[100805] in North American Network Operators' Group
RE: large-scale wireless [was: cpu needed to NAT 45mbs]
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Frank Bulk)
Tue Nov 13 09:23:58 2007
Reply-To: <frnkblk@iname.com>
From: "Frank Bulk" <frnkblk@iname.com>
To: "'Elmar K. Bins'" <elmi@4ever.de>
Cc: <nanog@merit.edu>
In-Reply-To: <20071113134607.GG66222@ronin.4ever.de>
Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2007 08:23:01 -0600
Errors-To: owner-nanog@merit.edu
Elmar:
Marketing and theory -- I haven't had a chance to test it myself.
BTW, I'm not regurgitating Extricom's marketing rhetoric when I say you
don't need to worry about channel planning -- their product is designed with
that specifically in mind. The technical benefits and caveats of this
single-channel architecture, and the possible concerns that a network
planner might have around the requirement to have L1 connectivity from
Extricom's APs to their switch, are better discussed in another forum.
Frank
-----Original Message-----
From: Elmar K. Bins [mailto:elmi@4ever.de]
Sent: Tuesday, November 13, 2007 7:46 AM
To: Frank Bulk
Cc: nanog@merit.edu
Subject: Re: large-scale wireless [was: cpu needed to NAT 45mbs]
frnkblk@iname.com (Frank Bulk) wrote:
> If you're going with Extricom you don't need to worry about channel
planning
> beyond adding more "channel blankets".
Is that based on marketing, theory (based on the whitepapers and patent
descriptions) or practical experience?
Elmar.
