World record 5GHz WiFi connection spans 189 miles

Alright kids, time to put away the Pringles can and get serious about that inter-continental LAN party of yours, 'cause the Italian Center for Radio Activities (CISAR) is making you all look bad with its new world record. Stretching from Sardinia Island to Central Italy, the 189 mile connection ran on Ubiquiti's XtremeRange5 miniPCI module at 5Mbps, and used 35dBi 5GHz parabolic dish antennas to achieve the range. It's not exactly the furthest WiFi connection ever achieved, but it is the first to use the 5GHz frequency for 5Mbps speeds, and was purportedly a snap to set up with the Ubiquiti tech. It all seems almost silly in a world where we lose a few home WiFi bars when we take the laptop into the bathroom -- maybe it's time to do something about all that lead paint.

[Loner45 @ Aug 27th 2007 4:14PM]

that would be on hell of a lan pary

[Yimmy @ Aug 27th 2007 4:20PM]

I think I just heard the sound of a million gamers exploding with joy... Something about me and 150 of my closest friends playing and sharing files on the same network sounds fun. Then again, the 5 million people that live within 200 miles of me easily seeing / cracking that network isn't very reassuring.

[Flinkman @ Aug 27th 2007 7:42PM]

Those were directional antenas, so unless the cracker aims his directional antenna, and yours at each other, there is a really small chance of cracking your network.

[Rainier @ Aug 27th 2007 4:31PM]

What amuses me is that years from now, people will say,
"Gee, remember when 5GHz WiFi was limited to ONLY 189 miles"

[Jeff @ Aug 27th 2007 7:35PM]

Yeah, no doubt. Because by then I'm sure we'll have upgraded the crap out of the physical properties of radio waves. We'll swap out our old, outdated Physics 1.0 for the hot new Physics 2.0!

[dj-kenpo @ Aug 27th 2007 10:42PM]

jeff: yeah, cuz I'm sure technology will stop advancing. it's not like radio waves travel far anyways... like into space and shit. (tv told me they do! tv is never wrong!)
anyways...

Radio waves *might not change, but HOW we use them DOES and WILL.

[trakais @ Aug 29th 2007 6:47AM]

actually regular 802.11 can't do this. they used mikrotik n-streme to achieve this distance. there is a video about this link on tiktube.com by the way

[strider_mt2k @ Aug 27th 2007 4:44PM]

Reports indicate that over 70,000 people snarfed the signal almost immediately.

[Randy @ Aug 27th 2007 4:53PM]

@Yimmy,

It requires a directional antenna and line of sight for both antennas. Only people in the path (or very close) to the path would be able to sniff. I would imagine that they would have to be pretty close to one of the endpoint to actually get on and do something. Hopefully you're using WPA(2) right?

[engadget.mlc @ Aug 27th 2007 4:59PM]

What are you guys doing with your laptop in the bathroom?

[The General @ Aug 27th 2007 5:02PM]

Surfing the tubes while emptying the tubes...

[Russ @ Aug 27th 2007 9:30PM]

..or cleaning the pipes?

[Brian @ Aug 28th 2007 3:00AM]

Reading a DIY site on how to install a new toilet to sit on and surf the web. It's not like they make anything more convient and smaller like books to bring in there.

[adaminc @ Aug 27th 2007 5:19PM]

They should've done it from Corsica, then at least it would've been international.

[Tomas Kapler @ Aug 27th 2007 5:48PM]

I always wonder why theese things are in news. This is nothing extra - you can have thousands of kilometers for one connection with your WiFi - it all depends on how big antenna you are using. But the problem is, it is ILEGAL. The bigger antenna you use, the higher antenna gain you achieve, the higher signal density you achieve. But this density must be maximum equivalent to 100 mW isotropic antenna (2,4 GHz Europe), or 1 W isotropic antenna (5 GHz Europe). They are overpowering it for about 200 times (calculating 20 dBm equivpemnt gain -2 dB cable loss). Are you going to write about other ilegal activites like taking drugs, roberry etc???
P.S.: author of this comment is doing WiFi (802.11) from 1997

[Flinkman @ Aug 27th 2007 7:50PM]

No, you can use antenna big as your house, and nobody can't tell tou nothing. You just can't have higher wifi radio output than 21 dBm at least here in Europe. I tweaked my Linksys DD-WRT router to 70 dbm for better covarage in my house.

[Tomas Kapler @ Aug 27th 2007 8:56PM]

No Flinkman, you can't (you are not allowed to, even you are able to).
See your national telecomunication standards, they all adopted the ETSI (EU) standard ETS 300 328, similar one is in FCI countries (US).
Search for EIRP limit (google Effective Isotropic Radiated Power) explanation, or just believe me (i do it profesinally for 10 years)

[dj-kenpo @ Aug 27th 2007 10:46PM]

meh, chill. it's illigal to download commercial mp3's. know what? I do it anways. if you don't want to that's fine, but your tone is a little too serious.

I doubt anyone would care especially seeing as it's pointed into a line, and this person isn't directing the signals outwards all over the airspace. it's not disrupting anyone but someone in the line of sight.

[Flinkman @ Aug 28th 2007 12:22AM]

@dj-kenpo: or something. Maybe with a high-gain antenna you could fry a flying pigeon. It would be a fun project to try.

[Tomas Kapler @ Aug 28th 2007 1:55AM]

yeh, but do you read here records of dowloading commercial mp3?

[Tomas Kapler @ Aug 27th 2007 5:58PM]

technicaly - it will be almost impossible to hack in - such big antennas hav about 1% beaming angle, and the antennas signal must have a clear space of at least 97 meters (30 floor skytower) around the beam (first fresnel zone), so you would have to fly in this area, very acurately point your antenna, to have a chance to catch the signal from one device, and then to second to do e.g. man in the middle attack.

[Maestro @ Aug 27th 2007 6:52PM]

Why Italy kicks the extra point instead of going for two is beyond me.

[scott @ Aug 27th 2007 7:32PM]

fArthest, not furthest.

[diablonhn @ Aug 27th 2007 8:54PM]

Don't the grammar police know that furthest and farthest are both grammatically correct? Jeeze, the police should stop hiring high school dropouts.

[Aaron @ Aug 27th 2007 9:20PM]

And get a great tan just by standing close to those parabolic dish antennas.

[Aaron @ Aug 27th 2007 9:32PM]

@diablonhn

Not that this has anything to do with anything but I think Scott is correct.

Farther and further can be used interchangeably when the word in question functions as an adverb, and distance is involved. However, in this particular sentence the word in question functions as an adjective. Therefore, farther and further are not interchangeable.

Farther is used when distance is involved. For example: The farther south I drive, the closer to home I get.

Further is used when information is involved. I need further information before I can make a decision.

Therefore, "farther" is the appropriate word and both are not grammatically correct since it is acting as an adjective, describing Wifi connection.

[dj-kenpo @ Aug 27th 2007 10:51PM]

I'll adjective your interchangeable.... and stuff.

I can haz adverbs...?

[diablonhn @ Aug 28th 2007 3:31AM]

Aaron,

I think you should look at a dictionary before you post. Just because your city block uses only farthest for distance doesn't mean it's the "correct way". Google up "farthest and furthest" and you will get a better picture of the world.

In other words, there are variations in English usage. It is because of variations over time that we get some of the different languages we have now.

[Husain @ Aug 28th 2007 1:57AM]

Thats the reason I dont take you guys any where!

[mip @ Aug 28th 2007 2:53AM]

@Tomas Kapler
Hy Thomas. If you have 10 years wifi experience (802.11b was deployed in 1999....), you have to know that there's no limit on gain for receiving antennas. You can transmit with 1 x 2,2dBi dipole and receiving with a 70dBi antenna and staying legal.

After that, you have to read better the news:
"...[CUT]the Italian Center for Radio Activities (CISAR) [CUT]...".
They (we) are radio ham, so they (we) have higher EIRP limits than which ETSI imposed to the european market.

P.S.
Sorry for bad english, i'm only an italian ham... ;-)

[oshean @ Aug 28th 2007 10:11AM]

Capicollo, culatello or prosciutto?

[elfribo @ Aug 28th 2007 4:29AM]

You are right I am remodeling my bathroom shortly!

[vabloke @ Aug 28th 2007 9:10AM]

Did anyone read the actual article? Because if you did you would see the record was set by CISAR and Ubiquiti which is a company that makes Wi-Fi equipment. As for CISAR most everything they do is experimental. What's my point, well both CISAR and Ubiquiti have licenses to do this sort of thing so it was not illegal. Not only that they are experimenting because their goal is to have long and short range Wi-Fi available throughout Italy and if they succeed I am sure laws will be passed and it will be leag for all. Don't you love inovation.

[diabalobo @ Aug 28th 2007 7:00PM]

I wonder how many seagulls they cooked when they flew through that beam

[Core @ Aug 29th 2007 4:27AM]

I don't keep up with Wifi, and may regret this comment. But it seems like from this article it would be super easy for all kinds of Broadband wireless IP's to pop up state side, and compete with landlines easily, and give decent rates of dled speed @ decent prices. 20.00 a month?

[Matt Welke @ Oct 16th 2007 11:40PM]

It is possible, but not many people want gigantic 35 dbi antennas (google image search it to see just how huge those things are :P) on their roofs. Also, not many WISP's want to put one of those antennas up for every customer. This distance was acheived using two directional antennas. It would be significantly shorter if the one of them was an omnidirectional antenna.

[Core @ Oct 20th 2007 8:57PM]

Alright. Thanks for explaining that.

[N.R. @ Aug 29th 2007 6:38AM]

more info about this wireless link:
http://forum.mikrotik.com/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=16548

includes more images and setup description!