RE: Exclusive 2.4 Ghz and 5 Ghz SSIDs

[Jason Cook]

Top info Chuck

A few additional things to play with from that list.

Do you have varying power in your set power or is it designed to be all one so 
very even spacing between AP’s?
By varying I guess do you set to X, survey then adjust some.
Or rely more on your testing and design to get it right and have them all the 
same. And double check with a survey
I’m trying to think of any downsides, but really it would only be the lack of 
ability to surrounding devices to up power and cover and AP that’s failed. 
However design and 2.4ghz still might cover this. And we find AP failures 
aren’t common.


--
Jason Cook
The University of Adelaide, AUSTRALIA 5005
Ph: +61 8 8313 4800

From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv 
[mailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU] On Behalf Of Chuck Enfield
Sent: Thursday, 13 August 2015 1:14 PM
To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] Exclusive 2.4 Ghz and 5 Ghz SSIDs

Yes, we use band-steering and I recommend it over the different SSID approach. 
If a device chooses the 2.4 GHz SSID on its own, most people won't notice for 
quite some time.  How often have you found your device on an SSID other than 
the one you intended?  My Netgear router at home won't let me use the same SSID 
on both bands. (I'll resist the temptation to comment on that "feature".)  
Every now and then I notice that my phone is connecting on the 2.4 GHz SSID 
instead of 5 GHz.  It's hard to say how long my phone was connecting to the 
wrong SSID before I noticed.  At work, my phone sometimes connects to the wrong 
SSID, but it ALWAYS connects at 5 GHz

There are design techniques that will result in a significant majority of 
clients connecting to 5 GHz radios.  If you make dual-band devices want to 
connect to 5 GHz I believe you'll end up with a higher percentage of device 
connected in that band than you'll get through the two SSID method.  It's 
possible to get a majority of dual-band devices onto 5 GHz even without 
band-steering.  Band-steering helps for those oddball devices that just won't 
go there by themselves, but that's less than 10%.  At PSU we attempt to 
optimize 5 GHz coverage, then adjust 2.4 GHz to do the best it can within that 
AP layout.  This allows us some flexibility with 2.4 GHz parameters.  Even with 
the compromised settings, 2.4 GHz isn't usually too bad.  With 75% of the 
devices on 5 GHz, 2.4 GHz is usually acceptable for the clients that remain on 
it.  In summary, our approach for getting clients onto 5 GHz is:

1. Have good 5 GHz coverage everywhere. >25dB SNR.  Not only will this make 5 
GHz attractive, but most devices won't probe for a better AP once connected, 
which keeps the air cleaner.
2, Turn down power on 2.4 GHz so it is at least 3 dB weaker than 5 GHz 
throughout the coverage area.  This is what makes the devices prefer 5 GHz.  
(It may go without saying given this recommendation, but we configure the AP 
with a fixed Tx power.  RF management only chooses the channel.  The benefits 
of optimizing the power settings of the two radios on an AP easily outweigh the 
benefits of the crappy power adjustment algorithms used by the AP 
manufacturers.)
3. Turn off 2.4 GHz radios only when necessary to avoid egregious CCI.  It's 
usually only needed in locations with a really high AP density, like 
auditoriums or lots of adjacent classrooms, although it's also sometimes needed 
if walls are close together and construction materials have a much higher loss 
at 5 GHz than at 2.4 GHz, as is common in dorms.  Turning off 2.4 GHz radios 
results in uneven coverage, which makes it hard to keep the signal weaker than 
5 GHz everywhere without having gaps in the 2.4 GHz coverage.
4. Enable band steering.
5. Make sure no other settings are undermining band-steering.  (Aruba's default 
settings for "Client Match" undermine band steering when there's a strong 2.4 
GHz signal.  Shout-out to Jason Mueller at Iowa for bringing that one to my 
attention.)
6. Adjust load balancing parameters such that clients are only pushed to 2.4 
GHz if 2.4 GHz utilization is VERY low.

If you do these things almost everybody with a 5 GHz radio will connect at 5 
GHz.  If your AP of choice doesn't support band-steering, adjustment of load 
balancing parameters, or a wide enough range of power settings, maybe two SSIDs 
is the way to go.  But then I'd start shopping for a new AP, because it's not 
the right product for higher ed.

Chuck


From: "Jeremy Gibbs" mailto:jlgi...@utica.edu>>
To: "EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv" 
mailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU>>
Sent: Wednesday, August 12, 2015 7:39:29 PM
Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] Exclusive 2.4 Ghz and 5 Ghz SSIDs

Does anyone employ band-steering?  When we enabled it, we saw a massive jump of 
users connecting at 5ghz. Obviously if the client doesn't support 5ghz or it 
just prefers 2.4 because of various factors it can stay on 2.4. I have o

Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] Exclusive 2.4 Ghz and 5 Ghz SSIDs

[Chuck Enfield]

Yes, we use band-steering and I recommend it over the different SSID approach. 
If a device chooses the 2.4 GHz SSID on its own, most people won't notice for 
quite some time. How often have you found your device on an SSID other than the 
one you intended? My Netgear router at home won't let me use the same SSID on 
both bands. (I'll resist the temptation to comment on that "feature".) Every 
now and then I notice that my phone is connecting on the 2.4 GHz SSID instead 
of 5 GHz. It's hard to say how long my phone was connecting to the wrong SSID 
before I noticed. At work, my phone sometimes connects to the wrong SSID, but 
it ALWAYS connects at 5 GHz 

There are design techniques that will result in a significant majority of 
clients connecting to 5 GHz radios. If you make dual-band devices want to 
connect to 5 GHz I believe you'll end up with a higher percentage of device 
connected in that band than you'll get through the two SSID method. It's 
possible to get a majority of dual-band devices onto 5 GHz even without 
band-steering. Band-steering helps for those oddball devices that just won't go 
there by themselves, but that's less than 10%. At PSU we attempt to optimize 5 
GHz coverage, then adjust 2.4 GHz to do the best it can within that AP layout. 
This allows us some flexibility with 2.4 GHz parameters. Even with the 
compromised settings, 2.4 GHz isn't usually too bad. With 75% of the devices on 
5 GHz, 2.4 GHz is usually acceptable for the clients that remain on it. In 
summary, our approach for getting clients onto 5 GHz is: 

1. Have good 5 GHz coverage everywhere. >25dB SNR. Not only will this make 5 
GHz attractive, but most devices won't probe for a better AP once connected, 
which keeps the air cleaner. 
2, Turn down power on 2.4 GHz so it is at least 3 dB weaker than 5 GHz 
throughout the coverage area. This is what makes the devices prefer 5 GHz. (It 
may go without saying given this recommendation, but we configure the AP with a 
fixed Tx power. RF management only chooses the channel. The benefits of 
optimizing the power settings of the two radios on an AP easily outweigh the 
benefits of the crappy power adjustment algorithms used by the AP 
manufacturers.) 
3. Turn off 2.4 GHz radios only when necessary to avoid egregious CCI. It's 
usually only needed in locations with a really high AP density, like 
auditoriums or lots of adjacent classrooms, although it's also sometimes needed 
if walls are close together and construction materials have a much higher loss 
at 5 GHz than at 2.4 GHz, as is common in dorms. Turning off 2.4 GHz radios 
results in uneven coverage, which makes it hard to keep the signal weaker than 
5 GHz everywhere without having gaps in the 2.4 GHz coverage. 
4. Enable band steering. 
5. Make sure no other settings are undermining band-steering. (Aruba's default 
settings for "Client Match" undermine band steering when there's a strong 2.4 
GHz signal. Shout-out to Jason Mueller at Iowa for bringing that one to my 
attention.) 
6. Adjust load balancing parameters such that clients are only pushed to 2.4 
GHz if 2.4 GHz utilization is VERY low. 

If you do these things almost everybody with a 5 GHz radio will connect at 5 
GHz. If your AP of choice doesn't support band-steering, adjustment of load 
balancing parameters, or a wide enough range of power settings, maybe two SSIDs 
is the way to go. But then I'd start shopping for a new AP, because it's not 
the right product for higher ed. 

Chuck 


From: "Jeremy Gibbs"  
To: "EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv" 
 
Sent: Wednesday, August 12, 2015 7:39:29 PM 
Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] Exclusive 2.4 Ghz and 5 Ghz SSIDs 

Does anyone employ band-steering? When we enabled it, we saw a massive jump of 
users connecting at 5ghz. Obviously if the client doesn't support 5ghz or it 
just prefers 2.4 because of various factors it can stay on 2.4. I have only 
seen it improve throughput for everyone. Any opinions on this? We are an 
extreme network shop, but our wireless is the enterasys (chantry) solution with 
new 3825i 3x3. 

On Wednesday, August 12, 2015, Jeffrey D. Sessler < j...@scrippscollege.edu > 
wrote: 



Single SSID – anything else just adds confusion for the end-user. Then again, I 
was recently visited a spot where they had a different SSID for every building. 
:) 

Thinking more about this… 

If residence halls (academic buildings too) are well designed around 5 GHz and 
use in-room AP placement, the issues with 2.4 tend to melt away (or you can 
ignore them), with clients only falling back to 2.4 when they transition 
outside of a building. 

If you’re a Cisco shop (I assume Aruba has something similar), their automatic 
RRM (radio resource management) and TPC (Transmit Power Control) tend to result 
in very tiny cells where there is a lot of 2.4 radios talking (which is a good 
thing - tiny cells). Of course, this can be really problematic if the AP layout 
design is not-optimal such as in a 

Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] Exclusive 2.4 Ghz and 5 Ghz SSIDs

[Hunter Fuller]

In some areas of campus I have enabled a sort of band-steering. Our
multi-radio Xirrus units will attempt to "load balance" across their 8
radios.  I am running 2x2GHz radios, 5x5GHz radios, and 1 radio in
monitor mode. When I turn this setting on, the AP will attempt to
steer the client away from highly-utilized radios and toward
underutilized ones. When I turned this on, those units moved from
almost entirely 2GHz clients to having approximately half and half
2GHz and 5GHz..

--
Hunter Fuller
Network Engineer
VBRH M-9B
+1 256 824 5331

Office of Information Technology
The University of Alabama in Huntsville
Systems and Infrastructure

I am part of the UAH Safe Zone LGBTQIA support network:
http://www.uah.edu/student-affairs/safe-zone


On Wed, Aug 12, 2015 at 6:39 PM, Jeremy Gibbs  wrote:
> Does anyone employ band-steering?  When we enabled it, we saw a massive jump
> of users connecting at 5ghz. Obviously if the client doesn't support 5ghz or
> it just prefers 2.4 because of various factors it can stay on 2.4. I have
> only seen it improve throughput for everyone. Any opinions on this?  We are
> an extreme network shop, but our wireless is the enterasys (chantry)
> solution with new 3825i 3x3.
>
>
> On Wednesday, August 12, 2015, Jeffrey D. Sessler 
> wrote:
>>
>> Single SSID – anything else just adds confusion for the end-user. Then
>> again, I was recently visited a spot where they had a different SSID for
>> every building. :)
>>
>> Thinking more about this…
>>
>> If residence halls (academic buildings too) are well designed around 5 GHz
>> and use in-room AP placement, the issues with 2.4 tend to melt away (or you
>> can ignore them), with clients only falling back to 2.4 when they transition
>> outside of a building.
>>
>> If you’re a Cisco shop (I assume Aruba has something similar), their
>> automatic RRM (radio resource management) and TPC (Transmit Power Control)
>> tend to result in very tiny cells where there is a lot of 2.4 radios talking
>> (which is a good thing - tiny cells).  Of course, this can be really
>> problematic if the AP layout design is not-optimal such as in a typically
>> budget-driven “down the center of the hallway” methods of deployment where
>> adjacent AP’s tend to have clear line-of-sight of each other. In cases such
>> as these, the reduction in radio output to reduce AP channel overlap can
>> result in client connection troubles i.e. The clients are probably behind
>> fire–proof metal clad doors, brick walls, etc. Coupled with coverage hole
>> detection (where AP power is increased for client connectivity), you now
>> have an environment that’s in constant chaos, where someone has to do a lot
>> of manual adjusting of AP radios or disable the auto-adjusting.
>>
>> On the other hand, if AP layout is optimal where you’re deploying AP’s
>> in-room, lower on the wall, avoiding line-of-sight, etc. then you get the
>> benefit of the room’s construction (doors, floors, walls, what inside the
>> walls, bed, desks, etc.). All of which help promote small cell isolation and
>> reduce the number of adjacent neighbor AP’s you’ll see, resulting in less
>> 2.4 GHz channel overlap.
>>
>> Now then, the same issues can crop up in 5 GHz, but it doesn’t propagate
>> as far, so if you're using the in-room deployment method, it’s likely not as
>> big of an issue even in dense deployments. That said, if you do have dense 5
>> GHz deployments, Cisco’s 8.1 code introduces 5 GHz dynamic channel-width
>> allocation, somewhat eliminating the issue by dynamically moving between 20,
>> 40, and 80 MHz channels.
>>
>> In my opinion, 2.4 GHz is slowly marching to its demise, and I’m focusing
>> all of my attention on 5 GHz. We have the luxury of of a robust Mac
>> population (~80% of the students), and Apple laptops and desktops have long
>> since had access to 5GHz, so I’m not sure how much effort should be put into
>> maintaining 2.4 if it’s ultimately only being used by old phones, devices
>> that move little data, or have alternative data paths such as cellular, why
>> expend a lot of effort on it?
>>
>> Jeff
>>
>>
>>
>> From: "wireless-lan@listserv.educause.edu" on behalf of Stephen Oglesby
>> Reply-To: "wireless-lan@listserv.educause.edu"
>> Date: Wednesday, August 12, 2015 at 9:41 AM
>> To: "wireless-lan@listserv.educause.edu"
>> Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] Exclusive 2.4 Ghz and 5 Ghz SSIDs
>>
>> Paul,
>>
>> We're an Aruba shop and, as Bruce of Liberty mentioned, for dense
>> deployments we turn 2.4 ghz radios off on every other AP (typically edge of
>> building APs). Our main performance issues were due to interference and
>> channel utilization on the 2.4 ghz spectrum. We attempted reducing 2.4 ghz
>> (20 mhz channel)  transmit power but still had issues.
>>
>> I also agree with keeping to the simplicity of a single SSID if at all
>> possible.  I can't imagine the number of issues that would be reported to me
>> simply because the user exited the ideal range for 5ghz spectrum. Our
>> student

Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] Exclusive 2.4 Ghz and 5 Ghz SSIDs

[Jeremy Gibbs]

Does anyone employ band-steering?  When we enabled it, we saw a massive
jump of users connecting at 5ghz. Obviously if the client doesn't support
5ghz or it just prefers 2.4 because of various factors it can stay on 2.4.
I have only seen it improve throughput for everyone. Any opinions on this?
We are an extreme network shop, but our wireless is the enterasys (chantry)
solution with new 3825i 3x3.

On Wednesday, August 12, 2015, Jeffrey D. Sessler 
wrote:

> Single SSID – anything else just adds confusion for the end-user. Then
> again, I was recently visited a spot where they had a different SSID for
> every building. :)
>
> Thinking more about this…
>
> If residence halls (academic buildings too) are well designed around 5 GHz
> and use in-room AP placement, the issues with 2.4 tend to melt away (or you
> can ignore them), with clients only falling back to 2.4 when they
> transition outside of a building.
>
> If you’re a Cisco shop (I assume Aruba has something similar), their
> automatic RRM (radio resource management) and TPC (Transmit Power Control)
> tend to result in very tiny cells where there is a lot of 2.4 radios
> talking (which is a good thing - tiny cells).  Of course, this can be
> really problematic if the AP layout design is not-optimal such as in a
> typically budget-driven “down the center of the hallway” methods of
> deployment where adjacent AP’s tend to have clear line-of-sight of each
> other. In cases such as these, the reduction in radio output to reduce AP
> channel overlap can result in client connection troubles i.e. The clients
> are probably behind fire–proof metal clad doors, brick walls, etc. Coupled
> with coverage hole detection (where AP power is increased for client
> connectivity), you now have an environment that’s in constant chaos, where
> someone has to do a lot of manual adjusting of AP radios or disable the
> auto-adjusting.
>
> On the other hand, if AP layout is optimal where you’re deploying AP’s
> in-room, lower on the wall, avoiding line-of-sight, etc. then you get the
> benefit of the room’s construction (doors, floors, walls, what inside the
> walls, bed, desks, etc.). All of which help promote small cell isolation
> and reduce the number of adjacent neighbor AP’s you’ll see, resulting in
> less 2.4 GHz channel overlap.
>
> Now then, the same issues can crop up in 5 GHz, but it doesn’t propagate
> as far, so if you're using the in-room deployment method, it’s likely not
> as big of an issue even in dense deployments. That said, if you do have
> dense 5 GHz deployments, Cisco’s 8.1 code introduces 5 GHz dynamic
> channel-width allocation, somewhat eliminating the issue by dynamically
> moving between 20, 40, and 80 MHz channels.
>
> In my opinion, 2.4 GHz is slowly marching to its demise, and I’m focusing
> all of my attention on 5 GHz. We have the luxury of of a robust Mac
> population (~80% of the students), and Apple laptops and desktops have long
> since had access to 5GHz, so I’m not sure how much effort should be put
> into maintaining 2.4 if it’s ultimately only being used by old phones,
> devices that move little data, or have alternative data paths such as
> cellular, why expend a lot of effort on it?
>
> Jeff
>
>
>
> From: "wireless-lan@listserv.educause.edu
> " on
> behalf of Stephen Oglesby
> Reply-To: "wireless-lan@listserv.educause.edu
> "
> Date: Wednesday, August 12, 2015 at 9:41 AM
> To: "wireless-lan@listserv.educause.edu
> "
> Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] Exclusive 2.4 Ghz and 5 Ghz SSIDs
>
> Paul,
>
> We're an Aruba shop and, as Bruce of Liberty mentioned, for dense
> deployments we turn 2.4 ghz radios off on every other AP (typically edge of
> building APs). Our main performance issues were due to interference and
> channel utilization on the 2.4 ghz spectrum. We attempted reducing 2.4 ghz
> (20 mhz channel)  transmit power but still had issues.
>
> I also agree with keeping to the simplicity of a single SSID if at all
> possible.  I can't imagine the number of issues that would be reported to
> me simply because the user exited the ideal range for 5ghz spectrum. Our
> student and staff networks support a wide range of client wireless cards,
> antenna configurations, and spectrum compatibility (many are including
> 2.4ghz only). Having users manually switch networks as needed may cause
> HelpDesk to become very popular.
>
> Good Luck,
>
> Stephen Oglesby
> Network and Telecommunications Architect
> Aims Community College
> 5401 W. 20th Street
> Greeley, CO 80634
> 970.339.6350 (Office)
> stephen.ogle...@aims.edu
> 
>
>
>
> *IT staff will never ask you for your username and password. Always decline 
> to provide the information and report such attempts to the help desk (x6380).*
>
>
> On Wed, Aug 12, 2015 at 8:24 AM, Philippe Hanset  > wrote:
>
>> Paul,
>>
>> Dorm design is an animal of itself and each school has its own set of
>> challenges based on
>> locations and policies. As much as I agree that 2.4 GHz and 5 GHz
>> shouldn’t be on sep

Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] Exclusive 2.4 Ghz and 5 Ghz SSIDs

[Jeffrey D. Sessler]

Single SSID – anything else just adds confusion for the end-user. Then again, I 
was recently visited a spot where they had a different SSID for every building. 
:)

Thinking more about this…

If residence halls (academic buildings too) are well designed around 5 GHz and 
use in-room AP placement, the issues with 2.4 tend to melt away (or you can 
ignore them), with clients only falling back to 2.4 when they transition 
outside of a building.

If you’re a Cisco shop (I assume Aruba has something similar), their automatic 
RRM (radio resource management) and TPC (Transmit Power Control) tend to result 
in very tiny cells where there is a lot of 2.4 radios talking (which is a good 
thing - tiny cells).  Of course, this can be really problematic if the AP 
layout design is not-optimal such as in a typically budget-driven “down the 
center of the hallway” methods of deployment where adjacent AP’s tend to have 
clear line-of-sight of each other. In cases such as these, the reduction in 
radio output to reduce AP channel overlap can result in client connection 
troubles i.e. The clients are probably behind fire–proof metal clad doors, 
brick walls, etc. Coupled with coverage hole detection (where AP power is 
increased for client connectivity), you now have an environment that’s in 
constant chaos, where someone has to do a lot of manual adjusting of AP radios 
or disable the auto-adjusting.

On the other hand, if AP layout is optimal where you’re deploying AP’s in-room, 
lower on the wall, avoiding line-of-sight, etc. then you get the benefit of the 
room’s construction (doors, floors, walls, what inside the walls, bed, desks, 
etc.). All of which help promote small cell isolation and reduce the number of 
adjacent neighbor AP’s you’ll see, resulting in less 2.4 GHz channel overlap.

Now then, the same issues can crop up in 5 GHz, but it doesn’t propagate as 
far, so if you're using the in-room deployment method, it’s likely not as big 
of an issue even in dense deployments. That said, if you do have dense 5 GHz 
deployments, Cisco’s 8.1 code introduces 5 GHz dynamic channel-width 
allocation, somewhat eliminating the issue by dynamically moving between 20, 
40, and 80 MHz channels.

In my opinion, 2.4 GHz is slowly marching to its demise, and I’m focusing all 
of my attention on 5 GHz. We have the luxury of of a robust Mac population 
(~80% of the students), and Apple laptops and desktops have long since had 
access to 5GHz, so I’m not sure how much effort should be put into maintaining 
2.4 if it’s ultimately only being used by old phones, devices that move little 
data, or have alternative data paths such as cellular, why expend a lot of 
effort on it?

Jeff



From: 
"wireless-lan@listserv.educause.edu" 
on behalf of Stephen Oglesby
Reply-To: 
"wireless-lan@listserv.educause.edu"
Date: Wednesday, August 12, 2015 at 9:41 AM
To: 
"wireless-lan@listserv.educause.edu"
Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] Exclusive 2.4 Ghz and 5 Ghz SSIDs

Paul,

We're an Aruba shop and, as Bruce of Liberty mentioned, for dense deployments 
we turn 2.4 ghz radios off on every other AP (typically edge of building APs). 
Our main performance issues were due to interference and channel utilization on 
the 2.4 ghz spectrum. We attempted reducing 2.4 ghz (20 mhz channel)  transmit 
power but still had issues.

I also agree with keeping to the simplicity of a single SSID if at all 
possible.  I can't imagine the number of issues that would be reported to me 
simply because the user exited the ideal range for 5ghz spectrum. Our student 
and staff networks support a wide range of client wireless cards, antenna 
configurations, and spectrum compatibility (many are including 2.4ghz only). 
Having users manually switch networks as needed may cause HelpDesk to become 
very popular.

Good Luck,

Stephen Oglesby
Network and Telecommunications Architect
Aims Community College
5401 W. 20th Street
Greeley, CO 80634
970.339.6350 (Office)
stephen.ogle...@aims.edu


IT staff will never ask you for your username and password.
Always decline to provide the information and report such
attempts to the help desk (x6380).

On Wed, Aug 12, 2015 at 8:24 AM, Philippe Hanset 
mailto:phan...@anyroam.net>> wrote:
Paul,

Dorm design is an animal of itself and each school has its own set of 
challenges based on
locations and policies. As much as I agree that 2.4 GHz and 5 GHz shouldn’t be 
on separate SSIDs for main campus,
I have really changed my mind for dormitories. Those buildings are really micro 
houses stacked on top of each other
with people bringing anything and everything they want which is quite different 
than academic buildings. We all spend our summers designing
the best coverage that we can for those residential areas, and as soon as 
students move in, the interference in 2.4 GHz makes our entire

Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] Exclusive 2.4 Ghz and 5 Ghz SSIDs

[Christopher Stave]

At Drew we very recently moved away from multiple SSIDs for this purpose,
but we had 'drew' on both 2.4 GHz and 5 GHz and '5drew' on just the 5GHz
range.  I don't remember exactly, but when we initially set it up some
devices would connect in alphabetical order and preferred the 5drew network
for that reason.  Having the 'drew' SSID on both ranges gave the clients a
few more options and let the APs do band steering.  We've also noticed that
clients have definitely been improving.

It worked and there were definitely some people who loved it, but it was
always a small portion of our wireless users that would be connected to
5drew.  With improved AP density and better client-side decisions, we ended
up dropping it.



 *Christopher Stave
*
Network Administrator | University Technology

Drew University | 36 Madison Ave | Madison, NJ 07940
(973) 408-3814 | drew.edu





On Wed, Aug 12, 2015 at 12:41 PM, Stephen Oglesby 
wrote:

> Paul,
>
> We're an Aruba shop and, as Bruce of Liberty mentioned, for dense
> deployments we turn 2.4 ghz radios off on every other AP (typically edge of
> building APs). Our main performance issues were due to interference and
> channel utilization on the 2.4 ghz spectrum. We attempted reducing 2.4 ghz
> (20 mhz channel)  transmit power but still had issues.
>
> I also agree with keeping to the simplicity of a single SSID if at all
> possible.  I can't imagine the number of issues that would be reported to
> me simply because the user exited the ideal range for 5ghz spectrum. Our
> student and staff networks support a wide range of client wireless cards,
> antenna configurations, and spectrum compatibility (many are including
> 2.4ghz only). Having users manually switch networks as needed may cause
> HelpDesk to become very popular.
>
> Good Luck,
>
> Stephen Oglesby
> Network and Telecommunications Architect
> Aims Community College
> 5401 W. 20th Street
> Greeley, CO 80634
> 970.339.6350 (Office)
> stephen.ogle...@aims.edu
>
>
>
> *IT staff will never ask you for your username and password. Always decline 
> to provide the information and report such attempts to the help desk (x6380).*
>
>
> On Wed, Aug 12, 2015 at 8:24 AM, Philippe Hanset 
> wrote:
>
>> Paul,
>>
>> Dorm design is an animal of itself and each school has its own set of
>> challenges based on
>> locations and policies. As much as I agree that 2.4 GHz and 5 GHz
>> shouldn’t be on separate SSIDs for main campus,
>> I have really changed my mind for dormitories. Those buildings are really
>> micro houses stacked on top of each other
>> with people bringing anything and everything they want which is quite
>> different than academic buildings. We all spend our summers designing
>> the best coverage that we can for those residential areas, and as soon as
>> students move in, the interference in 2.4 GHz makes our entire effort look
>> pointless in the eyes of the complaining student who is actually partly
>> responsible for the problem.
>> So, in dormitories only, I would have the regular set of SSIDs that the
>> campus provides plus and extra 5 GHz only called something like
>> "residential-preferred".
>> But I wouldn’t use “fast” or “5GHz” in the SSID name.
>>
>> Best,
>>
>> Philippe
>>
>>
>> Philippe Hanset
>> www.eduroam.us
>>
>>
>>
>> On Aug 11, 2015, at 4:22 PM, Paul Sedy  wrote:
>>
>> Hello everyone,
>>
>> We are a Cisco shop and have, up until now, employed a single SSID for
>> students, supporting both 2.4 Ghz and 5Ghz connections.  During this
>> summer, we have been working to develop sufficient AP density to ensure
>> good 5Ghz cells throughout our dorms.  In the past, we have seen numerous
>> instances of poorer performance on the 2.4 Ghz spectrum, but up to this
>> point, have relied on the client to make the decision between these two
>> options.
>>
>> We are thinking of deploying two separate SSIDs, a 5Ghz network and a 2.4
>> Ghz network, that are exclusive in order to promote a better experience for
>> the students with devices capable of 5Ghz connectivity.  We would probably
>> use the original SSID name with an appended (5 Ghz) or (2.4 Ghz).
>>
>> Are any of you currently employing this type of configuration and how
>> well has it worked for you?
>>
>> We would appreciate any insights that anyone might have.
>>
>> Paul Sedy
>> The Master’s College
>> Director of IT Operations
>> 21726 Placerita Canyon Rd, Santa Clarita, CA 91321
>> 661.362.2340 | rps...@masters

Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] Exclusive 2.4 Ghz and 5 Ghz SSIDs

[Stephen Oglesby]

Paul,

We're an Aruba shop and, as Bruce of Liberty mentioned, for dense
deployments we turn 2.4 ghz radios off on every other AP (typically edge of
building APs). Our main performance issues were due to interference and
channel utilization on the 2.4 ghz spectrum. We attempted reducing 2.4 ghz
(20 mhz channel)  transmit power but still had issues.

I also agree with keeping to the simplicity of a single SSID if at all
possible.  I can't imagine the number of issues that would be reported to
me simply because the user exited the ideal range for 5ghz spectrum. Our
student and staff networks support a wide range of client wireless cards,
antenna configurations, and spectrum compatibility (many are including
2.4ghz only). Having users manually switch networks as needed may cause
HelpDesk to become very popular.

Good Luck,

Stephen Oglesby
Network and Telecommunications Architect
Aims Community College
5401 W. 20th Street
Greeley, CO 80634
970.339.6350 (Office)
stephen.ogle...@aims.edu



*IT staff will never ask you for your username and password. Always
decline to provide the information and report such attempts to the
help desk (x6380).*


On Wed, Aug 12, 2015 at 8:24 AM, Philippe Hanset 
wrote:

> Paul,
>
> Dorm design is an animal of itself and each school has its own set of
> challenges based on
> locations and policies. As much as I agree that 2.4 GHz and 5 GHz
> shouldn’t be on separate SSIDs for main campus,
> I have really changed my mind for dormitories. Those buildings are really
> micro houses stacked on top of each other
> with people bringing anything and everything they want which is quite
> different than academic buildings. We all spend our summers designing
> the best coverage that we can for those residential areas, and as soon as
> students move in, the interference in 2.4 GHz makes our entire effort look
> pointless in the eyes of the complaining student who is actually partly
> responsible for the problem.
> So, in dormitories only, I would have the regular set of SSIDs that the
> campus provides plus and extra 5 GHz only called something like
> "residential-preferred".
> But I wouldn’t use “fast” or “5GHz” in the SSID name.
>
> Best,
>
> Philippe
>
>
> Philippe Hanset
> www.eduroam.us
>
>
>
> On Aug 11, 2015, at 4:22 PM, Paul Sedy  wrote:
>
> Hello everyone,
>
> We are a Cisco shop and have, up until now, employed a single SSID for
> students, supporting both 2.4 Ghz and 5Ghz connections.  During this
> summer, we have been working to develop sufficient AP density to ensure
> good 5Ghz cells throughout our dorms.  In the past, we have seen numerous
> instances of poorer performance on the 2.4 Ghz spectrum, but up to this
> point, have relied on the client to make the decision between these two
> options.
>
> We are thinking of deploying two separate SSIDs, a 5Ghz network and a 2.4
> Ghz network, that are exclusive in order to promote a better experience for
> the students with devices capable of 5Ghz connectivity.  We would probably
> use the original SSID name with an appended (5 Ghz) or (2.4 Ghz).
>
> Are any of you currently employing this type of configuration and how well
> has it worked for you?
>
> We would appreciate any insights that anyone might have.
>
> Paul Sedy
> The Master’s College
> Director of IT Operations
> 21726 Placerita Canyon Rd, Santa Clarita, CA 91321
> 661.362.2340 | rps...@masters.edu
> ** 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/.

RE: [WIRELESS-LAN] PoE Issue, Cisco Switches- Let's Poll The Audience!

[Chad Burnham]

Hi Jeff,

Sounds like a “talk to the BU via your SE” answer if you really want it fixed…

Chad



From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv 
[mailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU] On Behalf Of Jeffrey D. Sessler
Sent: Wednesday, August 12, 2015 9:03 AM
To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] PoE Issue, Cisco Switches- Let's Poll The Audience!

No bug ID, but it’s mentioned in the release notes for 15.2, but oddly, not in 
the open caveat section. That suggests it’s something that can’t be fixed.

Jeff

From: 
"wireless-lan@listserv.educause.edu" 
on behalf of "trent.h...@louisville.edu"
Reply-To: 
"wireless-lan@listserv.educause.edu"
Date: Wednesday, August 12, 2015 at 5:26 AM
To: 
"wireless-lan@listserv.educause.edu"
Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] PoE Issue, Cisco Switches- Let's Poll The Audience!

You have a bug id for this?

Sent from my iPhone

On Aug 11, 2015, at 6:20 PM, Jeffrey D. Sessler 
mailto:j...@scrippscollege.edu>> wrote:
Lee,

This could apply too. It’s a bug in the –X series.

When a powered device (such as an IP phone) connected to a PoE+ port restarts 
and sends a CDP or LLDP packet with a power TLV, the switch locks to the 
power-negotiation protocol of that first packet. The switch does not respond to 
power requests from the other protocol. For example, if the switch is locked to 
CDP, it does not provide power to devices that send LLDP requests. If CDP is 
disabled after the switch has locked on it, the switch does not respond to LLDP 
power requests and can no longer power on any accessories.

Jeff

From: 
"wireless-lan@listserv.educause.edu" 
on behalf of "lhbad...@syr.edu"
Reply-To: 
"wireless-lan@listserv.educause.edu"
Date: Tuesday, August 11, 2015 at 9:47 AM
To: 
"wireless-lan@listserv.educause.edu"
Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] PoE Issue, Cisco Switches- Let's Poll The Audience!

Hi Jeff,

Thanks for the information- generally, yes the problem device comes up an 
another port. Part of the madness is the infrequency and unpredictability of 
the condition, so hard to do any sort of real testing. But you’ve given us a 
good place to start with a version-quest☺

-Lee

Lee Badman | Network Architect
Information Technology Services
206 Machinery Hall
120 Smith Drive
Syracuse, New York 13244
t 315.443.3003   f 315.443.4325   e lhbad...@syr.eduw 
its.syr.edu
SYRACUSE UNIVERSITY
syr.edu

From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv 
[mailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU] On Behalf Of Jeffrey D. Sessler
Sent: Tuesday, August 11, 2015 12:42 PM
To: 
WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] PoE Issue, Cisco Switches- Let's Poll The Audience!

Lee,

There is/was a known PoE issue with the older 15.x releases where on boot 
connected devices will power up, but it there is any interruption on that port 
e.g. Device reboots or cable removed, the port will not power back up without a 
switch reboot. The problem manifests over time (if I recall). When it’s 
occurring, if you move the device from a “dead” port to another, does it power 
back up? When it’s at it worst, other ports won’t respond either.

It was fixed years ago in 15.2 train. Don’t think Cisco ever fixed it in 15.0. 
I’d get that switch updated to 15.2 and see if the problem goes away.

Jeff

From: 
"wireless-lan@listserv.educause.edu" 
on behalf of "lhbad...@syr.edu"
Reply-To: 
"wireless-lan@listserv.educause.edu"
Date: Tuesday, August 11, 2015 at 8:47 AM
To: 
"wireless-lan@listserv.educause.edu"
Subject: [WIRELESS-LAN] PoE Issue, Cisco Switches- Let's Poll The Audience!

We’re also going through TAC on this, but I’d like to see if anyone else is 
seeing similar in their Cisco switching environment and might have perspective 
to share.

We have an odd, seemingly spontaneous condition where  PoE stops working on a 
port or two, with only switch reboot bringing it back. Most recent switch:  
WS-C3560X-48 on 15.0(2)SE7.

Problem/discovery flow:

? One AP out of several on switch goes down
? Access switch, “show power inline” shows problem AP port has lost 
it’s PoE  detection signature and is only showing IEEE PD
? All other AP ports are fine
? For problem port, remove PoE (Power Inline Never) then restore PoE 
(Power Inline Auto)- Port now dead, will not come back -also do shut/no 
shut,makes no difference to condition
? No error disable on 

Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] PoE Issue, Cisco Switches- Let's Poll The Audience!

[Jeffrey D. Sessler]

No bug ID, but it’s mentioned in the release notes for 15.2, but oddly, not in 
the open caveat section. That suggests it’s something that can’t be fixed.

Jeff

From: 
"wireless-lan@listserv.educause.edu" 
on behalf of "trent.h...@louisville.edu"
Reply-To: 
"wireless-lan@listserv.educause.edu"
Date: Wednesday, August 12, 2015 at 5:26 AM
To: 
"wireless-lan@listserv.educause.edu"
Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] PoE Issue, Cisco Switches- Let's Poll The Audience!

You have a bug id for this?

Sent from my iPhone

On Aug 11, 2015, at 6:20 PM, Jeffrey D. Sessler 
mailto:j...@scrippscollege.edu>> wrote:

Lee,

This could apply too. It’s a bug in the –X series.

When a powered device (such as an IP phone) connected to a PoE+ port restarts 
and sends a CDP or LLDP packet with a power TLV, the switch locks to the 
power-negotiation protocol of that first packet. The switch does not respond to 
power requests from the other protocol. For example, if the switch is locked to 
CDP, it does not provide power to devices that send LLDP requests. If CDP is 
disabled after the switch has locked on it, the switch does not respond to LLDP 
power requests and can no longer power on any accessories.

Jeff

From: 
"wireless-lan@listserv.educause.edu" 
on behalf of "lhbad...@syr.edu"
Reply-To: 
"wireless-lan@listserv.educause.edu"
Date: Tuesday, August 11, 2015 at 9:47 AM
To: 
"wireless-lan@listserv.educause.edu"
Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] PoE Issue, Cisco Switches- Let's Poll The Audience!

Hi Jeff,

Thanks for the information- generally, yes the problem device comes up an 
another port. Part of the madness is the infrequency and unpredictability of 
the condition, so hard to do any sort of real testing. But you’ve given us a 
good place to start with a version-quest☺

-Lee

Lee Badman | Network Architect
Information Technology Services
206 Machinery Hall
120 Smith Drive
Syracuse, New York 13244
t 315.443.3003   f 315.443.4325   e lhbad...@syr.eduw 
its.syr.edu
SYRACUSE UNIVERSITY
syr.edu

From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv 
[mailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU] On Behalf Of Jeffrey D. Sessler
Sent: Tuesday, August 11, 2015 12:42 PM
To: 
WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] PoE Issue, Cisco Switches- Let's Poll The Audience!

Lee,

There is/was a known PoE issue with the older 15.x releases where on boot 
connected devices will power up, but it there is any interruption on that port 
e.g. Device reboots or cable removed, the port will not power back up without a 
switch reboot. The problem manifests over time (if I recall). When it’s 
occurring, if you move the device from a “dead” port to another, does it power 
back up? When it’s at it worst, other ports won’t respond either.

It was fixed years ago in 15.2 train. Don’t think Cisco ever fixed it in 15.0. 
I’d get that switch updated to 15.2 and see if the problem goes away.

Jeff

From: 
"wireless-lan@listserv.educause.edu" 
on behalf of "lhbad...@syr.edu"
Reply-To: 
"wireless-lan@listserv.educause.edu"
Date: Tuesday, August 11, 2015 at 8:47 AM
To: 
"wireless-lan@listserv.educause.edu"
Subject: [WIRELESS-LAN] PoE Issue, Cisco Switches- Let's Poll The Audience!

We’re also going through TAC on this, but I’d like to see if anyone else is 
seeing similar in their Cisco switching environment and might have perspective 
to share.

We have an odd, seemingly spontaneous condition where  PoE stops working on a 
port or two, with only switch reboot bringing it back. Most recent switch:  
WS-C3560X-48 on 15.0(2)SE7.

Problem/discovery flow:

· One AP out of several on switch goes down
· Access switch, “show power inline” shows problem AP port has lost 
it’s PoE  detection signature and is only showing IEEE PD
· All other AP ports are fine
· For problem port, remove PoE (Power Inline Never) then restore PoE 
(Power Inline Auto)- Port now dead, will not come back -also do shut/no 
shut,makes no difference to condition
· No error disable on port. No obvious reason for switch being out.
· Show environment/post commands reveal no issues with switch power or 
power controller
· Only a reboot restores PoE to problem port

Seeing the same sort of condition on PoE camera ports as well- seems very much 
to be a pure switch issue, nothing to do with AP version/model in this case.

Does this ring familiar for anyone?

Regar

Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] Exclusive 2.4 Ghz and 5 Ghz SSIDs

[Philippe Hanset]

Paul,

Dorm design is an animal of itself and each school has its own set of 
challenges based on 
locations and policies. As much as I agree that 2.4 GHz and 5 GHz shouldn’t be 
on separate SSIDs for main campus,
I have really changed my mind for dormitories. Those buildings are really micro 
houses stacked on top of each other
with people bringing anything and everything they want which is quite different 
than academic buildings. We all spend our summers designing
the best coverage that we can for those residential areas, and as soon as 
students move in, the interference in 2.4 GHz makes our entire effort look
pointless in the eyes of the complaining student who is actually partly 
responsible for the problem.
So, in dormitories only, I would have the regular set of SSIDs that the campus 
provides plus and extra 5 GHz only called something like 
"residential-preferred".
But I wouldn’t use “fast” or “5GHz” in the SSID name.

Best,

Philippe


Philippe Hanset
www.eduroam.us



> On Aug 11, 2015, at 4:22 PM, Paul Sedy  wrote:
> 
> Hello everyone,
>  
> We are a Cisco shop and have, up until now, employed a single SSID for 
> students, supporting both 2.4 Ghz and 5Ghz connections.  During this summer, 
> we have been working to develop sufficient AP density to ensure good 5Ghz 
> cells throughout our dorms.  In the past, we have seen numerous instances of 
> poorer performance on the 2.4 Ghz spectrum, but up to this point, have relied 
> on the client to make the decision between these two options.  
>  
> We are thinking of deploying two separate SSIDs, a 5Ghz network and a 2.4 Ghz 
> network, that are exclusive in order to promote a better experience for the 
> students with devices capable of 5Ghz connectivity.  We would probably use 
> the original SSID name with an appended (5 Ghz) or (2.4 Ghz).
>  
> Are any of you currently employing this type of configuration and how well 
> has it worked for you?
>  
> We would appreciate any insights that anyone might have.
>  
> Paul Sedy
> The Master’s College
> Director of IT Operations
> 21726 Placerita Canyon Rd, Santa Clarita, CA 91321
> 661.362.2340 | rps...@masters.edu ** 
> 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/.

Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] Exclusive 2.4 Ghz and 5 Ghz SSIDs

[Jake Snyder]

The challenge for "FAST" networks is when you don't have 5ghz dense enough to 
cover everywhere.

What will happen is users will be walking and run into places where they drop 
from 5Ghz.  And they will manually connect to the 2.4Ghz SSID.

Without having the ability to tune which network is preferred, you can run into 
issues where the clients may start artificially preferring 2.4 because of the 
SSID priority order on their device.  Bam, all that work and you may have made 
the problem worse.

And certain devices don't let you explicitly set the priority order.  iOS takes 
the last network used into account, security level, etc into account.  I don't 
know if it still prefers the highest alphabetically or not. Appending "FAST" 
moves a network down in alphabetical order, which is the opposite of what you 
want.

Now that a user has both SSIDs, as they walk along campus and they hit a 5ghz 
dead spot they will connect to the 2.4Ghz network which will remain preferred 
because "It was the last network joined."  For a device that already prefers 
5ghz over 2.4ghz, that's not a great way to go.

https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT202831

Thanks
Jake Snyder

Sent from my iPhone

> On Aug 12, 2015, at 6:07 AM, Tevlin, Dave  wrote:
> 
> Paul,
> 
> Similar to the concept that Jason mentioned earlier, I heard of a wireless 
> setup at an Educause conference a while back with separate SSIDs for 2.4 and 
> 5. What helped them, unfortunately can't remember who it was, was adding 
> 'FAST' to the 5Ghz SSID name to help steer users to the 5Ghz band. Once they 
> did that the uptick of devices on the 5Ghz band increased greatly.
> 
> They had two separate SSIDs before with 2.4 and 5Ghz but it was only after 
> they changed the SSID name to include FAST that they saw that improvement. I 
> also agree that the 2.4 and 5 should not show up in the SSID name.
> 
> Dave Tevlin
> Network/ Systems Administrator
> Georgetown Visitation Prep School
> 
> 
> 
>  
> 
>> On Wed, Aug 12, 2015 at 7:35 AM, Osborne, Bruce W (Network Services) 
>>  wrote:
>> Why not just deploy the 2.4 GHz with the same SSID on a few of the APs?  
>> With our Aruba APs, that is the recommended solution in a dense situation.
>> 
>>  
>> 
>> ​
>> 
>>  
>> 
>> Bruce Osborne
>> 
>> Wireless Engineer
>> 
>> IT Infrastructure & Media Solutions
>> 
>>  
>> 
>> (434) 592-4229
>> 
>>  
>> 
>> LIBERTY UNIVERSITY
>> 
>> Training Champions for Christ since 1971
>> 
>>  
>> 
>> From: Paul Sedy [mailto:rps...@masters.edu] 
>> Sent: Tuesday, August 11, 2015 4:23 PM
>> Subject: Exclusive 2.4 Ghz and 5 Ghz SSIDs
>> 
>>  
>> 
>> Hello everyone,
>> 
>>  
>> 
>> We are a Cisco shop and have, up until now, employed a single SSID for 
>> students, supporting both 2.4 Ghz and 5Ghz connections.  During this summer, 
>> we have been working to develop sufficient AP density to ensure good 5Ghz 
>> cells throughout our dorms.  In the past, we have seen numerous instances of 
>> poorer performance on the 2.4 Ghz spectrum, but up to this point, have 
>> relied on the client to make the decision between these two options. 
>> 
>>  
>> 
>> We are thinking of deploying two separate SSIDs, a 5Ghz network and a 2.4 
>> Ghz network, that are exclusive in order to promote a better experience for 
>> the students with devices capable of 5Ghz connectivity.  We would probably 
>> use the original SSID name with an appended (5 Ghz) or (2.4 Ghz).
>> 
>>  
>> 
>> Are any of you currently employing this type of configuration and how well 
>> has it worked for you?
>> 
>>  
>> 
>> We would appreciate any insights that anyone might have.
>> 
>>  
>> 
>> Paul Sedy
>> 
>> The Master’s College
>> 
>> Director of IT Operations
>> 
>> 21726 Placerita Canyon Rd, Santa Clarita, CA 91321
>> 
>> 661.362.2340 | rps...@masters.edu
>> 
>> ** 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/.

Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] PoE Issue, Cisco Switches- Let's Poll The Audience!

[trent . hurt]

You have a bug id for this?

Sent from my iPhone

On Aug 11, 2015, at 6:20 PM, Jeffrey D. Sessler 
mailto:j...@scrippscollege.edu>> wrote:

Lee,

This could apply too. It’s a bug in the –X series.

When a powered device (such as an IP phone) connected to a PoE+ port restarts 
and sends a CDP or LLDP packet with a power TLV, the switch locks to the 
power-negotiation protocol of that first packet. The switch does not respond to 
power requests from the other protocol. For example, if the switch is locked to 
CDP, it does not provide power to devices that send LLDP requests. If CDP is 
disabled after the switch has locked on it, the switch does not respond to LLDP 
power requests and can no longer power on any accessories.

Jeff

From: 
"wireless-lan@listserv.educause.edu" 
on behalf of "lhbad...@syr.edu"
Reply-To: 
"wireless-lan@listserv.educause.edu"
Date: Tuesday, August 11, 2015 at 9:47 AM
To: 
"wireless-lan@listserv.educause.edu"
Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] PoE Issue, Cisco Switches- Let's Poll The Audience!

Hi Jeff,

Thanks for the information- generally, yes the problem device comes up an 
another port. Part of the madness is the infrequency and unpredictability of 
the condition, so hard to do any sort of real testing. But you’ve given us a 
good place to start with a version-quest:)

-Lee

Lee Badman | Network Architect
Information Technology Services
206 Machinery Hall
120 Smith Drive
Syracuse, New York 13244
t 315.443.3003   f 315.443.4325   e lhbad...@syr.eduw 
its.syr.edu
SYRACUSE UNIVERSITY
syr.edu

From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv 
[mailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU] On Behalf Of Jeffrey D. Sessler
Sent: Tuesday, August 11, 2015 12:42 PM
To: 
WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] PoE Issue, Cisco Switches- Let's Poll The Audience!

Lee,

There is/was a known PoE issue with the older 15.x releases where on boot 
connected devices will power up, but it there is any interruption on that port 
e.g. Device reboots or cable removed, the port will not power back up without a 
switch reboot. The problem manifests over time (if I recall). When it’s 
occurring, if you move the device from a “dead” port to another, does it power 
back up? When it’s at it worst, other ports won’t respond either.

It was fixed years ago in 15.2 train. Don’t think Cisco ever fixed it in 15.0. 
I’d get that switch updated to 15.2 and see if the problem goes away.

Jeff

From: 
"wireless-lan@listserv.educause.edu" 
on behalf of "lhbad...@syr.edu"
Reply-To: 
"wireless-lan@listserv.educause.edu"
Date: Tuesday, August 11, 2015 at 8:47 AM
To: 
"wireless-lan@listserv.educause.edu"
Subject: [WIRELESS-LAN] PoE Issue, Cisco Switches- Let's Poll The Audience!

We’re also going through TAC on this, but I’d like to see if anyone else is 
seeing similar in their Cisco switching environment and might have perspective 
to share.

We have an odd, seemingly spontaneous condition where  PoE stops working on a 
port or two, with only switch reboot bringing it back. Most recent switch:  
WS-C3560X-48 on 15.0(2)SE7.

Problem/discovery flow:

· One AP out of several on switch goes down
· Access switch, “show power inline” shows problem AP port has lost 
it’s PoE  detection signature and is only showing IEEE PD
· All other AP ports are fine
· For problem port, remove PoE (Power Inline Never) then restore PoE 
(Power Inline Auto)- Port now dead, will not come back -also do shut/no 
shut,makes no difference to condition
· No error disable on port. No obvious reason for switch being out.
· Show environment/post commands reveal no issues with switch power or 
power controller
· Only a reboot restores PoE to problem port

Seeing the same sort of condition on PoE camera ports as well- seems very much 
to be a pure switch issue, nothing to do with AP version/model in this case.

Does this ring familiar for anyone?

Regards,

Lee Badman




** 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/

Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] Exclusive 2.4 Ghz and 5 Ghz SSIDs

[Tevlin, Dave]

Paul,

Similar to the concept that Jason mentioned earlier, I heard of a wireless
setup at an Educause conference a while back with separate SSIDs for 2.4
and 5. What helped them, unfortunately can't remember who it was, was
adding 'FAST' to the 5Ghz SSID name to help steer users to the 5Ghz band.
Once they did that the uptick of devices on the 5Ghz band increased greatly.

They had two separate SSIDs before with 2.4 and 5Ghz but it was only after
they changed the SSID name to include FAST that they saw that improvement.
I also agree that the 2.4 and 5 should not show up in the SSID name.

Dave Tevlin
Network/ Systems Administrator
Georgetown Visitation Prep School





On Wed, Aug 12, 2015 at 7:35 AM, Osborne, Bruce W (Network Services) <
bosbo...@liberty.edu> wrote:

> Why not just deploy the 2.4 GHz with the same SSID on a few of the APs?
> With our Aruba APs, that is the recommended solution in a dense situation.
>
>
>
> ​
>
>
>
> *Bruce Osborne*
>
> *Wireless Engineer*
>
> *IT Infrastructure & Media Solutions*
>
>
>
> *(434) 592-4229 <%28434%29%20592-4229>*
>
>
>
> *LIBERTY UNIVERSITY*
>
> *Training Champions for Christ since 1971*
>
>
>
> *From:* Paul Sedy [mailto:rps...@masters.edu]
> *Sent:* Tuesday, August 11, 2015 4:23 PM
> *Subject:* Exclusive 2.4 Ghz and 5 Ghz SSIDs
>
>
>
> Hello everyone,
>
>
>
> We are a Cisco shop and have, up until now, employed a single SSID for
> students, supporting both 2.4 Ghz and 5Ghz connections.  During this
> summer, we have been working to develop sufficient AP density to ensure
> good 5Ghz cells throughout our dorms.  In the past, we have seen numerous
> instances of poorer performance on the 2.4 Ghz spectrum, but up to this
> point, have relied on the client to make the decision between these two
> options.
>
>
>
> We are thinking of deploying two separate SSIDs, a 5Ghz network and a 2.4
> Ghz network, that are exclusive in order to promote a better experience for
> the students with devices capable of 5Ghz connectivity.  We would probably
> use the original SSID name with an appended (5 Ghz) or (2.4 Ghz).
>
>
>
> Are any of you currently employing this type of configuration and how well
> has it worked for you?
>
>
>
> We would appreciate any insights that anyone might have.
>
>
>
> Paul Sedy
>
> The Master’s College
>
> Director of IT Operations
>
> 21726 Placerita Canyon Rd, Santa Clarita, CA 91321
>
> 661.362.2340 | rps...@masters.edu
>
> ** 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/.

RE: Exclusive 2.4 Ghz and 5 Ghz SSIDs

[Osborne, Bruce W (Network Services)]

Why not just deploy the 2.4 GHz with the same SSID on a few of the APs?  With 
our Aruba APs, that is the recommended solution in a dense situation.

​

Bruce Osborne
Wireless Engineer
IT Infrastructure & Media Solutions

(434) 592-4229

LIBERTY UNIVERSITY
Training Champions for Christ since 1971

From: Paul Sedy [mailto:rps...@masters.edu]
Sent: Tuesday, August 11, 2015 4:23 PM
Subject: Exclusive 2.4 Ghz and 5 Ghz SSIDs

Hello everyone,

We are a Cisco shop and have, up until now, employed a single SSID for 
students, supporting both 2.4 Ghz and 5Ghz connections.  During this summer, we 
have been working to develop sufficient AP density to ensure good 5Ghz cells 
throughout our dorms.  In the past, we have seen numerous instances of poorer 
performance on the 2.4 Ghz spectrum, but up to this point, have relied on the 
client to make the decision between these two options.

We are thinking of deploying two separate SSIDs, a 5Ghz network and a 2.4 Ghz 
network, that are exclusive in order to promote a better experience for the 
students with devices capable of 5Ghz connectivity.  We would probably use the 
original SSID name with an appended (5 Ghz) or (2.4 Ghz).

Are any of you currently employing this type of configuration and how well has 
it worked for you?

We would appreciate any insights that anyone might have.

Paul Sedy
The Master’s College
Director of IT Operations
21726 Placerita Canyon Rd, Santa Clarita, CA 91321
661.362.2340 | rps...@masters.edu
** 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/.

RE: [WIRELESS-LAN] Exclusive 2.4 Ghz and 5 Ghz SSIDs

[Latchezar Filtchev]

Dear Paul,

Our Wi-Fi at AUBG is Trapeze/Juniper. Two years ago we installed WLA322 
dual-radio, 802.11n capable, 2x2 MIMO in every dorm room (370 new  + approx. 
175 existing 2.4 Ghz capable only devices). During fine tuning of the system 
with new AP’s we broadcasted separate SSID’s for 2.4 Ghz and for 5 Ghz.  Based 
on accumulated experience this summer we switched to single SSID and left band 
selection to the control system.
 I support Frans that user should see SSID and connect.

Thank you!
Best,
Latcho


[cid:image001.jpg@01D0D4F7.4F1E49A0]

Latchezar Filtchev
Director Office of Communications and Computing

Telephone: +359 73 | 888 346 | E-mail: lat...@aubg.edu

Office of Communications and Computing
Main building, room 118
1 G.Izmirliev sq.; 2700 Blagoevgrad, Bulgaria


[cid:image002.jpg@01D0D4F7.4F1E49A0]







From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv 
[mailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU] On Behalf Of Frans Panken
Sent: Wednesday, August 12, 2015 9:31 AM
To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] Exclusive 2.4 Ghz and 5 Ghz SSIDs

Paul,
I am not a supporter of this. Mainly because I think Wi-Fi knowledge for the 
end-user should be minimised. Users should just see the SSID and connect; 
options to choose from should be minimized. The most important thing users must 
learn is checking the correctness of the  Radius server to whom they give their 
credentials. For the rest, the device and the Wi-Fi infrastructure should do 
their very best in serving Wi-Fi users optimaly.

Devices in general do a rather good job in selecting the best band. Besides, 
users have insufficient knowledge in making the right choice between the 2,4Ghz 
and 5Ghz bands. Note that choosing 5Ghz is simply not always the best choice.  
If you're too far away from the AP (or because of whether channels or 
interference on the 5Gh band), the 2,4Ghz band may be the better choice. Good 
devices switch between the frequencies, to serve users best. You disable that 
function by introducing separate SSIDs for both bands.
-Frans
Paul Sedy schreef op 11/08/15 om 22:22:
Hello everyone,

We are a Cisco shop and have, up until now, employed a single SSID for 
students, supporting both 2.4 Ghz and 5Ghz connections.  During this summer, we 
have been working to develop sufficient AP density to ensure good 5Ghz cells 
throughout our dorms.  In the past, we have seen numerous instances of poorer 
performance on the 2.4 Ghz spectrum, but up to this point, have relied on the 
client to make the decision between these two options.

We are thinking of deploying two separate SSIDs, a 5Ghz network and a 2.4 Ghz 
network, that are exclusive in order to promote a better experience for the 
students with devices capable of 5Ghz connectivity.  We would probably use the 
original SSID name with an appended (5 Ghz) or (2.4 Ghz).

Are any of you currently employing this type of configuration and how well has 
it worked for you?

We would appreciate any insights that anyone might have.

Paul Sedy
The Master’s College
Director of IT Operations
21726 Placerita Canyon Rd, Santa Clarita, CA 91321
661.362.2340 | rps...@masters.edu
** 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/.

RE: [WIRELESS-LAN] Exclusive 2.4 Ghz and 5 Ghz SSIDs

[Jason Cook]

We were considered a similar approach last year but never completed the plan, 
mainly due to other priorities and having already kind of implemented one. 
Rather than go a 2.4 and a 5 the plan was to leave our normal network “UofA” as 
dual and create new network “UofA Premium” or some ‘join me I’m better’ name. 
We already have a “UofA 5ghz” network so the premium would have simply replaced 
that and we would have advertised it (website, email etc not broadcast). It was 
more of a time thing that we didn’t go ahead but now we don’t see it as such an 
issue. The name change really was about users seeing “UofA Premium” and 
believing that it would be a better service would attempt to use it over UofA. 
Where’s UofA 5ghz is technical and means nothing.

As mentioned already 5ghz isn’t always better, so advertising a “premium” 
service against it may have caused us more issues with higher expectations 
which might be met in most cases but could be worse if 2.4ghz was a better 
choice for a location for example.

Also
devices are now much better at selecting 5 over 2.4
We already offer a 5 only, and users struggling with experience are recommended 
to try this if they support it. It was first created to deal with some high 
interference areas where other wireless networks are unavoidable but made it to 
main campus and some users have found it better…. Or just another one to hop to 
during issues maybe that could have also been fixed with disconnect/reconnect. 
…..

So the plan now is continue as we are, we first and foremost recommend UofA 
with UofA and eduroam configured by our onboarding tool. But we do provide a 
5ghz only option to provide for the exception cases. Ideally we’ll remove it 
one day.


--
Jason Cook
The University of Adelaide, AUSTRALIA 5005
Ph: +61 8 8313 4800

From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv 
[mailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU] On Behalf Of Mathieu Sturm
Sent: Wednesday, 12 August 2015 6:36 PM
To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] Exclusive 2.4 Ghz and 5 Ghz SSIDs

I agree with Frans, the users in general don’t have the knowledge to decide. 
They will see 5Ghz, google it and see: oh it’s faster. They don’t realize other 
factors could make 2.4Ghz the better choice. We have one SSID and let the 
devices make the right choice.

Mathieu Sturm
Hoofdmedewerker Server – en netwerkbeheer
--
[http://www.hogent.be/www/assets/Image/maillogo.png]

Hogeschool Gent
Dienst Financiën en ICT
Valentin Vaerwyckweg 1
BE-9000 Gent
T + 32 92433523
mathieu.st...@hogent.be
HoGent.be



Van: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv 
[mailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU] Namens Frans Panken
Verzonden: woensdag 12 augustus 2015 8:31
Aan: 
WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
Onderwerp: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] Exclusive 2.4 Ghz and 5 Ghz SSIDs

Paul,
I am not a supporter of this. Mainly because I think Wi-Fi knowledge for the 
end-user should be minimised. Users should just see the SSID and connect; 
options to choose from should be minimized. The most important thing users must 
learn is checking the correctness of the  Radius server to whom they give their 
credentials. For the rest, the device and the Wi-Fi infrastructure should do 
their very best in serving Wi-Fi users optimaly.

Devices in general do a rather good job in selecting the best band. Besides, 
users have insufficient knowledge in making the right choice between the 2,4Ghz 
and 5Ghz bands. Note that choosing 5Ghz is simply not always the best choice.  
If you're too far away from the AP (or because of whether channels or 
interference on the 5Gh band), the 2,4Ghz band may be the better choice. Good 
devices switch between the frequencies, to serve users best. You disable that 
function by introducing separate SSIDs for both bands.
-Frans
Paul Sedy schreef op 11/08/15 om 22:22:
Hello everyone,

We are a Cisco shop and have, up until now, employed a single SSID for 
students, supporting both 2.4 Ghz and 5Ghz connections.  During this summer, we 
have been working to develop sufficient AP density to ensure good 5Ghz cells 
throughout our dorms.  In the past, we have seen numerous instances of poorer 
performance on the 2.4 Ghz spectrum, but up to this point, have relied on the 
client to make the decision between these two options.

We are thinking of deploying two separate SSIDs, a 5Ghz network and a 2.4 Ghz 
network, that are exclusive in order to promote a better experience for the 
students with devices capable of 5Ghz connectivity.  We would probably use the 
original SSID name with an appended (5 Ghz) or (2.4 Ghz).

Are any of you currently employing this type of configuration and how well has 
it worked for you?

We would appreciate any insights that anyone might have.

Paul Sedy
The Master’s College
Director of IT Operations
21726 Placerita Canyon Rd, San

RE: [WIRELESS-LAN] Exclusive 2.4 Ghz and 5 Ghz SSIDs

[Mathieu Sturm]

I agree with Frans, the users in general don’t have the knowledge to decide. 
They will see 5Ghz, google it and see: oh it’s faster. They don’t realize other 
factors could make 2.4Ghz the better choice. We have one SSID and let the 
devices make the right choice.

Mathieu Sturm
Hoofdmedewerker Server – en netwerkbeheer
--
[http://www.hogent.be/www/assets/Image/maillogo.png]

Hogeschool Gent
Dienst Financiën en ICT
Valentin Vaerwyckweg 1
BE-9000 Gent
T + 32 92433523
mathieu.st...@hogent.be
HoGent.be



Van: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv 
[mailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU] Namens Frans Panken
Verzonden: woensdag 12 augustus 2015 8:31
Aan: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
Onderwerp: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] Exclusive 2.4 Ghz and 5 Ghz SSIDs

Paul,
I am not a supporter of this. Mainly because I think Wi-Fi knowledge for the 
end-user should be minimised. Users should just see the SSID and connect; 
options to choose from should be minimized. The most important thing users must 
learn is checking the correctness of the  Radius server to whom they give their 
credentials. For the rest, the device and the Wi-Fi infrastructure should do 
their very best in serving Wi-Fi users optimaly.

Devices in general do a rather good job in selecting the best band. Besides, 
users have insufficient knowledge in making the right choice between the 2,4Ghz 
and 5Ghz bands. Note that choosing 5Ghz is simply not always the best choice.  
If you're too far away from the AP (or because of whether channels or 
interference on the 5Gh band), the 2,4Ghz band may be the better choice. Good 
devices switch between the frequencies, to serve users best. You disable that 
function by introducing separate SSIDs for both bands.
-Frans
Paul Sedy schreef op 11/08/15 om 22:22:
Hello everyone,

We are a Cisco shop and have, up until now, employed a single SSID for 
students, supporting both 2.4 Ghz and 5Ghz connections.  During this summer, we 
have been working to develop sufficient AP density to ensure good 5Ghz cells 
throughout our dorms.  In the past, we have seen numerous instances of poorer 
performance on the 2.4 Ghz spectrum, but up to this point, have relied on the 
client to make the decision between these two options.

We are thinking of deploying two separate SSIDs, a 5Ghz network and a 2.4 Ghz 
network, that are exclusive in order to promote a better experience for the 
students with devices capable of 5Ghz connectivity.  We would probably use the 
original SSID name with an appended (5 Ghz) or (2.4 Ghz).

Are any of you currently employing this type of configuration and how well has 
it worked for you?

We would appreciate any insights that anyone might have.

Paul Sedy
The Master’s College
Director of IT Operations
21726 Placerita Canyon Rd, Santa Clarita, CA 91321
661.362.2340 | rps...@masters.edu
** 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/.