Differences

This shows you the differences between the selected revision and the current version of the page.

dfwfreenet:hardware 2010/02/16 11:36 dfwfreenet:hardware 2010/02/16 12:35 current
Line 9: Line 9:
===== Overview ===== ===== Overview =====
Our primary consideration with hardware selection was cost, reliability and performance. It is our belief that mesh access points need to be as affordable as possible to ensure self-sustained growth of the network. Below is a description of the hardware platform we eventually settled on, after testing and evaluating numerous others. Our primary consideration with hardware selection was cost, reliability and performance. It is our belief that mesh access points need to be as affordable as possible to ensure self-sustained growth of the network. Below is a description of the hardware platform we eventually settled on, after testing and evaluating numerous others.
- 
- 
- 
- 
- 
- 
- 
- 
- 
- 
- 
- 
- 
- 
- 
- 
- 
- 
- 
- 
- 
Line 36: Line 15:
|  {{:dfwfreenet:indoor_meraki001.jpg|:dfwfreenet:indoor_meraki001.jpg}}  |  {{:dfwfreenet:outdoor-meraki.jpg|:dfwfreenet:outdoor-meraki.jpg}}  |  {{:dfwfreenet:img_indoor_210x125.gif.jpeg|:dfwfreenet:img_indoor_210x125.gif.jpeg}}  |  {{:dfwfreenet:hardware_outdoor_main.jpg|:dfwfreenet:hardware_outdoor_main.jpg}}  | |  {{:dfwfreenet:indoor_meraki001.jpg|:dfwfreenet:indoor_meraki001.jpg}}  |  {{:dfwfreenet:outdoor-meraki.jpg|:dfwfreenet:outdoor-meraki.jpg}}  |  {{:dfwfreenet:img_indoor_210x125.gif.jpeg|:dfwfreenet:img_indoor_210x125.gif.jpeg}}  |  {{:dfwfreenet:hardware_outdoor_main.jpg|:dfwfreenet:hardware_outdoor_main.jpg}}  |
-|  Meraki Mini (EOL)  |  Meraki Mini Outdoor (EOL)  |  [[http://meraki.com/products_services/hardware/indoor/|Meraki Indoor]]  |  [[http://meraki.com/oursolution/hardware/outdoor/|Meraki Outdoor]]  |+|  Meraki Mini (EOL)  |  Meraki Mini Outdoor (EOL)  |  [[http://meraki.com/products_services/access_points/indoor|Meraki Indoor]]  |  [[http://meraki.com/products_services/access_points/outdoor|Meraki Outdoor]]  |
Equipment from Meraki [was] low cost, has zero end user configuration, a back-end management system and most importantly, wireless mesh capabilities. This allows for several advantages. First, bandwidth usage is controlled, so one user doesn’t saturate any one Internet connection. Second, remote monitoring and management allows us to get an idea of network health/usage and modify configuration remotely. Third, as opposed to traditional wireless networks, which require an Internet connection at every access point, Meraki devices can relay data as many times needed until it reaches an Internet connected access point (gateway), significantly reducing the cost of building the network. Equipment from Meraki [was] low cost, has zero end user configuration, a back-end management system and most importantly, wireless mesh capabilities. This allows for several advantages. First, bandwidth usage is controlled, so one user doesn’t saturate any one Internet connection. Second, remote monitoring and management allows us to get an idea of network health/usage and modify configuration remotely. Third, as opposed to traditional wireless networks, which require an Internet connection at every access point, Meraki devices can relay data as many times needed until it reaches an Internet connected access point (gateway), significantly reducing the cost of building the network.
 
dfwfreenet/hardware.txt · Last modified: 2010/02/16 12:35 by admin
 
Recent changes RSS feed Creative Commons License Donate Powered by PHP Valid XHTML 1.0 Valid CSS Driven by DokuWiki