<?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 Wireless Bridge for Mobile Client in Wireless</title>
    <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/wireless/wireless-bridge-for-mobile-client/m-p/1748399#M36799</link>
    <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;The new 12.4.25 JA1 code was a huge improvement over the dev code Cisco had us running. The roaming performance was night and day different. We ran the two side by side. The new code roamed exactly as we would expect it to out of the box.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Thu, 08 Sep 2011 13:16:53 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>jasonwirz</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2011-09-08T13:16:53Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>Wireless Bridge for Mobile Client</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/wireless/wireless-bridge-for-mobile-client/m-p/1748396#M36796</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;What kind of hardware are people using for mobile bridges? I have not had good luck with Cisco 1242's in bridge mode with mobile-client enabled. The only reason we're using the Cisco access point over standard industrial bridges is because we need to manually forward the mac addresses of the devices behind the bridge. These are being installed on robotic forklifts. They have a generic ethernet scrolling marquee installed that does not maintain any active connections and drops from the fowarding table in the bridge if not staticly configured. I'm looking for an alternative because the roaming is not nearly as smooth as it should be. &lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Sun, 04 Jul 2021 03:40:30 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/wireless/wireless-bridge-for-mobile-client/m-p/1748396#M36796</guid>
      <dc:creator>jasonwirz</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2021-07-04T03:40:30Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Wireless Bridge for Mobile Client</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/wireless/wireless-bridge-for-mobile-client/m-p/1748397#M36797</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;You need to use the role "workgroup-bridge", not a bridge.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;The workgroup bridge can be roaming around and is working quite well on code 12.4.25 with the 1242. We have it installed on trains, so roaming at 80km/h is approved &lt;span class="lia-unicode-emoji" title=":slightly_smiling_face:"&gt;🙂&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 06 Sep 2011 18:51:45 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/wireless/wireless-bridge-for-mobile-client/m-p/1748397#M36797</guid>
      <dc:creator>Nicolas Darchis</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2011-09-06T18:51:45Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Wireless Bridge for Mobile Client</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/wireless/wireless-bridge-for-mobile-client/m-p/1748398#M36798</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;Thank for the reply. I can finally test on the new code released a few weeks ago. We had to run a custom dev code since January to deal with this nasty IOS bug that was affecting our bridges. &lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;A class="active_link" href="http://tools.cisco.com/Support/BugToolKit/search/getBugDetails.do?method=fetchBugDetails&amp;amp;bugId=CSCtk77013"&gt;http://tools.cisco.com/Support/BugToolKit/search/getBugDetails.do?method=fetchBugDetails&amp;amp;bugId=CSCtk77013&lt;/A&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;It turned all our robots into mobile wireless death stations. We could tell where the robot was in the building based on the access points locking up. Hopefully the new code roams as nice as you say it can. I'll have to test and post the results.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 07 Sep 2011 16:04:45 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/wireless/wireless-bridge-for-mobile-client/m-p/1748398#M36798</guid>
      <dc:creator>jasonwirz</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2011-09-07T16:04:45Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Wireless Bridge for Mobile Client</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/wireless/wireless-bridge-for-mobile-client/m-p/1748399#M36799</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;The new 12.4.25 JA1 code was a huge improvement over the dev code Cisco had us running. The roaming performance was night and day different. We ran the two side by side. The new code roamed exactly as we would expect it to out of the box.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 08 Sep 2011 13:16:53 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/wireless/wireless-bridge-for-mobile-client/m-p/1748399#M36799</guid>
      <dc:creator>jasonwirz</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2011-09-08T13:16:53Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

