There's been a series of excellent articles lately about the ongoing battles regarding version 1.0 of the high-speed wireless 802.11n specification.

At Wi-Fi Planet, Eric Griffith writes that Airgo Networks has good reason to be fighting against use of the 1.0 draft, since products with that version of 802.11n would make Airgo's TRUE MIMO offering much less unique in the marketplace. "Casting aspersions on the competition is par for the course," Griffith writes.

At Wi-Fi Networking News, Glenn Fleishman takes a closer look at the real interference issues remaining for 802.11n, politics aside. "It's important that the existing scarce 2.4 GHz spectrum not have even more demands placed upon it, which is why where a 40 MHz channel sits (by default or by choice) becomes a critial part of 802.11n," Fleishman writes.

But Fleishman also comes back to the Airgo issue, noting that an Airgo spokesman admitted to him that TRUE MIMO isn't quite as good as 802.11n -- the interference, he says, is really what Airgo is concerned about. "Airgo is saying that its competitors would risk destroying the performance or utility of existing 802.11b/g in order to capture part of Airgo's current proprietary, higher-margin business," he writes.

And at GigaOM, Om Malik warns, "To be honest, these guys better get their act together - given that most broadband providers including BELLS and MSOs are planning to include wireless in their gateways, do they really think they can decide what happens in the future?"