We just selected Foundry wireless (AKA Rebranded Meru) in part because they "do it different". We are a Foundry shop and have found that Foundry makes excellent decisions for their products so their choice to work with Meru for their wireless solution adds to our confidence that Meru is an excellent product. We have done an in house demo and the first permanent APs are going in place in the next weeks.
For what it's worth: we are piloting our first "wireless only" (i.e. no wired data connections) residence hall this fall using the Meru/Foundry gear. We are that confident. _________________________ Thank you, Gregory R. Scholz Director of Telecommunications Information Technology Group Keene State College (603)358-2070 --Lead, follow, or get out of the way. (author unknown) ________________________________ From: Jamie Savage [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, June 14, 2007 10:50 AM To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU Subject: [WIRELESS-LAN] Cisco vs. Meru article Hi, The attached article was in the May 28th issue of Network Computing. Regarding Meru vs. Cisco and the possibility of interference with co-located APs. I'd be interested in any commentary. We're currently a Cisco shop (autonomous APs) and realize we're heading for a forklift wireless change in the near future (most of our fat APs can't be converted to thin). Even if Meru violates the 802.11 standard (as claimed by Cisco), as we control the airspace on campus, I guess we don't care if we cause interference issues with devices (ie..rogues) that shouldn't be there in the first place. ...........comments anyone?...........thx...............J James Savage York University Senior Communications Tech. 108 Steacie Building [EMAIL PROTECTED] 4700 Keele Street ph: 416-736-2100 ext. 22605 Toronto, Ontario fax: 416-736-5701 M3J 1P3, CANADA ********** Participation and subscription information for this EDUCAUSE Constituent Group discussion list can be found at http://www.educause.edu/groups/.
