I had/have that concern as well. But it is mind boggling to me that so many people are complaining about ubiquiti putting in this value added feature (quite well I may add). I have never seen so many complaints about features being added. Shouldn't we instead complain about the needed features their products are missing?
Complaining about ubiquiti adding in DPI, even if it sucked, is like complaining that you get a dozen free games when you buy an XBox One. You may not like the games you get, but they are free and you don't have to play them if you don't want. Thank you, Brett A Mansfield > On Jul 24, 2015, at 6:52 AM, Mike Hammett <af...@ics-il.net> wrote: > > I think the thought is that DPI is a very intensive process and if the router > wasn't designed with enormous overhead or hardware acceleration, it could be > crippling. Maybe those routers were... > > > > ----- > Mike Hammett > Intelligent Computing Solutions > http://www.ics-il.com > > > > Midwest Internet Exchange > http://www.midwest-ix.com > > > From: "Brett A Mansfield" <li...@silverlakeinternet.com> > To: af@afmug.com > Sent: Friday, July 24, 2015 7:50:02 AM > Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Ubiquiti DPI? > > I don't know why anyone would have a problem with them putting this on > existing routers. If you don't like their routers, don't buy them. If you do > like their routers but think a feature shouldn't be there, don't enable it. > > I think it's great that ubiquiti innovates the way they do. They have some > great products that blow other products out of the water in one way or > another. And it's forced other companies to lower their seriously over priced > equipment and to rethink their strategies. Ubiquiti really is disrupting > things in the industry in only good ways. > > Sent from my iPhone > > On Jul 24, 2015, at 6:17 AM, Paul Stewart <p...@paulstewart.org> wrote: > > Well it will be interesting … sure would be nice to see someone “disrupt” I > agree … but there have been lots of folks try to provide “DPI” and fail badly > as they didn’t really understand what they were getting into… and doing it on > existing routers is usually the first mistake in my opinion….. > > > From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Jason McKemie > Sent: Friday, July 24, 2015 1:27 AM > To: af@afmug.com > Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Ubiquiti DPI? > > They've got the resources to do it, would be nice to see someone undercut the > existing players. > > On Thursday, July 23, 2015, Paul Stewart <p...@paulstewart.org> wrote: > I have no idea but if it’s like other attempts I’ve seen from companies to > stack heavy CPU “stuff” into a router, then stability and any type of scaling > would be first concerns. DPI is a very complex item to see someone like > Ubiquiti jump into in my opinion… > > From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Jeremy > Sent: Thursday, July 23, 2015 7:13 PM > To: af@afmug.com > Subject: [AFMUG] Ubiquiti DPI? > > Ok, so now that deep packet inspection has been announced I'd assume any NDAs > have been lifted. Have any of you been using this? Any idea what type of > latency is added? That pricing model is a whole lot different from any DPI > tool that I have ever seen.... >
