> server kicked my response back for too many lines?
We too are analyzing an upgrade to our wireless LAN also. We have had
Xirrus and Aerohive do site surveys. What I am trying to do is prevent
single points of failure. Controller-less architecture seems to be an
ideal situation. I really liked the robustness and flexibility of the
multiple radios. What I don't like is the single point issue. If that
Xirrus box goes down, for whatever, the whole building goes with it.
What I do like about multiple radio AP's is that we can offer a mixed
A/B/G/N environment without causing performance slowdowns for the N
users. Or once we move most nodes to the N standard. Some other
features I like is to have policy control such as TCP/UDP port
management, state-full packet inspection, kill rogue AP's, DoS attack
prevention, QoS, etc brought out to the AP rather than backhauling to
a controller.
Our particular needs don't necessarily require as many AP's due the
fact that we only have single story buildings. We have a little less
than 200 wireless computers and bandwidth needs vary throughout the
day. But clearly, the bandwidth needs are increasing exponentially.
Has anyone else looked at Aerohive? It would be nice to hear their
opinion in this thread also.
Thanks guys
Fred Austin
Technology Director
The Oakwood School
Greenville, NC
>
>
>> We are considering upgrading our wireless infrastructure. I'd like
>> to
>
>> hear from any schools that are using or had considered and decided
>> not
>
>> to use a Xirrus solution.
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>>
>> Larry Kahn
>> Director of Academic and Information Technology
>> The Kinkaid School
>> Phone: (713) 243-5090
>> Skype: larry.kahn
>> Blog: newthingsnewways.blogspot.com
>>
>>
[ For info on ISED-L see http://www.gds.org/ISED-L ]
Submissions to ISED-L are released under a creative commons, attribution, non-commercial, share-alike license.
RSS Feed, http://listserv.syr.edu/scripts/wa.exe?RSS&L=ISED-L
