5 ms·

I got the impression this is Amazon providing Airave-type "femotcells" that emit a low-powered cellular signal and use your wired network for calls and data ser

I got the impression this is Amazon providing Airave-type "femotcells" that emit a low-powered cellular signal and use your wired network for calls and data service. Seems to also imply Amazon would be providing SIM cards. I'm not sure of the advantage of this over Wi-Fi, though, except to get devices that have no other option other than cellular connectivity to be forced to go over your own network. > Cellular technology such as 4G/LTE and 5G augments existing networks with higher bandwidth, lower latency, and reliable long-range coverage to an increasing number of devices. With AWS Private 5G, you can build private cellular networks to take advantage of the technology benefits of 5G while maintaining the security and granular application and device controls of a private network. That's from the Amazon website. Why not just deploy Wi-Fi?

bri3d 5y ago
Large-scale, long range Amazon-managed 5G deployment should be easier than large-scale WiFi deployment, at least if the promises are accurate. Especially outdoors where deploying a large number of base stations is challenging. Lower frequencies mean improved building material penetration in environments like warehouses and docks, meaning fewer base stations are necessary. Generally 5G also supports higher density than WiFi for use cases like hotels and conventions, where too many devices on too few channels will quickly destroy WiFi functionality. WiFi is pretty crappy for many-device midrange solutions (let's say a dockyard, a 1km long facility with 1000 employees).
- ahaseeb 5y ago
  Commercial deployments on 5G are difficult because it's fairly new . Wifi is very tried and tested. It'll take some time to get practical experience but once done, it'll be easier than Wifi
saltminer 5y ago
> Why not just deploy Wi-Fi? Everyone has a potential wifi access point in their pocket. The only people who have the ability to run their own cellular networks are either a) respectful of frequency allocations or b) know a thing or two about SDR. Interfering with 5G systems is difficult to do on accident and has a much higher barrier to entry to do intentionally. And this is important for one of the use cases listed in the PDF: sports and entertainment venues. When you have a large venue, you will always have people who are using their phones as wifi hotspots (many of them having simply forgotten to turn them off), and this eats into valuable airtime. You can have your APs send deauth packets to rogue networks, but you could still end up not having enough bandwidth for your own purposes. I'm reminded of an article I read about the unveiling of the first iPhone[0]: > The software in the iPhone’s Wi-Fi radio was so unstable that Grignon and his team had to extend the phones’ antennas by connecting them to wires running offstage so the wireless signal wouldn’t have to travel as far. And audience members had to be prevented from getting on the frequency being used. “Even if the base station’s ID was hidden” — that is, not showing up when laptops scanned for Wi-Fi signals — “you had 5,000 nerds in the audience,” Grignon says. “They would have figured out how to hack into the signal.” The solution, he says, was to tweak the AirPort software so that it seemed to be operating in Japan instead of the United States. Japanese Wi-Fi uses some frequencies that are not permitted in the U.S. While wifi has come a long way since 2007, if you need a reliable, high bandwidth system in an environment with lots of interference, this is a good choice. [0]: https://www.nytimes.com/2013/10/06/magazine/and-then-steve-said-let-there-be-an-iphone.html https://www.nytimes.com/2013/10/06/magazine/and-then-steve-s... Edit: this comment has some more good reasons for why you would use this over wifi: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29398181 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29398181
ap6 5y ago
I think the whole point of the service is "convenience". If deploying private 5g is as convenient as deploying Wi-Fi, why not just deploy private 5g? We all like Wi-Fi because we can attach a Wi-Fi router to an internet link and it "just works". Similarly, if you can make a mobile network "just work", you are getting the same functionality plus the benefits you outlined. This may not seem very impressive to someone who has no need to support large Wi-Fi deployments, like a typical home or office wireless network. These are not the cases this service is targeting anyway. The target customers are enterprises that are managing large-scale fully-automated sites like warehouses and factories that need to support 10s-100s of thousands of IOT devices which may include some time-critical systems that need ultra-low-latency reliable connections to a backend. Today these enterprises have to rent a 4g network from a telecom provider to enable these sites which takes months of planning and is expensive to operate and extend. This is where the "convenience" becomes a game-changer. Using a private-5g service, an enterprise can deploy new large-scale networks in days, manage the networks like just another cloud resource, and extend the network at will. I presume the pricing model for the service will also be much more affordable where instead of paying for each end-user (IOT device), you'd likely be only charged for your data usage on pay-as-you-go basis.
ahaseeb 5y ago
5G will displace WiFi. 5G has better authentication, handshake etc

bri3d 5y ago

Large-scale, long range Amazon-managed 5G deployment should be easier than large-scale WiFi deployment, at least if the promises are accurate. Especially outdoors where deploying a large number of base stations is challenging. Lower frequencies mean improved building material penetration in environments like warehouses and docks, meaning fewer base stations are necessary. Generally 5G also supports higher density than WiFi for use cases like hotels and conventions, where too many devices on too few channels will quickly destroy WiFi functionality. WiFi is pretty crappy for many-device midrange solutions (let's say a dockyard, a 1km long facility with 1000 employees).

ahaseeb 5y ago
Commercial deployments on 5G are difficult because it's fairly new . Wifi is very tried and tested. It'll take some time to get practical experience but once done, it'll be easier than Wifi

saltminer 5y ago

> Why not just deploy Wi-Fi? Everyone has a potential wifi access point in their pocket. The only people who have the ability to run their own cellular networks are either a) respectful of frequency allocations or b) know a thing or two about SDR. Interfering with 5G systems is difficult to do on accident and has a much higher barrier to entry to do intentionally. And this is important for one of the use cases listed in the PDF: sports and entertainment venues. When you have a large venue, you will always have people who are using their phones as wifi hotspots (many of them having simply forgotten to turn them off), and this eats into valuable airtime. You can have your APs send deauth packets to rogue networks, but you could still end up not having enough bandwidth for your own purposes. I'm reminded of an article I read about the unveiling of the first iPhone[0]: > The software in the iPhone’s Wi-Fi radio was so unstable that Grignon and his team had to extend the phones’ antennas by connecting them to wires running offstage so the wireless signal wouldn’t have to travel as far. And audience members had to be prevented from getting on the frequency being used. “Even if the base station’s ID was hidden” — that is, not showing up when laptops scanned for Wi-Fi signals — “you had 5,000 nerds in the audience,” Grignon says. “They would have figured out how to hack into the signal.” The solution, he says, was to tweak the AirPort software so that it seemed to be operating in Japan instead of the United States. Japanese Wi-Fi uses some frequencies that are not permitted in the U.S. While wifi has come a long way since 2007, if you need a reliable, high bandwidth system in an environment with lots of interference, this is a good choice. [0]: https://www.nytimes.com/2013/10/06/magazine/and-then-steve-said-let-there-be-an-iphone.html https://www.nytimes.com/2013/10/06/magazine/and-then-steve-s... Edit: this comment has some more good reasons for why you would use this over wifi: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29398181 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29398181

ap6 5y ago

I think the whole point of the service is "convenience". If deploying private 5g is as convenient as deploying Wi-Fi, why not just deploy private 5g? We all like Wi-Fi because we can attach a Wi-Fi router to an internet link and it "just works". Similarly, if you can make a mobile network "just work", you are getting the same functionality plus the benefits you outlined. This may not seem very impressive to someone who has no need to support large Wi-Fi deployments, like a typical home or office wireless network. These are not the cases this service is targeting anyway. The target customers are enterprises that are managing large-scale fully-automated sites like warehouses and factories that need to support 10s-100s of thousands of IOT devices which may include some time-critical systems that need ultra-low-latency reliable connections to a backend. Today these enterprises have to rent a 4g network from a telecom provider to enable these sites which takes months of planning and is expensive to operate and extend. This is where the "convenience" becomes a game-changer. Using a private-5g service, an enterprise can deploy new large-scale networks in days, manage the networks like just another cloud resource, and extend the network at will. I presume the pricing model for the service will also be much more affordable where instead of paying for each end-user (IOT device), you'd likely be only charged for your data usage on pay-as-you-go basis.

ahaseeb 5y ago

5G will displace WiFi. 5G has better authentication, handshake etc