FREE NEWSLETTER
THE GAP BETWEEN theory and practice will never be wider than in the world of networking. And you will not find a finer example of this hard reality than in the rollout of Wi-Fi 7, the latest version of wireless networking from the Wi-Fi Alliance and IEEE.
A quick web search today turns up no end of stories from bloggers and journalists who breathlessly repeat the same promises of Wi-Fi 7: higher bandwidth, lower latency, and resilience to interference, with full backwards compatibility. This is the theory.
Today, the practice looks quite different, so much so I recommend hitting the snooze button for a year or two before upgrading your home Wi-Fi router or access points (AP).
There are three reasons for this:
This last point is important and a bit complex, so please bear with me.
Your IoT devices (short for Internet of Things), those Wi-Fi gadgets which have access to the internet, are often not easily updateable like a smartphone, tablet or a Mac/PC. The makers of many IoT devices, especially inexpensive ones, don’t spend the time and money needed to achieve Wi-Fi Alliance certification. That certification can help find the kinds of bugs which often show up when low-level Wi-Fi protocols change, and in Wi-Fi 7 those protocols changed a lot.
Today, the list of IoT devices which have access to the internet in our house would boggle the mind a decade ago: the dishwasher, the washer & dryer, our cars, a home power monitor, music speakers, smoke/CO detectors, a lighting controller, and a lawn irrigation controller. If all of these could be easily updated to use new Wi-Fi stacks, a technology transition like this would happen more quickly. Some companies will never update the code which powers Wi-Fi on their device.
Because of that, delivering backwards compatibility with this gaggle of things tends to fall most heavily on the companies which make Wi-Fi routers or APs. Those manufacturers have to implement wonky work-arounds to non-compliant or buggy Wi-Fi behavior from IoT devices. That kind of work takes far more time than writing code to a clear, definitive standard Wi-Fi specification.
Networking is hard, as my old boss used to say. But when you finally upgrade to a Wi-Fi 7 router or APs, there’s one thing you can do to make this transition easier and more likely to succeed if you–not your internet provider–control your network. Create a second, new Wi-Fi network. Move your modern/updateable phones and Macs/PCs to that and configure your old Wi-Fi network with legacy settings to maximize IoT compatibility. Keep that legacy IoT network on just 2.4 GHz or 2.4 GHz + 5 GHz and use only WPA2 security. That should signal your new router or AP to avoid doing anything which might rock the boat with an old client device. Meanwhile, on your new Wi-Fi network you can optimize for performance and the best security over new 6 GHz channels for devices that use fancy new Wi-Fi 7 features.
Wi-Fi 7 is a big, important step forward for the industry. And eventually it will make a real difference in the quality of customer experiences running over Wi-Fi networks. But delivering on that promise, without aggravation from interoperability issues involving older devices, will take the industry at least a year or two. In theory.
David, you had me at Hit Snooze”.
Thanks for this information.
Do I have it right that the faster the signal, the weaker its strength (much like 5 v. 2.4GHz)? Seems we will soon need an extender in every room of the house. The one extender I have definitely helps signal strength at one end of the home but those .EXT channels run about 100GHz slower. Are mesh networks better?
My old Apple Time Capsule tower router (and backup) is the slowest link in the chain – max ability is about 325 mbps even though Xfinity has graciously boosted my speed to 400 at no extra cost. Funny how this happened just as MetroNet fiber optic service became available in my neighborhood. However, I just don’t need 1200 mbps at additional expense to boot.
In a perfect world, you want Wi-Fi access points (APs) which support all three bands: 2.4, 5, and 6 GHz if you can. That gives a newer client like a phone or PC more chances of receiving a strong signal without interference.
Yes, lower frequencies, like 2.4 GHz, have longer waves. Those do have an easier time passing through walls, floors and ceiling, or other interfering material, yielding a stronger signal than higher frequencies like 5 or 6 GHz.
But there’s a catch.
2.4 GHz Wi-Fi in the U.S. has only three available 20 MHz-wide channels: 1, 6, and 11. All Wi-Fi channels (including at 5 and 6 GHz) are shared by all devices around you, like an old-school telephone party line. Having more available channels lowers the odds of your traffic colliding with others’ around you. If you live in a quiet, rural area, this won’t matter. In an urban or suburban neighborhood, interference can become a big headache. And thanks to Wi-Fi now in almost all newer cars, if you have a busy street out front, the problem can get worse.
5 GHz Wi-Fi has more channels and higher bandwidth, but some operate under dynamic frequency selection (DFS) rules which can force your network and devices to change channel unexpectedly. Some APs have a special radio which listens for DFS interference to change channels more quickly when needed.
Wi-Fi extenders are a disaster, avoid them. Yes, mesh networks are much better than an extender. The best option is Ethernet-connected Wi-Fi access points, but in older homes that means pulling Cat 5e or 6 cabling through an attic, or crawl space.
In my view, your 325 Mb/s is plenty fast for most things. Until last year we lived just fine with internet service at 120 Mb/s down and 40 Mb/s up. I cancelled our landline phone service and upgraded our internet speed, so we’re saving money and some time.
Over the next few years, you will see the cable network companies crank up bandwidth offered as the new DOCSIS 4.0 tech rolls out to compete with fiber companies like MetroNet, AT&T Fiber, et al. Compared to the current DOCSIS 3.1 gear, v4.0 is aimed at enabling higher upload data rates. So instead of seeing 1 Gb/s down and 200 Mb/s up on cable networks, you’ll start to see higher, symmetric speeds, up to ~10 Gb/s. I think most homeowners will be thrilled with symmetric 1 Gb/s if it’s the same cost as their current internet speed. I do wish we had fiber available here, but it’s not likely to happen any time soon.