I am seekng what others thoughts on 802.11a are. Is it worth the potential bandwidth gains to give up the coverage that 802.11b bring. Or, alternatively , would it be worth the wait for 802.11g which says the same coverage can be attained as 802.11b, but at speeds closer to 802.11a. I for one am not impressed with the limited coverage that 802.11a has. Anyone else have an opinion on this?
802.11a sucks. I order 15 of the modules for our AP1200's and basically the reception is terrable. To make a long story short, it's best to only consider 802.11a in a wide open space with out offices or even cubes at short ranges.
In an office enviornment stay with the 802.11b, and wait for the 802.11g (same speed different freq.) to become a standard.
** another problem with the 802.11a was the limitation of the "fixed" antenna ** That added to the standards short falls **
IntroductionHow to use the Wireless LAN Controller Configuration Analyzer (WLCCA)
Javier Contreras is a Senior Tech Lead for the Wireless Business Unit in Cisco, with over 2 decades of experi...
< PRE >
(#)For this reason being that : - application that doesn't use multicast, sends one copy of each packet ( data unit of traffic at layer 3 ) to each client (" who seeks the traffic ).- application that does use multicast, sends ...
Transferring Crash file from standby:
Login to the Active WLC in HA.
(Cisco Controller) >transfer upload datatype crash
(Cisco Controller) >transfer upload filename <Desired filename>
(Cisco Controller) >transfer up...