RikJonAtk,

Thanks for your response and suggestion. I'm using 2 2.4Ghz radio. The requirement is to provide abt 80Mbps link for synchronisation traffic between 2 servers in the same vlan but in 2 different locations. I was thinking of bundling the 3 bridges into an etherchannel on the switch but another option is to use layer3 switch e.g 3750 and configure EIGRP for equal load balancing across the 3 wireless links. I've not tried this before so I'm seeking opinions on the forum.

The L3 option is best, as you know the EtherChannel method isn't actually supported, whereas using them as parallel routed links certainly is.

Your next problem is that even if your APs run at "54Mbps" then you'll only see about 20Mbps throughput (half-duplex) for each radio, so if your requirement is 80Mbps, you'll realistically need four or five radios by the time you account for unreliability of wireless, additional over heads, etc..

The problem I have with the L3 option is that both servers (in different locations) are in the same subnet so routing is not possible except I move them to different subnets/vlan. Pls why do I have to run the radios in half-duplex and not full-duplex node?

Because the radios only work half duplex :o)

Oops...my bad!!!! The specs of the radio says its capable of "Super G" transmission rate of up to 108MBps so 3 radios should give the required 80Mbps at the minimum.

With etherchannel, you are still dedicated to one link, depending on how you configure the load-balancing on the etherchannel. Your best bet is to get an outdoor bridge that can give you the bandwidth you need in one link.

Please can you tell me why "the EtherChannel method isn't actually supported" ?

Regards

Roberto Taccon

r.taccon,

pls see below for response to your question

http://www.cisco.com/en/US/products/hw/wireless/ps5279/products_tech_note09186a0080736199.shtml