# Computer cable modem/router



## robut

I guess you should know I'm no geek 
I have comcast cable and renting their computer cable modem about $5.00 per month.
I want to buy a lap top perhaps a Sony around 15" with b/ray I expect to pay around
$750.00 to $800.00 around Christmas when the sales start.
I would like to buy my own modem with a built in router one compatable with the Comcast cable company. I have 42 inch Samsung hd tv two years old. So where am I going with this ?
I would like to be able to send a movie / pictures to the TV through the computer say ( Netflex ) I know a good Modem Router runs about $130.00. and I would like to retain my older ( 7 years old ) desk top too. 
That's ok my limit is $1000.00 total. " Best Buy " will come out and do the set up for $150.00 If it's a hassel OK but if it's a matter of plug A into B
and so on ? 
I see where the Netgear, D-Link and Linksys are rated best ?
Would they compatable with Comcast ?
How many ports do I need ?
I know there is someone who can use a simple term like, all you need is a X/Y system two special ( I guess ) cables call Comcast and return theirs,
Perhaps this will help many others with the same question.

Robut :whistling2:


----------



## RedHelix

*Cable Modem:*
You should definitely do a little legwork to ensure the new cable modem will work. (Sorry, no easy answer to this part.)

It needs to conform to the Data over Cable Service Interface Spec 1.1 at the bare minimum. If you have bursting or other performance boosting services attached to your account, you need to go higher. Some helpful details here: http://mydeviceinfo.comcast.net/

I'm a network administrator, and I never lose any sleep renting my cable modem from the ISP. I get newer models when I want them, and if it breaks, I drive five minutes and get a replacement. Buying your own is indeed cheaper, but the break/fix process is arduous because the modem manufacturer will blame the ISP and vice versa. 

*Router:*
I never go for those router/modem combo devices. That boils down to personal preference though. 

Intellinet (hard to find,) TrendNet and SMC are good consumer-grade brands. Linksys varies from year to year, and I've seen too many Netgear and D-Link routers fail to ever recommend them.

*Laptop:*
Word to the wise: Don't buy Sony, and don't buy black friday or big box retailer 'sale' laptops. A <$400 laptop may seem like a good deal, but you will get exactly what you pay for: Last year's batch of Celeron boxes that they're trying to push out the door. I say this after having spent a few years working for a large retailer's tech bench. 

*Netflix:*
Not a lot of people still use their PCs as media centers, which is what appears you're trying to do.

You might be interested to hear about a product called the Roku. Link here:
http://www.roku.com/

It's basically a box you connect to your TV that streams Netflix via wired or Wi-Fi. Ties into your existing Netflix account, no additional monthly cost. Easy peasy.


----------



## robut

*cable /modem/router*

Thanks RedHelix
Thank you for all the input, Now I'll do some of that leg work
and track down some of these sites.
This is exactly why I went to DIY, There is always someone unbiassed who is willing to stir one in the right direction.

Thanks
Robut :thumbup:


----------



## poppameth

This is THE modem to get.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16825122009

It supports the newest standards which Comcast is in the process of switching to. You'll get better speeds out of a DOCSIS 3.0 compatible modem in the next year or so than anything older. 

As far as routers go I still love the Linksys WRT54GL flashed to Tomato Firmware. There are newer, faster models available, but this one is one of the most reliable well supported devices out there today. It depends on what speeds you may need in the future as to whether it will be a bottleneck on you network or not.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16833124190&cm_re=wrt54gl-_-33-124-190-_-Product


----------



## RedHelix

robut said:


> Thanks RedHelix
> Thank you for all the input, Now I'll do some of that leg work
> and track down some of these sites.
> This is exactly why I went to DIY, There is always someone unbiassed who is willing to stir one in the right direction.
> 
> Thanks
> Robut :thumbup:


It's my pleasure. If you need any input on purchasing decisions, I'll be happy to lend a hand.

poppameth also pointed out newegg, a great site that I forgot to mention. 

I'm also a big fan of the WRT54G with custom firmware (I use DD-WRT on my Intellinet,) but probably only if you had a little background experience flashing a router. But even if you're just looking to buy, plug-in and forget, the WRT is still a good router.


----------



## poppameth

I use to use DD-WRT firmware. It's very good. So is Tomato. I tend to go Tomato now because it has all the features I need and is much easier to setup and use than DD-WRT. If you are a novice at this stuff, definitely go with Tomato. I've never had Tomato cause me any problems. DD-WRT can brick a router in a heartbeat if you do the slightest thing wrong. I've seen it brick two of these routers trying to do a simple firmware upgrade. Granted that was a few years back now.


----------



## RedHelix

poppameth said:


> I use to use DD-WRT firmware. It's very good. So is Tomato. I tend to go Tomato now because it has all the features I need and is much easier to setup and use than DD-WRT. If you are a novice at this stuff, definitely go with Tomato. I've never had Tomato cause me any problems. DD-WRT can brick a router in a heartbeat if you do the slightest thing wrong. I've seen it brick two of these routers trying to do a simple firmware upgrade. Granted that was a few years back now.


Oh totally. DD-WRT is better suited for Cisco guys thumbsup who somehow have a need for multiple SSIDs and static routes, but don't wanna blow $400 on a home router :laughing:

I also use it on a few of my subnets at work. It's crazy useful in a pinch.

But if you're just venturing custom firmware land and want to expand the functionality of your router without overloading it with features you won't use (and will break it if misconfigured,) Tomato is a better bet.


----------



## nap

poppameth said:


> As far as routers go I still love the Linksys WRT54GL flashed to Tomato Firmware. There are newer, faster models available, but this one is one of the most reliable well supported devices out there today. It depends on what speeds you may need in the future as to whether it will be a bottleneck on you network or not.


why would you guys recommend a wireless router that is only B/G compliant? what about N?

Is there a reason to not use an N compliant router?


----------



## poppameth

The main reason not to go with N routers is that none of them are all that great at this point. There are way too many problem reports floating around. They may work just fine for average use but for anything more advanced they tend to start giving the user headaches. Hopefully that'll change soon. Wireless N signal hasn't been focused on as much as it should be because it's use is limited at this point. You can get blazing fast speeds transferring files across your network on Wireless N but as far as you internet connection goes, I don't think this is much in the US public sector than can even saturate a Wireless G bandwidth. Wireless N is fairly useless for internet use at this point. That'll change as service providers upgrade their networks and offer more speed. But until it is available, the companies making these routers aren't going to worry too much about how good the N devices really work since you can't test it anyway. Pay for a full scale Cisco and you probably find much better N capabilities.


----------



## RedHelix

Wireless-N is extremely useful for a niche set of scenarios, but on the whole, it's more expensive and most people simply don't have a need for it.

N-Cards get a better signal gain when used with an N-Router of the same dBm as a G-Router counterpart, presumably because MIMO is built into the standard. (Note though that MIMO is also available on a lot of 802.11g equipment.) So if you live in a huge house and can't see your G router from the opposite corner, well, N might do the trick depending on placement and how the house is constructed. Unfortunately, you'll hit the same set of proverbial brick walls when dealing with factors that impact signal gains... such as, say, brick walls.

Wireless-N saved my butt when my company (development firm) needed to set up Wi-Fi at a construction site that had tons of high-voltage wires surrounding the building with the DMARC. G couldn't break through the interference, but a directional N came through clear as a bell. 

When Draft-N was announced, it was hailed as a great way to stream multimedia within a LAN. But c'mon; with devices like Roku, Boxee, and newer Blu-Ray/DVD players, everything gets pulled directly from the internet. Poppameth hit the nail on the head: Yeah, you can brag about the 300 to 600Mbit/s on your router, but your ISP will grant you a fraction of a fraction of that.

(Let's just hope that ISPs ever upgrade their networks )


----------



## piste

Interesting discussion..hope the following helps the OP and others. I have been thinking of upgrading my Linksys wireless G to Linksys wireless N. Why? Well...I'm paying Comcast for 16mbs download speed but only realizing a fraction of that. To confirm...I plugged my laptop directly into the Comcast modem...got right about 16mbs. Then plugged the router back in to the modem and whilst sitting in the exact same spot next to the router I only got about 9 or 10 mbs internet speed. Then I moved to further points in the house on my wireless network and saw my internet speed degrade with distance from my router. Why on earth would a G router rated (at least theoretically) at 54mbs not be able to keep up with a 16 mbs internet connection and only end up delivering at half that speed?? I had figured there's just some inherent latency/overhead in wireless...and that "theoretical" speeds are much different than experienced speeds....so am about to pull the trigger on the Linksys E3000 dual band N router. Is this not going to help? What gives?


----------



## poppameth

It could be crappy firmware causing the slowdowns. That's another reason the WRT54GL is so highly rated. It's a Linux based firmware and can be easily flashes to Tomato or DD-WRT to greatly enhance the performance of the router. The stock firmware on a lot of these things isn't that great.


----------



## RedHelix

piste said:


> Interesting discussion..hope the following helps the OP and others. I have been thinking of upgrading my Linksys wireless G to Linksys wireless N. Why? Well...I'm paying Comcast for 16mbs download speed but only realizing a fraction of that. To confirm...I plugged my laptop directly into the Comcast modem...got right about 16mbs. Then plugged the router back in to the modem and whilst sitting in the exact same spot next to the router I only got about 9 or 10 mbs internet speed. Then I moved to further points in the house on my wireless network and saw my internet speed degrade with distance from my router. Why on earth would a G router rated (at least theoretically) at 54mbs not be able to keep up with a 16 mbs internet connection and only end up delivering at half that speed?? I had figured there's just some inherent latency/overhead in wireless...and that "theoretical" speeds are much different than experienced speeds....so am about to pull the trigger on the Linksys E3000 dual band N router. Is this not going to help? What gives?


Is this a relatively new development, or has your router always performed this way?

Couple of items: 
-Each connection you add to 'the wire' results in a loss of throughput. Always. Your issue sounds a little disproportional, but we'll get to that.
-The Mbps you're paying for from your ISP is not guaranteed. You could very well get 16 one minute and 10 a few hours later. Have you experimented with this over an extended period of time?
-Does the router manufacturer have a firmware update available? 

If you're positive the router is the culprit, my suggested COA would be to try a manufacturer firmware update, and if that doesn't take, look for an MTU setting and consult with your ISP to see if they recommend deviating from the default. (Usually 1500.)

As for the Wireless, 54Mbps is an extremely theoretical number to a point where you disregard it. When your Operating System reports that it's connected at 54Mbps, it's reporting on the theoretical maximum transfer speed, not actual. You're more likely to be exchanging the important data at 24-36Mbps, if that. (Which is still pretty darn fast.)


----------



## piste

Thanks for all the very helpful info. I honestly don't know if this is a new development. We've had this service for about 3 years....and no one in the house is really complaining. It's more that I found www.speedtest.net... and so checked it out and when I saw the results I spoke to my ISP and they confirmed I'm getting the throughput I'm paying for to my modem. I actually did check my firmware and found it to be not the most current. I updated it last night and haven't check speed in every room in the house but it seems I do have some degree of improvement. I checked my MTU setting and it is indeed 1500. Lastly I do now realize that the 54mbps is purely theoretical. But I figured it would at least manage to handle 16mbps...one third of 54!!! Anyway...just tested the kids desktop upstairs...a Win 7 machine Core 2 Duo less than a year old...only getting about 5mbps. I've clearly learned that not only does signal decrease with distance but so does throughput. Seems like investing a one time amount in a N router will help me get better performance out of my monthly ISP fees.


----------



## 6burgh

Piste- Do you know if your laptop has a "G" wireless network card? If it is older it may be a "B" wireless card which top out 11Mbps in theory.


----------



## piste

6burgh said:


> Piste- Do you know if your laptop has a "G" wireless network card? If it is older it may be a "B" wireless card which top out 11Mbps in theory.


Hey 6! We might be neighbors! Now live in the North Hills ..but am native of visitors' hometown in Sunday night game!

Anyway...I have three computers at home...a work laptop, my wife's laptop and a desktop. All three are at least G and some are N...

But thanks for the suggestion.


----------



## 6burgh

robut-

I also use and recommend older WRT54G routers off ebay because they have more memory to run the previously mentioned tomato/DD-WRT firmware. They are alot cheaper on ebay and work just as good as brand new "G" routers. Here is a good site to fiugre out which version is best to get. Newer ones only have 8MB of RAM. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linksys_WRT54G_series

I am on Comcast myself and use their modem. It does cost more but if it breaks or I want a new one I can get it.

I also recommend ACER extensa laptops off ebay if you want a dual core and is dependable. It isn't the newest but has alot of RAM, they usually have 100 GB drive, around a 1.9 AMD dual core processor, 14.1 screen, S video output . Extensa 4420 is a good lappy. They have great bright screens. The 5420 is good also ( 15" screen) but the hinges are a weak point on that model. You can usually find them for $150. They now running around $200 because of Christmas. I buy alot of them with broken power jacks, fix them and sell them and people are always happy with them.


----------



## 6burgh

piste said:


> Hey 6! We might be neighbors! Now live in the North Hills ..but am native of visitors' hometown in Sunday night game!
> 
> Anyway...I have three computers at home...a work laptop, my wife's laptop and a desktop. All three are at least G and some are N...
> 
> But thanks for the suggestion.


I live in Chambersburg south central PA. Boo for where you come from!!!! :laughing:

Ok sorry. If you already posted that I overlooked it.I cant think of anything else besides trying another router.


----------



## poppameth

Note that the WRT54G and the WRT54GL are different. The GL is still available new from a ton of vendors. The L stands for Linux. This unit is basically the older version of the WRT54G. It still has Linux firmware and 16MB of RAM.


----------



## 6burgh

Piste- have you checked your wireless settings? Have you tried resetting the router?


----------



## robut

*tested MBPS*

Via Comcast
I just tested my Hp desk top using " www.speedtest.net " and this is my results

Down load 1.44mbps :laughing:
upload 0.37mbps :laughing:
deck hand


----------



## nap

comcast, older Dell, Teryon modem (supplied by Comcast), Linksys WRT54G router wired connection

24.7 Mbps down
1.64 Mbps up


----------



## piste

nap said:


> comcast, older Dell, Teryon modem (supplied by Comcast), Linksys WRT54G router wired connection
> 
> 24.7 Mbps down
> 1.64 Mbps up


That's some pretty good speed...you must have their highest level service. Where I'm at on my situation is this....I have learned that wireless G is nowhere near 54mbps on a practical level. In fact...in my case...it can't even really keep up with my 16mbps subscribed speed. Further, internet speed on a wireless network decreases with lower signal ie. distance from the router. Naturally....things like composition and layout of one's house and location of the wireless router play a big part in the degree to which the speed drop occurs. I could up my Comcast level from 16 to 22mbps for another $10 a month...but I'm thinking I'd be better off first upgrading to a Linksys dual band N router for a one time fee of about $150...thereby getting better leverage out of my current monthly ISP fee...ie. I might actually get closer to a full 16mbps and at greater distance from the router. The only other idea I have is to try a different channel on the router....currently set at "6-2.437 GHZ" where 6 is just the 6th choice in a list. Or...I might try and relocate the router in my house to get a better overall signal profile throughout the house.


----------



## poppameth

I have the 16 Mbps service and routinely get over 20Mbps using the same speed test. It's because of Powerboost. They spike your speed at the start of a download but on extended downloads it drops back to what you are paying for or less. It's very difficult to get an accurate speed rating on Comcast due to this.


----------



## piste

poppameth said:


> I have the 16 Mbps service and routinely get over 20Mbps using the same speed test. It's because of Powerboost. They spike your speed at the start of a download but on extended downloads it drops back to what you are paying for or less. It's very difficult to get an accurate speed rating on Comcast due to this.


Are you using wireless? Does your speed decrease with distance from the router? My premise is that it does for everyone ....to some degree.


----------



## hyunelan2

Here is my personal setup. I am an I.T. professional by trade, but also a cheap-o in my personal life. I spend money when it matters, but typically pay as little as possible to get the job done.



I have Comcast 20Mbps service, with their provided cable modem @ $5.00 per month.
That ties into a Buffalo WHR-HP-G54 router. http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16833162134
From there, my desktop is attached via a wired connection.
Wireless is used to stream to my HTPC hooked up to my 50" Samsung TV. This computer also stores all my movies.
Wireless is used to stream to a laptop connected to a 32" Vizio TV in the bedroom. I can watch movies from the HTPC on this computer/TV without issue.
Wireless is used for my laptop and my wife's laptop (work provided) for internet surfing.

I used to have a D-link wireless-G router that was fine for surfing, but the connection would get laggy for streaming from the internet. I don't use Netflix, but do use Hulu, which would be similar. Once I got that new Buffalo router - everything was fine. In fact, I started running CAT-5 from my office to the room with the HTPC, but never hooked it up because the new router took care of the problem.

I was debating between the linksys router and that Buffalo - they are similarly rated but I liked the reviews and open-source firmware of the Buffalo, which is why I went in that direction.


----------



## robut

deck hand said:


> Via Comcast
> I just tested my Hp desk top using " www.speedtest.net " and this is my results
> 
> Down load 1.44mbps :laughing: ugh!!
> upload 0.37mbps :laughing: What the hey!
> deck hand


 
11/18/2010
I just checked my modem it is a Motorola SB4220 Surfboard.

Next: I have an older Airlink wireless router super " G " AR430 W
Given to me by my son many years ago.
I'm going to purchase an apple laptop as a gift from my
kids.Will this router be ok to stream movies to my TV ?

Now as for this Modem I called comcast and told them how old my modem is, I guessed around 8 to 10 years, they will send me a newer modem.:thumbup:


----------



## 6burgh

I have the 12mbps service.


----------



## piste

6burgh said:


> I have the 12mbps service.


Yeah...when you run it you have to pay attention as it is testing each component..up...down etc....you should see it hover for most of each component test right around what would be your typical speed...then it may spike and record that instead. On my wife's laptop I've gotten spikes of like 90 something Mb/s...but it usually hovers in the teens..with my 16 mbps service.


----------



## RedHelix

I hate to rain on the speedtest parade, but 2 items:

1. Most ISPs blatantly prioritize traffic from those hosts to give you the impression that you're getting the bandwidth you're paying for.

2. Connection speed to one host is not reflective of anything except the circumstances it presents: Continuous interaction with one remote host, using a few select protocols. This is useful for gamers perhaps, but does it reflect the performance you'll get from general web browsing? Absolutely not.


----------



## 6burgh

Yeah there are many things to be figured in. Especially on an ISP like Comcast where you are part of a cluster. Our household uses alot of bandwidth a month with 5 laptops, 2 ipods, 2 xboxes, a wii and 3 media centers and will give credit to Comcast in my region for their internet but not their cable or phone.


----------



## RedHelix

Exactly.

There seems to be a roaming misconception that Mbps is a metric that has anything to do with 'packet speed.' Even I find myself doing that sometimes to make things easier to understand for the listener.

But it's more like this: Mbps is a metric for measuring bandwidth. It's the amount of bits that can be pushed across a medium per second, plain and simple. For all the electricians in the audience, consider the principle of allowable amperage on a length of romex and you're... well, kind of close. I'm not great at analogies.

In any case, if you want to talk about 'speed', then you're probably thinking of (RTT) latency. That is a whole other animal, because the now you're getting into UDP versus TCP packets, geography and routing through intermediate hops. If speedtest.net tried to give you a report on that data, you'd have no idea what to do with it.


----------



## piste

Well maybe Elvis and Jim Morrison really aren't dead and we didn't really put a man on the moon!

For better or worse ISP providers market their various service levels first and foremost on download/upload speed as measured in Mbps. Therefore us consumers only have that to go on as a relative measure regarding the value of one service vs. another. And from a consumer perspective value is entirely the performance as experienced by us. People are interested in (hopefully objective) means to evaluate internet performance...that's the goal here. And performance in this case is primarily latency or lack thereof (ie. press enter and get back what you expect). And it's all just bits coming through so a bit speed metric would appear to be most relevant. 

Sure one can shoot holes in anything if you try hard enough...and possibly very legitimate holes at that. And there may indeed be many limitations to something like speedtest.net..but it is what it is ...no more no less. So if folks REALLY want to be of assistance to others...feel free to shoot holes and tread down into the depths of technology and electronics...but if you REALLY want to help... please articulate a better practical solution or alternative to achieve the stated goal...for which I for one would be most grateful.

(Lastly, apologies to the OP if I helped hijack this thread...but hopefully this is a collectively useful dialogue.)


----------



## RedHelix

> For better or worse ISP providers market their various service levels first and foremost on download/upload speed as measured in Mbps. Therefore us consumers only have that to go on as a relative measure regarding the value of one service vs. another.


And PC manufacturers market their computers on how many Gigahertz they have. Auto manufacturers market their cars on horsepower. It's a relevant spec but only in a proper context.



> but if you REALLY want to help... please articulate a better practical solution or alternative to achieve the stated goal...for which I for one would be most grateful.


For starters, let's dial back the clock here to page one where the very first suggestion I pitched to you (upgrade your firmware) resulted your coming back to report a net improvement to responsiveness. I'm not out to prove people wrong just for the sake of being a jerk.

That said: The reason I'm making it a point to clearly define the function of bandwidth is because the fundamental problem is that 9-10Mbps of actual negotiated throughput for a single host across an 802.11g session apparently isn't acceptable on the grounds that your ISP has allotted you 16. There are indeed ways to improve that, but please consider a few items:

1. Not every connection you make to a remote host will utilize 100% of the bandwidth allotted to you by your ISP, nor should it.

2. Packet loss, high latency and other factors that take place between the gateway and client PCs will result in a lower negotiated throughput between said PCs to remote hosts. This is perfectly common, particularly in in the case of wireless networking where higher latency and noisier connections than copper are just a fact of life.

3. Wireless is a complement or a workaround to copper runs - not a substitute. Unless there's some other factor slowing down internet connectivity for that PC, 10Mbps of throughput sounds pretty darned good on paper.


My advice? If nobody in the house is complaining, squeezing another 6Mbps of bandwidth for a single wireless PC falls squarely into "ain't broke, don't fix it" territory. 

But, since you asked:
-Wireless-N might indeed do the trick if you have 802.11n equipment on both sides of the connection. It's been my experience that the frequency band and MIMO tech pierces right through areas with ludicrous amounts of interference.
-On that note, identify sources of interference. Do you have 2.4GHz cordless phones in your house? How many sheetrock walls does the signal have to penetrate?
-Directional or aftermarket antennas can be an inexpensive fix if it works for your particular structure.

Realistically, the only resolution that I (or anyone) can totally guarantee will work would be a Cat5e run.


----------



## piste

Thanks. I did not mean to sound ungrateful....I just think for all its limitations speedtest.net is the best thing that I know of anyway to do at least some relative testing. I basically agree with your assessment that I've got a configuration that is running as would be expected given all constraints. Upgrading the firmware seems like it might have helped..though the day after the upgrade the wife was complaining that she thought things got slower...take that with a grain of salt. I HAVE noticed since the firmware upgrade that my 2GB NAS drive that is ethernet cat5 connected to the router seems to be performing much better. Changing to an N router with gigabit ethernet will hellp that too....but for now I agree...it ain't really broke so will hold off for a while on moving to dual band N with gigabit ethernet. I'll have to check the phone...don't recall if it is 2.4 ghz or not. Cheers.


----------



## poppameth

If you want a better idea of your true speed, find a large file to download, like a linux live cd for example, and watch the speed on the progress bar of the download. That'll give you a much better idea of you true speed over an extended download that using a speed test will. It's a simple method to try.


----------



## Tizzer

I use Comcast with their RCA modem and a Linksys router. I didn't know you could use your own modem. As from what I understand, the modem is what's turned off if you're late on payment and/or have internet connection problems.
They can diagnose problems via a phone call w/o sending out a tech.:confused1:


----------



## poppameth

They can do that with any modem. They provision it with their own firmware update when you first call them with the new modem information.


----------



## gychang

nap said:


> why would you guys recommend a wireless router that is only B/G compliant? what about N?
> 
> Is there a reason to not use an N compliant router?


here is what I use with the modem that was recommended above on my Cox, can't beat the combo, high speed indeed.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16833127215&Tpk=dir 655

gychang


----------



## Plump

gychang said:


> here is what I use with the modem that was recommended above on my Cox, can't beat the combo, high speed indeed.
> 
> http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16833127215&Tpk=dir 655
> 
> gychang




I have the same N router and have for a few years now. It works flawlessly with my Compaq and Acer laptops as well (obviously) my Dell desktop. The added speed is a big deal and in the neighborhood, gets less interference from phones, etc.

Definitely recommend it and would say that 802.11n is the only way to go at this stage of wireless development.


----------

