[173075] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Inevitable death, was Re: Verizon Public Policy on Netflix
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Brett Glass)
Tue Jul 15 14:59:58 2014
X-Original-To: nanog@nanog.org
Date: Tue, 15 Jul 2014 12:59:38 -0600
To: Rubens Kuhl <rubensk@gmail.com>, "nanog@nanog.org" <nanog@nanog.org>
From: Brett Glass <nanog@brettglass.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAGFn2k07mpXax=F-i=Oxv76QVigxMM5bHie6at3dKTZ3226rQA@mail.g
mail.com>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces@nanog.org
At 12:18 PM 7/15/2014, Rubens Kuhl wrote:
>If you are picky enough to prefer other radios that cost more on Mbps/$,
>that's your call,
We need reliability. That particular radio wouldn't cut it. As I've
mentioned, users can get away with much less bandwidth if the quality
is high, so going for a less reliable radio with a high nominal speed
does not actually save money.
Also, that 5 GHz radio is a "spectrum spammer" and hence is a bad
neighbor.
After 25 years of doing wireless, one learns what really works and what
is a false economy. Believe me, we've learned some hard and expensive
lessons.
--Brett Glass
