Let me know if 25km on a radio that does not allow adjustment of the 802.11b protocol for distance works... Supposedly things should stop working for an unadulterated 802.11b radio at that distance..
-----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Simon Woodside Sent: Monday, October 20, 2003 1:14 PM To: Joel Jaeggli Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [BAWUG] cisco ripping me off? In practical terms, what does that mean for me? Can you direct me to a link or two that would explain? simon On Monday, October 20, 2003, at 09:36 AM, Joel Jaeggli wrote: > the aironet or ios based firmware for the cisco ap's is vastly > superior to > any other I've ever used. > > joelja > > On Mon, 20 Oct 2003, Simon Woodside wrote: > >> 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 -- general wireless list, a bawug thing <http://www.bawug.org/> [un]subscribe: http://lists.bawug.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless -- general wireless list, a bawug thing <http://www.bawug.org/> [un]subscribe: http://lists.bawug.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
