Good point, though those legacy client devices seem to stick around longer than you think. In any case, shipping chipsets will be predominately 802.11n by 2009 and my guess is that the installed base of clients will reach 50% that year.
I think Kevin's 5 to 8 years is much too conservative. Frank From: Toby Krohn (tkrohn) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, November 13, 2007 4:00 PM To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] 802.11n Draft 2.0 Actually, all but the lowest end of client devices are already shipping with n. With that said, assuming a conservative 4 year refresh cycle, in just 2 years the simple majority of the clients will be n and in 4 years the overwhelming majority will be n. Besides, with MIMO you will see better performance from your legacy abg clients so the move to n aps has mutiple drivers/benefits. Toby Krohn 4049060909 from my Treo -----Original Message----- From: Kevin Pait [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, November 13, 2007 04:49 PM Eastern Standard Time To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] 802.11n Draft 2.0 We are currently rolling out Cisco a/b/g wireless and asked the vendor about designing with 802.11n in mind. The overall response was that the technology is too immature and any predictions would be highly speculative. They also said that the consumer base would not be populated with N - capable devices within the next 5-8 years in sufficient numbers to realize an advantage. So what does the population think about the lifespan of the current 802.11a/b/g technology? On Tue, 2007-11-13 at 16:09 -0500, Jorj Bauer wrote: > > > We are looking at a campus wide wireless deployment, and my supervisor is > > > pushing for a complete Cisco 1252 with N draft 2.0 capability. We would > > > have about a total of 250 to 300 AP's in full deployment. Our wired > > > infrastructure is currently 100% Procurve with about 90% of it being 10/100 > > > switched. I'd like to know what other schools are doing with 802.11n. > > > > I think you are right on. I think as long as your a/b/g network is working > > well, the students aren't going to care about 11n. In my mind this is still > > a very immature technology. > > Personally, I'd hate to put any draft technology on my production > network. > > We went through the same thing with 802.11g. Network researchers (here) > that started using 802.11g draft hardware suffered innumerable > interoperability headaches. > > -- Jorj > > -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= - > Jorj Bauer | [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Director of Networking | 3330 Walnut St. > School of Engineering and Applied Science | Levine Building, Room 160 > University of Pennsylvania | Philadelphia, PA 19104 > -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= - > > > ********** > Participation and subscription information for this EDUCAUSE Constituent Group discussion list can be found at http://www.educause.edu/groups/. ********** Participation and subscription information for this EDUCAUSE Constituent Group discussion list can be found at http://www.educause.edu/groups/. ********** Participation and subscription information for this EDUCAUSE Constituent Group discussion list can be found at http://www.educause.edu/groups/. ********** Participation and subscription information for this EDUCAUSE Constituent Group discussion list can be found at http://www.educause.edu/groups/.
