As interest in Wi-Fi-based wireless networks picks up, interest is growing in wireless switching as well. But if some wireless switch standards are not put in place soon, buyers of w/switching technologies will end up with a lot of proprietary gear that results in the sort of risky vendor lock-ins that they should be trying to avoid.

My worries about proprietary w/switching technologies started when the first w/switch vendor --- Symbol Technologies --- went public with its plans to sell its Mobius line of w/switches and access points. Those worries were compounded when I met recently with a second w/switch vendor -- Aruba Wireless Networks.

The basic idea of wireless switching seems pretty noble. Both the Symbol and Aruba designs take the intelligence normally embedded in the access point (for things like security) and moves it upstream to the device to which the access point connects -- the hub. But, whereas the typical Wi-Fi-compatible (802.11a or 802.11b) access point can be connected to any 10- or 100-mbps Ethernet hub or switch, the dumbed-down access points from Aruba and Symbol can only be connected to a w/switch from the same vendor.

There are some benefits to this architecture.

As the Wi-Fi standard matures and managers of wireless local area networks (WLANs) must replace access points to keep pace with the evolving standards (which affect such things as performance and security), that field work is greatly simplified when the device at the edge requires minimal attention. Given the complexity of running a WLAN, most network managers would welcome anything that simplifies the administration of access points.

So, let's say that today, when you install or replace an access point in the field, you have to use some management software to go into that device and change some settings to make it compatible with the rest of the WLAN and to guarantee that your security policy is in effect. With Aruba's and Symbol's offerings, that management activity takes place in the w/switch instead of in the access point. If you're replacing an access point to upgrade from 802.11b to 802.11a or 802.11g, you simply take out the old access point and plug in the new one. Since the management settings for the old access point are stored in the w/switch, the new access point automatically inherits the old access point's settings.

Another advantage: Whereas most enterprise-class access points have an RS-232 port so that a VT-100 terminal (or equivalent) can be connected directly to them for out-of-band management, the access points for w/switches have no such ports because there's nothing to manage. That lack of an RS-232 port on the access point eliminates a potential security vulnerability. Granted, most network managers are smart enough to lock down all RS-232-managed devices. But those same managers will tell you that, on occasion, they discover an RS-232-enabled device that somehow found its way into the field without being properly secured.

Ease of management is only the start of lowering your total cost of ownership (TCO), claim Symbol and Aruba. Because the cost of producing a dumb access point is lower than the cost of producing a more full-fledged device, the companies note, as access points get replaced (due to maturing standards) or as the network grows, lower cost access points will contribute to overall lower TCO. The w/switch may cost more money than the average hub or switch to which you might normally connect your access points. But, both Symbol and Aruba will be happy to show you an ROI-analysis that determines the number of access points at which you'll start saving money over traditional WLAN designs.

Both companies also have an extended list of advantages specific to their w/switching solutions. Some of these appear to be very compelling, especially in the area of security. But, if what Aruba founders Pankaj Manglik and Keerti Melkote say is true (and I think they're right) --- that WLANs have the same "switched" manifest destiny that Ethernet did --- then, as a buyer, you have to ask yourself if it's worth trading in the standards-based nature of your network for those advantages. Both Symbol and Aruba admit that their access points don't work with the other guy's w/switches. In both cases, the access point-w/switch connection is 100 percent proprietary. And, going with any w/switched WLAN strategy has its risks.

The biggest risk of any proprietary technology is that it puts the vendor of that technology in control of your information technology.

As I discussed in a previous column, standards put you in control of your technology's performance, reliability, security, and TCO. If your current standards-compliant gear is failing your tolerance thresholds for any one of those criteria, you have the option of replacing that gear with another standards-compliant offering that promises to do better. But once you go the proprietary route, you lose that option.

If, for example, you go the Aruba or Symbol route, and suddenly, a gaping security hole is discovered in your chosen product, you are at the vendor's mercy to fix that hole on a timely basis. That risk could be compounded in the case of a year-old start-up like Aruba. While the 40-employee company doesn't appear to be in any financial peril and its solutions are the sort of technology that could end up being acquired by a larger networking vendor, what happens if I'm fully dependent on Aruba's gear and the company goes under?

Bottom line: The same economic climate that demands rapid ROI-based IT investment decisions also demands conservative thinking when it comes to the compromises needed to get that rapid ROI. In the case of something as important as your wireless network, one of those compromises should not be the introduction of proprietary technologies that lock you into one vendor.

Fortunately, both Aruba and Symbol agree that it would be good to see a w/switching standard emerge and both have said to me that they'd be willing to contribute to the evolution of such a standard. Hopefully, that time will come sooner rather than later.

Would you be willing to sacrifice the open-standards-based nature of your networking infrastructure for reduced complexity and long-term TCO reduction? Do you want the benefits of w/switching without the vendor lock-in that's comes with the territory of proprietary technology? Use ZDNet's TalkBack below to share your feelings with your fellow readers, or write to david.berlind@cnet.com.