
Wi-Fi Alliance introduces low power, long range Wi-Fi HaLow - daegloe
http://www.wi-fi.org/news-events/newsroom/wi-fi-alliance-introduces-low-power-long-range-wi-fi-halow
======
blhack
There used to be a good wikipedia article about LoraWan, which is better than
this (for IoT) in just about every way, but it has been replaced with this:
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LoRaWAN](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LoRaWAN)

LoraWan consumes power at a similar rate that BLE does, except it has a 20km
range. You're talking about months (or even years, depending on your interval)
of usefulness out of a CR2032 coincell battery.

Sidenote: the removal of the wikipedia page on this irks me more than it
probably should. They're claiming a copyright problem because some of the text
of the page was taken _from the Lora Alliance 's official website_.

[https://www.lora-alliance.org/What-Is-LoRa/Technology](https://www.lora-
alliance.org/What-Is-LoRa/Technology)

~~~
mschuster91
> They're claiming a copyright problem because some of the text of the page
> was taken from the Lora Alliance's official website.

Stolen content (i.e. content not explicitly licensed as GFDL/CC by the author)
is stolen content.

~~~
blhack
>Stolen content (i.e. content not explicitly licensed as GFDL/CC by the
author) is stolen content.

Do you mean by wikipedia's definition of stolen? Because some things, like for
instance: the description of Lora taken from the website that exists to
provide descriptions of Lora to people, has an _implicit_ usability.

Like I said, this irked me more than it probably should. I totally get
sometimes stuff will get caught in the margins.

~~~
mschuster91
Wikipedia's mission is NOT about usability, but to provide an encyclopedia
that can be used, edited, forked, reproduced EVERYWHERE without anyone having
to fear lawyer attacks.

It's not a "free as in free beer" encyclopedia, it's a "free as in truly free"
encyclopedia.

(Yes I know that this is only valid for the text content, images (e.g. logos)
and screenshots are not free but used under different legal regimes in
different countries)

~~~
sangnoir
> Wikipedia's mission is NOT about usability, but to provide an encyclopedia
> that can be used, edited, forked, reproduced EVERYWHERE _without anyone
> having to fear lawyer attacks._

To that, I say [citation needed]. Where in their mission statement do they
state this particular stance on lawyer attacks?

------
Kadin
It looks neat, but it's hard not to be cynical about yet another competing
standard for low-power "smart home" / IoT-type devices, just to muddy the
ZigBee vs. Z-Wave vs. BT LE Longrange vs. conventional WiFi waters a bit more.

Not saying there's anything wrong with the protocol per se; it's probably
perfectly fine. But the lack of widespread standardization in the 900MHz ISM
low power space is really crippling what could otherwise be a robust market
for smart devices. That's the key problem, rather than anything technical, and
adding yet another option for hardware designers to choose from seems unlikely
to improve things in the near future.

~~~
roymurdock
Relevant xkcd:

[https://xkcd.com/927/](https://xkcd.com/927/)

~~~
abrookewood
Are we really downvoting xkcd? I don't see anything wrong with a little bit of
humour on HN.

~~~
MBCook
That comic is a trope at this point. Any discussion of standards includes it.

The comment didn't add anything. If it was a more substantive comment and
mentioned the comic you'd have a point.

But the comment might as well be a copy and paste job. It's not really adding
to the discussion.

I mean just from the discussion and the letters XKCD I knew which comic it
was.

~~~
nitrogen
[https://xkcd.com/1053/](https://xkcd.com/1053/)

------
MetricMike
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/33-centimeter_band](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/33-centimeter_band)
has more info on the 900MHz band they're using, which is an odd choice because
it isn't recognized outside Region 2 (Americas).

~~~
Daneel_
900MHz seems a curious choice to me as an Australian, because I know my mobile
phone uses 850 and 900MHz to talk to the mobile towers. Attempting to use
900MHz for wifi wouldn't get you very far due to all the interference.

~~~
lovelearning
Not to mention all the regulatory hurdles.

------
ausjke
[http://www.afar.net/tutorials/900-mhz-
versus-2.4-ghz/](http://www.afar.net/tutorials/900-mhz-versus-2.4-ghz/)

900Mhz does not buy much for distance, however it works better under difficult
line-of-sight situations comparing to 2.4Ghz. For real long-distance
4xx/3xxMhz might be better, or even the frequency we used for FM/AM radios.

~~~
ausjke
TI etc has those decent 9xx/4xx/3xxMhz chips for long time, it's just that
they were not wifi-certified.

------
mwsherman
This is about minimizing power-per-range, not maximizing range itself. IoT
devices have very local utility, one assumes.

I do like the idea of regular laptop-and-tablet Wifi having better range. But
in dense environments, that might be an anti-feature: more interference from
more (distant) neighbors. Suburban/rural might be the best use case.

~~~
Gibbon1
I more would like the idea of laptops and smartphones being able to talk
directly with low cost smart home stuff like your thermostat without having to
have bridges or pay someone for access through some 'your data is now our data
not yours' cloud services

------
kentt
Would this interfere with phones that operate on the 800MHz frequency?

------
Tepix
Wi-Fi HaLow has a chance of success if it can be integrated into regular Wi-Fi
access points.

LTE category-0 introduced with specification release 12 (and to be expanded in
rel-13) is another competitor (other than LoraWan).

Here's more information: [http://blog.3g4g.co.uk/2015/03/lte-category-0-low-
power-m2m-...](http://blog.3g4g.co.uk/2015/03/lte-category-0-low-
power-m2m-devices.html)

------
bsder
I'd be happy if they just spec'd a 2mW WiFi, thanks. The fact that I can see
my neighbor's WiFi is actually a hindrance, not a benefit, nowadays.

~~~
Gibbon1
I'm somewhat concerned about LoRa and things like it for that reason. Having a
transmitter emitting energy in your band is bad. But having a bunch of
transmitters emitting coherent energy you're receiver can detect it worse. The
former just cuts down your signal to noise. The latter directly limits your
available bandwidth. Which is to say, if your radio detects the beginning of a
weak packet from far away it's locked down for the duration. Can't transmit,
can't receive another stronger packet that arrives slightly later.

~~~
hodwik2
LoraWan is inherently monolithic. There is only supposed to be one LoraWan
provider, who acts as the router, and passes traffic to receiver according to
their address -- just like a cell tower. You don't have a hundred cell towers,
you have 3.

~~~
yaantc
Not so. Sigfox has a single operator model: they're the only operator for
their proprietary technology. But LoRa is multi-operator: anyone can buy LoRa
base station and deploy their network (it's in unlicensed spectrum). And it's
already happening this way. So several operators and even technologies will
share the same limited unlicensed spectrum. Should be interesting when it
scales...

~~~
stevegriff
It was designed to be "single operator", but that's not how it is shaking out.
I think a trainwreck is coming, because if you have multiple LoRaWAN networks
operating in the same area, all the packets are colliding at layer 2. They
have to be thrown away by the server. And since the Semtech SX1301 baseband
chip only has 8 demodulators, capacity quickly approaches zero, if there are
multiple uncoordinated networks.

LoRaWAN is an okay solution for European Carrier networks where duty cycle
limitations come into pay, but for the 915MHz band, it is not a good design.

------
noselasd
How long is "long range" going to be ?

------
Tepix
I hope we see a 8011.ah version of the ESP8266 soon. A solar powered GK-RadMon
([https://sites.google.com/site/diygeigercounter/gk-
radmon](https://sites.google.com/site/diygeigercounter/gk-radmon)) would be
the perfect device for this new standard.

------
aceperry
Some very cool features included, I especially like using 900 MHz. I hope the
WiFi Alliance doesn't pull the licensing crap that Bluetooth SIG has.

------
ksec
I am pretty sure there are many, if not most developed countries which has
their GSM Network working on 900Mhz.

How is that going to work out?

------
horsecaptin
So, can my Macbook connect to a HaLow router, or is this a new protocol that
will require all new hardware across the board?

~~~
tomkinstinch
It looks like this runs in the 900MHz ISM (US) band, so we'll all need new
hardware. The longer range is nice. Interference from other 900MHz
transmitters (cordless house phones, baby monitors, etc.) may not be.

It seems everything old[1] is new again.

1\.
[https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/WaveLAN](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/WaveLAN)

~~~
voltagex_
I'd hope no one's phone is running in 900MHz - what does DECT use in North
America?

~~~
Someone1234
1.9 GHz

