Novell deploys 100 access points: lets a 100 flights of data contend? Not in this installation. They use VPNs to restrict network access. Their entire campus is now wireless, like Microsoft's. (Link via Tomalak's Realm.)
An aside: Microsoft's own internal experience with 802.11b obviously affected their thinking in the simple and robust way in which Windows XP seamlessly manages wireless networking. It's as good or better out of the shrinkwrap than Apple's, which Apple managed only after two years of messing around with the software and its integration with location management software.
Meanwhile, Apple itself sheds some scary light on a business in Ashland. The scary part is not how much they enjoy AirPort, Apple's branded version of 802.11b, nor how well it works for them. The scary part is this: To secure the network, Arthur simply listed the unique AirPort Card addresses for each authorized user in the base station’s access control panel. That was it.
Unfortunately, it's insanely trivial to watch these MAC (media access control) addresses flash through the air, grab one, and change the address on another card to gain access. With WEP encryption broken and this simple hack - most PC Card software has the built-in feature to change a MAC address - they're toast. Apple itself uses VPN software and places its access points outside the corporate firewall.
Cisco demos 802.11a at Comdex: scroll down to Wireless Wonders; Cisco plans to demonstrate the technology.
Meanwhile, Proxim invents its own flavor of double-speed 802.11a in access hubs by 2002 second quarter: Although from my understanding, current FCC regulations wouldn't allow a 5 GHz spread-spectrum broadcast that exceeds the 802.11a spec of 54 Mbps raw transmission, Proxim has doubled that speed in raw terms. Read their press release, too, notable for the inclusion of good details. The article focuses on hub-and-card networking, but, apparently, the PC Cards can already function in ad hoc mode (machine to machine) at the 2x speed.
The actual throughput listed in this article floors me. Running at a raw speed of 54 Mbps, 802.11a supposedly produces just 23 Mbps of real bandwidth. Likewise, Proxim's 108 Mbps flavor will net just 34 Mbps. Is the standard truly that inefficient? 802.11b runs at 11 Mbps, but delivers more like 7 Mbps in actual bandwidth. Many folks testing their specific equipment find that 2 to 4 Mbps with the chipsets and OEM packaging is the maximum they see, especially with WEP turned on.
Also, note that the Register misspells HiperLAN as HyperLAN, and claims that 802.11b has three channels. (It has 14 defined 22 MHz overlapping channels; only channels 1, 6, and 11 can be operated simultaneously without signal interference, meaning it has three non-interferring channels.)