At 16:15 29/06/00 , Joe Touch wrote:
>DS appears to be better for large, flat spaces (largely 2-dimensional,
>under 3 stories tall, since transcievers on the middle floor largely
>cover the upper and lower).
>
>FH is better for more spherical spaces (largely 3-dimensional).
These optimisations do not appear to matter significantly in practice
in the locations that IETFs have been held or in other places where
I have experience with DS/FH being overlaid (a work campus environment).
>And DS and FH do not play well together, i.e., it's much better to stay
>away from concurrent overlapping installations. I had earlier measured a
>BW penalty of between 1/2 to 3/4 (transferring data over only one of the
>two technologies at a time, in a concurrent deployment).
IETF/DC is a fine counter-example of why the above might theoretically
be true, but is not really true in deployed networks. IETF/DC had both
overlaid on the same 3D spaces and both worked OK. Obviously one
must be thoughtful about the channel/frequency plan and such like
(which is true regardless of overlaid networks).
Ran
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
