On Sun, Nov 09, 2003 at 05:25:17PM -0500, Perry E.Metzger wrote:
Right now, I'm hearing (from where I'm sitting) eight different 802.11b
base stations on channel 6. Is this the intended configuration?
I recall this wasn't unusual in Vienna (well, maybe not eight :) and the
wireless provision
On Mon, 10 Nov 2003, Tim Chown wrote:
On Sun, Nov 09, 2003 at 05:25:17PM -0500, Perry E.Metzger wrote:
Right now, I'm hearing (from where I'm sitting) eight different 802.11b
base stations on channel 6. Is this the intended configuration?
I recall this wasn't unusual in Vienna (well,
On 10-nov-03, at 9:53, Joel Jaeggli wrote:
It would be nice for whoever lays on such provision for the IETF to
document their approach. I enquired about this on this list after
Vienna, but got no reply.This would be helpful for other people
organising events where a few hundred wireless
Thus spake Iljitsch van Beijnum [EMAIL PROTECTED]
What I'm missing is guidance on how to make use of the available
frequency space in the best way possible. Obviously doing everything on
channel 6 as we saw yesterday (but has changed now) isn't the best
approach. Using the non-overlapping
Right now, I'm hearing (from where I'm sitting) eight different 802.11b
base stations on channel 6. Is this the intended configuration?
--
Perry E. Metzger[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Right now, I'm hearing (from where I'm sitting) eight different 802.11b
base stations on channel 6. Is this the intended configuration?
it is not an accident. it is not the production plan. but they
are not charging extra for it at the moment. :-)
On 9-nov-03, at 16:53, Randy Bush wrote:
Right now, I'm hearing (from where I'm sitting) eight different
802.11b
base stations on channel 6. Is this the intended configuration?
it is not an accident. it is not the production plan. but they
are not charging extra for it at the moment. :-)
So
