Speed, features, reduced points of failure, price.
If I can setup two complete and separate MT systems for less than the other
guys can... Heck, could probably even setup a wireless ring using different
bands for each link for less than the other guys. Even the greatest gear
will lose out to basic redundancy.
Speed. I can setup a full duplex link that can do in excess of 70 megabits
with a single set of gear. I can increase that in 70 megabit increments as
tower space (for additional antenna) and available spectrum allow, all
having a single Ethernet cable handoff.
With proper RF engineering, I can have sectors deployed that can provide 10
megs plus to each user. When your system can do 70 megs plus, you can fit a
lot more customers with higher speeds. He who can scale wins. The more
bigger pipes you sell, the cheaper your bandwidth becomes. When your
bandwidth is cheaper, not only can you pass this along to your customer, but
you can also profit more. I can have multiple customers on a sector that
each can consume more bandwidth than a Canopy AP could only dream of
supplying.
In an AP application all electronics are in one system. I don't need to
have a bunch of patch cords and a switch and a router and a {etc} sitting on
a tower. All coax runs into one box that hosts the AP. All sector to
sector to backhaul to backhaul communications are internal, allowing for
greater flexibility in traffic control and uptime (reduced failures).
When I implement a QoS feature or a firewall or a {etc} I can do so directly
on the inbound interface, before it has gone completely through the AP,
through a switch, and into a router. The AP is the router.
When I need to add another wireless interface to a system (AP, backhaul,
CPE, etc.), I can just add a mPCI, antenna, and cables. This is an even
cheaper route than a new MT system, which is cheaper than just about
anything else you could do. Again, all of the above advantages also apply
here.
I'd imagine Alvarion is pretty close in this respect, but they'd be the only
ones... The same interface (whether its GUI, SSH, SNMP, etc.) across
every piece of equipment.
I can run torch (a tool that tells you exactly what's running through any
interface at that exact time, with filtering capabilities).
I can stream traffic (matching a filter) to Wireshark for further analysis
from any device on the network.
CALEA utilities integrated into every device on the network (not yet in the
stable release, but present in the beta).
MT (and I believe Star-OS) can do everything. It is far easier\cheaper to
get an MT system certified (which would only require a firmware that was
restricted to US band options) than it is to have Motorola or Trango or
Alvarion completely overhaul their entire lines to have the same abilities.
-----
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
http://www.ics-il.com
----- Original Message -----
From: "Matt Liotta" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "WISPA General List" <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, June 10, 2007 11:06 AM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] MT Babble
I don't really understand this MT thread at all. Why use MT over all the
other certified systems available? Further, why spend time and money trying
to get MT certified? Why not just use certified gear that is available from
vendors that are actually interested in participating in this market?
-Matt
--
WISPA Wireless List: [email protected]
Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
--
WISPA Wireless List: [email protected]
Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
