Does this do only inspection or shaping based on inspection? On Fri, Jul 24, 2015 at 12:35 PM, Jon Langeler <[email protected]> wrote:
> I think they have different teams on each project and some are more > resource limited. they need to spend some more $$$$ > > Sent from my iPhone > > On Jul 24, 2015, at 12:02 PM, Ken Hohhof <[email protected]> wrote: > > Now if they could just release the U-NII-1 firmware for the Beam > products. > SOON! > > *From:* Jon Langeler <[email protected]> > *Sent:* Friday, July 24, 2015 9:31 AM > *To:* [email protected] > *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Ubiquiti DPI? > > When you have the volume and variety of products that ubiquiti does, > they can do things that nobody else can do especially when they have some > specialized 3rd party developers. > > Sent from my iPhone > > On Jul 24, 2015, at 8:52 AM, Ken Hohhof <[email protected]> wrote: > > My view is with DPI, like virus scanning or spam filtering, you are > buying the updates as much as the platform. If the signatures and rules > aren’t kept up to date, it loses value. Any vendor that uses this feature > to sell hardware and doesn’t charge a yearly fee may not understand the > task. > > > *From:* Paul Stewart <[email protected]> > *Sent:* Friday, July 24, 2015 7:38 AM > *To:* [email protected] > *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Ubiquiti DPI? > > > LOL … I have a hard time with that term being used with Ubiquiti ;) > > > > *From:* Af [mailto:[email protected] <[email protected]>] *On > Behalf Of *Josh Luthman > *Sent:* Friday, July 24, 2015 8:30 AM > *To:* [email protected] > *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Ubiquiti DPI? > > > > "Carrier Grade" > > Josh Luthman > Office: 937-552-2340 > Direct: 937-552-2343 > 1100 Wayne St > Suite 1337 > Troy, OH 45373 > > On Jul 24, 2015 8:17 AM, "Paul Stewart" <[email protected]> wrote: > > Well it will be interesting … sure would be nice to see someone > “disrupt” I agree … but there have been lots of folks try to provide “DPI” > and fail badly as they didn’t really understand what they were getting > into… and doing it on existing routers is usually the first mistake in my > opinion….. > > > > > > *From:* Af [mailto:[email protected]] *On Behalf Of *Jason McKemie > *Sent:* Friday, July 24, 2015 1:27 AM > *To:* [email protected] > *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Ubiquiti DPI? > > > > They've got the resources to do it, would be nice to see someone undercut > the existing players. > > On Thursday, July 23, 2015, Paul Stewart <[email protected]> wrote: > > I have no idea but if it’s like other attempts I’ve seen from companies > to stack heavy CPU “stuff” into a router, then stability and any type of > scaling would be first concerns. DPI is a very complex item to see someone > like Ubiquiti jump into in my opinion… > > > > *From:* Af [mailto:[email protected] <[email protected]>] *On > Behalf Of *Jeremy > *Sent:* Thursday, July 23, 2015 7:13 PM > *To:* [email protected] > *Subject:* [AFMUG] Ubiquiti DPI? > > > > Ok, so now that deep packet inspection has been announced I'd assume any > NDAs have been lifted. Have any of you been using this? Any idea what > type of latency is added? That pricing model is a whole lot different from > any DPI tool that I have ever seen.... > >
