Once we've grown a bit, that's what we are planning. 5.8GHz
backhauls to WiFi POPs. HotSpot access with roaming from
anywhere on our network that you can pick up good enough
signal.

Kevin Summers
KISTech Internet Services Inc.
www.kistech.com

> -----Original Message-----
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Joe
> Sent: Monday, August 04, 2003 4:19 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: RE: [smartBridges] Max clients per APPO ? SmartBridge
> recommended for covering a small community ?
>
>
>   You are correct, I'm a Field Engineer for a PCS company, we can make a
> site cover 20 miles easy but because of capacity we will have 20
> or 30 sites
> in that area. If you want them to run off the same server you need to link
> them all back to tha same  switch. We do this with T1's at almost every
> site, a few do use microwave hops where the telco's want too much for the
> T's.
>   With WIFI I would sugest using 5Ghz equip. for your link back.
> Joe
> RiverNet
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Kevin Summers
> Sent: Monday, August 04, 2003 5:28 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: RE: [smartBridges] Max clients per APPO ? SmartBridge
> recommended for covering a small community ?
>
>
>
> Basically you are going to end up doing what the cell phone
> companies do. Instead of trying to cover an entire area
> with a 14 mile radius from just one tower, you'll end up
> putting a few more POPs closer to the high usage areas, and
> using a higher bandwidth backhaul to link the sites back to
> your NOC.
>
> Remember also, this technology was NEVER designed with this
> stuff that we are doing in mind. It was designed for small
> indoor LANs. The limitations are embedded into the spec, which
> is not the fault of the SmartBridges design. They are just
> doing what they can, while still remaining compatible with
> other WiFi devices.
>
> If you want something that is going to be a little more robust
> than what the WiFi spec can give you, then choose something that
> will run Karlnet, or choose Motorola Canopy. It just depends on
> what you are after when it's all said and done.
>
> Being WiFi compatible/compliant is one of our MAJOR requirements
> and one of the many reasons we've chosen SmartBridges. We've
> subsequently designed our system with that in mind.
>
> Kevin Summers
> KISTech Internet Services Inc.
> www.kistech.com
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Steven Shearer
> > Sent: Monday, August 04, 2003 11:11 AM
> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Subject: RE: [smartBridges] Max clients per APPO ? SmartBridge
> > recommended for covering a small community ?
> >
> >
> > I think that Rob Cleminson & I are asking essentially the
> > same questions.
> >
> > What would be sB recommended way of supporting 1000 (or
> > more) users that may within range of an WAP ?
> >
> > I was originally considering just using narrower & narrower
> > focused antennas (ie. omni -> 120' -> 60' -> 30') as the
> > numbers of subscribers increased.  But as someone reminded
> > me, there is the limit of 3 non-overlapping channels.
> >
> > I was also planning on component upgrades once conditions
> > warranted (ie. replace 802.11b Bridge connection back to
> > NOC with an 802.11a, or whatever's available then) in order
> > to upgrade the bandwidth capabilities.
> >
> > To tell me that there's a limit of 128 concurrent clients,
> > while understandable, is not heart-warming - I'd rather see
> > a limit of 256, or even higher (ie. 512, 1024).  If you
> > need to boost your units CPU & RAM & a 100MB NIC instead of
> > a 10MB NIC, then all I can say is: "Just Do It." - thank you
> > Nike.
> >
> > Bandwidth being used up by those people is a different issue
> > and shouldn't affect the design of the WAP.
> >
> > The only thing I get out of your answer is that I should
> > continue shopping around.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Steve.
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of sB Tech Support
> > Sent: Monday, August 04, 2003 1:45 PM
> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Subject: RE: [smartBridges] Max clients per APPO ? SmartBridge
> > recommended for covering a small community ?
> >
> >
> > Hi Steve,
> >
> > You can have up to 128 client devices associated to an airPoint Pro
> > simultaneously. But in order to have better performance, bandwidth and
> > reduce congestion an average keep it lower numbers which is usually
> > about 50.
> > For the airPoint, the total number of client connectivity is listed in
> > the user guide's FAQ list. We will add into the spec also. Thank You
> >
> > Seeni, SB support
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Steven Shearer
> > Sent: Monday, August 04, 2003 1:42 AM
> > To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
> > Subject: [smartBridges] Max clients per APPO ? SmartBridge recommended
> > for covering a small community ?
> >
> > Hi all, while I'm new to this list, I did try going thru the archives to
> > find an answer for this, but finally gave up looking for the proverbial
> > needle in the haystack.
> >
> > I see in the specs for the AirBridge, there is a limit of 64 client IPs
> > -
> > but the same spec is not documented for the AirPoint.
> >
> > Q1. How many concurrent mobile WiFi clients can be supported by the
> > AirPointPro Outdoor ?
> >
> > Q2. Also, would you recommend this product line to provide WiFi coverage
> > for
> > a small community ?
> >
> > I'm expecting to create a central site (or network operations center,
> > NOC)
> > which has:
> > - up to 12 AirPoint Total (each one covering 30' of the circle around
> > the
> > building),
> > - a server capable of supporting roaming, optional IPSEC links, RADIUS
> > accounting,
> > - a server for managing subscriber accounts which integrates with the
> > above
> > server,
> > - misc. servers for DNS, DHCP, firewall, etc.
> > - back-end high-speed Internet connection.
> >
> > The NOC would support multiple 'Remote Sites', each with
> > - an AirBridgeTotal that points towards the NOC
> > - an AirPointPro with an omni antenna
> >
> > Q3. There may be times when the NOC is not LOS with the Remote Site - is
> > there any reason why it could not instead be pointed to a nearby
> > RemoteSite
> > which would act as a hoping point ?
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Steve.
> >
> > The PART-15.ORG smartBridges Discussion List
> > To Join: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (in the body type subscribe
> > smartBridges <yournickname>
> > To Remove: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (in the body type unsubscribe
> > smartBridges)
> > Archives: http://archives.part-15.org
> >
> > The PART-15.ORG smartBridges Discussion List
> > To Join: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (in the body type subscribe
> > smartBridges <yournickname>
> > To Remove: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (in the body type unsubscribe
> > smartBridges)
> > Archives: http://archives.part-15.org
> >
> > The PART-15.ORG smartBridges Discussion List
> > To Join: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (in the body type subscribe
> > smartBridges <yournickname>
> > To Remove: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (in the body type
> > unsubscribe smartBridges)
> > Archives: http://archives.part-15.org
> The PART-15.ORG smartBridges Discussion List
> To Join: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (in the body type subscribe
> smartBridges <yournickname>
> To Remove: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (in the body type unsubscribe
> smartBridges)
> Archives: http://archives.part-15.org
>
> The PART-15.ORG smartBridges Discussion List
> To Join: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (in the body type subscribe
> smartBridges <yournickname>
> To Remove: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (in the body type
> unsubscribe smartBridges)
> Archives: http://archives.part-15.org

The PART-15.ORG smartBridges Discussion List
To Join: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (in the body type subscribe smartBridges 
<yournickname>
To Remove: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (in the body type unsubscribe smartBridges)
Archives: http://archives.part-15.org  

Reply via email to