2013 Robot Bridge-Rev B Only

[Mark McLeod]

The FRC Blog had some important news about the 2013 robot radio.

All teams will receive in their Kickoff Kit, and be required to use, a new wireless bridge. The new bridge is still a D-Link DAP 1522, but only the hardware Rev B version will be permitted.

Also, legal motor controllers.

First, the list of approved motor controllers will be expanded. Specifically, Cross the Road Electronics’ Talon and Innovation First’s Victor 888 motor controllers will be legal.

[linuxboy]

This is interesting. I've had nothing but good experiences with the Rev. B (aside from having to program them by hand). They've always seemed more reliable to me. My main concern is that they have less visible diagnostic lights. I'm excited to see what the other next steps are!

[akoscielski3]

WOOHOO! They're Officially Legal!

[Mark McLeod]

Originally Posted by linuxboy

This is interesting. I've had nothing but good experiences with the Rev. B (aside from having to program them by hand). They've always seemed more reliable to me. My main concern is that they have less visible diagnostic lights. I'm excited to see what the other next steps are!

My concerns with carrying the same radio for multiple years are the effects of long term wear & tear. Even though we don't use them constantly, I think the older radios become less reliable just from age and being driven into walls and other robots, having the power cut and restored repeatedly, suffering brown-outs, etc.

I loved the old black bridges, but the older they get, the more idiosyncratic they become.

I think the same of most of our electronic components. Many of them are really tough like the Victor 884s and last for years if properly taken care of and kept clean, but students change and things happen given the time.

[dcarr]

I'm glad that they are standardizing everyone on the newer hardware. But my $0.02...it's going to take a lot more than a slightly newer WiFi radio to fix the underlying problems we've dealt with for years. Looking forward to the additional upcoming announcements.

[DominickC]

I'm having a hard time locating information on the dlink 1522 rev b. Other than the front status light changes, are there any other notable changes on the router? Are there status lights on the back? Is the size/weight any different?

[Mark McLeod]

There is a difference on the back as well, the switch has no Auto setting and two different AP settings.



Here is the Rev B manual.

[Alan Anderson]

Originally Posted by DominickC

...are there any other notable changes on the router?

Where the switch on the back of the older version selected among AP/Auto/Bridge modes, the new one has AP2.4GHz/AP5HGz/Bridge. There don't appear to be any lights on the new version to indicate active wired network connections.

[DominickC]

Okay, so not much changed in the physical size of the router, and there's no additional status lights. (Why less lights is better is beyond me)...Thanks.

[Jon Stratis]

I just hope they don't release a "Rev C" in January to confuse everyone!

[dcarr]

Now that everyone will have a 5Ghz radio...will they be switching entirely to that? In my experience (albeit limited) the range of 5Ghz is pretty poor but the speed and reliability seem great. Considering the field is a fairly small area, and that there will be a lot less happening on the 5Ghz band in most cases, that could be good...I trust they've taken this all into consideration.

[Jon Stratis]

Originally Posted by dcarr

Now that everyone will have a 5Ghz radio...will they be switching entirely to that? In my experience (albeit limited) the range of 5Ghz is pretty poor but the speed and reliability seem great. Considering the field is a fairly small area, and that there will be a lot less happening on the 5Ghz band in most cases, that could be good...I trust they've taken this all into consideration.

Rev A supported 5 GHz as well. In fact, the field has used 5GHz for a couple of years now.

The Einstein report highlighted the "Failed Client Authorization" on page 7/8. Notably, they tried 5 different access points (including Rev B), and only Rev A was susceptible to the FCA attempt. Switching everyone to Rev B should help with this.

[dcarr]

Originally Posted by Jon Stratis

Rev A supported 5 GHz as well. In fact, the field has used 5GHz for a couple of years now.

The Einstein report highlighted the "Failed Client Authorization" on page 7/8. Notably, they tried 5 different access points (including Rev B), and only Rev A was susceptible to the FCA attempt. Switching everyone to Rev B should help with this.

Ah, thank you for pointing that out. I did read the Einstein report but it's been a while. Any thoughts on why there always seems to be a request for all mobile hotspots to be turned off? Those typically run on 2.4 and wouldn't interfere with a 5Ghz field.

[Jon Stratis]

You answered your own question... "typically" isn't good enough. Having a single team create a mobile hotspot on 5 GHz could be enough to disrupt play. Likewise, having laptops that support 5GHz attempting to create local networks could cause issues as well.

It's generally considered better in situations like this to put a blanket ban out there instead of trusting everyone present to be able to know the difference. Simply removing as many possible points of failure is just good practice, and one of those points of failure is the audiences knowledge of wireless devices.

Of note, At the last off-season event I was at, my new 5 GHz iPhone 5 could detect the field AP, while older devices without 5GHz could not (I looked out of curiosity after reading the Einstein report, though I made no attempts to access the field with it!).

[dcarr]

Originally Posted by Jon Stratis

You answered your own question... "typically" isn't good enough. Having a single team create a mobile hotspot on 5 GHz could be enough to disrupt play. Likewise, having laptops that support 5GHz attempting to create local networks could cause issues as well.

It's generally considered better in situations like this to put a blanket ban out there instead of trusting everyone present to be able to know the difference. Simply removing as many possible points of failure is just good practice, and one of those points of failure is the audiences knowledge of wireless devices.

Of note, At the last off-season event I was at, my new 5 GHz iPhone 5 could detect the field AP, while older devices without 5GHz could not (I looked out of curiosity after reading the Einstein report, though I made no attempts to access the field with it!).

Indeed. For the same reason that Apple, Microsoft etc now ask all attending press to disable their hotspots during press conferences/demos.

That's really interesting (naturally there are tons of people with iPhone 5's now so I hope everyone exercises GP and self restraint).

On another note...I wonder if there has been any talk to release an updated FMS Lite. At all of the non-official events I've been to, field problems are incredibly persistent, and I hope that the changes and improvements brought to official competitions can benefit off-season events as well.