RE: [WIRELESS-LAN] Aruba's SCA vs. MCA whitepaper [was: Open Wireless in Higher Ed]

2008-03-31 Thread Johnson, Bruce T
Yet another architecture (sectorized multi-AP array). This is comparing apples and oranges (except we don't know the variety of traditional apple Tolly is comparing Xirrus to in the study). I think the problem is all these vendors live in Silicon Valley flatland and don't consider the effect of h

RE: [WIRELESS-LAN] Aruba's SCA vs. MCA whitepaper [was: Open Wireless in Higher Ed]

2008-03-31 Thread Chad Frisby
Wireless Density of users and co-channel interference has already been solved. Micro cell or channel blanket architectures do not. Independent 3rd party test-results below by Tolly Group. http://www.tolly.com/DocDetail.aspx?DocNumber=206152 http://www.tolly.com/DocDetail.aspx?DocNumber=207181 C

Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] Aruba's SCA vs. MCA whitepaper [was: Open Wireless in Higher Ed]

2008-03-31 Thread Charles Spurgeon
On Wed, Mar 26, 2008 at 10:31:50PM -0500, Frank Bulk - iNAME wrote: > I wish it was easier to evaluate the performance (not only aggregrate > throughput, but also QoS) of the MCA and SCA products in various scenarios > and density and usage, but unfortunately examining the impact of co-channel > in

Wireless Projection (yet again)

2008-03-31 Thread Lee H Badman
In the quest for a non-wireless-projector-server solution to getting to projectors from wireless clients, I came across this little nugget: http://www.supershareware.com/info/projector-online.html. In testing, it's not perfect, but it does evoke thought. Basically, if you have an Ethernet-wired te