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

Re: [K12OSN] Re:K12ltsp wirelss

On Tue, 2003-10-07 at 13:47, Julius Szelagiewicz wrote:
> On 7 Oct 2003, Steve Wright wrote:
> > On Tue, 2003-10-07 at 09:13, Julius Szelagiewicz wrote:
> > re: EPIA 5000
> > Which LCD do you use in the Car, and how do you power it ?
> >
> > The idea of multiple APs or using 'g' instead has merit.  It just seems
> > to me there might be a different approach which works with standard
> > 802.11b which or course is dead cheap.
> >
> Steve,
> 	I found a 15" Sony LCD on my desk and moved it to the truck
> because it was using a 120V to 12VDC transformer. Still works fine despite
> the fact the the voltage reulator pushes anything from 10V to 16V.

nice.  what is the monitor exactly ?  I will try to find one similar

> 	G is more expensive because the cards cost more, the low end APs
> are rather cheap. If you want to stay with 802.11b, use multiple APs -
> Orinoco supports 2 cards and each can be set at a different channel. That
> gives you 4 channels with just 2 APs. Again, as you have noticed yourself,
> this can be done directly on the Linux server, driving the cost even
> lower.

ok.  sounds good.

>  4 channels give you effective 44MHz network. I have run 40+
> stations on a 100MHz wired switched network. I would think that 16
> workstations should be adequate on a 44MHz, even with traffic contention,
> and in normal use, without the screen saver, even 20 should be ok.

wireless is a bit different to wired networks.  11mbps works out to
about 4mbps in actual practice.  Where there is channel contention
involved, you can halve this to two mbit *total* throughput.  When there
are hidden transmitters involved, count yourself *very* lucky to ever
see 1mbit.

Also, there are not enough channels to run 4 APs in close proximity,
since the channels overlap.  3 simultaneous APs is the best you can hope
for in an enclosed space.

>  That
> said, I'd use a switch and an octopus of wires to connect as many of the
> laptops as possible - where the wiring would not be a big hazard. julius

yeah, for sure.  I think the wireless situation is workable, and I think
it's a real good idea, but for more than a couple of terminals, there
needs to be a way to cut the WLAN traffic wayyy back.

I am interested in this since I am studying wireless networks.  I have
discovered all is not exactly what it seems with wireless.


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