What is the difference between wimax and canopy

With Canopy the AP is always transmitting, even if there is no data for the frames. This makes it very destructive to WiFi-based equipment. Canopy will overpower anything else, and it will win as the FSK coding is so robust. Not totally sure on the inner workings of WiMAX, it is a technology rooted in cellphone land. OK, thanks. You have said that the Canopy FSK coding is robust so it works well.

Would the 5. On the same channel? On separate channels? With some 5Mhz overlap channels? Whereas with some This is generally the real source of complaints from operators regarding Canopy. The old story is that once upon a time, Provider A was operating with low power high modulation product like Alvarion and Provider B shows up with Canopy. Provider B has no requirement to actually coordinate a frequency plan with Provider A because the Canopy just drowns out everything else.

Properly planned to avoid interference it works fine. Canopy does very well as far as behaving as expected, it stays within the indicated band with predictable rolloff. We operate 2. As a provider, the same aspect is a huge advantage in certain situations. On a smaller scale, a more robust transmission is great in the unlicensed bands with every idiot on the planet with baby monitors, wireless routers, and video senders.

Like you mention bandwidth is a big issue… 14 Mbps on a 20 MHz 2. The MHz product is even worse - you get 3 channels capable of 4 Mbps each, max. For example FSK wins over If you have OFDM competing with OFDM at the same power level and on the same frequency, both devices will have a huge problem and problems will be apparent on both sides. Thanks for the reply. The results obtained from the development and experimental setup of this architecture show that the processing times for the resource reservations, both in the resource control modules and WiMAX equipments are small, even for a large number of simultaneous reservation requests, which enable the use of WiMAX in real-time environments with high mobility scenarios.

The chapter is organized as follows. Section 2 briefly describes both the IEEE Section 5 describes a practical use case of the WXL system, developed in the WEIRD project, whereas Section 6 discusses the experimental results obtained, as well as our test methodology. Finally, Section 7 concludes this chapter. This section starts by briefly introducing the IEEE The IEEE Figure 1 illustrates the IEEE The classifier is based on a set of packet matching criteria applied to each packet.

It consists of some protocol-specific fields, such as IP and Ethernet addresses, a classifier priority and a reference to a specific connection. Each connection has a specific service flow associated providing the necessary QoS requirements for that packet. If no classifier is found for a specific packet, the packet can be discarded, sent on a default connection or a new dedicated connection can be established. It receives packets arriving from the CS and is responsible for the most important MAC functions, such as system access, construction and transmission of MAC PDUs, scheduling services management, bandwidth allocation and contention resolution.

The Associated with each connection is a Service Flow SF and a scheduling service. Five scheduling services are supported by IEEE Finally, the Security Sublayer is the last sublayer from the MAC layer, providing authentication and security mechanisms.

Since the IEEE In particular, Detailed information about each one of the aforementioned primitives can be found in the IEEE Using this model, multiple implementation options for each functional entity are allowed, while maintaining interoperability using the RPs.

The main goal of IEEE Towards this aim, it defines a Media Independent Handover MIH framework, which provides standardized interfaces between the access technologies and the mobility protocols from the higher layers in the protocol stack. MIES provides event reporting such as dynamic changes in link conditions, link status and link quality.

Multiple higher layer entities may be interested in these events at the same time, so these events may need to be sent to multiple destinations. Finally, MIIS provides a framework by which a MIHF located at the MS or at the network side may discover and obtain network information within a geographical area to facilitate handovers. The objective is to acquire a global view of all heterogeneous networks in the area in order optimize seamless handovers when roaming across these networks.

Figure 3 presents the Nowadays, standardized mechanisms for both network layer and link layer are already in place. However, one of the major gaps is the inter-layer connectivity, also known as cross-layer, between the network and the link layer functions. One particular example is the WiMAX access technology, which requires an efficient communication with the network layer to exploit all its functionalities.

To interact with the network layer, the WXL provides a set of dedicated interfaces, known as WXL Upper Interfaces , comprising, among others, support for QoS, mobility, accounting and security. Likewise, the WXL Lower Interfaces also encompass several interfaces to interact with the link layer technologies.

As described in Section 2, Nevertheless, we cannot assume beforehand that all WiMAX systems support the WXL System Architecture. The functionalities provided by the WXL system are grouped on different management services. As defined in the IEEE This QoS parameter set is the preparation to subsequently activate the flow. Depending on the QoS parameters set, a specific service flow will have a status associated. The following service flow statuses are defined and supported in the WXL system:.

Provisioned Service Flow : created via provisioning by, for example, the network management system. To manage the service flows and their status, both static and dynamic models are defined. In this case, the service flow must pass through all the existing status Provisioned and Admitted until it reaches the Active one.

In the dynamic model, the service flow can be directly activated without traversing the remaining status. This model is suitable for real-time services that require instantaneous allocations of service flows on the WiMAX path. If enough resources are available, the service reservation is accepted. Eircom's recent thawing on the issue of allowing other broadband providers into its exchanges and the Government's announcement of the National Broadband Scheme all point to a future where anyone in Ireland who wants broadband will be able to get it.

And, while these advances are taking place at a national level, smaller wireless providers are not letting the grass grow under their feet and are bringing broadband to rural communities. Last Mile Broadband, which has a licence to provide wireless services in the northern half of the State, this week launched its WiMax-based services in the midlands.

Ultimately it plans to roll out WiMax broadband to more than locations in 17 counties, including Cavan, Laois, Leitrim, Mayo, Monaghan and Roscommon. Separately, Ice Broadband, founded by technology industry veteran Fran Rooney, has purchased Canopy wireless technology from Motorola, which operates in an unlicensed part of the radio spectrum. Mr Rooney says that Ice, which already provides services in 30 towns around Ireland, will make broadband available in another 30 towns over the next six weeks.

He says that the company chose Motorola's proprietary Canopy technology primarily because it can be rolled out in rural towns in a matter of weeks. What are you going to do? Dig up the whole country to provide broadband? In contrast, he says, Ice simply installs a relatively small radio antenna on a high point to provide coverage to a whole town. He says that the alternatives are more expensive mobile 3G technology or WiMax, which require "massive infrastructure investments".

John Gibbons, a director of Last Mile, admits that becoming the first service provider to deploy WiMax commercially has been a painful process, primarily because the technology is still maturing. The upside is that Last Mile's services are now based on an international standard.