You got it right Lee. The higher speeds will not necessarily be of use for us
in the higher ed sector (yet... you never know), although it will be nice to
simply have the capability in those special cases where they could be used. For
now the one advantage that Gigabit Wi-Fi will provide will
I can't find the direct quote. I can find the mission statement that is
directly related to it:
http://www.google.com/fiber/kansascity/about.html
But a project manager invovled with the Google Fiber Project (Gigabit
access to the home in Kansas City) had a quote along the lines of:
When
With the amount of glasses free HD 3D screens being shown at CES this week, I
would imagine something along the lines of Skype in HD 3D. Also, the next HD
standard will be 4k HD. That will exceed the limits of current 802.11n. Think
of it this way, HDMI version 1.4 cables are capable of 10Gbps.
Hello, I am running multiple Cisco 4404 controllers Vers-7.0.116 and
the majority of the WAPS are CAPWAP 1131's . The issue I seem to be
having is that lately when I reboot an access layer switch, POE, 3750
series, with WAPS attached, I lose some of the WAPS. The WAPS never
come back on
Vikki,
After the reboot are the APs still drawing power, just not showing a link
light on the switch? Have you tried plugging a console cable into an AP
when you do a reboot on the 3560 to see what messages the AP returns?
I have seen an issue on our 3560's before, and the condition was related
For clarity- the power commands I referenced are port by port, not global.
-Lee
-Original Message-
From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv
[mailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU] On Behalf Of Vikki Cutrone
Sent: Wednesday, January 11, 2012 3:50 PM
To:
Vicki,
If I remember correctly the power module in the cisco switch controls ports
in groups of 4. Try and move one of the dead access points to a port in a
group of 4 that does NOT already have an access point in the group. I've
seen issues like this before but not on a 3560.
Regards,
Craig
We're dealing with a similar issue right now too, but it seems to be
AP-independent. We have a mix of Cisco 3500's and 1250's running on Cisco
3750EPs (running 12.2(53)SE2) and a sample of each type of AP experience the
problem. Our 3750's are Gigabit so I've been using the 'test
Got it, just did it per port-- same thing
On 1/11/2012 3:51 PM, Lee H Badman wrote:
For clarity- the power commands I referenced are port by port, not global.
-Lee
-Original Message-
From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv
The consumer market loves new technology, and since this standardizes on the
5GHz band only, it is my best friend. Most of the RF problems we have is
because too many computers are perfectly happy working on N on the 2.4 GHz
range, yet there are too many legacy devices and mobile devices to
Are these 1131's LWAPP from the factory or did you convert these in the field
from autonomous to LWAPP / CAPWAP? We have found that some of our converted
1230 series APs do this and show the same IEEE PD message on the switch. We
had to go onsite or bring them back to the office to reload the
Has anyone come across any solid explanation of why iphones, ipads, and ipod
touches all seem to respond poorly to simple ping tests in terms of latency?
Just pinging an ipad across a local home network yields horrible results e.g.
bjp$ ping 10.0.1.14
PING 10.0.1.14 (10.0.1.14): 56 data bytes
Brandon,
I'm pasting a link to a Mac forum thread. If you read almost down to the
bottom, it seems to explain the issue that you are seeing. In short, it seems
to be a power-save feature. If you ping the device while it's idle, you get
delayed ping times. If you ping it while it's
13 matches
Mail list logo
