<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:taxo="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/taxonomy/" version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>topic 1100 overlap in Wireless</title>
    <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/wireless/1100-overlap/m-p/236935#M214809</link>
    <description>&lt;P&gt;how far apart minimally should the wap's be. Mine are 3 ft and seem to create a loop which brings down the F/server&lt;/P&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Sun, 04 Jul 2021 16:37:36 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>admin_2</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2021-07-04T16:37:36Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>1100 overlap</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/wireless/1100-overlap/m-p/236935#M214809</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;how far apart minimally should the wap's be. Mine are 3 ft and seem to create a loop which brings down the F/server&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Sun, 04 Jul 2021 16:37:36 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/wireless/1100-overlap/m-p/236935#M214809</guid>
      <dc:creator>admin_2</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2021-07-04T16:37:36Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: 1100 overlap</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/wireless/1100-overlap/m-p/236936#M214810</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;There is no issue in having the APs 3 feet apart.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 14 May 2004 21:55:10 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/wireless/1100-overlap/m-p/236936#M214810</guid>
      <dc:creator>sbilgi</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2004-05-14T21:55:10Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

