-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 I so hugely agree with you. We have been able to deliver so much more than our Canopy competitors because of our flexibility as to CPE's and the competitive field that 802.11 has created. I do believe that UBNT will stay at the bottom of the price arena, so AIRmax looks good so far. But not getting proprietary has been such a huge win. If AIRmax was public, it would be a no brainer. We are looking at a problem where we will need to roll out 200-400 cpes in a 4 square mile area next year, and I cannot think of another solution that will deal with that.
On 02/14/2010 08:43 PM, Josh Luthman wrote: > For 802.11 I love MT and Ubnt AP/CPEs. I won't go nstreme or airmax > because I like interchangability and each 802.11 site has minimal > subs. > > MT gives me the lovable control and capability. Ubnt CPEs are just so > damned cheap and work well. > > On 2/14/10, RickG <[email protected]> wrote: >> The timing for this discussion is good because I'm considering moving >> users to a new platform this summer. My choice is MT or Ubiquiti or a >> combination of both. Thanks! -RickG >> >> On Sun, Feb 14, 2010 at 10:56 PM, Butch Evans <[email protected]> wrote: >>> On Sun, 2010-02-14 at 00:51 -0500, RickG wrote: >>>> As you know I've got your QOS on my firewall. Unfortunately, it doesnt >>>> help my AP's any. What then? >>> >>> As you say, it is unfortunate, but it is a reality. The problem is not >>> in the volume of traffic, but in the packet rate. The BEST approach >>> here is to use some sort of polling (i.e. eliminate the 802.11 problem >>> at the offset). The problem with this is that it may involve CPE or AP >>> changes. If you are using all MT CPE, then it is a simple matter of >>> moving everyone over to NStreme. Another possibility is to limit packet >>> rate at the cpe. This is easier said than done, unless you have all MT >>> cpe, in which case, nstreme is a better choice anyway. I'll spend some >>> time in a bit trying to address some options here that will possibly >>> help with this issue, even WITH 802.11. >>> >>> -- >>> ******************************************************************** >>> * Butch Evans * Professional Network Consultation* >>> * http://www.butchevans.com/ * Network Engineering * >>> * http://store.wispgear.net/ * Wired or Wireless Networks * >>> * http://blog.butchevans.com/ * ImageStream, Mikrotik and MORE! * >>> ******************************************************************** >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Mikrotik mailing list >>> [email protected] >>> http://www.butchevans.com/mailman/listinfo/mikrotik >>> >>> Visit http://blog.butchevans.com/ for tutorials related to Mikrotik >>> RouterOS >>> >> _______________________________________________ >> Mikrotik mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://www.butchevans.com/mailman/listinfo/mikrotik >> >> Visit http://blog.butchevans.com/ for tutorials related to Mikrotik RouterOS >> > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Fedora - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJLeNQSAAoJEO0qoUuK0uZgBb4H/3fX30F1tMA/XEzWw6+jWb9b tjwuIIEJ9q+04zABA12ASjwt5Eb0JsYfMHxqQ4e2baN1tc1FzMzSskr3nsGmlAzB 9hr3t/8dV33XQvpq4OrZ9GCUHJLjDEfKivJLf7YbI4b86dk06zhNOohLMw4owPi2 HdeQY6A716DGsZ1whGAgyUeYMZzmHKgzlEmyg+0aHtJYLxwm48Yw6uyuhW7mMqMO bZQWcuXQGeUce5ygiDnNVuBPbiLz5WWYnJNM55sWFEpJCjEM/WwzrGjyI60OoumN d8p4QAnV+hXa0MVqcmHA+hnR39LsO1J3qUPDClWm0ugkKTx7cc9U0Q4g5fF9Ysc= =zpeP -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- _______________________________________________ Mikrotik mailing list [email protected] http://www.butchevans.com/mailman/listinfo/mikrotik Visit http://blog.butchevans.com/ for tutorials related to Mikrotik RouterOS
