At 11/30/2012 11:45 AM, Matt wrote: > > approach is used, you could comment that raising it from 768/200 to 4/1 is > > excessive, and perhaps say a 1.5/384 standard is more appropriate. Even > > Canopy 100 can probably claim that (if it's not loaded), though YMMV. > >Are you saying no one is providing service past 1.5/384 with Canopy 100?
I'm referring to the 900 MHz version with a 4 Mbps one-way burst rate. That won't pass the 4/1 test. -- Fred Goldstein k1io fgoldstein "at" ionary.com ionary Consulting http://www.ionary.com/ +1 617 795 2701 _______________________________________________ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
