Yeah, but it’s shiny and new.
Joking aside, my philosophy is that development is going to be more on W2 and
it *should* give me a longer period before the next refresh.
-Brian
From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv
[mailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU] On Behalf Of
Another consideration is that, at least in our case, it can take years just to
complete the lifecycle upgrade.
Pete Morrissey
From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv
[mailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU] On Behalf Of Jake Snyder
Sent: Friday, August 05, 2016 2:38 PM
Thanks GT,
I definitely agree with your overall point, but I have to take issue with
the following:
* MU-MIMO just takes the same number of streams and distributes them to
multiple clients. For example, 3 MU streams has no greater Eth load than a
3x3:3 client on a 3x3:3 AP.
This state
I think there's a short term risk vs long term reward. In the short term,
there's little benefit to W2 and more risk of code stability, lack of features,
etc.
In the long term, MU will bring some benefit. How much will depend on a lot of
factors. W1 vs W2 for me is really about these risks v
Go GT!
Lee Badman
Network Architect/Wireless TME
Syracuse University
315.443.3003
-Original Message-
From: GT Hill [g...@gthill.com]
Received: Friday, 05 Aug 2016, 10:09
To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU [WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU]
Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] Outsourced ResN
Hello all…
Just a few thoughts on this topic.
Wave 2 isn’t any faster than wave 1 so it doesn’t need two Eth ports etc.
Now, by true specification, yes it CAN be faster but that’s only because of 160
MHz channelization.
MU-MIMO just takes the same number of streams and distributes them to multi
Brian,
Food for thoughts...
How is the over-subscription to the commodity Internet keeping up with Wi-Fi
these days?
Most services are in the cloud and it seems that Internet Commodity could be
the limiting factor rather than wave1 or wave2 or even staying with 802.11n.
Is it worth worrying a
There are few problems I see with this line of thinking.
a) This is the same argument people made when 802.11n arrived i.e. Stick
with 802.11g as it’s less expensive, proven, and there are hardly any 11n
clients. For those of us who jumped on the cutting edge, we road an explosive
wave of
If it’s really cat5 and not 5e, gigabit may work but you will run into a lot of
crosstalk issues in bundles as the number of cables running gig increase i.e.
five in a bundle of 50 probably OK, 20 out of 50, maybe not. I’d test the cat5
just to see where you are.
Wave 1 vs Wave 2 – Some of the
From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv
mailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU>>
on behalf of Jake Snyder mailto:jsnyde...@gmail.com>>
Date: Friday, 5 August 2016 at 10:41 PM
In the competitive stuff, I am seeing partners leading with Wave1 equipment
because they get be
In the competitive stuff, I am seeing partners leading with Wave1 equipment
because they get better pricing.
There are also some verticals where stability is more important (healthcare)
and wave1 APs don't run as bleeding edge code.
Thanks
Jake Snyder
Sent from my iPhone
> On Aug 5, 2016, at
Excellent question. Their explanation seemed like more of an excuse – that
Wave 1 was proven. I think they probably have an inventory of Wave 1 AP’s
and/or are getting them at a better price. Personally I wouldn’t use them,
just because it doesn’t make sense to not install the most current te
Any idea why they are specifying 11ac Wave 1 when Wave 2 APs are current?
Bruce Osborne
Wireless Engineer
IT Network Oprations - Wireless
(434) 592-4229
LIBERTY UNIVERSITY
Training Champions for Christ since 1971
From: Brian Helman [mailto:bhel...@salemstate.edu]
Sent: Thursday, August 4
13 matches
Mail list logo