My understanding is that there is no "repeater" involved here. There may be a RP2D, which is an access point and not a true repeater. It is providing connectivity to a resource (a server) but is a "simplex" node on the network, just like any of the ID-1s, in fact any of the ID-1s could have a server behind them. That ethernet port, is just that, a port between the wired Ethernet and RF "Ether"-net. Everything in this network is point to point, the RP2C is just a participant in the network, with an automated operator (the server).
On Mon, Oct 20, 2008 at 10:08 AM, Brian Mury <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Sun, 2008-10-19 at 18:31 -0700, John D. Hays wrote: > > It may be splitting hairs, but would you consider it infrastructure, > > if the server and access point (not repeater) was self contained, > > having uninterruptable power supplies (with generator backup), and not > > dependent on an external network? If not, why? > > Yes, still infrastructure. I would consider infrastructure to be > anything that is used to connect two stations, other than the stations > themselves. Consider the effect of losing that repeater for whatever > reason - you would lose the "wide area network covering most of the > city" that Mike was talking about. > > -- de K7VE [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
