HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.butchevans.com/pipermail/mikrotik/attachments/20080430/03199864/attachment.html
___
Mikrotik mailing list
Mikrotik@mail.butchevans.com
http://www.butchevans.com/mailman/listinfo/mikrotik
http://www.butchevans.com/pipermail/mikrotik/attachments/20080430/03199864/attachment.html
On Wed, 30 Apr 2008, Keith Barber wrote:
>Right, which we'll have a fair split of customer's that don't have
>publics running in plain station mode. But in some of the business
>districts about 90% of those clients are going to be putting the
>public IP into their equipment, with the ap as the
Right, which we'll have a fair split of customer's that don't have publics
running in plain station mode. But in some of the business districts about 90%
of those clients are going to be putting the public IP into their equipment,
with the ap as the gateway, so we don't have to do any NATing ab
On Wed, 30 Apr 2008, Keith Barber wrote:
>I have an AP (RB600) with about 40 clients and 3 full wds links at
>the moment. We are looking at providing the customer with their IP
>on their own equipment. Station-wds was looking like the answer.
>If all 40 of those clients were in station-wds,
Question about the station-wds performance hit.
I have an AP (RB600) with about 40 clients and 3 full wds links at the moment.
We are looking at providing the customer with their IP on their own equipment.
Station-wds was looking like the answer. If all 40 of those clients were in
station-wd
On Wed, 30 Apr 2008, Eric Sooter wrote:
I thought that pseudobridge had better performance in
p-t-multipoint. On the Mikrotik forum, I noticed alot of
complaining about WDS performance dropping when you get over 5 or 6
WDS sessions on an AP. Is this true?
Let's say that you have an AP with
Butch,
I thought that pseudobridge had better performance in p-t-multipoint.
On the Mikrotik forum, I noticed alot of complaining
about WDS performance dropping when you get over 5 or 6 WDS sessions on
an AP. Is this true?
Eric
//
Butch Evans wrote:
On Thu, 24 Apr 2008, Keith Barber wrot
Lanham,
I have used about everything as CPE's (including tranzeo's), but the 133
and 411 boards perform so much better for us. The Mikrotik boards also
do a better job when the signal drops pretty low. We just started using
the 411's, about 20-30 clients out there now; but they might be as f
9 matches
Mail list logo
