Is there any good reason why the Cisco Aironet bridges cost so much more than the APs? Looking at something like the D-Link AP900+ which can operate in AP or bridge mode, and reading some other comments, it seems like they're just taking advantage of ignorant corporate customers.

I need to set up a long-distance link (like 25 km) and I want to put in more reliable radios for that section of the network, but I don't want to pay the cisco "bridge tax".

simon

--
www.simonwoodside.com :: www.openict.net :: www.semacode.org
                    99% Devil, 1% Angel

--
general wireless list, a bawug thing <http://www.bawug.org/>
[un]subscribe: http://lists.bawug.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Reply via email to