Re: Roadmap question

[Dan Williams <dcbw redhat com>]

On Tue, 2007-01-23 at 10:11 -0800, Shane Bryan wrote:
> On 1/23/07, Dan Williams <dcbw redhat com> wrote:
>         On Tue, 2007-01-23 at 09:25 -0800, Shane Bryan wrote:
>         > Does NM have plans (near or far) to also manage connections
>         to
>         > WiMax/WMAN (802.16) networks and/or Digital Cellular (aka
>         WWAN)
>         > networks?
>         
>         Both; but certainly cellular before WiMAX.  What the cell bits
>         require
>         is the integrated PPP support, which we're working on.
> 
> Is there a release target for PPP or is the support more
> "opportunistic".  IOW, is anyone working on it now with good progress
> towards, say, the next release, or is it lower priority to other
> objectives and gets attention as time permits?  Just trying to get a
> full understanding, not questioning anyones priorities or schedule. 

It would be nice to get it into 0.7, but I'm not sure that's possible in
the timeframe.  It's pretty much #4 on the list of stuff to do, and only
the top 3 are "blockers" for a 0.7 release.

>         I'd really like to support WiMAX in the future too, but we'll
>         need quite 
>         a few things before that happens.  First, we need to know what
>         the
>         interface to the card looks like.  Second, how much of the
>         stack will be
>         running in firmware versus how much will be running on the
>         host.  Third, 
>         how to tune various things that might need tuning, and fourth,
>         we need
>         drivers for WiMAX cards :)
> 
> Heh, details, details...
> 
> On that note, what are people hearing about OSS based drivers for
> these devices.  I can name a few that are somming out with PCMCIA or
> SOC based solutions in the next year or two: 
>       * Intel Rosedale 2 (802.16d/e combined)
>       * Sequans' SQN1110 SOC
>       * ZyXEL WiMax PCMCIA
>       * Beceem - Apparently has a ref design kit with PCMCIA card
>         prototypes
> Any of these promise OSS Drivers? 

I have heard nobody promise OSS drivers for WiMAX.  Furthermore, since
the spectrum is _licensed_ spectrum, I wouldn't expect quite as much
willingness from manufacturers or providers (like Sprint or Clearwire)
to release/allow OSS implementations of some stuff.  There is quite a
big difference here between licensed/unlicensed in what companies might
do to protect the integrity of the network.

> I know that if Intel makes WiMax part of their Centrino brand, then
> they have usually provided base functionality in some form of OSS
> driver (even if it has firmware chunks or user space proprietary
> code).  What about other manufacturers? 

Unsure.  Nobody has publicly discussed any plans WRT WiMAX and Linux yet
AFAIK.

>         Companies like Sprint have committed to "mobile" WiMAX
>         (802.16e) as
>         their 4G cellular standard, and I would like to support them
>         in the same
>         manner as I'd like to support current GSM/CDMA cellular cards.
>  
> 
>         > I've seen recent announcements of WiMax deployments in the
>         Portland,
>         > OR area and other places around the world, and was curious
>         if these
>         > wireless networks (in the functional sense of the word)
>         were 
>         > considered in scope for what NM is designed for, or is this
>         lower
>         > level than NM ( i.e. does it need to be implimented in
>         wireless tools
>         > or dscape or ???)?
>         
>         Well, WiMAX bits would certainly require a configuration
>         interface of 
>         some kind to be able to receive stuff like strength and maybe
>         other
>         tunables.  But GSM/CDMA cards get away without this sort of
>         thing
>         because they simply present a serial interface that you can
>         dial and
>         talk PPP over.
> 
> Yeah, this is what I was thinking...that it's not all just kernel
> space.  Authentication methodologies might differ enough to require UI
> changes in the collection of authentication information, correct?
> What else? 

Unsure, since nobody has really talked about a Linux WiMAX stack yet.
But it's probably combination of kernel device drivers and userland
configuration dialing software.

>         > If not NM, is anyone aware of other projects or companies
>         working on
>         > WiMax and WWAN connection manager/configuration tools
>         similar to what 
>         > NM is doing for WLAN?
>         
>         The plan is to support the wider-area regulated frequency
>         networks in
>         much the same way as WLANs are right now, with the caveat that
>         they
>         never connect automatically unless you tell the configuration
>         to do so, 
>         unlike current WLAN devices.
> 
> Why the caveat?  Perceived risk?  Assumption that more local network
> is more secure, appropriate, or faster?  Just curious.

Neither.  It's more that current cellular providers usually charge per
kilobyte for the majority of their data plans.  Wifi providers like
T-Mobile usually do it by the day, and lock you out after your time has
expired.

That's _not_ traditionally been the case with cellular companies.  Not
everyone buys the "unlimited" plans, and in some cases (ie, Verizon)
"unlimited" actually means "unlimited, but with a 5GB/month unstated
limit".  So it's pretty much irresponsible to turn on cellular
autoconnection by default.  I wouldn't expect the pricing model of
_mobile_ WiMAX to be all that different from cellular.

Obviously there will be a checkbox somewhere that you can check to
autoconnect and use your cell card over the wifi, it just won't be
checked by default.

> If I am connected to a the "Metropolis" WiMax network at home, why
> would it be assumed that I would want to connect to $tarbuck$ WiFi
> instead when I am enjoying my morning coffee?  Wouldn't network
> consistancy be desirable, I mean that's one of the key selling
> features of Mobile WiMax isn't it? 

Right; but do you really want to autoconnect and have it "always on" and
used when you have, say, a 40MB/month limit with charges of $1/MB over
that?  That's Sprint's "lite" plan right now, for example.

Dan