[72643] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Campus size Wireless LAN
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (William Petrisko)
Wed Jul 21 21:08:31 2004
Date: Wed, 21 Jul 2004 18:07:53 -0700
From: William Petrisko <nanog@wjp.net>
To: nanog@merit.edu
In-Reply-To: <024A163A-DB51-11D8-B973-000A95D15116@columbia.edu>; from Brandon Pinsky on Wed, Jul 21, 2004 at 04:03:18PM -0400
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
On Wed, Jul 21, 2004 at 04:03:18PM -0400, Brandon Pinsky wrote:
> I just installed a Quickbridge 60 recently. It's pretty nice. The
> throughput is good over a .75 mile link. I was able to successfully
> push ~20Mbps with an iperf test. Installation was easy relative to
> some of the other equipment we have installed. The feed line is UTP
> and the radio gets power over the UTP cable. The uplink interface is
> 100BaseT which is easy. My only complaint is that it is not remotely
> manageable. You have to have direct console to make any config changes
> which means taking the link down. We have another .11a system in
I believe that this is fixed in the latest release of code...
bill
> production made by RadioLan and it is plagued by the same design flaw.
> Stupid... I'd like to compare it to the Cisco one. I bet it is more
> manageable.
>
> BJ
>
> On Jul 21, 2004, at 2:01 PM, Eric Brown wrote:
>
> >
> > Anyone have experience with Proxim's tsunami quickbridge for wireless
> > connectivity between buildings at line of site distances under 1 mile?
> > It's cheaper than Cisco and looks good on paper. Looking for the good
> > bad and ugly. Thanks in advance!
> >
> > -Eric
>
--
Bill Petrisko
