probably not, as it will end up eating more of your AP's processing power
-----Original Message-----
From: karlnet-admin@WISPNotes.com [mailto:karlnet-admin@WISPNotes.com]On
Behalf Of Dan Metcalf
Sent: Friday, July 05, 2002 6:37 PM
To: karlnet@WISPNotes.com
Subject: RE: [Karlnet] Drop in Throughput? - some routing examples
Yes, it is still shared, I was just wondering if there was a benefit for
doing it one way or the other?
Dan Metcalf
Wireless Broadband Sytems
dan.metcalf@wbsysnet.com
www.wirelessbroadbandsystems.com
> -----Original Message-----
> From: karlnet-admin@WISPNotes.com [mailto:karlnet-admin@WISPNotes.com]
On
> Behalf Of Charles Chia Sheng Wu
> Sent: Friday, July 05, 2002 7:33 PM
> To: karlnet@WISPNotes.com
> Subject: RE: [Karlnet] Drop in Throughput? - some routing examples
>
> >No It would be PtMP
>
> >I would add multiple DIRECT routes for each radio so I would have an
> >entry for each /30 network. So the AP would use 1 IP address for each
> >/30 network
>
> but the wireless medium is still shared...
>
> -Charles
> _______________________________________________
> Karlnet mailing list
> Karlnet@WISPNotes.com
> http://lists.wispnotes.com/mailman/listinfo/karlnet
> ---
> [This E-mail scanned for viruses by Declude Virus]
>
---
[This E-mail scanned for viruses by Declude Virus]
_______________________________________________
Karlnet mailing list
Karlnet@WISPNotes.com
http://lists.wispnotes.com/mailman/listinfo/karlnet
|