are not nec- essarily the same. Mobility implies the ability to connect to the network via a wireless local loop. Ideally it offers predictable high-bandwidth, easy, dependable connections, and secure transmission. Ubiquity, on the other hand, implies the ability to connect to the network anywhere, Downloaded from Digital Engineering Library @ McGraw-Hill (www.digitalengineeringlibrary.com Copyright © 2004 The McGraw-Hill Companies. All rights reserved. Any use is subject to the Terms of Use as given at the website. Access Technologies Chapter 6 anytime, regardless of the characteristics of the loop. Ubiquitous access may include wireless as an option, but may also include wired solutions such as Ethernet, T1, and DSL. Another issue is the usage of the two words in terms of parts of speech. Mobility, used as it is in our lexicon, is a noun, because in the minds of many it defines (incorrectly) an application. Mobility is no more an application than DSL is an application. It is a technology option-no more and no less. Ubiquity, on the other hand, is used as an adjectival modifier to qual- ify the nature of an individual's access to the network. Ubiquitous access implies the delivery of something that is superior because it is-every- where. But isn't wireline access universally available and, therefore, ubiquitous as well? And isn't it significantly more secure than a wireless connection, particularly in an enterprise application? After all, if a busi- ness decides to implement wireless (802.11) as its connectivity option of choice within a workplace, how can it possibly guarantee that (1) all users implement a secure wireless protocol over the local loop, and (2) signals do not leak out of the building? Wireless is a great technology, offering freedom and mobility to users, but there is a price. And that price can be steep if it is implemented without forethought. I have observed in this book that customers are not really looking for the "next great killer application" but rather for a "killer" way to access exist