A comparison of wi-fi and wimax with case studies - Florida State ...

increased bandwidth, fixed connectivity issues, and hid antennas through upgrading in this phase.
The total cost was within $6,000 but if using fiber, it would cost at least $10,000. [70]
In phase II, the operators tracked the outside campus usage and wanted to install wireless
network to these small groups or departments. They located the outside campus connections. The
goal was to renovate these networks in the FSU extended campus. After evaluating these
connections, the operators found out that they could establish connections to these places
wirelessly and retrieved many modem lines. Eventually, the operators removed 37 dial-up
connections in 5 buildings and then they had more dial-up resources for other users. These
buildings used hubs to connect each PC and then used wireless bridges/gateway to connect back
to main campus network. In the middle, there is no wired network; it is totally wireless. [70]
In this last phase, operators added 8 additional buildings into the FSU wireless network. The
problems of these buildings were that they were either too far away from campus (1.5 miles
away) or too expensive to install fiber for each user (spanned city street). By applying the
wireless solution, the operators spent around 15,000 dollars without recurring costs or permits.
[70]
The Building-to-Building Connections covered 19 buildings with 207 users and 22 bridges.
(Document in 09/2006) [70]
Part II contained two phases and mainly focused on the inner connections of a building. In
phase I, the operators estimate the areas on the campus where the WLAN was highly needed.
These places included three libraries and Student Union. The Student Union is a place where
vendors are and students and employees hand-out together. [70]
Phase II was to help the departments which requested an intra-building network to install
and setup the FSUWIN network. The process included implementation, integration, optimization
and installation. They would make sure the departments did not have any problems when using
the WLAN. For achieving maximum efficiency, the operators not only installed and maintained
the network, but also evaluated future extensions for the departments. The installation process is
documented for future improvement. The departments which have FSUWIN service are the
College of Law, Registrar’s Office, College of Business, School of Social-Work, and
Mathematics. (Document in 09/2006)[70]
The APs and switches used by FSUWIN are produced by many different companies, such as
Vivato Networks, Xirrus and Foundry Networks. The technology details are shown in figure 5-
6[145], figure 5-7[146] And figure 5-8[71]; table 5-2[145], table 5-3[146] and table 5-4[71].
Comparing the Vivato solution to regular AP, it is easy to find that Vivato has longer coverage
and could support more users. In the survey “Vivato Switch Evaluation”[70], there are five
scenarios had been defined: Fisher, Landis, Shores, Sliger and Stadium. This survey shows that
only 1 or 2 pieces of Vivato equipment are needed to cover an area. In the scenario one, Fisher
Lecture Hall takes 6 regular APs, three at each side, to cover the whole area, but the Vivato
63