|
Hi Michael,
The APPT client bridge mode requires address 4 field support and is optional in IEEE802.11b, not all vendors support is so it is not fully supported when you connecting to the CISCO 350. In this mode, we will recommend you to use sB APPO or APPT for the both AP and CB modes.
aBT works well with CISCO AP and it can able to support 64 MAC and does the MAC translation also. So you can go ahead and use aBT to bridge with Cisco 350 and then feeding aBT ___ aPPO. This may be better, if you do not want to change the head end CISCO 350.
Thank you & Best regards.
Seeni sB Tech Support
-----Original
Message-----
A followup to my Cisco 350 question....
If I have an appo set up with an omni servicing a local area and then wish to service another area from that same feed, which would be better:
+ abt -> Cisco 350 AP + omni, or + appt in client bridge mode -> Cisco 350 AP + omni
Any big advantages / disadvantages of the abt vs appt for this scenario (apart from cost)?
(Bonus points: any idea if I'm likely to hit a 64 user MAC problem with the abt, or is the Cisco 350 AP doing MAC translation anyway?)
cheers, michael
PS: It appears that another scenario is using the Cisco 350 on the main omni, then feeding to an abt -> appo, but we've already swapped the Cisco 350 for the appo when we found the appt wouldn't bridge to the 350. Only in hindsight do we realize that an abt would probably have been sufficient)
----------ANNOUNCEMENT---------- Don't forget to register for WISPCON IV http://www.wispcon.info/us/wispcon-iv/wispcon-iv.htm
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 |
- [smartBridges] appt vs abt as bridge? Michael Mee
- Re: [smartBridges] appt vs abt as bridge? Seeni Mohamed
- Re: [smartBridges] appt vs abt as bridge? Blazen Wireless
- RE: [smartBridges] appt vs abt as bridge? Seeni Mohamed
