Subject: RE: IETF Wireless LAN history

From: Christian Huitema <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2000 10:59:24 -0700

OK, we have come to use and like the 802.11 nets at the IETF meeting. What
will happen if many attendees also turn up BlueTooth devices? AFAIK, they
operate on the same frequency band, and the BT devices emit enough noise to
seriously hamper 802.11 operation!

Christian Huitema

---

From: Randy Bush <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2000 11:22:42 -0700

> operate on the same frequency band, and the BT devices emit enough noise
> to seriously hamper 802.11 operation!

simple, we take them out and have them shot for attacking critical network
infrastructure

---

From: "RL 'Bob' Morgan" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2000 11:34:35 -0700 (PDT)

> OK, we have come to use and like the 802.11 nets at the IETF meeting.
> What will happen if many attendees also turn up BlueTooth devices?
> AFAIK, they operate on the same frequency band, and the BT devices
> emit enough noise to seriously hamper 802.11 operation!

Right, that was why Dan brought this up.  It is said that a likely
approach if/when Bluetooth starts to proliferate is for all 802.11 sites
currently using 2.4Ghz to migrate to 5Ghz; hence yet more card purchases
for IETF attendees at some point.  I've heard of corporate installations
where access point locations were designed with 5Ghz diameters in mind
even though 2.4Ghz is being installed today.  The idea that Bluetooth and
2.4Ghz 802.11 be designed to coexist seems to be getting less attention
for some reason.

 - RL "Bob"

---

From: "Angelos D. Keromytis" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2000 14:34:04 -0400

In message <[email-masked]
>seriously hamper 802.11 operation!

BT has a very, very short range, so (supposedly) it shouldn't hurt anyone's
wavelan performance (that's the theory anyhow).
-Angelos

---

From: John Stracke <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2000 15:11:29 -0400

> simple, we take them out and have them shot for attacking critical network

Don't be silly.  We can't kill people for that.  We'll shoot the *devices*.

--
/==============================================================\
|John Stracke    | http://www.ecal.com |My opinions are my own.|
|Chief Scientist |=============================================|
|eCal Corp.      |Until you stalk and overrun, you can't devour|
[email-masked]|anyone. --Hobbes                             |
\==============================================================/

---

From: [email-masked]
Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2000 15:28:58 -0400

> Don't be silly.  We can't kill people for that.  We'll shoot the *devices*.

If 100 people buy offending devices, you use 100 bullets right away.  And that
only solves the problem until they find a way to contact wwww.RealFastCards.com
and order new ones - at which point you need 100 more bullets.

Or you can use *one* bullet, and watch the other 99 devices get disconnected
very quickly ;)

For some reason, my manager hasn't approved this technique as a cost-cutting
move - I'm not sure why... ;)

-- 
				Valdis Kletnieks
				Operating Systems Analyst
				Virginia Tech

---

From: Phil Neumiller <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2000 14:44:18 -0500

Its very likely that within a year, almost all cellular phones will have BT in
them.  The interference issues between 802.11 and BT are a problem.  BT tends
to win in this battle. So, BT is something folks will probably need to learn
to live with.