date:20170925

RE: [WIRELESS-LAN] Two RF Questions

2017-09-25 Thread Yahya M. Jaber

Try to simulate your AP location in Ekahau, see what it tells you.
I use almost 40Mhz channels everywhere, and some 80Mhz which was based on the 
design.


Yahya Jaber.
Sr. Wireless Engineer
IT Network & Communications – Engineering

From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv 
[mailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU] On Behalf Of Entwistle, Bruce
Sent: Tuesday, September 26, 2017 12:11 AM
To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] Two RF Questions

We have a similar configuration and have begun using the additional channels 
but continue to use 20MHz channel width.

Bruce Entwistle
Network Manager
University of Redlands


From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv 
[mailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU] On Behalf Of David Blahut
Sent: Monday, September 25, 2017 12:17 PM
To: 
WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
Subject: [WIRELESS-LAN] Two RF Questions

Greetings,
I have two hopefully simple RF related questions:
1.  Should I enable the extended UNII-2 channels campus wide?
2.  Should I enable 40Mhz channel width campus wide?
In other words what are you doing on your campus and what is the "best practice?

Our wireless infrastructure:

3 Cisco 5508s running 8.2.141.0

20 - 3800 APs
368 - 3700 APs
414 - 3600 APs
8 - 3500 APs
7 - 1810 APs
32 - 1142 APs

Prime 3.1.0

Thanks for your input.
David
** Participation and subscription information for this EDUCAUSE 
Constituent Group discussion list can be found at 
http://www.educause.edu/discuss.
** Participation and subscription information for this EDUCAUSE 
Constituent Group discussion list can be found at 
http://www.educause.edu/discuss.


This message and its contents including attachments are intended solely for the 
original recipient. If you are not the intended recipient or have received this 
message in error, please notify me immediately and delete this message from 
your computer system. Any unauthorized use or distribution is prohibited. 
Please consider the environment before printing this email.

**
Participation and subscription information for this EDUCAUSE Constituent Group 
discussion list can be found at http://www.educause.edu/discuss.

Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] Aruba OS 6.5.X

2017-09-25 Thread Wesley Troy Scott

We ran into the SOS Assert crash too and the workaround was to disable Deep 
Packet Inspection. Since then we've been stable.

From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv 
 on behalf of Johnson, Christopher 

Sent: Monday, September 25, 2017 12:06:15 PM
To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] Aruba OS 6.5.X

We’re also on 6.5.3.1 and have ran into the “Reboot Cause: Datapath timeout 
(SOS Assert) (Intent:cause:register 54:86:50:2) “ message with an open TAC 
case. Something else I’d be curious about – for those of your running 6.5.3.1 – 
could you verify via packet-capture that your configured data rates match what 
your APs are actually broadcasting. We’ve recently discovered during a 
packet-capture that our APs had the default 1,2, 5, and 11 rates enabled – even 
though the controllers have those specifically disabled via the running-config 
and webUI. Note this only affected on pair of our 7240 controllers – but not 
another separate pair.

Christopher Johnson
Wireless Network Engineer
AT Infrastructure Operations & Networking (ION)
Illinois State University
(309) 438-8444
Stay connected with ISU IT news and tips with @ISU IT Help on 
Facebook and 
Twitter
From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv 
[mailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU] On Behalf Of Jake Snyder
Sent: Saturday, September 23, 2017 8:13 PM
To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] Aruba OS 6.5.X

We had some issues with the controllers crashing on 6.5.2.1. 6.5.3.2 has been 
solid for the same client.

Sent from my iPhone

On Sep 22, 2017, at 1:55 PM, Brian L. Cox 
mailto:cox...@unk.edu>> wrote:
For whatever it is worth, we are going to go from 6.5.2.0 to 6.5.3.2 
conservative release per TAC recommendation

Brian

From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv 
[mailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU] On Behalf Of Michael Hulko
Sent: Friday, September 22, 2017 2:06 PM
To: 
WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] Aruba OS 6.5.X

I stand corrected… we are experiencing - Reboot Cause: Datapath timeout (SOS 
Assert) (Intent:cause:register 54:86:50:2)  associated with bug ID: 168710

Cause:  "contents in datapath is not freed. New streams are not allocated with 
resources to categorize. Due to this duplicate session deletes were not 
happening and hence the controller was crashing.”

This appears to happen when the controllers reach over 9k users.

We have been experiencing AP103H reboots since 6.4.4.x code base as well as 
increased number of radar events.  These were supposed to be fixed moving to 
6.5.4x code.

We have over 4600 APs on Campus (105, 215, 225, 315,103H, 205H)

M

On Sep 22, 2017, at 12:21 PM, Colin Randall 
mailto:crand...@mines.edu>> wrote:

We’re running 6.5.2.1 as well, without any issues.  That said, we’re running 
mostly AP-225’s and a few AP-335’s, and not running the DFS frequencies at all.
-Colin

Colin Randall
Network Manager
Colorado School of Mines
303-384-2208

On Sep 22, 2017, at 9:18 AM, Amel Caldwell mailto:am...@uw.edu>> 
wrote:

Did they say what the release will be?  Will it be 6.5.2.1 or are they going to 
expect you to jump to 6.5.3 or 6.5.4?  We often request fixes to be put in 
older versions to minimize risk of going to a whole other train of code.

I am curious because I was told 6.5.2 had been “parked”.

Amel Caldwell
University of Washington UW-IT
Wi-Fi Network Engineer
Wi-Fi Service Manager

am...@uw.edu
206-543-2915

Ask me about open Network Engineer positions on the wireless team.

From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv 
mailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU>> 
on behalf of "Bucklaew, Jerry" mailto:j...@buffalo.edu>>
Reply-To: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv 
mailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU>>
Date: Friday, September 22, 2017 at 5:46 AM
To: 
"WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU" 
mailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU>>
Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] Aruba OS 6.5.X

We have been on 6.5.2.1 for a couple months now with no “major issues”.We 
have the 3xx dfs bug and we do see a ton of radar hits.

Waiting for the fix release that is due out in another week or two.

From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv 
[mailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU] On Behalf Of Amel Caldwell
Sent: Thursday, September 21, 2017 5:15 PM
To: 
WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
Subject: [WIRELESS-LAN] Aruba OS 6.5.X

Hi y’all—

We have depleted our supply of AP 215s and are wanting to begin installing AP 
315s on our campus and have been having a hard time finding stable 6.5.X code.  
Our school starts next week, and we just had a failed attempt at r

Re: UT Austin Biennial Network Report

2017-09-25 Thread Richard Nedwich

Hi William,

This report is insanely great!  Is this a private URL, or would you allow us to 
share?

Best,
Rich

**
Participation and subscription information for this EDUCAUSE Constituent Group 
discussion list can be found at http://www.educause.edu/discuss.

RE: [WIRELESS-LAN] Two RF Questions

2017-09-25 Thread Entwistle, Bruce

We have a similar configuration and have begun using the additional channels 
but continue to use 20MHz channel width.

Bruce Entwistle
Network Manager
University of Redlands


From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv 
[mailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU] On Behalf Of David Blahut
Sent: Monday, September 25, 2017 12:17 PM
To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
Subject: [WIRELESS-LAN] Two RF Questions

Greetings,
I have two hopefully simple RF related questions:
1.  Should I enable the extended UNII-2 channels campus wide?
2.  Should I enable 40Mhz channel width campus wide?
In other words what are you doing on your campus and what is the "best practice?

Our wireless infrastructure:

3 Cisco 5508s running 8.2.141.0

20 - 3800 APs
368 - 3700 APs
414 - 3600 APs
8 - 3500 APs
7 - 1810 APs
32 - 1142 APs

Prime 3.1.0

Thanks for your input.
David
** Participation and subscription information for this EDUCAUSE 
Constituent Group discussion list can be found at 
http://www.educause.edu/discuss.

**
Participation and subscription information for this EDUCAUSE Constituent Group 
discussion list can be found at http://www.educause.edu/discuss.

Wi-Fi Request for University Conference event

2017-09-25 Thread Williams, Mr. Michael

Hello,

Here recently, we have received numerous requests for guest WI-FI access during 
on campus conference events.  In order to support these events, we normally 
create a special open conference SSID that requires a pre-shared key or 
passcode for authentication.

What we struggling with is how to set the level of expectation for WI-FI 
functionality during these types events.   Conference sponsors inform us that 
Wi-Fi/internet access for conference attendees is critical, or some special app 
must function flawlessly or their conference event will be a bust.

We want to develop a formal conference request process that would detail what 
type of Wi-Fi support we can offer, what level of user experience to expect and 
what the sponsor responsibilities would be during these conference events.

I am curious to hear how other university handle these types of events. Does 
anyone have a formal process, that they are willing to share, that addresses 
some of these concerns?
Thanks

Mike


Michael M. Williams
Senior Network Engineer
Information Technology Services
Tarleton State University
201 St. Felix Str.
Box T-0220
Stephenville, TX 76402
Tel: (254) 968-1850
Fax: (254) 968-9658
mmwilli...@tarleton.edu

“ Tarleton Networks – Connecting people with their potential”

Information Technology Services staff will never ask for your password in an 
email.  Don't ever email your password to anyone or share confidential 
information in emails.

Confidentiality Notice:  This electronic message, including any attachments, is 
for the sole use of the intended recipients(s) and may contain confidential and 
privileged information.  Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or 
distribution is prohibited.  If you are not the intended recipient, please 
contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original 
message

From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv 
[mailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU] On Behalf Of Hunter Fuller
Sent: Monday, September 25, 2017 2:36 PM
To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] Two RF Questions

We currently won't even touch 40MHz as we like having the ability to solve 
problems by throwing more APs at them.

On Mon, Sep 25, 2017 at 2:28 PM Chuck Enfield 
mailto:chu...@psu.edu>> wrote:

1.  Enable it in places to check for radar events.  If you get few, then 
yes.  Client devices are almost fully capable now.  Hidden SSID’s are the only 
issue.  Some clients don’t probe on DFS channels, and will only respond to 
beacons.  Make sure 2.4 is usable for the small number of incompatible devices.

2.  No.  Don’t even consider 40MHz unless you’re using almost all the DFS 
channels, but even then you’ll probably have to disable it in some high density 
areas.

From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv 
[mailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU]
 On Behalf Of David Blahut
Sent: Monday, September 25, 2017 3:17 PM

To: 
WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
Subject: [WIRELESS-LAN] Two RF Questions

Greetings,
I have two hopefully simple RF related questions:
1.  Should I enable the extended UNII-2 channels campus wide?
2.  Should I enable 40Mhz channel width campus wide?
In other words what are you doing on your campus and what is the "best practice?

Our wireless infrastructure:

3 Cisco 5508s running 8.2.141.0

20 - 3800 APs
368 - 3700 APs
414 - 3600 APs
8 - 3500 APs
7 - 1810 APs
32 - 1142 APs

Prime 3.1.0

Thanks for your input.
David
** Participation and subscription information for this EDUCAUSE 
Constituent Group discussion list can be found at 
http://www.educause.edu/discuss.
** Participation and subscription information for this EDUCAUSE 
Constituent Group discussion list can be found at 
http://www.educause.edu/discuss.
--

--
Hunter Fuller
Network Engineer
VBH Annex B-5
+1 256 824 5331

Office of Information Technology
The University of Alabama in Huntsville
Systems and Infrastructure
** Participation and subscription information for this EDUCAUSE 
Constituent Group discussion list can be found at 
http://www.educause.edu/discuss.

**
Participation and subscription information for this EDUCAUSE Constituent Group 
discussion list can be found at http://www.educause.edu/discuss.

Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] Two RF Questions

2017-09-25 Thread Kenny, Eric

Hi Dave,

I personally would not enable 40+ MHz wide channels without already having the 
UNII-2 channels enabled as it will cut down on your available channels.

Also, stay away from any doppler radar frequencies used in Poughkeepsie ;-)

-Eric Kenny

> On Sep 25, 2017, at 3:16 PM, David Blahut  wrote:
> 
> Greetings,
> 
> I have two hopefully simple RF related questions:
> 
> 1.  Should I enable the extended UNII-2 channels campus wide?
> 2.  Should I enable 40Mhz channel width campus wide?
> 
> In other words what are you doing on your campus and what is the "best 
> practice?
> 
> Our wireless infrastructure:
> 
> 3 Cisco 5508s running 8.2.141.0
> 
> 20 - 3800 APs
> 368 - 3700 APs
> 414 - 3600 APs
> 8 - 3500 APs
> 7 - 1810 APs
> 32 - 1142 APs
> 
> Prime 3.1.0
> 
> Thanks for your input.
> David
> ** Participation and subscription information for this EDUCAUSE 
> Constituent Group discussion list can be found at 
> http://www.educause.edu/discuss.
> 

**
Participation and subscription information for this EDUCAUSE Constituent Group 
discussion list can be found at http://www.educause.edu/discuss.

Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] Two RF Questions

2017-09-25 Thread Jeremy Gibbs

I have been moving our less AP dense buildings to 40 Mhz channels.  In the
dorms, I stick with 20 Mhz, unless there is little to no CCI when I do my
testing.  I see RADAR events, but they are sparse.  I definitely see an
improvement with the 40 Mhz channels and keeping users connected and happy
in our academic areas.

On Mon, Sep 25, 2017 at 3:27 PM, Chuck Enfield  wrote:

> 1.  Enable it in places to check for radar events.  If you get few,
> then yes.  Client devices are almost fully capable now.  Hidden SSID’s are
> the only issue.  Some clients don’t probe on DFS channels, and will only
> respond to beacons.  Make sure 2.4 is usable for the small number of
> incompatible devices.
>
> 2.  No.  Don’t even consider 40MHz unless you’re using almost all the
> DFS channels, but even then you’ll probably have to disable it in some high
> density areas.
>
>
>
> *From:* The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv [mailto:
> WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU] *On Behalf Of *David Blahut
> *Sent:* Monday, September 25, 2017 3:17 PM
> *To:* WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
> *Subject:* [WIRELESS-LAN] Two RF Questions
>
>
>
> Greetings,
>
> I have two hopefully simple RF related questions:
>
> 1.  Should I enable the extended UNII-2 channels campus wide?
>
> 2.  Should I enable 40Mhz channel width campus wide?
>
> In other words what are you doing on your campus and what is the "best
> practice?
>
>
>
> Our wireless infrastructure:
>
>
>
> 3 Cisco 5508s running 8.2.141.0
>
>
>
> 20 - 3800 APs
>
> 368 - 3700 APs
>
> 414 - 3600 APs
>
> 8 - 3500 APs
>
> 7 - 1810 APs
>
> 32 - 1142 APs
>
>
>
> Prime 3.1.0
>
>
>
> Thanks for your input.
>
> David
>
> ** Participation and subscription information for this EDUCAUSE
> Constituent Group discussion list can be found at http://www.educause.edu/
> discuss.
> ** Participation and subscription information for this EDUCAUSE
> Constituent Group discussion list can be found at http://www.educause.edu/
> discuss.
>
>


-- 


*--Jeremy L. Gibbs*
Sr. Network Engineer
Utica College IITS

T: (315) 223-2383
F: (315) 792-3814
E: jlgi...@utica.edu
http://www.utica.edu

**
Participation and subscription information for this EDUCAUSE Constituent Group 
discussion list can be found at http://www.educause.edu/discuss.

Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] Two RF Questions

2017-09-25 Thread Hunter Fuller

We currently won't even touch 40MHz as we like having the ability to solve
problems by throwing more APs at them.

On Mon, Sep 25, 2017 at 2:28 PM Chuck Enfield  wrote:

> 1.  Enable it in places to check for radar events.  If you get few,
> then yes.  Client devices are almost fully capable now.  Hidden SSID’s are
> the only issue.  Some clients don’t probe on DFS channels, and will only
> respond to beacons.  Make sure 2.4 is usable for the small number of
> incompatible devices.
>
> 2.  No.  Don’t even consider 40MHz unless you’re using almost all the
> DFS channels, but even then you’ll probably have to disable it in some high
> density areas.
>
>
>
> *From:* The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv [mailto:
> WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU] *On Behalf Of *David Blahut
> *Sent:* Monday, September 25, 2017 3:17 PM
>
>
> *To:* WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
> *Subject:* [WIRELESS-LAN] Two RF Questions
>
>
>
> Greetings,
>
> I have two hopefully simple RF related questions:
>
> 1.  Should I enable the extended UNII-2 channels campus wide?
>
> 2.  Should I enable 40Mhz channel width campus wide?
>
> In other words what are you doing on your campus and what is the "best
> practice?
>
>
>
> Our wireless infrastructure:
>
>
>
> 3 Cisco 5508s running 8.2.141.0
>
>
>
> 20 - 3800 APs
>
> 368 - 3700 APs
>
> 414 - 3600 APs
>
> 8 - 3500 APs
>
> 7 - 1810 APs
>
> 32 - 1142 APs
>
>
>
> Prime 3.1.0
>
>
>
> Thanks for your input.
>
> David
>
> ** Participation and subscription information for this EDUCAUSE
> Constituent Group discussion list can be found at
> http://www.educause.edu/discuss.
> ** Participation and subscription information for this EDUCAUSE
> Constituent Group discussion list can be found at
> http://www.educause.edu/discuss.
>
> --

--
Hunter Fuller
Network Engineer
VBH Annex B-5
+1 256 824 5331

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

**
Participation and subscription information for this EDUCAUSE Constituent Group 
discussion list can be found at http://www.educause.edu/discuss.

RE: [WIRELESS-LAN] Two RF Questions

2017-09-25 Thread Chuck Enfield

1.  Enable it in places to check for radar events.  If you get few, then 
yes.  Client devices are almost fully capable now.  Hidden SSID’s are the 
only issue.  Some clients don’t probe on DFS channels, and will only respond 
to beacons.  Make sure 2.4 is usable for the small number of incompatible 
devices.

2.  No.  Don’t even consider 40MHz unless you’re using almost all the 
DFS channels, but even then you’ll probably have to disable it in some high 
density areas.



From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv 
[mailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU] On Behalf Of David Blahut
Sent: Monday, September 25, 2017 3:17 PM
To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
Subject: [WIRELESS-LAN] Two RF Questions



Greetings,

I have two hopefully simple RF related questions:

1.  Should I enable the extended UNII-2 channels campus wide?

2.  Should I enable 40Mhz channel width campus wide?

In other words what are you doing on your campus and what is the "best 
practice?



Our wireless infrastructure:



3 Cisco 5508s running 8.2.141.0



20 - 3800 APs

368 - 3700 APs

414 - 3600 APs

8 - 3500 APs

7 - 1810 APs

32 - 1142 APs



Prime 3.1.0



Thanks for your input.

David

** Participation and subscription information for this EDUCAUSE 
Constituent Group discussion list can be found at 
http://www.educause.edu/discuss.


**
Participation and subscription information for this EDUCAUSE Constituent Group 
discussion list can be found at http://www.educause.edu/discuss.

RE: [WIRELESS-LAN] Two RF Questions

2017-09-25 Thread Manon Lessard

Hi

The answer is: it depends.
Extended channels depend on the presence of TDWR radars in your environment 
(ex: if you are near an airport, there are lists of TDWR radars in the US).
40 Mhz channels depends on your clients: do you need more small cells in 20Mhz 
or can afford less available channels and go 40?
Are there going to be more clients using 40 Mhz capacity or are they older 
clients which means your additional channel won’t be used by many VS the 
benefit of mitigating CCI...

Tell us more about your client devices and your environment. In the end, 
regardless of your APs’ capability it’s all about the client.

Thx

Manon Lessard
Technicienne en développement de systèmes
CCNP, CWNA, CWDP
Direction des technologies de l'information
Pavillon Louis-Jacques-Casault
1055, avenue du Séminaire
Bureau 0403
Université Laval, Québec (Québec)
G1V 0A6, Canada

418 656-2131, poste 12853
Télécopieur : 418 656-7305
manon.less...@dti.ulaval.ca
www.dti.ulaval.ca

Avis relatif à la confidentialité | Notice of 
Confidentiality



[Description : Description : Description : Description : Description : 
Description : Description : Description : Description : Description : 
Description : Description : Description : Description : Description : 
Description : Description : Description : Description : Logo de l'Université 
Laval]



From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv 
[mailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU] On Behalf Of David Blahut
Sent: 25 septembre 2017 15:17
To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
Subject: [WIRELESS-LAN] Two RF Questions

Greetings,
I have two hopefully simple RF related questions:
1.  Should I enable the extended UNII-2 channels campus wide?
2.  Should I enable 40Mhz channel width campus wide?
In other words what are you doing on your campus and what is the "best practice?

Our wireless infrastructure:

3 Cisco 5508s running 8.2.141.0

20 - 3800 APs
368 - 3700 APs
414 - 3600 APs
8 - 3500 APs
7 - 1810 APs
32 - 1142 APs

Prime 3.1.0

Thanks for your input.
David
** Participation and subscription information for this EDUCAUSE 
Constituent Group discussion list can be found at 
http://www.educause.edu/discuss.

**
Participation and subscription information for this EDUCAUSE Constituent Group 
discussion list can be found at http://www.educause.edu/discuss.

Two RF Questions

2017-09-25 Thread David Blahut

Greetings,

I have two hopefully simple RF related questions:

1.  Should I enable the extended UNII-2 channels campus wide?
2.  Should I enable 40Mhz channel width campus wide?

In other words what are you doing on your campus and what is the "best
practice?

Our wireless infrastructure:

3 Cisco 5508s running 8.2.141.0

20 - 3800 APs
368 - 3700 APs
414 - 3600 APs
8 - 3500 APs
7 - 1810 APs
32 - 1142 APs

Prime 3.1.0

Thanks for your input.
David

**
Participation and subscription information for this EDUCAUSE Constituent Group 
discussion list can be found at http://www.educause.edu/discuss.

RE: [WIRELESS-LAN] Aruba OS 6.5.X

2017-09-25 Thread Johnson, Christopher

We’re also on 6.5.3.1 and have ran into the “Reboot Cause: Datapath timeout 
(SOS Assert) (Intent:cause:register 54:86:50:2) “ message with an open TAC 
case. Something else I’d be curious about – for those of your running 6.5.3.1 – 
could you verify via packet-capture that your configured data rates match what 
your APs are actually broadcasting. We’ve recently discovered during a 
packet-capture that our APs had the default 1,2, 5, and 11 rates enabled – even 
though the controllers have those specifically disabled via the running-config 
and webUI. Note this only affected on pair of our 7240 controllers – but not 
another separate pair.

Christopher Johnson
Wireless Network Engineer
AT Infrastructure Operations & Networking (ION)
Illinois State University
(309) 438-8444
Stay connected with ISU IT news and tips with @ISU IT Help on 
Facebook and 
Twitter
From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv 
[mailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU] On Behalf Of Jake Snyder
Sent: Saturday, September 23, 2017 8:13 PM
To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] Aruba OS 6.5.X

We had some issues with the controllers crashing on 6.5.2.1. 6.5.3.2 has been 
solid for the same client.

Sent from my iPhone

On Sep 22, 2017, at 1:55 PM, Brian L. Cox 
mailto:cox...@unk.edu>> wrote:
For whatever it is worth, we are going to go from 6.5.2.0 to 6.5.3.2 
conservative release per TAC recommendation

Brian

From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv 
[mailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU] On Behalf Of Michael Hulko
Sent: Friday, September 22, 2017 2:06 PM
To: 
WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] Aruba OS 6.5.X

I stand corrected… we are experiencing - Reboot Cause: Datapath timeout (SOS 
Assert) (Intent:cause:register 54:86:50:2)  associated with bug ID: 168710

Cause:  "contents in datapath is not freed. New streams are not allocated with 
resources to categorize. Due to this duplicate session deletes were not 
happening and hence the controller was crashing.”


This appears to happen when the controllers reach over 9k users.

We have been experiencing AP103H reboots since 6.4.4.x code base as well as 
increased number of radar events.  These were supposed to be fixed moving to 
6.5.4x code.

We have over 4600 APs on Campus (105, 215, 225, 315,103H, 205H)

M



On Sep 22, 2017, at 12:21 PM, Colin Randall 
mailto:crand...@mines.edu>> wrote:

We’re running 6.5.2.1 as well, without any issues.  That said, we’re running 
mostly AP-225’s and a few AP-335’s, and not running the DFS frequencies at all.
-Colin

Colin Randall
Network Manager
Colorado School of Mines
303-384-2208

On Sep 22, 2017, at 9:18 AM, Amel Caldwell mailto:am...@uw.edu>> 
wrote:



Did they say what the release will be?  Will it be 6.5.2.1 or are they going to 
expect you to jump to 6.5.3 or 6.5.4?  We often request fixes to be put in 
older versions to minimize risk of going to a whole other train of code.

I am curious because I was told 6.5.2 had been “parked”.

Amel Caldwell
University of Washington UW-IT
Wi-Fi Network Engineer
Wi-Fi Service Manager

am...@uw.edu
206-543-2915

Ask me about open Network Engineer positions on the wireless team.


From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv 
mailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU>> 
on behalf of "Bucklaew, Jerry" mailto:j...@buffalo.edu>>
Reply-To: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv 
mailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU>>
Date: Friday, September 22, 2017 at 5:46 AM
To: 
"WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU" 
mailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU>>
Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] Aruba OS 6.5.X


We have been on 6.5.2.1 for a couple months now with no “major issues”.We 
have the 3xx dfs bug and we do see a ton of radar hits.

Waiting for the fix release that is due out in another week or two.

From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv 
[mailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU] On Behalf Of Amel Caldwell
Sent: Thursday, September 21, 2017 5:15 PM
To: 
WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
Subject: [WIRELESS-LAN] Aruba OS 6.5.X

Hi y’all—

We have depleted our supply of AP 215s and are wanting to begin installing AP 
315s on our campus and have been having a hard time finding stable 6.5.X code.  
Our school starts next week, and we just had a failed attempt at rolling out 
6.5.1.8 because we saw dozens of radar detected events right after upgrading.  
This was the fourth version of 6.5.1.x we have tried to put on this particular 
set of controllers and each has brought a new set of issue; STM crash and cause 
APs to lose contact with controller; AMON not sending firewall session data; 
radar detection events; LACP and VRRP problems to name a

RE: [WIRELESS-LAN] Two RF Questions

Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] Aruba OS 6.5.X

Re: UT Austin Biennial Network Report

RE: [WIRELESS-LAN] Two RF Questions

Wi-Fi Request for University Conference event

Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] Two RF Questions

Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] Two RF Questions

Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] Two RF Questions

RE: [WIRELESS-LAN] Two RF Questions

RE: [WIRELESS-LAN] Two RF Questions

Two RF Questions

RE: [WIRELESS-LAN] Aruba OS 6.5.X

12 matches

Site Navigation

Mail list logo

Footer information