
Introducing a new kind of Wi-Fi system - rmanalan
https://blog.google/products/google-wifi/introducing-new-kind-wi-fi-system/
======
mikecb
Just for everyone focusing on gimmicky features, this is an OnHub, which are
intended to just work.

Under the hood, they run ChromiumOS, including things like trusted boot (yes,
this home router has a tpm), and the A/B partitions so when you get an
automatic update, (which happens during a time of low bandwidth usage), it
reboots into the new version in about 6 seconds. The security team is awesome:
they pushed an update to all onhubs within 48 hours of public disclosure of a
critical RCE earlier this year.

There has been some slowness to expected features, like ipv6, but the PMs have
been clear about their goal: they won't include a feature that's buggy. It's
exactly what you want in a piece of infrastructure.

~~~
modeless
Wait, OnHub doesn't support IPv6?! That's inexcusable. There's no reason IPv6
couldn't "just work" too. Google Wifi had better support IPv6 at launch.

~~~
givinguflac
If you require IPv6 so crucially, you probably shouldn't be using consumer
grade gear.

~~~
mmagin
I've been using IPv6 on a consumer-grade cable modem connection with a Cisco
DPC3008 modem and a previous-generation Apple Airport extreme since 2012.
There weren't even any difficulties getting it working.

~~~
calinet6
There aren't any difficulties if you don't get it working either (yet). The
Internet still works with no issues.

------
Animats
Lots of vendors already offer this. It's pretty standard for commercial WiFi
units. It's just slightly more expensive than dumb routers.

* Eero: [https://eero.com/](https://eero.com/)

* Ubuquiti: [https://www.ubnt.com](https://www.ubnt.com)

* Cisco: [http://www.cisco.com](http://www.cisco.com) (sized for larger buildings)

Does this new Google device come with the Google Fi feature which backhauls
all your traffic to Google via a VPN?

~~~
drzaiusapelord
No. It comes with pretty much nothing but a nice little price break. You get a
3-pack for $299. The Eero 3-pack is $499.00. This is a serious price break in
this market, which is currently over-priced. You can get 3 Ubiquities for
almost $300. A lot less user friendly, but $500 for 3 units is holding back
mass adoption.

Personally, for my home I need just two units. Shame there's no $199 2-pack
yet. It would be an instant buy for me.

~~~
fps
Ubiquiti's Amplifi is $199 for 3 units.

~~~
hossbeast
Amplifi has 3 models. The high end, the amplifi HD is $350 for a 3 pack

------
calinet6
Serious question: whose WiFi is not working, to the degree that they think, "I
really need to get a modern router to make this Internet thing actually work."

I'm seeing about a dozen fancy modern wifi routers all trying to solve a
problem I'm not sure exists.

~~~
xahrepap
I had nothing but problems with typical consumer hardware. Having to restart
routers all the time. Dead spots. When family would visit (both my wife and I
have large families) they would connect at least 2 devices each to my wifi
(tablet, phone, laptop, etc). My wireless would just tank. They would always
ask me why my internet was so terrible.

Last year I bought an Edge router and a higher end Netgear hotspot. Works
wonders separating things out and letting me easily add separate "Guest"
wireless networks on different channels or whatever using my older devices.

If I were to have done that change now I would've definitely used a device
like Google's. But to do something like that would've been outside my budget.
I wish I could easily add new hotspots that just seamlessly worked so that I
could eliminate the dead spots on the edges of my house and in my yard over
time.

Maybe there's something I don't know already and I don't need Google's new
Wifi System. But it definitely seems to fix my usecase.

~~~
robocat
Ubiquiti Unifi Access Points just work.

I too have bought a variety of high end consumer devices (for a small
business), and they all crash or randomly drop out.

Disable wifi radio on router, plug in Unifi AP, solid connection.

They are annoying to configure, but have been so worth it.

Apple AirPort has also been rock solid.

~~~
saidajigumi
Motion seconded on Unifi. I've just deployed these and they're so far a
delight. The PoE (power-over-ethernet) support is great -- if you can get the
ethernet cable to the AP's location, you're good. Allows for zero visible
cable installations if you have the opportunity to do in-wall cabling.

I did spring for a "Unifi Cloud Key", which is just a small (pack of cards
sized), dedicated host for running the Unifi Controller. Makes administration
and updates a fair bit easier.

As someone else mentioned, they do require a wired ethernet connection, but
the point of that is these are intended as (entry-level) enterprise hardware.
Unifi vs. Amplifi is for contexts where 1) the administration overhead isn't a
burden and 2) it's preferable to run cable and leave wifi bandwidth available
for clients and/or the rich multiple network support (vs. mesh networking).
Obviously, #1 means it's not intended for the general consumer market.

~~~
ebrewste
I wish they didn't do 24V PoE. I know they are coming from a WISP background,
but a AP seems like something that should support 802.11af. It's not like it's
something exotic.

~~~
saidajigumi
Note that the Unifi AP AC Pro (which I'm using) are 802.3af/at (PoE/PoE+). The
AC LR and AC Lite are indeed passive 24v. So there's that option within the
line at least.

------
biot
Despite their claims of being designed for user privacy, I'm wary of anything
Google puts out. What information does it report back to the mothership?

~~~
jaytaylor
I feel the same way. Was also disappointed with my Chromecast after it just
stopped being able to connect to wifi and eventually wouldn't even boot at
all. What kind of warranty and privacy disclosures does this solution come
with?

------
eridius
I'm surprised nobody here has yet questioned the wisdom of allowing Google
access to literally all of your internet traffic. This is actually a
commercial product that you pay money for, so maybe they're all aboveboard
here, but with Google's history of trying to get as much personal data as
possible about everybody makes me unwilling to trust them with something like
this.

On a different note, is there any reason why someone should prefer this to
Ubiquiti's AmpliFi? Unlike Google, Ubiquiti has a long history of making
networking gear. The only obvious benefit I see right now is Google Wifi
starts at $129 for one unit whereas AmpliFi starts at $199, but that $199
includes 2 "mesh points" and presumably to get the same effect with Google
Wifi you'd have to shell out $299 for the 3-pack.

~~~
acdha
I realize it's popular to peddle conspiracy theories about Google in some
circles but think about just how many people use Google search, Gmail, Chrome,
Android, etc. – do you really think their choice of routers matters more?

There's also an inconvenient truth that such problems are greatly hindered by
… Google in their prominent role improving security for average users. If
their goal was to spy on people, they'd be the last to push HTTPS, HSTS, HKP,
various TLS hardening, etc. rather than one of the first.

~~~
IMcD23
None of those technologies you listed make it harder for Google to collect
information from you, but instead make it harder for 3rd parties to intercept
that data in transit.

~~~
notatoad
If they were attempting to collect information via your router, those
technologies would absolutely hamper them.

~~~
acdha
Exactly right

------
rmanalan
I just bought an OnHub last year. WTF Google?!

~~~
dragonwriter
> I just bought an OnHub last year. WTF Google?!

Do you get upset when a new phone is introduced a year after you bought your
last one? A new car?

~~~
ocdtrekkie
The problem is Google sells products like the OnHub with indications that more
is coming. It was strongly hinted that the OnHub was going to be the center of
Google's soon to come Google Home solution.

Of course, those of us seasoned with the experience of buying Google products
before should know better, but it really doesn't change the fact that people
who bought it are absolutely right to feel upset.

~~~
mikecb
This is part of Onhub, which can be a part of the mesh, and they both use the
same app.

------
throw7
I'm a little concerned that an android device is listed as _required_... i
would hope all functions of the wifi devices can be configured/administrated
from the web or just an internal browser pointed to the device(s).

~~~
wmf
There is no Web interface; you really do have to use the app.

~~~
rootbear
Well, that's a deal breaker. I don't own an Android device. There's no excuse
for not providing a web interface.

~~~
lucb1e
I own an Android device and it's still a dealbreaker.

I thought it was cool to deploy a web application from my smartphone but after
having done it once or twice, and two or three times having to hotfix
production stuff from my smartphone, I can say it's not a device made to
configure anything except alarm clocks.

~~~
wmf
In this case, OnHub has pretty much no configuration other than the SSID and
password.

~~~
christianmann
That's terrible. What about:

\- Proxy settings \- MAC address cloning \- Port forwarding \- Strict security
controls \- Wifi bands, 2.4 vs 5GHz (I guess this is less important) \- Logs

~~~
wmf
It does have port forwarding buried under advanced settings but I didn't see
the others.

------
spullara
My Airports work just fine and have worked for years. I think that the WiFi
issues are mostly that people are only willing to pay like $50 for their WiFi
router. At this price point I'm not sure it changes anything.

~~~
pat2man
If you try to use multiple Airport routers together without Ethernet you get
severely reduced bandwidth. These routers (and other similar products) have
multiple radios which allow mesh networking without reducing bandwidth as
much. In a large house where running cable isn't an option having a mesh
network can solve a lot of issues. In a small apartment a single access point
is probably sufficient.

~~~
spullara
They have multiple radios and my bandwidth is basically capped by my comcast
internet at around 180 Mbps which I get everywhere in the house with 2
airports, one extending the other.

------
dorianm
I actually just got a "Wi-Fi booster"[1] for my place to have good Wi-Fi
upstairs and it's amazing (it even has an ethernet port)

[1]: [https://www.amazon.fr/Netgear-
WN3000RP-200FRS-R%C3%A9p%C3%A9...](https://www.amazon.fr/Netgear-
WN3000RP-200FRS-R%C3%A9p%C3%A9teur-
Wifi-N300/dp/B00MWNWEIE/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1475607805&sr=8-1&keywords=wifi+booster)

------
andrewpe
Anyone notice they are using their new TLD?

~~~
sp332
Yeah, I thought they were only using that internally. Well, there used to be
an April Fool's page at elgoog.google which was just a mirror-image of the
homepage, but that's gone now.

~~~
striking
I think you mean [http://com.google](http://com.google), which is indeed now
just a redirect. I think someone discovered a vulnerability in it.

------
vikiomega9
I guess the lay persons question at this point is why not just publish the
software and dispel any notion of privacy infringement?

------
mariusz79
The list of features is missing one important item \- Using these we will be
better able to monitor your indoor whereabouts.

~~~
SEJeff
And in specific, lookup Tomographic Motion Detection ala:

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y8updJWoSxE](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y8updJWoSxE)

[http://www.securityelectronicsandnetworks.com/articles/2014/...](http://www.securityelectronicsandnetworks.com/articles/2014/06/24/xandem-
tmd-tomographic-motion-detection-review)

~~~
captn3m0
This is a nice piece of recent research: Keystroke Recognition Using WiFi
Signals

[0]:
[https://www.sigmobile.org/mobicom/2015/papers/p90-aliA.pdf](https://www.sigmobile.org/mobicom/2015/papers/p90-aliA.pdf)

------
ebf6
> The system uses a technology called mesh Wi-Fi (something usually only seen
> in expensive commercial installations).

This is misleading. You can create your own mesh networks with several off-
the-shelf routers / access points using open source software like batman-
advanced [0].

[0] [https://www.open-mesh.org/projects/batman-adv/wiki](https://www.open-
mesh.org/projects/batman-adv/wiki)

~~~
dragonwriter
I don't think its misleading to anyone -- the kind of people to whom
aftermarket open source software for routers is a reasonable solution won't be
misled, and its completely accurate for the people for whom what comes built
in with the router is the only thing of interest.

~~~
ebf6
But that's different from saying "something usually only seen in expensive
commercial installations". And it is still misleading, accuracy of some
information has nothing to do with what someone is looking for (a self-
contained, plug-and-play mesh network).

~~~
dragonwriter
> But that's different from saying "something usually only seen in expensive
> commercial installations".

No, its not. The fact that there are inexpensive alternative means by which it
_can_ be deployed, and by which certain segments of the population _can_ and
_do_ deploy it, doesn't make it any less true that it is _usually_ only seen
in expensive commercial installations.

> And it is still misleading if it tends to mislead one group of people more
> than another group.

I don't think it tends to mislead any group at all. I think that the group to
whom the exceptions to the "usual" case accurately described here is relevant
will be well aware of it and so not misled, and the group who is not
interested will also not be misled by the accurate statement, even though they
are likely to be less aware of the nature of the alternative.

~~~
ebf6
>> But that's different from saying "something usually only seen in expensive
commercial installations".

> No, its not. The fact that there are inexpensive alternative means by which
> it can be deployed, and by which certain segments of the population can and
> do deploy it, doesn't make it any less true that it is usually only seen in
> expensive commercial installations.

Well then they should have made that more clear. Expensive + commercial means,
well, expensive, and commercial installation means proprietary and hard to
access (which, by the way, is also untrue).

> I don't think it tends to mislead any group at all. I think that the group
> to whom the exceptions to the "usual" case accurately described here is
> relevant will be well aware of it and so not misled, and the group who is
> not interested will also not be misled by the accurate statement, even
> though they are likely to be less aware of the nature of the alternative.

Sorry, I edited my comment for clarity. Anyway I don't think it's right to
just say that because a certain population can't be mislead, it means that the
information itself is not misleading.

~~~
dragonwriter
> Well then they should have made that more clear.

"Usually" generally means that they are exceptions, but they are less common.
There's no lack of clarity here, you are just ignoring that word.

~~~
ebf6
Of course I am ignoring the word "Usually". It's not a substantial word. How
much is usually? There are always "uncommon exceptions" to some subject (see
the implicit flaw with this sentence? That's because I don't use the word
"usually". What kind of an argument can I make without the word "usually"?)

It disregards a whole field of volunteered hard work to make mesh networking
technology accessible by people who don't want to buy "expensive, commercial"
hardware and software.'

It sends the message: "Don't look further, because it's not worth it --
_because usually other solutions are expensive and commercial_."

~~~
dragonwriter
> Of course I am ignoring the word "Usually".

Then you are criticizing something other than their actual description.

~~~
ebf6
> Then you are criticizing something other than their actual description.

No, I'm criticizing the wording. Perhaps you should ask yourself more
questions about the construction of these descriptions and what messages they
convey, than merely the definition of the word _usually_.

~~~
dragonwriter
> No, I'm criticizing the wording.

Well, except that you are _expressly_ ignoring a key word in doing that.

------
bakman329
The problems with this are the same as the rest of the things announced
today(except the pixel, in my opinion): Too expensive, and not much to set it
apart.

~~~
anderber
I believe Google Home is cheaper than Amazon's Echo too. But in general I
agree with you.

------
millstone
I've used my Airport Express to extend my Airport Base Station for years. Is
this "mesh networking?" How is Google WiFi different?

~~~
pat2man
If you ran an Ethernet cable you probably get a similar experience. Otherwise
Airport routers use a single radio for communicating with the other access
point and clients. This greatly reduces bandwidth.

------
cynix
Why are all these mesh Wi-Fi products (Google Wifi, Eero, UBNT AmpliFi, ...)
only available in the US?

~~~
lobster_johnson
Ubiquity products are available in Europe.

~~~
cynix
"The AmpliFi online store is currently available only for US-based customers."

~~~
lobster_johnson
You have to buy from a European reseller.

~~~
cynix
Since the power plug is built into the repeaters, I assume I won't be able to
plug it directly into my Australian wall socket.

~~~
TheSpiceIsLife
Maybe. I've modded more than one device from the US for AU power by changing 1
capacitor for a higher voltage unit.

I believe European mains is 220 volts and our Australian mains is 230 volts,
so it should be fine. I think.

Might need an adapter or change the plug.

------
obrienmd
Anyone know if this is going to make use of modern AQM (fq_codel or cake) like
OnHub did? OnHub used the Qualcomm brand name for it: "Streamboost".

------
SamuelAdams
How is Mesh networking different from a wireless repeater? Yes, there's a
nicer UI for this, but are there any technical advantages?

~~~
ebf6
The difference between the two isn't in the UI. Wireless repeaters
traditionally have a set receiving and transmission point. Let's assume that
signal interference / reflection / amplification does no matter, for the sake
of simplicity in this example. So if you have a chain of three repeaters A
<\--> B <\--> C, and then you move access point C closer to A (closer than B
is to A), then the topology does not change (do you see the issue here?).
Worse, if you have a longer chain with a few alternatives, then a single point
going down (call it X) would require nodes previously connected to X to be
reconfigured.

Mesh networks automatically judge the path of least resistance to a
destination, and distribute the state of all the access points on a network.
If one access point goes down, all the access points previously connected to
the faulty access point will find alternatives if there's anything else within
signal range.

In this case, if those are meant to be portable access points, you can move
them between different rooms without worrying about nodes choosing a
suboptimal path.

------
spynxic
Mesh-based Device Triangulation

------
Apreche
You can tell this product is made by people who live in suburban McMansions.
In a 1 BR NYC apartment, you have no problems with wifi coverage.

~~~
dragonwriter
> You can tell this product is made by people who live in suburban McMansions.
> In a 1 BR NYC apartment, you have no problems with wifi coverage.

More relevantly, _for_ instead of _by_ (though its quite possible both are
true), but, sure, in a small urban apartment, coverage isn't going to be your
big issue, and you aren't going to need a set of routers forming a mesh
network.

OTOH, lots of people _don 't_ live in small urban apartments and use the
internet.

------
bikamonki
Introducing a new way to spy on you? A WiFi repeater will do the trick...

