The best thing about stand-ards, it's been said, is that there are so many to choose from. Regardless, without standards, communications and networking, both wired and wireless, would never reach the critical mass for a real market to exist. The arrival of 802.11 in 1997 is but one powerful indicator: WLANs took off once the concept received IEEE blessing.

But standards can also be seen as the lowest-common-denominator entry point for functionality. They create a level playing field, to be sure, but the very companies that work so hard to create them often suffer with the result-everyone ends up selling essentially the same product. All that work instantly results in commoditization, and the low-cost supplier wins. Innovation grinds to a halt until the next standards process begins, which it must to solve the problem just created.

Thus, there's a good reason that 802.11 only standardizes up through the MAC layer. Sure, some above-the-MAC stuff is available in 802.1, but by and large the real differentiators in products and even companies aren't covered by standards, and this is by design. Unfair advantage in the market depends upon it.

So it's entirely unsurprising that Cisco Systems would invent its Cisco Compatible Extensions, a set of wireless-LAN security functionality, and then license these at no charge to WLAN chip suppliers. The goal in this case is most certainly not to create a new standard, prestandard or anything of the sort. The goal is to make Cisco WLAN products more attractive in the marketplace by integrating Cisco-compatible above-the-MAC functionality into what might otherwise be competitive (to Cisco) products.

Now, some have decried this move as anti-standard, anti-Wi-Fi and anti just about everything else. It is, of course, none of these. It's competition at its finest. Is Cisco using its undeniable market presence to beat the other guy? Duh, of course! That's what competitors do. That's what competition is all about. Could someone else try this? Sure-maybe it wouldn't be as effective coming from a lesser player, but it could work. I would go so far as to predict a lot more of this type of activity in the future. It's one good way to "unlevel" the playing field.

Some call this strategy "standards plus." It's been around for a long time. And we should expect a lot more of it.

Craig J. Mathias is Principal of Farpoint Group (Ashland, Mass.).

http://www.eet.com