4 ms·

I was hoping the article would provide more detail for why this is better or different from existing microwave radio methods. Higher bandwidth appears to the a

I was hoping the article would provide more detail for why this is better or different from existing microwave radio methods. Higher bandwidth appears to the answer. It appears that some laser systems feature a hybrid system with laser and rf technologies, and will automatically downgrade to RF when weather, pollution, or other obstructions come up. http://www.lightpointe.com/airebridge-lx-1.html http://www.lightpointe.com/airebridge-lx-1.html

deepnotderp 9y ago
Higher bandwidth maybe?
- KirinDave 9y ago
  Absolutely not. There's a lot of competition for the non-visible spectrum at useful levels. It's only natural we'd start to move up. Also, as your wavelength gets smaller it gets cheaper to start compressing signals in ways that don't interfere over the same physical area.
sandworm101 9y ago
Be more pragmatic. It's about licensing. The microwave frequencies are licensed. Laser frequencies are not. Want to setup a network without first securing government permission, the obvious choice is laser. This is also a primary reason COPs switch to lasers for speed enforcement. The bandwidth of individual connections is only half the equation, and largely irrelevant imho. What matters for the network is the lack of interference. Laser connections can spider across a city without real risk of contaminating one signal with another. So even if the point-to-point bandwidth is the same, the total potential bandwidth of the installed network will be much higher.
- oktobercrisis 9y ago
  There are a lot of microwave connections (E.G. 24Ghz, 5.7Ghz) that are in the unlicensed spectrum. We are using these extensively in our network. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ISM_band https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ISM_band
  - sandworm101 9y ago
    Unlicensed, but not unregulated. There are very detailed limitations on transmitter/antenna powers in those areas, limitations that are very country-specific. The rules for laser, where they exist, are more akin to "don't burn our people's eyes".
- ethagknight 9y ago
  I feel like licensing is even less pragmatic than technological capability and limitation. Ubiquiti's 2.4ghz and 5ghz 'air fiber' radios are approved for use in India, license free, and those spectrums are license free under certain requirements. There is no difference between laser and microwave devices for in this use case, except that laser has higher speed but lower persistence in line of site. https://community.ubnt.com/t5/airFiber/Airfiber-in-India/m-p/1267171/highlight/true#M21328 https://community.ubnt.com/t5/airFiber/Airfiber-in-India/m-p... EDIT: maybe a missing detail is that “AirFiber” and similar products are point to point comm devices. So each pair of AirFiber units is a 1.2+ gbps link, same as a laser set up. You may be confusing with an alternate PtMP radio setup.
- slovette 9y ago
  No. Plenty of Spectrum and more will eventually be available. This is about public ear. We all want to hear about some magic tech saving our internet’s ass. It’s not going to happen. The solve is in the change of business models of ISPs, not in the tech that brings it to doorsteps. We have the tech, we need a shift in how these companies make money.
scott00 9y ago
I was wondering that myself. At least at a first pass higher bandwidth doesn't look like an advantage. The system you link to promises up to 2 Gbps, the same as a Ubiquiti AF24HD microwave system. Perhaps it's easier to put several of these on the same pole, and that's how you get the higher bandwidth?
slovette 9y ago
Yeah, expect laser won’t work any better than RF in real world applicability. We’re doing symmetrical 2.5Gbps to CPE using RF and I can’t, in the least bit, see how and why a laser may make for a better solution fit in any scenario. There’s a point when a hard wired fiber line just makes sense and it’s all postering to put out press releases about some bs laser solution that supposed to somehow be better than RF but less difficult/expensive than just running a wire.

deepnotderp 9y ago

Higher bandwidth maybe?

KirinDave 9y ago
Absolutely not. There's a lot of competition for the non-visible spectrum at useful levels. It's only natural we'd start to move up. Also, as your wavelength gets smaller it gets cheaper to start compressing signals in ways that don't interfere over the same physical area.

sandworm101 9y ago

Be more pragmatic. It's about licensing. The microwave frequencies are licensed. Laser frequencies are not. Want to setup a network without first securing government permission, the obvious choice is laser. This is also a primary reason COPs switch to lasers for speed enforcement. The bandwidth of individual connections is only half the equation, and largely irrelevant imho. What matters for the network is the lack of interference. Laser connections can spider across a city without real risk of contaminating one signal with another. So even if the point-to-point bandwidth is the same, the total potential bandwidth of the installed network will be much higher.

oktobercrisis 9y ago
There are a lot of microwave connections (E.G. 24Ghz, 5.7Ghz) that are in the unlicensed spectrum. We are using these extensively in our network. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ISM_band https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ISM_band
- sandworm101 9y ago
  Unlicensed, but not unregulated. There are very detailed limitations on transmitter/antenna powers in those areas, limitations that are very country-specific. The rules for laser, where they exist, are more akin to "don't burn our people's eyes".
ethagknight 9y ago
I feel like licensing is even less pragmatic than technological capability and limitation. Ubiquiti's 2.4ghz and 5ghz 'air fiber' radios are approved for use in India, license free, and those spectrums are license free under certain requirements. There is no difference between laser and microwave devices for in this use case, except that laser has higher speed but lower persistence in line of site. https://community.ubnt.com/t5/airFiber/Airfiber-in-India/m-p/1267171/highlight/true#M21328 https://community.ubnt.com/t5/airFiber/Airfiber-in-India/m-p... EDIT: maybe a missing detail is that “AirFiber” and similar products are point to point comm devices. So each pair of AirFiber units is a 1.2+ gbps link, same as a laser set up. You may be confusing with an alternate PtMP radio setup.
slovette 9y ago
No. Plenty of Spectrum and more will eventually be available. This is about public ear. We all want to hear about some magic tech saving our internet’s ass. It’s not going to happen. The solve is in the change of business models of ISPs, not in the tech that brings it to doorsteps. We have the tech, we need a shift in how these companies make money.

scott00 9y ago

I was wondering that myself. At least at a first pass higher bandwidth doesn't look like an advantage. The system you link to promises up to 2 Gbps, the same as a Ubiquiti AF24HD microwave system. Perhaps it's easier to put several of these on the same pole, and that's how you get the higher bandwidth?

slovette 9y ago

Yeah, expect laser won’t work any better than RF in real world applicability. We’re doing symmetrical 2.5Gbps to CPE using RF and I can’t, in the least bit, see how and why a laser may make for a better solution fit in any scenario. There’s a point when a hard wired fiber line just makes sense and it’s all postering to put out press releases about some bs laser solution that supposed to somehow be better than RF but less difficult/expensive than just running a wire.