RE: [WIRELESS-LAN] 8540 Code version- holiday work

2020-12-09 Thread Kyle Nielsen 
Hi Everyone, 

I'm working with Cisco TAC/Engineering with this MacOS and ARP issues. They 
have asked for all of the SR #'s that are related to this issue so they can get 
them correlated. For anyone you that have opened a case for this issue, if you 
would please reply to me with the SR# (direct reply is fine). I'm hoping by 
brining more attention to the issue that the BU will take a serious look at it.

Thank you,

Kyle

==
Kyle Nielsen
Senior Network Systems Engineer 
Grand Valley State University
226 Manitou Hall 
Allendale, MI 49401

-Original Message-
From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Community Group Listserv 
 On Behalf Of Carlo Terminiello
Sent: Wednesday, December 9, 2020 4:33 AM
To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] 8540 Code version- holiday work

Michael,

We had similar issues earlier in the year with 8.8 code on AireOS controllers 
specifically with MacOS and IOS clients and had to do a lot of digging into arp 
on the AP and locally conncted switch, it seems the Apple devices were 
poisoning arp but sending out responses on behalf of the local gateway, it's 
worth investigating in this area.

Just another pointer, its seems the software end of life is actually related to 
your 8510 WLC, seems the 700w are supported on later WLC like 3504, 5520, 8540 
running 8.8 or 8.10, if you can get hold of a later WLC or spin up a VM 
temporarily and move some AP access to a later version of code it may help you 
determine if it’s a known bug that has already been fixed in later versions.

Rgds

Carlo

On 09/12/2020, 01:09, "The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Community Group Listserv 
on behalf of Michael Vinson"  wrote:

Kyle,

I wanted to reply to your post...

We have Cisco 702W APs in our residence halls and have been fighting issues 
with wireless for many months now.  This issue seemed to appear this fall 
semester.

Students are complaining they are getting disconnected from wireless or not 
being able to get connected to wireless.  We have been able to reproduce the 
issue on an iPhone, iMac, MacBook Pro, and MacBook Air.  We also had several 
Windows laptops fail one day while testing, but this happened to use only once. 
 We are also having reports of other devices such as Android phones or other 
BYOD devices, but the main complaint is coming from Apple devices.

What we have seen while testing with Apple devices is the AP and WLC show 
the device connected.  The users wireless device also shows that it is 
connected to the SSID, but when the issue is happening you can't pass any 
traffic.  Everything will be working fine (pings and a streaming YouTube video) 
and all of a sudden the pings will stop and YouTube will fail after the buffer 
is exhausted.  Some times it will come back after a short amount of time or we 
have seen it not come back for over an hour.  What is interesting is while one 
or more of the devices are experiencing issues, we have other devices working 
off the same AP just fine.  

We are using Cisco 8510 WLCs running 8.5.161.7   The previous semester we 
were running 8.5.140We initially upgraded this fall to 8.5.161.4, then down 
graded to 8.5.140 and then upgraded to 8.5.161.7 based on recommendations from 
Cisco.  All these version have had issues.

Students have said if the go to Campus buildings, dens or community centers 
that the wireless works great.  The APs in these locations are 3702 or 3802 
APs.  We have done a small amount of testing with a 1815 and have not 
experienced any issues on this. 

We have been working with Cisco and Apple for help, but have had no 
solution at this time.  Cisco has also told us that the 702W AP no longer has 
software support, so if this issue is due to a Cisco bug that it will not be 
fixed.

Michael Vinson
Iowa State University, IT Services
Network Engineer

**
Replies to EDUCAUSE Community Group emails are sent to the entire community 
list. If you want to reply only to the person who sent the message, copy and 
paste their email address and forward the email reply. Additional participation 
and subscription information can be found at https://www.educause.edu/community


**
Replies to EDUCAUSE Community Group emails are sent to the entire community 
list. If you want to reply only to the person who sent the message, copy and 
paste their email address and forward the email reply. Additional participation 
and subscription information can be found at https://www.educause.edu/community

**
Replies to EDUCAUSE Community Group emails are sent to the entire community 
list. If you want to reply only to the person who sent the message, copy and 
paste their email address and forward the email reply. Additional participation 
and subscription information can be found at https://www.educause.edu/community

Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] 8540 Code version- holiday work

2020-12-09 Thread Carlo Terminiello 
Michael,

We had similar issues earlier in the year with 8.8 code on AireOS controllers 
specifically with MacOS and IOS clients and had to do a lot of digging into arp 
on the AP and locally conncted switch, it seems the Apple devices were 
poisoning arp but sending out responses on behalf of the local gateway, it's 
worth investigating in this area.

Just another pointer, its seems the software end of life is actually related to 
your 8510 WLC, seems the 700w are supported on later WLC like 3504, 5520, 8540 
running 8.8 or 8.10, if you can get hold of a later WLC or spin up a VM 
temporarily and move some AP access to a later version of code it may help you 
determine if it’s a known bug that has already been fixed in later versions.

Rgds

Carlo

On 09/12/2020, 01:09, "The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Community Group Listserv 
on behalf of Michael Vinson"  wrote:

Kyle,

I wanted to reply to your post...

We have Cisco 702W APs in our residence halls and have been fighting issues 
with wireless for many months now.  This issue seemed to appear this fall 
semester.

Students are complaining they are getting disconnected from wireless or not 
being able to get connected to wireless.  We have been able to reproduce the 
issue on an iPhone, iMac, MacBook Pro, and MacBook Air.  We also had several 
Windows laptops fail one day while testing, but this happened to use only once. 
 We are also having reports of other devices such as Android phones or other 
BYOD devices, but the main complaint is coming from Apple devices.

What we have seen while testing with Apple devices is the AP and WLC show 
the device connected.  The users wireless device also shows that it is 
connected to the SSID, but when the issue is happening you can't pass any 
traffic.  Everything will be working fine (pings and a streaming YouTube video) 
and all of a sudden the pings will stop and YouTube will fail after the buffer 
is exhausted.  Some times it will come back after a short amount of time or we 
have seen it not come back for over an hour.  What is interesting is while one 
or more of the devices are experiencing issues, we have other devices working 
off the same AP just fine.  

We are using Cisco 8510 WLCs running 8.5.161.7   The previous semester we 
were running 8.5.140We initially upgraded this fall to 8.5.161.4, then down 
graded to 8.5.140 and then upgraded to 8.5.161.7 based on recommendations from 
Cisco.  All these version have had issues.

Students have said if the go to Campus buildings, dens or community centers 
that the wireless works great.  The APs in these locations are 3702 or 3802 
APs.  We have done a small amount of testing with a 1815 and have not 
experienced any issues on this. 

We have been working with Cisco and Apple for help, but have had no 
solution at this time.  Cisco has also told us that the 702W AP no longer has 
software support, so if this issue is due to a Cisco bug that it will not be 
fixed.

Michael Vinson
Iowa State University, IT Services
Network Engineer

**
Replies to EDUCAUSE Community Group emails are sent to the entire community 
list. If you want to reply only to the person who sent the message, copy and 
paste their email address and forward the email reply. Additional participation 
and subscription information can be found at https://www.educause.edu/community


**
Replies to EDUCAUSE Community Group emails are sent to the entire community 
list. If you want to reply only to the person who sent the message, copy and 
paste their email address and forward the email reply. Additional participation 
and subscription information can be found at https://www.educause.edu/community

RE: [WIRELESS-LAN] 8540 Code version- holiday work

2020-11-20 Thread Kyle Nielsen 
Matt,

We are on 8.5.151.0 and we are seeing the same issue dropping/re-associating 
with the 702W’s but not with the 1815W’s as well.
We are also seeing (just started this semester) that devices are associated and 
connected but  unable to pass traffic, this will last anywhere from 30 seconds 
to 10 minutes (unless they turn off/on the radio again). Seems to primarily 
impact MacBook’s, they can’t ping or browser to any local or remote hosts 
during this time.

I’ve had a few cases open with TAC, I suggested the issue being with the 702W’s 
as well, because we do not see the issue with any of the non-hospitality AP’s 
in academic spaces or the 1815’s in housing. TAC is saying must be a local RF 
issue… but I’m not convinced.

-Kyle

-
Kyle Nielsen
Senior Network Systems Engineer
Information Technology

Grand Valley State University
225 Manitou Hall
Allendale, MI 49401
office: 616-331-9104
niels...@gvsu.edu<mailto:%7B%20props.email%20%7D>


From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Community Group Listserv 
 On Behalf Of Matthew Craig
Sent: Friday, November 20, 2020 12:59 PM
To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] 8540 Code version- holiday work

Lee,

We’re currently running 8.5.135.0, and its been running fine for us for a long 
time, despite multiple comments on this list of problems with that code.

However just within in last couple of months or so we’ve been chasing problems 
with clients in dorms connecting to 702w (but dorms with 1815w are fine).  
Clients keep dropping and re-associating; rapid tx errors causing 
de-associating then coming back in the logs etc...


We think something had to have changed on the client side as we’ve had no 
issues for a long time prior… students bought a bunch of new ax chipsets this 
semester that don’t like older N radios?, bigsur updates?… haven’t been able to 
pin it down.



Cisco won’t say much more than ditch 702w… but can’t do that on a dime of 
course.


We have been targeting 8.5.151.0 and 8.5.161.0 as an upgrade path to see if it 
helps.  8.5.161.0 is the recommended TAC release, but I have a somewhat 
irrational feeling to try 8.5.151.0 first.  Your comments about 8.5.151.0 not 
totally sucking vindicate my feeling!  :)



-
Matt Craig
Network Engineer
Information and Communication Technologies
New Mexico State University









On Nov 20, 2020, at 4:30 AM, Lee H Badman 
<00db5b77bd95-dmarc-requ...@listserv.educause.edu<mailto:00db5b77bd95-dmarc-requ...@listserv.educause.edu>>
 wrote:

WARNING: This email originated external to the NMSU email system. Do not click 
on links or open attachments unless you are sure the content is safe.

Knowing that there is no easy answer on questions of Cisco code versions, I’ll 
throw it out there anyways. We have been on 8.5.151.0 for quite some time now , 
with mostly good reliability for 3700s and 3800s alike (occasional need to 
reboot 3700s), We are due to minimally reboot everything, and I’ve been 
following the various discussions regarding code bugs and specific client 
issues these past few months.

So curious- is there a solid, reliable newer version to consider? We are not in 
a hurry to get into .11ax yet for a number of reasons. Given the long and 
problematic history of WLC code, 8.5.151.0 has been as close to “wow, it 
actually doesn’t totally suck” as we’ve ever been.

Regards,

Lee Badman | Network Architect (CWNE#200)
Information Technology Services
(NDD Group)
206 Machinery Hall
120 Smith Drive
Syracuse, New York 13244
t 315.443.3003   e lhbad...@syr.edu<mailto:lhbad...@syr.edu> w 
its.syr.edu<http://its.syr.edu>
Campus Wireless Policy: 
https://answers.syr.edu/display/network/Wireless+Network+and+Systems<https://nam10.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fanswers.syr.edu%2Fdisplay%2Fnetwork%2FWireless%2BNetwork%2Band%2BSystems=04%7C01%7Cmatcraig%40nmsu.edu%7C172a11558a8b4def780f08d88d47c71d%7Ca3ec87a89fb84158ba8ff11bace1ebaa%7C1%7C0%7C637414686703494298%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000=lnmnUbjZc%2F4fiq09Dfiz5r5Y4N8BwZYEJCGiNaONID4%3D=0>
SYRACUSE UNIVERSITY
syr.edu<http://syr.edu>

**
Replies to EDUCAUSE Community Group emails are sent to the entire community 
list. If you want to reply only to the person who sent the message, copy and 
paste their email address and forward the email reply. Additional participation 
and subscription information can be found at 
https://www.educause.edu/community<https://nam10.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.educause.edu%2Fcommunity=04%7C01%7Cmatcraig%40nmsu.edu%7C172a11558a8b4def780f08d88d47c71d%7Ca3ec87a89fb84158ba8ff11bace1ebaa%7C1%7C0%7C637414686703494298%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000=hs%2Bb4W%2B2ZLHPGGwi8ZaC4lSBF0qGzSVst3hpguRQ0gE%3D=0>


**
Replies to EDUCAUSE Community Group emails are sent to the e

Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] 8540 Code version- holiday work

2020-11-20 Thread Slone, Kelly 
We were hitting three bugs that appear resolved in 8.10.142.0.

CSCvm17365
CSCvu55303
CSCvu83242


Very few 3700’s left in our deployment.  We are mostly 1815’s, 3800’s, and 
4800’s with a few buildings moved to 9130’s.  We’ve only been running 
8.10.142.0 for about a week in production.  So far, so good.  Prior to moving 
to it we were experience quite a few reloads of 1815’s and 3800’s.

In an early release candidate of 8.10.142.0 we did experience a controller 
reload of our 8540.  This test controller was a standalone controller.  I’m not 
sure if the bug we encountered that caused the reload has been patched or 
officially identified but we felt more comfortable running in production since 
production controllers are in HA a pair.

Kelly Slone, B.S., MCP
IT Infrastructure Engineer
Marshall University Information Technology
Drinko Library DL 436
Office:  304-696-6109
Helpdesk:  304-696-3200
slon...@marshall.edu<mailto:slon...@marshall.edu>


From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Community Group Listserv 

Date: Friday, November 20, 2020 at 1:30 PM
To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU 
Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] 8540 Code version- holiday work
We have been running 8.8.130.0 since this summer and it has been stable. No 
issues. 8.8 is similar to 8.5 from feature wise, but it will make us easier to 
upgrade to 8.10 in the future.

Dennis


From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Community Group Listserv 
 On Behalf Of Catania, Michael
Sent: Friday, November 20, 2020 1:15 PM
To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] 8540 Code version- holiday work

CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the University of Guelph. Do not 
click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the 
content is safe. If in doubt, forward suspicious emails to 
ith...@uoguelph.ca<mailto:ith...@uoguelph.ca>

We are currently running 8.5.161.0 with many 2800s and a few 3800s. What have 
been the issues you were seeing? We did upgrade from .151 over the summer…so no 
one has been on campus really due to COVID. Should we be moving off this?

From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Community Group Listserv 
mailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU>> 
On Behalf Of Glinsky, Eric
Sent: Friday, November 20, 2020 12:09 PM
To: 
WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU<mailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU>
Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] 8540 Code version- holiday work

Avoid 8.5.161.0 if you have 2800/3800s. 8.5.161.6 has been working better for 
us, though our campus population is sparse with COVID and the particular issues 
we were having were in higher traffic areas.
Eric Glinsky
Network Administrator
University of Connecticut
ITS – Network Operations
Temporary Administration Building
25 Gampel Service Drive | Storrs, CT 06269-1138
(860) 486-9199
e...@uconn.edu<mailto:e...@uconn.edu>


From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Community Group Listserv 
mailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU>> 
on behalf of Matthew Craig mailto:matcr...@nmsu.edu>>
Sent: Friday, November 20, 2020 12:59:15 PM
To: 
WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU<mailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU> 
mailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU>>
Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] 8540 Code version- holiday work

*Message sent from a system outside of UConn.*

Lee,

We’re currently running 8.5.135.0, and its been running fine for us for a long 
time, despite multiple comments on this list of problems with that code.

However just within in last couple of months or so we’ve been chasing problems 
with clients in dorms connecting to 702w (but dorms with 1815w are fine).  
Clients keep dropping and re-associating; rapid tx errors causing 
de-associating then coming back in the logs etc...


We think something had to have changed on the client side as we’ve had no 
issues for a long time prior… students bought a bunch of new ax chipsets this 
semester that don’t like older N radios?, bigsur updates?… haven’t been able to 
pin it down.



Cisco won’t say much more than ditch 702w… but can’t do that on a dime of 
course.

We have been targeting 8.5.151.0 and 8.5.161.0 as an upgrade path to see if it 
helps.  8.5.161.0 is the recommended TAC release, but I have a somewhat 
irrational feeling to try 8.5.151.0 first.  Your comments about 8.5.151.0 not 
totally sucking vindicate my feeling!  :)



-
Matt Craig
Network Engineer
Information and Communication Technologies
New Mexico State University








On Nov 20, 2020, at 4:30 AM, Lee H Badman 
<00db5b77bd95-dmarc-requ...@listserv.educause.edu<mailto:00db5b77bd95-dmarc-requ...@listserv.educause.edu>>
 wrote:

WARNING: This email originated external to the NMSU email system. Do not click 
on links or open attachments unless you are sure the content is safe.

Knowing that there is no easy answer on questions of Cisco code versions, I’ll 
throw it out there anyways. We have been on 8.5.151.0

RE: [WIRELESS-LAN] 8540 Code version- holiday work

2020-11-20 Thread Dennis Xu 
We have been running 8.8.130.0 since this summer and it has been stable. No 
issues. 8.8 is similar to 8.5 from feature wise, but it will make us easier to 
upgrade to 8.10 in the future.

Dennis


From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Community Group Listserv 
 On Behalf Of Catania, Michael
Sent: Friday, November 20, 2020 1:15 PM
To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] 8540 Code version- holiday work

CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the University of Guelph. Do not 
click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the 
content is safe. If in doubt, forward suspicious emails to 
ith...@uoguelph.ca<mailto:ith...@uoguelph.ca>

We are currently running 8.5.161.0 with many 2800s and a few 3800s. What have 
been the issues you were seeing? We did upgrade from .151 over the summer...so 
no one has been on campus really due to COVID. Should we be moving off this?

From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Community Group Listserv 
mailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU>> 
On Behalf Of Glinsky, Eric
Sent: Friday, November 20, 2020 12:09 PM
To: 
WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU<mailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU>
Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] 8540 Code version- holiday work

Avoid 8.5.161.0 if you have 2800/3800s. 8.5.161.6 has been working better for 
us, though our campus population is sparse with COVID and the particular issues 
we were having were in higher traffic areas.
Eric Glinsky
Network Administrator
University of Connecticut
ITS - Network Operations
Temporary Administration Building
25 Gampel Service Drive | Storrs, CT 06269-1138
(860) 486-9199
e...@uconn.edu<mailto:e...@uconn.edu>


From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Community Group Listserv 
mailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU>> 
on behalf of Matthew Craig mailto:matcr...@nmsu.edu>>
Sent: Friday, November 20, 2020 12:59:15 PM
To: 
WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU<mailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU> 
mailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU>>
Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] 8540 Code version- holiday work

*Message sent from a system outside of UConn.*

Lee,

We're currently running 8.5.135.0, and its been running fine for us for a long 
time, despite multiple comments on this list of problems with that code.

However just within in last couple of months or so we've been chasing problems 
with clients in dorms connecting to 702w (but dorms with 1815w are fine).  
Clients keep dropping and re-associating; rapid tx errors causing 
de-associating then coming back in the logs etc...


We think something had to have changed on the client side as we've had no 
issues for a long time prior... students bought a bunch of new ax chipsets this 
semester that don't like older N radios?, bigsur updates?... haven't been able 
to pin it down.



Cisco won't say much more than ditch 702w... but can't do that on a dime of 
course.

We have been targeting 8.5.151.0 and 8.5.161.0 as an upgrade path to see if it 
helps.  8.5.161.0 is the recommended TAC release, but I have a somewhat 
irrational feeling to try 8.5.151.0 first.  Your comments about 8.5.151.0 not 
totally sucking vindicate my feeling!  :)



-
Matt Craig
Network Engineer
Information and Communication Technologies
New Mexico State University








On Nov 20, 2020, at 4:30 AM, Lee H Badman 
<00db5b77bd95-dmarc-requ...@listserv.educause.edu<mailto:00db5b77bd95-dmarc-requ...@listserv.educause.edu>>
 wrote:

WARNING: This email originated external to the NMSU email system. Do not click 
on links or open attachments unless you are sure the content is safe.

Knowing that there is no easy answer on questions of Cisco code versions, I'll 
throw it out there anyways. We have been on 8.5.151.0 for quite some time now , 
with mostly good reliability for 3700s and 3800s alike (occasional need to 
reboot 3700s), We are due to minimally reboot everything, and I've been 
following the various discussions regarding code bugs and specific client 
issues these past few months.



So curious- is there a solid, reliable newer version to consider? We are not in 
a hurry to get into .11ax yet for a number of reasons. Given the long and 
problematic history of WLC code, 8.5.151.0 has been as close to "wow, it 
actually doesn't totally suck" as we've ever been.



Regards,



Lee Badman | Network Architect (CWNE#200)

Information Technology Services
(NDD Group)
206 Machinery Hall
120 Smith Drive
Syracuse, New York 13244

t 315.443.3003   e lhbad...@syr.edu<mailto:lhbad...@syr.edu> w 
its.syr.edu<https://nam10.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fits.syr.edu%2F=04%7C01%7Ceg%40UCONN.EDU%7C523d489d0eee424f803508d88d7e00d1%7C17f1a87e2a254eaab9df9d439034b080%7C0%7C0%7C637414919611714430%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000=oXjY6SJ%2BqtXfVRsbV%2Fj3wwWbSzPpjODwFJVp

RE: [WIRELESS-LAN] 8540 Code version- holiday work

2020-11-20 Thread Catania, Michael 
We are currently running 8.5.161.0 with many 2800s and a few 3800s. What have 
been the issues you were seeing? We did upgrade from .151 over the summer...so 
no one has been on campus really due to COVID. Should we be moving off this?

From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Community Group Listserv 
 On Behalf Of Glinsky, Eric
Sent: Friday, November 20, 2020 12:09 PM
To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] 8540 Code version- holiday work

Avoid 8.5.161.0 if you have 2800/3800s. 8.5.161.6 has been working better for 
us, though our campus population is sparse with COVID and the particular issues 
we were having were in higher traffic areas.
Eric Glinsky
Network Administrator
University of Connecticut
ITS - Network Operations
Temporary Administration Building
25 Gampel Service Drive | Storrs, CT 06269-1138
(860) 486-9199
e...@uconn.edu<mailto:e...@uconn.edu>


From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Community Group Listserv 
mailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU>> 
on behalf of Matthew Craig mailto:matcr...@nmsu.edu>>
Sent: Friday, November 20, 2020 12:59:15 PM
To: 
WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU<mailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU> 
mailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU>>
Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] 8540 Code version- holiday work

*Message sent from a system outside of UConn.*

Lee,

We're currently running 8.5.135.0, and its been running fine for us for a long 
time, despite multiple comments on this list of problems with that code.

However just within in last couple of months or so we've been chasing problems 
with clients in dorms connecting to 702w (but dorms with 1815w are fine).  
Clients keep dropping and re-associating; rapid tx errors causing 
de-associating then coming back in the logs etc...


We think something had to have changed on the client side as we've had no 
issues for a long time prior... students bought a bunch of new ax chipsets this 
semester that don't like older N radios?, bigsur updates?... haven't been able 
to pin it down.



Cisco won't say much more than ditch 702w... but can't do that on a dime of 
course.


We have been targeting 8.5.151.0 and 8.5.161.0 as an upgrade path to see if it 
helps.  8.5.161.0 is the recommended TAC release, but I have a somewhat 
irrational feeling to try 8.5.151.0 first.  Your comments about 8.5.151.0 not 
totally sucking vindicate my feeling!  :)



-
Matt Craig
Network Engineer
Information and Communication Technologies
New Mexico State University









On Nov 20, 2020, at 4:30 AM, Lee H Badman 
<00db5b77bd95-dmarc-requ...@listserv.educause.edu<mailto:00db5b77bd95-dmarc-requ...@listserv.educause.edu>>
 wrote:

WARNING: This email originated external to the NMSU email system. Do not click 
on links or open attachments unless you are sure the content is safe.

Knowing that there is no easy answer on questions of Cisco code versions, I'll 
throw it out there anyways. We have been on 8.5.151.0 for quite some time now , 
with mostly good reliability for 3700s and 3800s alike (occasional need to 
reboot 3700s), We are due to minimally reboot everything, and I've been 
following the various discussions regarding code bugs and specific client 
issues these past few months.



So curious- is there a solid, reliable newer version to consider? We are not in 
a hurry to get into .11ax yet for a number of reasons. Given the long and 
problematic history of WLC code, 8.5.151.0 has been as close to "wow, it 
actually doesn't totally suck" as we've ever been.



Regards,



Lee Badman | Network Architect (CWNE#200)

Information Technology Services
(NDD Group)
206 Machinery Hall
120 Smith Drive
Syracuse, New York 13244

t 315.443.3003   e lhbad...@syr.edu<mailto:lhbad...@syr.edu> w 
its.syr.edu<https://nam10.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fits.syr.edu%2F=04%7C01%7Ceg%40UCONN.EDU%7C523d489d0eee424f803508d88d7e00d1%7C17f1a87e2a254eaab9df9d439034b080%7C0%7C0%7C637414919611714430%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000=oXjY6SJ%2BqtXfVRsbV%2Fj3wwWbSzPpjODwFJVpmkxd5do%3D=0>

Campus Wireless Policy: 
https://answers.syr.edu/display/network/Wireless+Network+and+Systems<https://nam10.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fanswers.syr.edu%2Fdisplay%2Fnetwork%2FWireless%2BNetwork%2Band%2BSystems=04%7C01%7Ceg%40UCONN.EDU%7C523d489d0eee424f803508d88d7e00d1%7C17f1a87e2a254eaab9df9d439034b080%7C0%7C0%7C637414919611714430%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000=kVcMbAvobwGQiBaBRjW2zdgITdCitQoQ1c5T5CKEzVQ%3D=0>

SYRACUSE UNIVERSITY
syr.edu<https://nam10.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fsyr.edu%2F=04%7C01%7Ceg%40UCONN.EDU%7C523d489d0eee424f803508d88d7e00d1%7C17f1a87e2a254eaab9df9d439034b080%7C0%7C0%7C637414919611724426%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8

Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] 8540 Code version- holiday work

2020-11-20 Thread Glinsky, Eric 
Avoid 8.5.161.0 if you have 2800/3800s. 8.5.161.6 has been working better for 
us, though our campus population is sparse with COVID and the particular issues 
we were having were in higher traffic areas.

Eric Glinsky
Network Administrator
University of Connecticut
ITS – Network Operations
Temporary Administration Building
25 Gampel Service Drive | Storrs, CT 06269-1138
(860) 486-9199
e...@uconn.edu


From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Community Group Listserv 
 on behalf of Matthew Craig 

Sent: Friday, November 20, 2020 12:59:15 PM
To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU 
Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] 8540 Code version- holiday work


*Message sent from a system outside of UConn.*


Lee,

We’re currently running 8.5.135.0, and its been running fine for us for a long 
time, despite multiple comments on this list of problems with that code.

However just within in last couple of months or so we’ve been chasing problems 
with clients in dorms connecting to 702w (but dorms with 1815w are fine).  
Clients keep dropping and re-associating; rapid tx errors causing 
de-associating then coming back in the logs etc...


We think something had to have changed on the client side as we’ve had no 
issues for a long time prior… students bought a bunch of new ax chipsets this 
semester that don’t like older N radios?, bigsur updates?… haven’t been able to 
pin it down.



Cisco won’t say much more than ditch 702w… but can’t do that on a dime of 
course.



We have been targeting 8.5.151.0 and 8.5.161.0 as an upgrade path to see if it 
helps.  8.5.161.0 is the recommended TAC release, but I have a somewhat 
irrational feeling to try 8.5.151.0 first.  Your comments about 8.5.151.0 not 
totally sucking vindicate my feeling!  :)



-
Matt Craig
Network Engineer
Information and Communication Technologies
New Mexico State University









On Nov 20, 2020, at 4:30 AM, Lee H Badman 
<00db5b77bd95-dmarc-requ...@listserv.educause.edu<mailto:00db5b77bd95-dmarc-requ...@listserv.educause.edu>>
 wrote:

WARNING: This email originated external to the NMSU email system. Do not click 
on links or open attachments unless you are sure the content is safe.

Knowing that there is no easy answer on questions of Cisco code versions, I’ll 
throw it out there anyways. We have been on 8.5.151.0 for quite some time now , 
with mostly good reliability for 3700s and 3800s alike (occasional need to 
reboot 3700s), We are due to minimally reboot everything, and I’ve been 
following the various discussions regarding code bugs and specific client 
issues these past few months.



So curious- is there a solid, reliable newer version to consider? We are not in 
a hurry to get into .11ax yet for a number of reasons. Given the long and 
problematic history of WLC code, 8.5.151.0 has been as close to “wow, it 
actually doesn’t totally suck” as we’ve ever been.



Regards,



Lee Badman | Network Architect (CWNE#200)

Information Technology Services
(NDD Group)
206 Machinery Hall
120 Smith Drive
Syracuse, New York 13244

t 315.443.3003   e lhbad...@syr.edu<mailto:lhbad...@syr.edu> w 
its.syr.edu<https://nam10.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fits.syr.edu%2F=04%7C01%7Ceg%40UCONN.EDU%7C523d489d0eee424f803508d88d7e00d1%7C17f1a87e2a254eaab9df9d439034b080%7C0%7C0%7C637414919611714430%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000=oXjY6SJ%2BqtXfVRsbV%2Fj3wwWbSzPpjODwFJVpmkxd5do%3D=0>

Campus Wireless Policy: 
https://answers.syr.edu/display/network/Wireless+Network+and+Systems<https://nam10.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fanswers.syr.edu%2Fdisplay%2Fnetwork%2FWireless%2BNetwork%2Band%2BSystems=04%7C01%7Ceg%40UCONN.EDU%7C523d489d0eee424f803508d88d7e00d1%7C17f1a87e2a254eaab9df9d439034b080%7C0%7C0%7C637414919611714430%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000=kVcMbAvobwGQiBaBRjW2zdgITdCitQoQ1c5T5CKEzVQ%3D=0>

SYRACUSE UNIVERSITY
syr.edu<https://nam10.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fsyr.edu%2F=04%7C01%7Ceg%40UCONN.EDU%7C523d489d0eee424f803508d88d7e00d1%7C17f1a87e2a254eaab9df9d439034b080%7C0%7C0%7C637414919611724426%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000=5jQqY52RpEcqMYjtoK9LEQVCH24fC8U27Nj%2Fo372DJM%3D=0>



**
Replies to EDUCAUSE Community Group emails are sent to the entire community 
list. If you want to reply only to the person who sent the message, copy and 
paste their email address and forward the email reply. Additional participation 
and subscription information can be found at 
https://www.educause.edu/community<https://nam10.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.educause.edu%2Fcommunity=04%7C01%7Ceg%40UCONN.EDU%7C523d489d0eee424f803508d88d7e00d1%7C17f1a87e2a254eaab9df9d439034b080

Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] 8540 Code version- holiday work

2020-11-20 Thread Matthew Craig 
Lee,

We’re currently running 8.5.135.0, and its been running fine for us for a long 
time, despite multiple comments on this list of problems with that code.

However just within in last couple of months or so we’ve been chasing problems 
with clients in dorms connecting to 702w (but dorms with 1815w are fine).  
Clients keep dropping and re-associating; rapid tx errors causing 
de-associating then coming back in the logs etc...


We think something had to have changed on the client side as we’ve had no 
issues for a long time prior… students bought a bunch of new ax chipsets this 
semester that don’t like older N radios?, bigsur updates?… haven’t been able to 
pin it down.



Cisco won’t say much more than ditch 702w… but can’t do that on a dime of 
course.



We have been targeting 8.5.151.0 and 8.5.161.0 as an upgrade path to see if it 
helps.  8.5.161.0 is the recommended TAC release, but I have a somewhat 
irrational feeling to try 8.5.151.0 first.  Your comments about 8.5.151.0 not 
totally sucking vindicate my feeling!  :)



-
Matt Craig
Network Engineer
Information and Communication Technologies
New Mexico State University









On Nov 20, 2020, at 4:30 AM, Lee H Badman 
<00db5b77bd95-dmarc-requ...@listserv.educause.edu>
 wrote:

WARNING: This email originated external to the NMSU email system. Do not click 
on links or open attachments unless you are sure the content is safe.
Knowing that there is no easy answer on questions of Cisco code versions, I’ll 
throw it out there anyways. We have been on 8.5.151.0 for quite some time now , 
with mostly good reliability for 3700s and 3800s alike (occasional need to 
reboot 3700s), We are due to minimally reboot everything, and I’ve been 
following the various discussions regarding code bugs and specific client 
issues these past few months.

So curious- is there a solid, reliable newer version to consider? We are not in 
a hurry to get into .11ax yet for a number of reasons. Given the long and 
problematic history of WLC code, 8.5.151.0 has been as close to “wow, it 
actually doesn’t totally suck” as we’ve ever been.

Regards,

Lee Badman | Network Architect (CWNE#200)
Information Technology Services
(NDD Group)
206 Machinery Hall
120 Smith Drive
Syracuse, New York 13244
t 315.443.3003   e lhbad...@syr.edu w 
its.syr.edu
Campus Wireless Policy: 
https://answers.syr.edu/display/network/Wireless+Network+and+Systems
SYRACUSE UNIVERSITY
syr.edu


**
Replies to EDUCAUSE Community Group emails are sent to the entire community 
list. If you want to reply only to the person who sent the message, copy and 
paste their email address and forward the email reply. Additional participation 
and subscription information can be found at 
https://www.educause.edu/community


**
Replies to EDUCAUSE Community Group emails are sent to the entire community 
list. If you want to reply only to the person who sent the message, copy and 
paste their email address and forward the email reply. Additional participation 
and subscription information can be found at https://www.educause.edu/community