Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] Distributed WiFi model - Thin vs Thick debate revisited
On 29/04/13 22:51, Barros, Jacob wrote: It feels like I am coming full circle to where I was six years ago. Though I know its not exactly the same, I went back to the thin vs thick debates in the archives. A few things stood out to me as considerations: One concern was vendor longevity. Another was whether or not the thick AP model would be able to keep up with the controller based architecture. An advantage of the controller based architecture that stood out to me was central processing, specifically regarding key exchange. Are these points still valid concerns? If your administration asked you to consider a distributed architecture, what other (vendor-neutral) concerns would you have? There's a middle ground between thick and thin - relatively thick APs, that are centrally managed but with enough smarts to process traffic locally. 802.11ac will have an effect here, as each thin AP could theoretically require 1Gb/s to the controller. This is why Cisco is putting controllers in its switches, to distribute the traffic load. Most controller-based vendors do support local bridging, but some will not support all features or not maintain sessions if the controller fails. I haven't really looked at the new range of thick APs like Meraki or Aerohive, so can't comment on their architecture. -- James Andrewartha Network Projects Engineer Christ Church Grammar School Claremont, Western Australia Ph. (08) 9442 1757 Mob. 0424 160 877 ** Participation and subscription information for this EDUCAUSE Constituent Group discussion list can be found at http://www.educause.edu/groups/.
RE: Distributed WiFi model - Thin vs Thick debate revisited
Jacob, You mention a sup card. That indicates that your Aruba hardware is EOL and cannot run the latest code. The EOL was announced in 2010. Aruba's latest 7200 series controllers(the current successor to the Sup controllers) have been designed with 802.11ac in mind, If you upgrade now you would not need to upgrade the controller for 802.11ac Wi-Fi. The controller provides central management intelligence to the wireless system, If the controller load specs are exceeded, data path issues can result,. You would also have client issues if there are too many clients on an AP. That does not mean you move away from deploying APs though. Somebody mentioned managing APs with Airwave, Remember, Airwave is owned by Aruba, so I would expect them to better support their own products and possible deprecate support for other vendors. Bruce Osborne Network Engineer IT Network Services (434) 592-4229 LIBERTY UNIVERSITY Training Champions for Christ since 1971 From: Barros, Jacob [mailto:jkbar...@grace.edu] Sent: Monday, April 29, 2013 4:02 PM Subject: Re: Distributed WiFi model - Thin vs Thick debate revisited Thanks to all so far. To answer some questions: We have 145 ap's deployed. However that is likely to go up as we address high density areas and re-deploy for 5GHz. Some of that will happen as part of this summer's upgrades. Unfortunately, I cannot afford a complete overhaul so we would have to maintain both systems for at least one more academic year. That does weigh heavily on our decision. Regarding a/c, please correct me if I am mistaken, but I believe that the investment should wait until rev2 or whenever multi-user MIMO is mainstream. I anticipate the distributed environment to be much more conducive to the newest ratification. I will not have to upgrade a controller again, rather only replace the AP. Our controller is dropping clients. Aruba has confirmed that this is the case and only offered to sell me an updated sup card as a fix. We do have had several cases open and still do now. Effort is not in question here, just results. Unfortunately having redundant controllers never fit into our budget model. With a distributed model, no redundancy is needed. We are considering Aerohive, using the HiveManager installed on a VM instead of the cloud-based version. I have had four Aerohive AP's running in an off-campus dorm this academic year and am pleased so far. It is a single point of management and metric gathering similarly to the Aruba web UI, but with all metrics included, not needing an additional server i.e. Airwave. The greatest management disadvantage I have identified so far is that changes to any AP require a reboot. With Aruba, I can make many changes in real time. I am trying to build a long term cost analysis considering a five year life for each AP. At first estimates, the costs appear to be similar and not a key decision point. POE costs are a definite concern, but that exists with whatever architecture model we choose. So far, I do not believe anyone has thrown a red flag. Is that a fair assessment? Jake Barros | Network Administrator | Office of Information Technology Grace College and Seminary | Winona Lake, IN | 574.372.5100 x6178 On Mon, Apr 29, 2013 at 11:59 AM, Bob Williamson bob_william...@aw.orgmailto:bob_william...@aw.org wrote: While significantly smaller than most on this list, I would like to throw in my two cents: We are using Meraki to manage our Ipads, ipods, etc. It works great. Having said that, if there is any interruption (internet, problems with firewall, their site, whatever) the only downside would be that we could not install apps, change settings, etc. until the issue was rectified. I hesitate to put something that is more critical, like a wireless controller, offsite as it is a more time sensitive system. Even without internet our users can logon and work locally. We are using a Ruckus ZD3000 with 31 APs and have had zero downtime, coverage is excellent, and speeds are fast. We feel strongly enough about it we purchased a second ZD3000 and have them synced at all times. The failover is instant (almost) and the second unit was very inexpensive. Best thing about the Ruckus is the interface is MUCH easier than the Aruba that we retired. . The APs act independent from the controller (for the most part. Maybe I am showing my age, but giving up all control to the cloud spooks me. Hope that helps, Bob Williamson Network Administrator Annie Wright Schools | 827 N Tacoma Ave, Tacoma, WA 98403 | www.aw.orghttp://www.aw.org/ D: 253.272.2216tel:253.272.2216 | F: 253.572.3616tel:253.572.3616 | bob_william...@aw.orgmailto:bob_william...@aw.org Mission: Annie Wright's strong community cultivates individual learners to become well-educated, creative, and responsible citizens for a global society. Find Annie Wright Schools on Facebookhttp://www.facebook.com/anniewrightschools
Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] Distributed WiFi model - Thin vs Thick debate revisited
Yes, I think there's a mistaken impression about the Aerohives and Merakis out there. Some of it is FUD from the big iron vendors. Some of it is old-timers like me questioning the over-hyped magic cloud. The stuff works. Anyone looking to move off their current solution should take a look. It's not perfect, but neither is the establishment. Rand P.S. A little de-FUD if you want it: http://www.meraki.com/trust/#oob Rand Rand P. Hall Director, Network Services askIT! Merrimack College 978-837-3532 rand.h...@merrimack.edu If I had an hour to save the world, I would spend 59 minutes defining the problem and one minute finding solutions. – Einstein On Mon, Apr 29, 2013 at 3:05 PM, Hurt,Trenton W. trent.h...@louisville.eduwrote: With the aerohive solution this is done thru cooperative control amongst the aps that are RF neighbors with each other. Here is article that discusses the protocols that aerohive uses to accomplish this. http://blogs.aerohive.com/blog/wi-fi-that-wont-die/cooperative-control-part-3 ** ** ** ** *From:* The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv [mailto: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU] *On Behalf Of *Watters, John *Sent:* Monday, April 29, 2013 11:55 AM *To:* WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU *Subject:* Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] Distributed WiFi model - Thin vs Thick debate revisited ** ** ** ** What happens to client roaming, RF balancing, and channel selection without a controller-based architecture? ** ** If you use the Aruba Airwave AMP management platform, it should be able to keep your autonomous APs in sync. ** ** ** ** -jcw [image: cid:image001.jpg@01CE44EA.874CDAC0] ** ** * * John Watters The University of Alabama Office of Information Technology 205-348-3992 -- *From:* The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv [ mailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDUWIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU] *On Behalf Of *Tim Cappalli *Sent:* Monday, April 29, 2013 10:50 AM *To:* WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU *Subject:* Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] Distributed WiFi model - Thin vs Thick debate revisited ** ** What types of controller issues are you seeing that you hope to be fixed with a controller-less architecture? Tim Cappalli*, *Network Engineer LTS | Brandeis University x67149 | (617) 701-7149 cappa...@brandeis.edu ** ** On Mon, Apr 29, 2013 at 10:51 AM, Barros, Jacob jkbar...@grace.edu wrote: Hello all. We are seriously considering replacing our Aruba infrastructure in favor of a distributed model. We are having controller issues this academic year and the appeal of a controller-less model is strong. ** ** It feels like I am coming full circle to where I was six years ago. Though I know its not exactly the same, I went back to the thin vs thick debates in the archives. A few things stood out to me as considerations: One concern was vendor longevity. Another was whether or not the thick AP model would be able to keep up with the controller based architecture. An advantage of the controller based architecture that stood out to me was central processing, specifically regarding key exchange. ** ** Are these points still valid concerns? If your administration asked you to consider a distributed architecture, what other (vendor-neutral) concerns would you have? ** ** Thanks, in advance, for your opinions! ** ** ** ** Jake Barros | Network Administrator | Office of Information Technology Grace College and Seminary | Winona Lake, IN | 574.372.5100 x6178 ** Participation and subscription information for this EDUCAUSE Constituent Group discussion list can be found at http://www.educause.edu/groups/. ** ** ** Participation and subscription information for this EDUCAUSE Constituent Group discussion list can be found at http://www.educause.edu/groups/. ** ** ** Participation and subscription information for this EDUCAUSE Constituent Group discussion list can be found at http://www.educause.edu/groups/. ** ** ** Participation and subscription information for this EDUCAUSE Constituent Group discussion list can be found at http://www.educause.edu/groups/. ** Participation and subscription information for this EDUCAUSE Constituent Group discussion list can be found at http://www.educause.edu/groups/. image001.jpg
RE: [WIRELESS-LAN] Distributed WiFi model - Thin vs Thick debate revisited
I will second that emotion. Though we are a large Cisco controller-based environment, we run an extremely successful Meraki deployment in London: http://www.meraki.com/customers/higher-education/syracuse-university-london and I also have a small Aerohive deployment in play. I would recommend that anyone give either solution as much consideration as any of the controller-based solutions, to include a legitimate trial. I'd also not get so hung up on white papers that tout AP performance and seriously consider whether the system management and vendor support mechanisms is effective for your own particular needs. -Lee Lee H. Badman Network Architect/Wireless TME ITS, Syracuse University 315.443.3003 From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv [WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU] on behalf of Hall, Rand [ha...@merrimack.edu] Sent: Tuesday, April 30, 2013 9:10 AM To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] Distributed WiFi model - Thin vs Thick debate revisited Yes, I think there's a mistaken impression about the Aerohives and Merakis out there. Some of it is FUD from the big iron vendors. Some of it is old-timers like me questioning the over-hyped magic cloud. The stuff works. Anyone looking to move off their current solution should take a look. It's not perfect, but neither is the establishment. Rand P.S. A little de-FUD if you want it: http://www.meraki.com/trust/#oob Rand Rand P. Hall Director, Network Services askIT! Merrimack College 978-837-3532 rand.h...@merrimack.edumailto:rand.h...@merrimack.edu If I had an hour to save the world, I would spend 59 minutes defining the problem and one minute finding solutions. – Einstein On Mon, Apr 29, 2013 at 3:05 PM, Hurt,Trenton W. trent.h...@louisville.edumailto:trent.h...@louisville.edu wrote: With the aerohive solution this is done thru cooperative control amongst the aps that are RF neighbors with each other. Here is article that discusses the protocols that aerohive uses to accomplish this. http://blogs.aerohive.com/blog/wi-fi-that-wont-die/cooperative-control-part-3 From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv [mailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDUmailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU] On Behalf Of Watters, John Sent: Monday, April 29, 2013 11:55 AM To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDUmailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] Distributed WiFi model - Thin vs Thick debate revisited What happens to client roaming, RF balancing, and channel selection without a controller-based architecture? If you use the Aruba Airwave AMP management platform, it should be able to keep your autonomous APs in sync. -jcw [cid:image001.jpg@01CE44EA.874CDAC0] John Watters The University of Alabama Office of Information Technology 205-348-3992tel:205-348-3992 From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv [mailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU] On Behalf Of Tim Cappalli Sent: Monday, April 29, 2013 10:50 AM To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDUmailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] Distributed WiFi model - Thin vs Thick debate revisited What types of controller issues are you seeing that you hope to be fixed with a controller-less architecture? Tim Cappalli, Network Engineer LTS | Brandeis University x67149 | (617) 701-7149tel:%28617%29%20701-7149 cappa...@brandeis.edumailto:cappa...@brandeis.edu On Mon, Apr 29, 2013 at 10:51 AM, Barros, Jacob jkbar...@grace.edumailto:jkbar...@grace.edu wrote: Hello all. We are seriously considering replacing our Aruba infrastructure in favor of a distributed model. We are having controller issues this academic year and the appeal of a controller-less model is strong. It feels like I am coming full circle to where I was six years ago. Though I know its not exactly the same, I went back to the thin vs thick debates in the archives. A few things stood out to me as considerations: One concern was vendor longevity. Another was whether or not the thick AP model would be able to keep up with the controller based architecture. An advantage of the controller based architecture that stood out to me was central processing, specifically regarding key exchange. Are these points still valid concerns? If your administration asked you to consider a distributed architecture, what other (vendor-neutral) concerns would you have? Thanks, in advance, for your opinions! Jake Barros | Network Administrator | Office of Information Technology Grace College and Seminary | Winona Lake, IN | 574.372.5100 x6178tel:574.372.5100%20x6178
Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] Distributed WiFi model - Thin vs Thick debate revisited
Don't forget. Meraki is Cisco. They bought them, but running them as an independent unit. Cisco also has they're Flex controller, which is a similar model. I haven't seen any other vendor with Aerohive's model. I haven't used it, just sat through a few sales presentations. But from what I've seen, it's very interesting. It's not as cut and dried as it was 1 year ago. The Thick/Thin models are merging in more ways than one. Mike On Tue, Apr 30, 2013 at 9:51 AM, Lee H Badman lhbad...@syr.edu wrote: I will second that emotion. Though we are a large Cisco controller-based environment, we run an extremely successful Meraki deployment in London: http://www.meraki.com/customers/higher-education/syracuse-university-london and I also have a small Aerohive deployment in play. I would recommend that anyone give either solution as much consideration as any of the controller-based solutions, to include a legitimate trial. I'd also not get so hung up on white papers that tout AP performance and seriously consider whether the system management and vendor support mechanisms is effective for your own particular needs. -Lee *Lee H. Badman* Network Architect/Wireless TME ITS, Syracuse University 315.443.3003 -- *From:* The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv [ WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU] on behalf of Hall, Rand [ ha...@merrimack.edu] *Sent:* Tuesday, April 30, 2013 9:10 AM *To:* WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU *Subject:* Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] Distributed WiFi model - Thin vs Thick debate revisited Yes, I think there's a mistaken impression about the Aerohives and Merakis out there. Some of it is FUD from the big iron vendors. Some of it is old-timers like me questioning the over-hyped magic cloud. The stuff works. Anyone looking to move off their current solution should take a look. It's not perfect, but neither is the establishment. Rand P.S. A little de-FUD if you want it: http://www.meraki.com/trust/#oob Rand Rand P. Hall Director, Network Services askIT! Merrimack College 978-837-3532 rand.h...@merrimack.edu If I had an hour to save the world, I would spend 59 minutes defining the problem and one minute finding solutions. – Einstein On Mon, Apr 29, 2013 at 3:05 PM, Hurt,Trenton W. trent.h...@louisville.edu wrote: With the aerohive solution this is done thru cooperative control amongst the aps that are RF neighbors with each other. Here is article that discusses the protocols that aerohive uses to accomplish this. http://blogs.aerohive.com/blog/wi-fi-that-wont-die/cooperative-control-part-3 ** ** ** ** *From:* The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv [mailto: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU] *On Behalf Of *Watters, John *Sent:* Monday, April 29, 2013 11:55 AM *To:* WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU *Subject:* Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] Distributed WiFi model - Thin vs Thick debate revisited ** ** ** ** What happens to client roaming, RF balancing, and channel selection without a controller-based architecture? ** ** If you use the Aruba Airwave AMP management platform, it should be able to keep your autonomous APs in sync. ** ** ** ** -jcw [image: cid:image001.jpg@01CE44EA.874CDAC0] ** ** * * John Watters The University of Alabama Office of Information Technology 205-348-3992 -- *From:* The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv [ mailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDUWIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU] *On Behalf Of *Tim Cappalli *Sent:* Monday, April 29, 2013 10:50 AM *To:* WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU *Subject:* Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] Distributed WiFi model - Thin vs Thick debate revisited ** ** What types of controller issues are you seeing that you hope to be fixed with a controller-less architecture? Tim Cappalli*, *Network Engineer LTS | Brandeis University x67149 | (617) 701-7149 cappa...@brandeis.edu ** ** On Mon, Apr 29, 2013 at 10:51 AM, Barros, Jacob jkbar...@grace.edu wrote: Hello all. We are seriously considering replacing our Aruba infrastructure in favor of a distributed model. We are having controller issues this academic year and the appeal of a controller-less model is strong. ** ** It feels like I am coming full circle to where I was six years ago. Though I know its not exactly the same, I went back to the thin vs thick debates in the archives. A few things stood out to me as considerations: One concern was vendor longevity. Another was whether or not the thick AP model would be able to keep up with the controller based architecture. An advantage of the controller based architecture that stood
Multi vendor interoperability on Campus
What are others doing to getinteroperabilitywhen you have multiple wireless vendors on campus? We are transitioning to a new system and trying to think of all the issues we may run into during this. A little background about our layout… abuilding will have all the same vendor AP's but adjacent building may not, over 100 buildings on campus, total of 4000 across campus,systemswill have different ip pool space,and limited outdoor coverage. Ideas 1. Same ssid across both systems and let the clients choose what system. 2. Samessid and adjust the probe/reponse thresholds so clients outside of a building don't connect. 3. Have versions of ssids for each system so clients can choose what ssid to connect to. Thanks, Jason ** Participation and subscription information for this EDUCAUSE Constituent Group discussion list can be found at http://www.educause.edu/groups/.
Question about the signal strength of cisco Aironet 3602E on 5GHz
Dear All We found that the signal strength of cisco Aironet 3602E (with omni directional antenna AIR-ANT2524DW-R) on 5GHz is quite unstable (2.4GHz is good). I am using a HP win7 laptop, and sitting 5 meters away from the AP. Usually the signal strength on the laptop is only one or two bars (out of 5). However, I use some third party application (e.g. Xirrus, Ekahau), the signal strength is -47 (almost same value as shown on the controller). Do you have the similar problem? Is it a bug of Win7 or Cisco WLC (We are using version 7.2.111.3)? Have a nice day. Yours, Linchuan Yang (Antony) Wireless Networking Analyst Network Assessment and Integration, IITS-Concordia University Tel: (514)848-2424 ext. 7664 ** Participation and subscription information for this EDUCAUSE Constituent Group discussion list can be found at http://www.educause.edu/groups/.
Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] Question about the signal strength of cisco Aironet 3602E on 5GHz
Hi. Are you using RRM to manage the radios? If so what is the reported power output RRM is setting? If you manually set power to max do you get a performance increase? We have both 3602i and 3602e series with dipoles you mention with no issues. We are running 7.2 code currently but plan to goto7.5 later this summer. -Jimmy University of Michigan On Tue, Apr 30, 2013 at 11:36 AM, Linchuan Yang linchuan.y...@concordia.cawrote: Dear All ** ** We found that the signal strength of cisco Aironet 3602E (with omni directional antenna AIR-ANT2524DW-R) on 5GHz is quite unstable (2.4GHz is good). I am using a HP win7 laptop, and sitting 5 meters away from the AP. Usually the signal strength on the laptop is only one or two bars (out of 5). However, I use some third party application (e.g. Xirrus, Ekahau), the signal strength is -47 (almost same value as shown on the controller). Do you have the similar problem? Is it a bug of Win7 or Cisco WLC (We are using version 7.2.111.3)? ** ** Have a nice day. ** ** Yours, Linchuan Yang (Antony) Wireless Networking Analyst Network Assessment and Integration, IITS-Concordia University Tel: (514)848-2424 ext. 7664 ** ** ** ** ** Participation and subscription information for this EDUCAUSE Constituent Group discussion list can be found at http://www.educause.edu/groups/. -- James Helzerman Wireless Network Engineer University of Michigan - ITS Communications Systems and Data Centers Phone: 734-615-9541 ** Participation and subscription information for this EDUCAUSE Constituent Group discussion list can be found at http://www.educause.edu/groups/.
Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] Question about the signal strength of cisco Aironet 3602E on 5GHz
Are you seeing actual performance issues, or just issues with the display of signal strength? -Chris On Apr 30, 2013, at 11:36 AM, Linchuan Yang linchuan.y...@concordia.ca wrote: Dear All We found that the signal strength of cisco Aironet 3602E (with omni directional antenna AIR-ANT2524DW-R) on 5GHz is quite unstable (2.4GHz is good). I am using a HP win7 laptop, and sitting 5 meters away from the AP. Usually the signal strength on the laptop is only one or two bars (out of 5). However, I use some third party application (e.g. Xirrus, Ekahau), the signal strength is -47 (almost same value as shown on the controller). Do you have the similar problem? Is it a bug of Win7 or Cisco WLC (We are using version 7.2.111.3)? Have a nice day. Yours, Linchuan Yang (Antony) Wireless Networking Analyst Network Assessment and Integration, IITS-Concordia University Tel: (514)848-2424 ext. 7664 ** Participation and subscription information for this EDUCAUSE Constituent Group discussion list can be found at http://www.educause.edu/groups/. --- Chris Murphy - MIT IST Network Operations - ch...@mit.edu ** Participation and subscription information for this EDUCAUSE Constituent Group discussion list can be found at http://www.educause.edu/groups/. smime.p7s Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
RE: [WIRELESS-LAN] Question about the signal strength of cisco Aironet 3602E on 5GHz
Thank you, Chris and Jimmy In fact, I configured the power level of 5GHz to level 1. And I think this maybe the issues with the display of the signal strength. However, with 3602I and other model, we do not see the similar problem. Yours, Linchuan Yang (Antony) Wireless Networking Analyst Network Assessment and Integration, IITS-Concordia University Tel: (514)848-2424 ext. 7664 From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv [mailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU] On Behalf Of Chris Murphy Sent: April-30-13 11:54 AM To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] Question about the signal strength of cisco Aironet 3602E on 5GHz Are you seeing actual performance issues, or just issues with the display of signal strength? -Chris Hi. Are you using RRM to manage the radios? If so what is the reported power output RRM is setting? If you manually set power to max do you get a performance increase? We have both 3602i and 3602e series with dipoles you mention with no issues. We are running 7.2 code currently but plan to goto 7.5 later this summer. -Jimmy University of Michigan ** Participation and subscription information for this EDUCAUSE Constituent Group discussion list can be found at http://www.educause.edu/groups/.
Microsoft Surface WiFi issue - resolved
Rolling back the driver one version fixed it. I believe Surface Pro has a Marvel chip. Tom Zeller Senior Technology Analyst Indiana University zel...@indiana.edu (812) 855-6214 On 4/24/13 5:23 PM, Zeller, Tom S zel...@indiana.edu wrote: I'm no longer directly involved in the WiFi here, but I was helping someone with a Microsoft Surface (Intel version) that is perfectly up-to-date. My Mac Air WiFi worked perfectly with our Aruba AP throughout the exercise. His would connect, get DHCP, get a lease renewal in five min (ten min lease) and a few minutes later Windows would tell him he had limited Internet, but in fact he could only ping his own IP and not the router (that's pretty limited!). The WiFi bars icon never wavered. I'm suspecting a failure to renegotiate keys. Anyone else seeing Surface WiFi issues? Tom Zeller Senior Technology Analyst Indiana University zel...@indiana.edu (812) 855-6214 ** Participation and subscription information for this EDUCAUSE Constituent Group discussion list can be found at http://www.educause.edu/groups/. ** Participation and subscription information for this EDUCAUSE Constituent Group discussion list can be found at http://www.educause.edu/groups/.
