<<   <   Page 2 / 2
zwixard 12/5/2012 | 3:03:03 PM
re: Muni Meltdown Mobility is a universal requirement and must work across all systems. No matter what Tropos and Cisco do, their solutions are designed for their own systems. Their customers can replace all boxes that are already deployed and still provide NO mobility when the device moves from their coverage area into a non-Tropos/Cisco network.
George B 12/5/2012 | 3:03:02 PM
re: Muni Meltdown HCCA and 802.11e is a significant protocol improvement over CSMA/CA, but it does very little to solve the problem of interfering transmitters on the same RF channel operating outside of that protocol. The fundamental problem is that the owner of the wide area Wi-Fi network has no control over other transmitters sharing the same spectrum. Considering the popularity of home Wi-Fi gear and other 2.4GHz equipment, it's not unreasonable to expect many cochannel users outside the control of the wide area network.
Net Worthy 12/5/2012 | 3:03:01 PM
re: Muni Meltdown Who says that mobility "must work across all systems"? If a network provider blankets a city with Wi-Fi coverage, and clients can move across that entire network while maintaining one IP address, I think that qualifies as mobility. Demanding mobility from that network to the AP in your family room is unreasonable and will never work until the day (i.e., never) that IPv6 is universal and all NAT firewalls are banished from the earth.
zwixard 12/5/2012 | 3:03:01 PM
re: Muni Meltdown 1.
An ordinary user cannot tell the difference between outdoor and indoor wireless APs. Engineers' job is to make the life of all easier.
If you knew how packets are routed, you would have known IPv6 is not the panacea as you thought to be.
<<   <   Page 2 / 2
Sign In