Thread: [Aironet] for consumer access?
Status: Inactive
Brought to you by:
breed
From: Steve C. <sc...@no...> - 2000-10-24 21:52:25
|
We are a hardwire ISP in Jersey, and I've been doing some research into the feasibility of deploying wireless access for competition with cable and dsl offerings in the area. We'd be wanting to use our wireless network both for consumer access and wireless "leased lines". In all of our dedicated circuit installations, we setup a firewall doing NAT amongst many other things. My question would be this: from your experience, would the aironet product line be sufficient for this type of application? From my understanding, the client cards can connect to each other with the 'Ad hoc' setting, or to an access point with whatever that other setting was. Can the client cards connect up to a bridge with an amp and external antenna? My thinking is to grow a wireless network with bridges and omni-antennae, and then use the pci client cards in the firewalls to connect to the bridges via directional antenna. What's a good number to figure on for the max radius of coverage of a single bridge? [I take it that if I have two bridges with overlapping footprints that they can communicate over their omnis?] Is my thinking in the ballpark, or am I just way out there? ___________________________________________________________ Steve Creel Nothin But Net, LLC. sc...@no... "Always do right. This will gratify some people and astonish the rest." -- Mark Twain |
From: Elmer J. <el...@yl...> - 2000-10-24 22:45:13
|
On Tue, 24 Oct 2000, Steve Creel wrote: > We'd be wanting to use our wireless > network both for consumer access and wireless "leased lines". This makes sense if you have problems getting dsl lines for reasonable price, otherwise it is quite complicated and may not end with you and your customers being happy. > In all of > our dedicated circuit installations, we setup a firewall doing NAT amongst > many other things. My question would be this: from your experience, would > the aironet product line be sufficient for this type of application? depends. Wavelan has a special software for that, with which you can limit and guarantee bandwidth for customers. Hoverev, with proper topology, aironet is a bit better, it behaves better in noisy environments in 802.11 compatible mode. > What's a good number to figure on for the max radius of coverage > of a single bridge? [I take it that if I have two bridges with overlapping > footprints that they can communicate over their omnis?] > Is my thinking in the ballpark, > or am I just way out there? No, here around there are wireless networks in every city. However, I have been watching their progress and it is painful. Now it is even more, as local telecom has finally learned and starting come competitive with ADS being offered with 100$ + 35$/month, it becomes meaningless. But for last 4 years those network have been serving well. I have here small network on countryside and it is perfect. There is huge market for 802.11 in longdistance countriside links. But, in city, to be short, from my experience of seeing other peoples mistakes: 1. Do not make any central point. 2. make your APs with sector antennas AND separate uplink card. if there will be AP software for cards, it can be built into single 486, 2-4 cards, one of them uplink with directional antenna + sector antennas for serving clients 3. Do not install power nor powerful antennas at client site. It is real bad, if there will be one more ISP in your city, it will be nightmare. if you need to use powerful antenna, make it look a bit up, so the power will vanish into sky. Make it work so that it connects only "on the edge" install minimum power, if you are doing client installations. 4. put APs at high buildings on the border of city, or, if larger city, make clients allways to look from centrum to countryside and only point2point backbone links looking the other way. All people here have done otherwise and now redoing it. 5. If your real problem is your telecom not being flexible, then better talk to them and intrduce them to successful wireless WANs in eastern europe and in States too. Maybe they start being more flexible. 6. If you have a lot of money to invest, then make a 3 APs/km^2 network and clients with very small (2db) antennas. Or some 8dbi sector on client site and turn power down. Other side of it is that people can then walk on streets with their laptops. older 100mW aironets connect 1400m with 2 dbi antennas on both sides in relatively noise-free environments. So around 500m with 30mW cards and 8dbi antennas and power limited to 5-10mW at start would be a good bet. the cost of equipment for such a network would be about minimal 5k$/km^2 if to do it with cards. 7. On countryside, otherwise, use central desgin and average 5-8 km distance to client with max range about 15km 8. difference between bridge and AP, start with APs, you can reuse them anytime if your network grows. Besides, the HW is quite the same and _probably_ bridge soft will work later in those APs if you really need it. 9. Real cost for such a network with longstanding quality is 2 (not 1) radio kits(card, antenna, cables, processor(AP,computer) ) per client. 10. cabling, antenna and all small pieces make together a lot of money. The first salesman asks allways a double price. elmer. |