300 points

The renewed focus on reliability is motivated by emerging applications. Imagine a wireless factory robot in a situation where a worker suddenly steps in front of it and the robot needs to make an immediate decision.

This example is a real WTF. I really hope nobody is planning on building safety-critical real-time systems on top of WiFi!

permalink
report
reply
52 points

I imagine many already exist. But the system should be designed to fail safe with WiFi in mind.

permalink
report
parent
reply
47 points

I don’t know about manufacturing environments but I deal with laboratories a lot, and I’m a bit baffled at how quickly lab operators have jumped on battery-operated wifi sensors for lab monitoring systems. I have like three room sensors attached to my EcoBee thermostat at home and I can barely be assed to change the batteries in those things, I cannot imagine dealing with batteries and connectivity troubleshooting for a building full of sensors whose reliable operation is often critical for regulatory compliance. Seems like the perfect application for PoE systems, to me

permalink
report
parent
reply
17 points

In industrial there are very few wireless systems unless they are either too remote from the CPU and aren’t safety sensitive. Safety is taken very seriously because any incident can mean injuries/death and ending up in the public eye. Any safety systems are hard wired because of reliability.

permalink
report
parent
reply
27 points

as a software developer, that example screams bad design

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

It screams “live service”

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

It also reflects something probably half the industry would push for since they can monetize it.

permalink
report
parent
reply
17 points

I really hope nobody is planning on building safety-critical real-time systems on top of WiFi!

Are you new to the planet? Let me tell you about this thing we have called capitalism…

permalink
report
parent
reply
15 points

Better hope staff don’t Microwave their lunch at the wrong time….

permalink
report
parent
reply
14 points
*

If your robot moves around, then it needs a wireless connection. And it doesn’t really get any more reliable than wifi. I’m certainly not going to outsource that to a Verizon cellular connection.

And even for things that can be wired - ethernet is far from reliable. Cables are easily damaged or simply unplugged.

Wifi can work really well, especially with high end networking gear (and not, for example, the wifi access point you get for free from Verizon).

permalink
report
parent
reply
33 points

I think you’ve missed the point.

Anything automated that could be a threat needs to have safeguards. Needing constant wifi to prevent death or injury is not an acceptable safeguard.

Consider consumer/professional drones. If they lose connection they have on board protocols to mitigate hazards. Even then they are still governed by laws to isolate then from people because even those safeguards aren’t good enough. Suggesting that a robot could completely rely on wifi is preposterous.

permalink
report
parent
reply
30 points

I think the point is that that sort of safety critical stuff should be on board, not relying on a wireless connection.

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points
*

Yesh it should be self contained. Although to be fair there shouldn’t be a way for a human to be there to begin with.

permalink
report
parent
reply
13 points

As someone using various wireless standards over over twenty years and in IT dealing with wifi instability on basically a daily basis. No.

Wifi is a series of compromises to be convenient. It’s “good enough” for most of those but generally and increasingly in newer standards, the compromise is to drop stability for things speed. You’ll see this to be the case in a lot of professional wifi gear that will transfer you to a lower standard if it sees weaker signals to improve stability.

To make that concrete, a problem with wifi in an office is an embarrassing “I’ll call back on my phone” but a factory floor that could be millions of dollars of downtime to restart an entire chain of machines. Hardened industrial wiring and connections is well established and wifi is just not at that level. The poorly formed example of the robot was trying to convey their intention to start addressing that level of hardening.

All that said, based on my experience reading ieee articles this is all exaggerated. in reality we’re probably just getting more stable video calls at higher bandwidths. Still a win for the help desk techs everywhere and people with a heavy wall making Netflix flaky.

permalink
report
parent
reply
9 points
*

This sounds like they’re talking about something specific. There was a guy that was picked up/crushed by a robot recently that is eerily similar.

permalink
report
parent
reply
7 points
*

As long as they have a delay counter which immediately shuts the robot down when it hasn’t been answered within a certain time period it shouldn’t pose much of a problem if it has an E stop. Just inconvenient when it keeps shutting down all day.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

I work in autonomous vehicle engineering. That’s not even on the table for something we’d consider doing. But China is trying to enter the market hard, and I am less sure they wouldnt do that.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

You could safely bet somebody already does

permalink
report
parent
reply
68 points

I’m guessing the bump to 6GHz means range is even lower. Seems we’re leaning towards a future of hardwired-equivalent speed and reliability… within 1 meter.

permalink
report
reply
36 points

Then you can buy a bunch of repeaters and the economy is saved

permalink
report
parent
reply
34 points

I know this is a joke but please do not buy repeaters they do not work how you would expect them to work.

Repeaters take an already weak signal and amplify that signal while increasing the latency. Sure this makes the signal go farther but it doesn’t increase the bandwidth and if you stand in between the originating wifi source and the repeater your device may not migrate to the source wifi even though it might be faster because the reapeter has the illusion of being a better signal because it’s louder.

The better route to go is to use multiple wifi APs through out the building connected back to your router with ethernet.

You could also go with mesh access points but you have to do a lot of research and planning; The two key things to look out for is they mesh system must have a dedicated backhaul and you must place them where each node has an excellent signal to the next node. Since most backhauls run on 5Ghz and 6Ghz this means there shouldn’t be any walls between them.

permalink
report
parent
reply
9 points

Exactly. I’m going to be running Ethernet through my house soon, and even if we stay full Wi-Fi, we’ll benefit by having physical cables connecting the APs. I already have a separate AP, just need to run the cables to get a second in our basement where the signal is weak.

permalink
report
parent
reply
33 points

Yes but WiFi 7 FINALLY lets devices connect to multiple BANDS at the same time with a new feature called Multi-link operation (MLO)… IE the device can hold on to a longer range but slower band and more seamlessly transmit data over the best one at the time.

permalink
report
parent
reply
27 points

That’s an advantage if you utilize it right. Less range means your neighbor’s wifi is less likely to interfere with your own. Multiple access points are a superior way to get coverage of your whole house than some octopus antenna monstrosity.

The inverse square law doesn’t have to be a problem.

permalink
report
parent
reply
13 points
*

I think the prevalence of mesh systems is intended to remedy this. Instead of a single AP that can cover your entire house you can mesh two or three (or more) APs to get the coverage desired.

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points

That’s how I do it, except because I have all these AP’s I just set them up near the devices that will use it and plug them all into the AP’s and use the backhaul which is way more reliable. Phones and tablets are the only things that use the wifi and never really found an issue with speed or reliability since moving to mesh.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point
*

It’s still better to have wired backhaul with multiple APs than a mesh, but it’s definitely a decent option if you can’t wire it for whatever reason.

permalink
report
parent
reply
41 points

Fighting games with Wi-Fi instead of Ethernet? Sounds more like a dream. This genre is particularly demanding on stable low latency connections and current technology absolutely doesn’t offer it. Spreading across frequencies sounds like a latency vs reliability trade-off.

permalink
report
reply
10 points

I feel like this is really dependent upon the game. Guilty Gear Strive for instance uses roll back net code and my personal experience playing it online over wifi is that it feels practically identical to playing locally. Here and there I might have minor issues if the person I’m playing against has horrible Ping but for the most part wifi is flawless.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

That game does have pretty good netcode, but it cannot do everything. If the Wi-Fi connection drops packets there are bound to be problems even with low ping. Not every Wi-Fi setup is the same and it also depends on your surroundings like the physical distance between devices and how much interference.

Sometimes the issue is only visible for one player. If you can, absolutely do use a wired connection. It will undoubtedly be better even with a good Wi-Fi setup.

permalink
report
parent
reply
9 points

Back when 5G cellular was first rolling out, a professor brought in a Qualcomm senior level manager and the topic was how 6G was being developed for long distance low latency capabilities.

How much of that was industry bullshit, no idea but it sounds like they had a pulse on the tech now that we hear about it years later.

permalink
report
parent
reply
10 points

And 5G is mostly ass anyway. I feel like LTE is faster and EASILY more reliable everywhere I am. If I lose power at my house, I can barely send text only messages in any app.

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points
*

I am still using LTE because it always works and is plenty fast for what I need to do on a mobile device. 5G also uses more battery too.

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

What phone are you using? My first 5G phone didn’t support midband 5G, and yeah, my experience was similar. Lowband 5G was maybe slightly faster than LTE, but wasn’t worth the lower battery life, higher heat, and spottier performance that was associated with early 5G radios.

Now I’ve got a phone with midband 5G support and midband 5G kicks the shit out of LTE.

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

The lowest latency links right now are already wireless point to point links.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

In theory the speed of light is higher in free space than it is in copper.

permalink
report
parent
reply
16 points
Deleted by creator
permalink
report
parent
reply
16 points

Your comment faces resistance.

permalink
report
parent
reply
23 points

Kudos to the working group.

permalink
report
reply
20 points

Glad to see stability and QoS being prioritised over throughput this time around. I feel like once WiFi broke through the 300 Mbps barrier with the 5GHz band, strictly focusing on further improvements in throughput would just yield diminishing returns for most people.

However, latency and signal strength have been notoriously annoying long-term problems that I’m happy to see finally being acknowledged.

permalink
report
reply

Technology

!technology@lemmy.world

Create post

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


Community stats

  • 18K

    Monthly active users

  • 12K

    Posts

  • 553K

    Comments