RE: reflections from the trenches of ietf62 wireless

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Thursday, March 17, 2005 07:51:27 AM -0800 Tony Hain <alh-ietf@xxxxxxxx> wrote:

FWIW: Those 350s were provided after a similar bad experience specifically
so there would be consistent and stable equipment available. The fact that
they are considered 'emergency' at this point shows that in fact people do
expect new features from the equipment

On the contrary, I think it reflects the realization that a dozen AP's is not enough to provide service for O(1000) people over a dozen meeting rooms plus lobbies, bars, restaurants, etc. Had the volunteers who built the network been unable to get wireless hardware in time, they could have broken out the emergency AP's and provided worse coverage to fewer areas than we had last week. It would have been better than nothing, but it would _not_ have been better than what we got. And you'd still all be whining.


-- Jeffrey T. Hutzelman (N3NHS) <jhutz+@xxxxxxx>
  Sr. Research Systems Programmer
  School of Computer Science - Research Computing Facility
  Carnegie Mellon University - Pittsburgh, PA


_______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

[Index of Archives]     [IETF Annoucements]     [IETF]     [IP Storage]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux SCTP]     [Linux Newbies]     [Fedora Users]