Only inspection.
On 7/24/2015 2:38 PM, TJ Trout wrote:
Does this do only inspection or shaping based on inspection?
On Fri, Jul 24, 2015 at 12:35 PM, Jon Langeler
<jon-ispli...@michwave.net <mailto:jon-ispli...@michwave.net>> wrote:
I think they have different teams on each project and some are
more resource limited. they need to spend some more $$$$
Sent from my iPhone
On Jul 24, 2015, at 12:02 PM, Ken Hohhof <af...@kwisp.com
<mailto:af...@kwisp.com>> wrote:
Now if they could just release the U-NII-1 firmware for the Beam
products.
SOON!
*From:* Jon Langeler <mailto:jon-ispli...@michwave.net>
*Sent:* Friday, July 24, 2015 9:31 AM
*To:* af@afmug.com <mailto:af@afmug.com>
*Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Ubiquiti DPI?
When you have the volume and variety of products that ubiquiti
does, they can do things that nobody else can do especially when
they have some specialized 3rd party developers.
Sent from my iPhone
On Jul 24, 2015, at 8:52 AM, Ken Hohhof <af...@kwisp.com
<mailto:af...@kwisp.com>> wrote:
My view is with DPI, like virus scanning or spam filtering, you
are buying the updates as much as the platform. If the
signatures and rules aren’t kept up to date, it loses value.
Any vendor that uses this feature to sell hardware and doesn’t
charge a yearly fee may not understand the task.
*From:* Paul Stewart <mailto:p...@paulstewart.org>
*Sent:* Friday, July 24, 2015 7:38 AM
*To:* af@afmug.com <mailto:af@afmug.com>
*Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Ubiquiti DPI?
LOL … I have a hard time with that term being used with Ubiquiti ;)
*From:*Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] *On Behalf Of *Josh Luthman
*Sent:* Friday, July 24, 2015 8:30 AM
*To:* af@afmug.com <mailto:af@afmug.com>
*Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Ubiquiti DPI?
"Carrier Grade"
Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340 <tel:937-552-2340>
Direct: 937-552-2343 <tel:937-552-2343>
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373
On Jul 24, 2015 8:17 AM, "Paul Stewart" <p...@paulstewart.org
<mailto: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
<mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com>] *On Behalf Of *Jason McKemie
*Sent:* Friday, July 24, 2015 1:27 AM
*To:* af@afmug.com <mailto: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 <mailto: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 <mailto: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....
