On Thu, Oct 9, 2008 at 3:32 PM, Christopher Chen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Do you think there's enough just to deploy around certain city parks?
I think you'd have difficulty getting decent coverage in the park, as there were demonstrated coverage problems just reaching halfway down a city block. If *I* were to design a reuse project for it, my initial inclination (having never touched a single one of the units or seen any internal performance measurements) would be to find a single neighborhood to deploy very dense rooftop nodes with many wired backhauls (1:4 or 1:5). Presumably, this would succeed in creating a near-ubiquitous wireless cloud for one area, and would require many fewer Internet connections than many neighborhoods currently have. > cc > > On Thu, Oct 9, 2008 at 3:24 PM, Thomas Fitzgerald <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >> Too bad they chose such crappy gear, we might have been able to use it. I'm not certain that's entirely true. I think it's fair to say the gear was ill-suited to accomplish what they were after, at the density they adopted. It might be useful for something, if only to allow us to determine the relative crappiness of it. -- Michael Weinberg President Personal Telco Project, Inc. A 501(c)(3) Non-Profit --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ The Personal Telco Project - http://www.personaltelco.net/ Donate to PTP: http://www.personaltelco.net/donate Archives: http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.wireless.portland.general/ Etiquette: http://www.personaltelco.net/index.cgi/MailingListEtiquette List information: http://lists.personaltelco.net To post to this group, send email to ptp-general@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
