I was reading a very interesting article over at istartedsomething.com this morning.

Link

It seems Windows 7 incorporates Virtual Wi-Fi technology, which is in the current RC release, but there are no drivers yet that can take advantage of this, so we just have to wait a bit longer to try a hands-on test.

More from istartedsomething.com:

“You might be wondering why anyone would ever need multiple WLAN adapters on the same PC, well to be honest, you don’t need but its sometimes good to have. In any case where you’re connected to an existing wireless access point and want to connect to another network whether that be a separate access point or even set up an ad-hoc connection, Virtual WiFi will allow you to do just that. But perhaps the scenario that is more appealing is the idea of a mesh network. In a mesh network, every client becomes a repeater, growing the network organically as more clients connect. Virtual WiFi enables this, since every client can become an access point too.”

Those are certainly some interesting uses, and I can only imagine some other uses that haven’t been realized yet.  What do you think about this feature?  Would this be something you will use?


Comments
on May 18, 2009

sounds fun, though i can see unsecure networks in a link of secure networks allowing aggresive opportunist to comprimise a much larger system.

though using the virtualisation, 1 PC would have multiple IPs. which would [probably?] allow multiple High speed connections, through multiple networks.
Though I forsee a problem for noobs... why is the internet broken for this and not that?

although if there could be some ultimate 'bridge connections' option that automatically assigns a vitualised IP address to each process requesting one, without hogging to many memory resources trying to instance one process from one virtualised layer to another... it could be a pretty OK system... throw in a shell to allow advanced users to control applications using what goes through which IP and the connectivity to all of them (speed meterage would be nice to have around the place here) it would be an excellent system!

Though there would still be the issue that using that would be a superior hacking tool...

But REAL end users like things that 'just work' and if they need to change something themselves and they can. otherwise it seems more like a 'working bug' than a 'feature'.

This is a feature i would use to seperate my internet usage, gaming, IM and video calling. cause some of us like to be on Skype while using pidgin[an msn messenger alternative] while checking the nonsense your friends are telling you on wikipedia. then when thats boring alt-tabbing between facebook, myspace, and Unreal Tournement 3.

it would do microsoft a World Of Advantage to include an API that allows a relocated IP process to be broadcast to whats connected. Cause there would be nothing worse than some idiot hosting a game match server thinking its a little laggy, and switching it over and bam, connection to server lost. everybody rages... then games could listen for this broadcast pause the game while connecting to the new IP and people would be, less annoyed.
and with the use of AJAX increasing, im not sure how the background stuff works, but if the IP changes in a session then the server might be sending live data to a dead IP...

I've probably left too long a comment so i'll cut it off here.

tl;dr : It COULD be awesome, but it COULD fail if done wrong.

x

on May 18, 2009

sounds nice but it is a legal nightmare. many routers have "guest" bands where they leave an open wifi connection with throttled speed for anyone to use, but many countries put full legal responsibility on the owner of the ISP account and even classify them as an ISP...

For example in england if you have more than 15 people connect to your network you are an ISP, and are requried to spy on them for the government or face legal action. In the US if anyone uses your IP to, say, share a song or engage in something truely criminal. then you are held responsible because the courts treat an IP as an unspoofable fingerprint.

There are other security issues but they are not as devastating to the future of the technology as the legal issues...

Of course, many people that do not know of the massive legal liability they put themselves in will go ahead and use it. And if enough cases of misjustice occur we might actually get some smart laws. (that or the old fogies will die and we will get someone who was born this century in office who actually understands squat about computer tech)

on May 19, 2009

In the US if anyone uses your IP to, say, share a song or engage in something truely criminal. then you are held responsible because the courts treat an IP as an unspoofable fingerprint.

This would not be too hard to get around. If the virtual WiFi uses subnets of the assigned IP, that range could fall under the user. This will be really simple if it uses IPV6. I'm sure MS thought of some way to tie it all together.

on May 20, 2009

that is no guarentee that the COURTS will see it that way. they should NOT be holding people accountable based solely on IP, but they do.

on May 21, 2009

that is no guarentee that the COURTS will see it that way. they should NOT be holding people accountable based solely on IP, but they do.

Many folks use dynamic IP's over static. I would think the MAC tied to whatever IP, at whatever time frame would make for evidence in court, provided the prosecution can prove the person was the only one with access or motive. This is still kind of new, as to date most courts are interested as to what is on the hard drive (which includes cashed web addresses). Who knows what future effect the actual transmission leg of data will have. Soon your TV or refrigerator will have it's own IP (let you know when your beer is cold).

on May 21, 2009

Nitro Cruiser

that is no guarentee that the COURTS will see it that way. they should NOT be holding people accountable based solely on IP, but they do.
Many folks use dynamic IP's over static. I would think the MAC tied to whatever IP, at whatever time frame would make for evidence in court, provided the prosecution can prove the person was the only one with access or motive. This is still kind of new, as to date most courts are interested as to what is on the hard drive (which includes cashed web addresses). Who knows what future effect the actual transmission leg of data will have. Soon your TV or refrigerator will have it's own IP (let you know when your beer is cold).

 

wouldn't they just build a fridge into the PC?

on May 21, 2009

Nitro Cruiser

that is no guarentee that the COURTS will see it that way. they should NOT be holding people accountable based solely on IP, but they do.


Many folks use dynamic IP's over static. I would think the MAC tied to whatever IP, at whatever time frame would make for evidence in court, provided the prosecution can prove the person was the only one with access or motive. This is still kind of new, as to date most courts are interested as to what is on the hard drive (which includes cashed web addresses). Who knows what future effect the actual transmission leg of data will have. Soon your TV or refrigerator will have it's own IP (let you know when your beer is cold).

All they need to do is prove that during the time of the crime, the IP in question was linked to an account owned by person A. Person A is held liable by the courts. they SHOULD need to prove that it was really that person, but they are not being required to as of yet.

on May 28, 2009

wouldn't they just build a fridge into the PC?

The number of devices and appliances that use IP's is going to explode. Exciting times.

on May 28, 2009

so far I love Win7, it runs great on my 2 year old laptop.