 

certification and evaluation of copper and fiber cabling 

installations. It is simply the must intuitive and easy-tooperate 

LAN certification tester on the market today! 

That alone makes it a tester to try. Now, add all of these 

other impressive features: 

1 to 1,000 MHz frequency range. Certifies twisted pair to all 

approved ISO and TIA standard, including ISO Class F. 

Powerful diagnostics pinpoint the distance to link disturbances 

on each measured pair. 

Unique “connector-less” recessed copper and fiber optic 

adapters eliminate virtually all potential adapter or tester 

damage…keeping your SCT on the job. 

Unparalleled result storage capability. Internal memory stores 

over 5,000 certification test results, or 100 graphic results. 

Powerful certification management software organizes, edits, 

views, prints, saves or archives test results by job site, 

customer, campus building and more. 

Large color VGA LCD display provides a rich graphical user 

interface, speeding users through twisted pair and fiber optic 

cabling certification and diagnosis. 

“Talk” feature allows two-way voice communication between 

the main and remote units. 

Really? How easy is it? 

Request a live demonstration at your location today by calling 

1-800-723-2861 ext. 8518, email us at dean.craig@megger.com or 

go online to www.megger.com/sct for complete product specifications. 

WWW.MEGGER.COM 

BICSINEWS | September/October 2007 | 31

manufacturer bring an internal WiMAX radio to the mass 

market to match the way Centrino ® wireless has become a 

de facto standard. 

The same is generally true for IEEE 802.11a. All 

notebook computers have the option for an internal IEEE 

802.11b/g radio, and IEEE 802.11n is close on its heels. 

Not everyone offers an internal IEEE 802.11a radio. The 

advantage of IEEE 802.11a is, primarily, the fact that 

fewer people use it. 

Hence, there is less interference from nearby IEEE 

802.11 transmitters. There are some technical advantages 

to the 5.8 gigahertz (GHz) frequency band used by IEEE 

802.11a but, at the end of the day, the technology is 

effectively the same as IEEE 802.11g in the 2.4 GHz band. 

In both cases you get a 54 Mb/s “modulation rate” with 

roughly 30 Mb/s of maximum TCP/IP data throughput. In 

both cases you can often “bond” two adjacent channels 

to get double the throughput (using vendor-specific, 

proprietary methods). 

To summarize, WiMAX is rare or non-existent in the 

notebook computer space, IEEE 802.11a networks have 

much less interference than IEEE 802.11b/g but not all 

notebooks support IEEE 802.11a, and IEEE 802.11n is still 

a draft standard. 

It is common to see a campus network covered with 

a Wi-Fi network utilizing a centralized wireless LAN 

(WLAN) switch system. APs in a WLAN switch system 

are referred to as “lightweight.” This is because some or 

all of the management and control functionality that 

is associated with a Wi-Fi AP is removed from the radio 

unit and relocated in a central hardware device to which 

the APs are attached. The advantage of the WLAN switch 

system is that the central controller is aware of the overall 

configuration of the system and the location of the users. 

Power levels, channel configuration, and load balancing 

between APs is controlled by the central switch. 

There are some similarities between WLAN switch systems 

and mesh router systems. In both cases, the radios are 

aware of each other’s presence and power levels, channels, 

and load balancing is available. The difference lies in the 

awareness of individual client devices. Mesh routers are 

essentially aware only of each other, not as much of the 

behavior of the client devices. 

A mesh router is responsible for determining a best 

path back through the mesh architecture to get to a 

point of Ethernet egress. The paths are through wireless 

links and most mesh routers are not connected to an 

Ethernet network; they talk to each other to get back to 

the point where an Ethernet (and, hence, the Internet or 

the corporate server) is accessible. In the WLAN switch 

system all the APs are already connected to an Ethernet/IP 

infrastructure. They receive wireless traffic from wireless 

clients and send that traffic back to the WLAN switch. It’s 

the WLAN switch that becomes the actual point of origin 

for the traffic back onto the wired network for delivery to 

the ultimate wired destination. 

Mesh routers are intended for deployment when 

wiring is not an option (e.g., between light poles) WLAN 

switch systems are connected to an existing Ethernet 

network—then the system self-organizes to create a 

homogenous Wi-Fi network. It is centrally managed 

and controlled and provides a level of security and 

functionality that goes far beyond simply deploying a 

large number of standard (“fat”) APs. 

It is generally recognized that any enterprise-class Wi- 

Fi network with more than a handful of APs is best served 

by a WLAN switch system. Hospitals, hotels, warehouses 

and other large-scale deployments are all based on one 

or another vendor’s WLAN switch system. If you are 

considering a Wi-Fi system for more than 5575 m 2 (60,000 

ft 2 ) you will want to strongly consider the advantages of a 

WLAN switch system. 

All the WLAN switch systems have options for 

combined IEEE 802.11b/g and IEEE 802.11a integration in 

a single, homogenous network. Most vendors have IEEE 

802.11n on their near-term roadmap. WiMAX and 3G 

cellular are completely different technologies relative to 

WLAN switches and they aren’t part of the WLAN switch 

landscape. 

The key integration challenges in a campus network 

relate to subnet roaming. When a user connects to the 

network in Building #1 and then walks across to Building 

#2 they are physically in a location served by a different 

IP subnet. The APs in Building #2 are connected to a 

different side of a router than those in Building #1. 

Something has to be implemented to allow the client’s IP 

address to work properly in both buildings. 

There are two basic approaches to solving this 

problem—virtual LAN (VLAN) tunneling and mobile 

IP. While different vendors have different specific ways 

of implementing subnet roaming the basics of the two 

methods can be described in general terms. 

VLAN tunneling involves configuring a virtual 

connection between the AP and the WLAN switch 

through the use of packet-level “tags” on the data 

packets related to theAP. The tags define a virtual 

“tunnel” that conceptually acts like a separate network 

within the network. In this case, the VLAN existing as a 

completely separate network, is 

a single IP subnet that extends through the switches 

and routers in the network, transcending the actual IP 

routed infrastructure of the actual physical network. 

The user obtains an IP address that’s consistent with 

the VLAN and the VLAN extends throughout the entire 

corporate campus. 

Mobile IP is a technology that is defined by various 

Internet request for comments (RFCs) and has been a 

standard in the wired world for many years. A router that 


supports mobile IP has special software running in it that 

listens for an attempt on the part of a mobile client device 

to contact the “home” router (the router in the other 

building.) The mobile IP software (called foreign agent 

software) pretends to be the router in the “other” building 

and the client believes it’s still on the original subnet. The 

foreign agent software then sends the data packet back to 

the original, home router where the data is placed on the 

home network for delivery to the final destination. 

In one case, the routers must support VLAN 

tunneling—in the other case, 

the routers must support mobile 

IP. Some WLAN switch vendors 

offer clever, vendor-proprietary 

solutions to pass traffic back from 

remote APs to the WLAN switch 

with a minimum of router and 

switch reconfiguration. 

What should be evident 

in this discussion is that there 

are complexities in the campus 

environment that are minimized 

in the metro-area environment. 

By the same token, there are 

challenges in the metro-area 

mobile environment that are not 

present on the campus. 

While medical data rate requirements are typically low, 

there is often the requirement for wireless VoIP in the 

hospital. This demands slightly higher data rates but, 

more importantly, it requires absolutely high-quality 

connections with a minimum of “jitter” (variance in the 

rate of delivery of data packets). Even a small amount 

of environmental noise or interference can dramatically 

introduce jitter to a wireless network which, while it won’t 

negatively impact data transfer, will wreak havoc on a 

VoIP system. 

The In-Building User 

Corporate enterprises have 

users that meet in conference 

rooms, roam to different parts of 

the building or different building 

floors, and generally demand 

high-speed data transfer over 

the wireless network They’re 

comparing the 1 Mb/s to 30 Mb/s 

Wi-Fi data throughput rates to 

the 100 Mb/s wired Ethernet 

data rates. (Remember that data 

throughput for IEEE 802.11b/g 

and 802.11a is generally half the 

“modulation rate” of 11 Mb/s or 

54 Mb/s or less.) 

Nurses and doctors in a 

hospital using computer on 

wheels patient monitoring 

and management mobile carts 

have very low data throughput 

requirements. They are looking 

up patient medical information 

and uploading blood pressure, 

temperature, and other datarelated 

information to a server. 

What’s at the core of your fiber? 

Chances are you don’t know. Some fiber manufacturers 

don’t specify bandwidth in the critical center region of 

the fiber. But when you select OFS’ LaserWave ® OM3 

fiber, you get outstanding performance right down to 

the core. LaserWave fiber delivers DMD specified in the 

0 – 5 micron range and up to twice the bandwidth for 

lasers that launch power in the fiber’s center. Enjoy fast, 

reliable transmission and easier connectivity. To learn more, 

ask your cabler about OFS or visit ofsoptics.com/fiber. 


A computer-on-wheels medical cart used in hospital 

environments 

In the hospitality sector, hotel guests are typically 

provided with minimum bit-rate service at the edges of 

coverage areas. One strong challenge in hospitality relates 

to capacity planning. Today’s guest may be satisfied with a 

1 Mb/s connection (512 kb/s throughput) to check email 

and lookup an address on an Internet map. In the near 

future, , that same guest will expect VoIP roaming for their 

cellular handset, iPhone, or other wireless PDA. They will 

expect support for streaming video so they can watch 

their favorite movie. The hospitality sector is probably 

trailing when it comes to the future evolution of wireless 

networking. They have created networks that offer a 

minimal level of service and they are entering an era when 

users will demand high levels of service and capacity. 

We could detail warehouse and manufacturing 

networks, wireless video security systems, multi-tenant 

dwellings, school classroom buildings and more. At the 

end of the day, the bottom line always comes back to the 

bandwidth, jitter and coverage quality requirements of the 

end-user community. 

Developing an In-Building System Design 

You will be able to obtain specific engineering 

requirements from manufacturers of wireless VoIP 

equipment, wireless video cameras, or simply 

requirements regarding data throughput and the number 

of simultaneous users that will be active on the wireless 

network. From this you develop your set of performance 

metrics. Some representative of the kind of metrics you 

might develop include general office workers that load 

and save documents, spreadsheets, and other files that 

do not use wireless VoIP. The wireless network is used in 

addition to a wired Ethernet to every desktop. 

In this case you can assume a 10:1 oversubscription rate 

(meaning that only 1 in every 10 users will be active at 

any given moment). If each user is given 2 Mb/s of data 

throughput that implies that they’ll need at least 5.5 

Mb/s IEEE 802.11b modulation (or 6 Mb/s IEEE 802.1g). 

This implies that RF power levels of at least -80 dBm to 

-85 dBm will probably be required (depending on which 

vendor’s equipment is selected for the project.) A single 

AP can support roughly 20 simultaneous low-bit-rate users 

so, with the oversubscription rate, up to 200 users could 

be served with oneAP. In reality, one AP may provide 

coverage out to roughly a 24 m (80 ft) radius (at 5.5 Mb/ 

s) indoors. A 24 m (80 ft) radius is roughly a 1860 m 2 

(20,000 ft 2 ) area. This would give a 200 user community a 

3 m x 3 m (10 ft X 10 ft) workspace for each person. This 

scenario is realistic. 

If these same general office workers are going to use 

wireless VoIP then signal coverage must be provided 

at roughly -65 dBm to -70 dBm for most vendor’s 

VoIP handsets. The coverage radius probably drops to 

something approaching 15 m (50 ft), which shrinks the 

coverage zone to roughly 740 m 2 (8000 ft 2 ). The result is 

that four times more APs will be required to support VoIP 

compared to support for data only. Moreover, a single AP 

may only support between four and ten simultaneous 

VoIP calls (with some vendors making more generous 

claims). In this case, it may be the user density, rather 

than the RF signal strength, that becomes the limiting 

factor. If users occupy 9.3 m 2 (100 ft 2 )each (e.g., cubicles, 

offices, and hallway circulation space), and if you are 

using an AP that supports ten VoIP calls, then you’ll need 

an access point for every 93 m 2 (1000 ft 2 ). 

Assume the network requires support for streaming 

video. This may be from security cameras, users accessing 

YouTube.com or other on-line video sites, or because the 

corporate training department makes instructional videos 

available on the company’s intranet. A video stream may 

require a 1 Mb/s throughput. It turns out that the signal 

power levels required for wireless VoIP are greater than 

those required for streaming video so the VoIP design 

becomes the controlling factor. 

Wireless VoIP requires high power levels (-65 

dBm) to overcome noise and interference that would 

cause jitter and degrade call quality. Recall that jitter 

is the characteristic when data packets carrying voice 

conversations arrive at differing times and with 

different delays between them. VoIP is not particularly 

data intensive. Wireless, non-real-time video typically 

tolerates jitter because the video stream is buffered on 

the receiving end to smooth out variances in receive 

times. At -65 dBm (for the VoIP) a device will be 

operating at 54 Mb/s modulation for IEEE 802.11g or 

802.11a. This provides up to 30 Mb/s of throughput in 

the air. Hence, the 10 users connected to the AP share 30 

Mb/s and, even if they transfer data simultaneously, they 

each have 3 Mb/s of actual TCP/IP throughput. 

There are some specific variables that relate to each 

other. In any design and implementation you develop 

specifications based on user community requirements, 

manufacturer’s equipment specifications, and the 

results of an on-site RF survey or virtual RF survey 

using 3-dimensional RF CAD modeling and simulation 

software. The RF survey tells you how and where the 

signal will penetrate through the building, and what the 

signal power levels will be in each area. The vendor’s 

specifications tell you how the equipment will perform 

in the presence of each level of RF power. The user 

requirements tell you how much equipment will be 

necessary, and what wireless standards should be used, to 

provide sufficient bandwidth capacity, jitter limitations, 


and simultaneous access support. Then you pull the cable 

to the AP locations, hook everything up, and turn it on. 

A Contemporary “Gotcha” 

The disturbing aspect of these considerations is 

that often the requirements are based on current usage 

scenarios without due consideration for what’s coming 

on the horizon. You must consider the requirements that 

will be applied over the expected lifetime of the network. 

If a company installs a wireless system today they’re not 

going to want to rip it out in three years and replace it 

with something faster and better. That’s not to say that 

something faster and better won’t be available in three 

years. It’s to say that the network is going to have to 

support reasonable user’s requirements over a period of 

time that is acceptable to the finance department. 

Today, Windows Vista is on everyone’s mind. 

Microsoft has positioned Vista as the next great thing 

in the PC world. Buying a new PC without Vista verges 

on being difficult. Does that mean that every corporate 

network is planning to throw out all the old PC hardware 

than can’t support Vista and upgrade all the XP and 

Windows 2000 machines? Absolutely not. Windows XP is 

going to be around for quite some time. There are 

even some machines out there, still doing their 

BISCI_half page P_T Ad 8/13/07 4:59 PM Page 1 

originally intended jobs, running Windows 98! Wireless 

network technology has a similar story to tell. IEEE 

802.11g has been around for several years and all new 

wireless notebooks come with IEEE 802.11b/g radios. 

The security flaws with WEP (wired equivalent privacy) 

have been well-addressed by WPA (Wi-Fi protected access) 

and AES (Advanced Encryption Standard) 

Nonetheless, handheld inventory scanners that support 

only IEEE 802.11b with WEP-only encryption remain in 

service in the retail space and promise to delivery many 

more years of reliable use. 

The Local User 

In this category are standards related to the wireless 

replacement for printer, keyboard, and mouse cables. 

It’s here that wireless technologies like Bluetooth (IEEE 

802.14) connect headsets to cell phones, printers to 

desktop or notebook computers, and support wireless 

keyboards and mice. Ultra wideband (UWB) is an 

emerging standard in the local connectivity space. 

The Big-Picture Summary 

There are many wireless standards from which to 

choose, but the laws of physics shape each technology 

standard to be more appropriately suited to a particular 

Maximized flexibility. Minimized risk. 

3M Fire Barrier Pass-Through Devices are perfect for firestopping structures 

where electrical, data and communication cables or plumbing pipes pass through 

fire-rated walls or floors. These self-contained devices are designed to meet a wide variety 

of through-penetration firestop system requirements. Easy-to-install and re-enterable, for cable modifications or additions and with no need for 

caulks, 3M Fire Barrier Pass-Through Devices reduce construction costs while giving you peace of mind that your project is code-compliant. 

It’s a hassle-free method of fire proofing the life of any building while helping to protect the precious people and resources within it. 

For more information, contact 3M Building and Commercial Services Division at 1-800-328-1687 or go to www.3M.com/firestop. 3 

3M is a trademark of 3M. © 3M 2007. 


application. Remember the trade-offs: 

• To get longer range—You need more power, a more 

sensitive receiver, or you must reduce the bit-rate 

• To get higher throughput—You’ll get less range 

unless you either increase power or receiver 

sensitivity 

And (very important!) remember that the weaker 

transmitter or receiver becomes the limiting factor. A 

whiz-bang, high-power transmitter on a pole won’t help 

a weak notebook computer radio get its signal back to 

that pole. Range and throughput are always limited by 

the less capable side of the communications link. 

Today, and at least through Q1 2008, IEEE 802.11b/ 

g, 802.11a, and 3G cellular data solutions are solid 

potential solutions for wireless data. WiMAX is currently 

being deployed for point-to-point links at distances 

greater than 1.6 km(1 mi) and mobile WiMAX is starting 

to enter the marketplace. Look for more mobile WiMAX 

in 2009. There is a generally consistent relationship 

between data rates and range. When you go further 

you go slower. Hence, the maximum required data rate 

for a network will eliminate some standards from the 

list of possible selections for deployment because some 

standards won’t provide the required bit rates. 

3G cellular has a monthly subscription rate 

associated with it from AT&T, Sprint, Verizon Wireless, or 

whichever cellular carrier is used. Often, data access adds 

additional fees to the monthly bill. New cell phone plans 

(and hardware) that allow the phone to roam off the 3G 

network and onto an in-building Wi-Fi network mitigate 

the monthly costs but demand proper design support 

from the in-building network. 

Ultimately, the standards you choose will have 

to provide data rates, user density support, and jitter 

limitations that meet the specifications for the vendor’s 

equipment that you’re deploying. 

The option and combinations are not infinite, 

although sometimes they seem to be. Remember that 

there are a handful of variables that must be nailed down 

as part of a system design and implementation. The user 

community, the vendor’s equipment specifications, and 

the RF survey give you the values of the variables. The 

communication standards provide support for various 

levels of service. Put it all together, make the appropriate 

trade-offs, and you’ve got a successful RF system. • 

Joe Bardwell 

Joe Bardwell is chief scientist with Connect802 

Corporation, a systems integrator and wireless 

network design consulting firm based in California. 

Joe can be reached at +1 925.552.0802 or at 

joe@Connect802.com. 

Advanced OSP Education 

for Emerging Technologies 

www.bicsi.org 

Let a world-renowned leader teach you what you need to know to excel in the field of outside plant. 

BICSI’s line of OSP courses includes: •OSP100: Introduction to Outside Plant 

•OSP110: Outside Plant Design 

•OSP200: OSP Specialty Design Review 

Our classes are geared to prepare you for BICSI’s prestigious Registered Communications Distribution 

Designer (RCDD ® )/OSP Specialty, awarded to those individuals who have demonstrated expertise 

in OSP design. To learn more, visit www.bicsi.org or call 800.242.7405 (USA and Canada tollfree) 

or +1 813.979.1991.

Using the New ANSI/TIA/EIA-606-A Label Standard as a Way to ...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?