RE: [WIRELESS-LAN] Backup power

[Robert Owens]

We routinely put UPS's in our closets. One thing to keep in mind concerning 
reliability. Properly cooled closets tend to be more reliable and have longer 
battery life then closets with higher temperatures. We use management cards to 
monitor when they have a battery failure. Hot closets can have battery life 
under 1 year vs 6 years in a cool closet.

Bob Owens
Network Group
Kansas State University

From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv 
[mailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU] On Behalf Of Eric Glinsky
Sent: Thursday, July 20, 2017 10:40 AM
To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] Backup power

We have an APC Smart-UPS in every closet. Between VoIP, WiFi, paging, HVAC, 
door locks, and repeaters for 2-way radios, we can’t let a power glitch 
interrupt connectivity, especially since we’re in a rural area prone to 
brownouts and blackouts.

We’re also on a hill, prone to lightning strikes, which can go through the 
Cat5, circumventing the UPS. We had a strike last summer ruin one whole switch, 
several ports in a couple other switches, a couple IP cameras, an AP, and a 
copier NIC.

We carry warranties on all our Juniper switches on our main campus, however, 
our newly-acquired campus came with ProCurve switches with the lifetime 
warranty, so we may let the Juniper warranties lapse and replace them with HP 
as they die, with the exception of the core.


From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv 
[mailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU] On Behalf Of Sandra Bury
Sent: Thursday, July 20, 2017 11:02 AM
To: 
WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
Subject: [WIRELESS-LAN] Backup power

Good morning -

I would be interested to know how many of you include UPS purchases for 
switches in each network closet in your campus deployments. If you do not build 
in backup power, do you put your switches on a maintenance contract, or do you 
pay to replace them when they fail outside of warranty?

Thanks very much.

Sandy

Sandra H. Bury
Executive Director, Computing Services
Information Resources and Technology
Bradley University
309-677-2808
sa...@bradley.edu

[https://www.bradley.edu/global/images/emailsig_wordmark.gif]

** Participation and subscription information for this EDUCAUSE 
Constituent Group discussion list can be found at 
http://www.educause.edu/discuss.
This e-mail message is intended only for the person or entity to which it is 
addressed and may contain CONFIDENTIAL or PRIVILEGED material. Any unauthorized 
review, use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited. If you are not the 
intended recipient, please contact the sender and destroy all copies of the 
original message. If you are the intended recipient but do not wish to receive 
communications through this medium, please so advise the sender immediately.
** 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] Wifi blocking paint?

[Robert Owens]

Keep in mind that RF goes up and down as well. If this is a multistory building 
shielding has to be considered for floor and ceiling as well as walls.


From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv 
[mailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU] On Behalf Of Chuck Enfield
Sent: Thursday, February 16, 2017 3:52 PM
To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] Wifi blocking paint?

If the lab needs to be completely isolated you're going to want to hire a 
consultant to design a shielding system.  If you just need enough attenuation 
to mitigate significant interference, I've heard good things about the yshield 
paint.  You can add about 30-40dB of loss to a wall.  If you can keep your 
radios 40-50 feet apart, this should isolate them from each other enough that 
they disappear into the noise floor.

Keep in mind that it has to be grounded for maximum effect, and if I'm 
skeptical about the efficacy of the paint it's mostly to do with this.  Good 
bonding and grounding is hard, and carbon paint doesn't strike me as a great 
medium for reliable bonding.  That said, at Wi-Fi wavelengths ground quality 
shouldn't be too much of a factor in attenuation as long as you keep antenna 
elements far enough from the walls to avoid near field effects.  But if the 
grounding isn't effective you could end up with excessive internal reflection 
in the lab.  No problem if there's a normal amount of absorptive material in 
the room, but could be a problem otherwise.

Just my two cents.

Chuck

From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv 
[mailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU] On Behalf Of Sweetser, Frank E
Sent: Thursday, February 16, 2017 3:27 PM
To: 
WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
Subject: [WIRELESS-LAN] Wifi blocking paint?




Hi all,



we just got word that a professor here wants to start running a certificate 
program around a wireless lab setup.  To mitigate any potential problems from 
this, we'd like to try to isolate the lab wireless to the one room as much 
possible.  Does anyone have any recommendations for wifi blocking paint, or 
other building material choices and techniques?



thanks!


Frank Sweetser
Director of Network Operations
Worcester Polytechnic Institute
"For every problem, there is a solution that is simple, elegant, and wrong." - 
HL Mencken
** 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.

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

RE: [WIRELESS-LAN] Clients unable to obtain an IP address via DHCP

[Robert Owens]

This seems to be an issue with a recent windows update. I had this pop up on 
two out of the 4 windows 10 machines I updated.
Does not appear to be just wireless related.
Another  staff member also reported as follows along with a link:

There seems to be a bug happening with Windows 10 that both I
(at home) and our intern (at work) saw this week where DHCP
just stops working.  Others are reporting it in Windows 8x also.

Evidently Microsoft is trying to figure it out as it is happening
many places.  The Reg just put up an article on it and have a fix
that we both used to fix our machines in the article.

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2016/12/09/mysterious_windows_10_networking_bug/

From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv 
[mailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU] On Behalf Of Lee H Badman
Sent: Tuesday, December 13, 2016 1:58 PM
To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] Clients unable to obtain an IP address via DHCP

We are going to MR4 next week- but as Atanas mentioned- this is also happening 
with wired clients.

Lee Badman | CWNE #200 | 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.edu w 
its.syr.edu
SYRACUSE UNIVERSITY
syr.edu

From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv 
[mailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU] On Behalf Of Mccormick, Kevin
Sent: Tuesday, December 13, 2016 2:49 PM
To: 
WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] Clients unable to obtain an IP address via DHCP

Cisco has released 8.2.141 last week.

On Tue, Dec 13, 2016 at 1:33 PM, Swartz, Pola 
> wrote:
You want to get to the 8.2.140 code if possible.  We were seeing this as well.  
However, there is another CCO release coming soon beyond 8.2.140.  8.2.140 has 
settle things down a bit for us.

Smile,
Pola
Wireless Team Lead
Sr. Wireless Administrator
Department of Technology Services
Denver Public Schools
720-423-3603
I Proudly Play For Team DPS

Good enough... isn't

-Original Message-
From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv 
[mailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU]
 On Behalf Of Bucklaew, Jerry
Sent: Tuesday, December 13, 2016 12:30 PM
To: 
WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] Clients unable to obtain an IP address via DHCP

You need a trace closer to the client.  Most likely the offer is not making it 
to the client or request is not making it back to the server.


Possible causes -

1. packetloss at client side
2. rouge dhcp server


On 12/13/2016 02:23 PM, Atanas P Atanasov wrote:
> We're a seeing some odd behavior in our wireless deployment, seemingly random 
> clients aren't able to obtain an IP via DHCP
>
> When analyzing the DHCP logs and also debugs on the wireless controller, we 
> see the clients sending a DHCP DISCOVER
> packet and the DHCP server responds with a DHCP OFFER. However the client 
> doesn't follow up with a DHCP REQUEST. This
> behavior continues sometimes for hours, until the client finally sends a DHCP 
> REQUEST and obtains a lease.
>
> The side effect of this is our DHCP servers are getting long delays when the 
> dhcp service is restarted. We are using
> Infoblox dhcp severs in a failover group. From a support case we have opened 
> with Infoblox, they have determined that
> these excessive dhcp requests are increasing the number of dhcp leases in the 
> database which causes the long restart.
>
> We have seen similar behavior with our wired clients but in lot smaller 
> numbers.
>
>
>
> We're a Cisco shop, using 8450 controllers, code version is 8.2.121
>
>
>
> Attached is a Splunk search on one of the "misbehaving" clients' MAC
>
> Any comments are appreciated.
>
>
>
> Atanas Atanasov
>
> Network Engineer
>
> Syracuse University
>
>
>
> ** 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/.



--
Kevin McCormick
Network Administrator
University Technology - Western Illinois University
ke-mccorm...@wiu.edu | (309) 
298-1335 | Morgan Hall 106b
Connect with uTech: Website | 
Facebook | 
Twitter
[http://www.wiu.edu/university_technology/images/signatures/currentimage.jpg]
** Participation and 

RE: Outdoor PoE

[Robert Owens]

One other avenue to investigate is to check links to Ham Radio operators.
They have been working with towers, antennas, and lightning protection
since I was born and I am not a spring chicken. Sometimes researching it
yourself will glean more useful information.

From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv 
[mailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU] On Behalf Of John York
Sent: Friday, August 7, 2015 4:48 PM
To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] Outdoor PoE

“qualified electrical engineer”… I am/was one, and Chuck is correct.  All of my 
EE training was in circuit and microwave design, next to nothing in power or 
lightning protection.  That was 40+ years ago, though.  Someone who has gone 
through the Professional Engineer (PE) wringer might be better equipped for 
lightning and power.

It’s cool to see the #ILookLikeAnEngineer thing going on now.  Back in the dark 
ages, I think I had one lady in all my engineering classes.  She had to endure 
us gawking at her, and who knows what else.  Life is much better when you have 
a more even mix.

John

From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv 
[mailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU] On Behalf Of Chuck Enfield
Sent: Friday, August 7, 2015 5:06 PM
To: 
WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDUmailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] Outdoor PoE

I apologize to any female electrical engineers on the list for my choice of the 
pronoun he.  I was not consciously thinking of a man when I wrote it.  The nuns 
used to punish me if I didn’t use pronouns this way.  Old habits are hard to 
break.

From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv 
[mailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU] On Behalf Of Chuck Enfield
Sent: Friday, August 07, 2015 4:58 PM
To: 
WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDUmailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] Outdoor PoE

PS – if you ask a “qualified electrical engineer” a grounding question and 
don’t like his answer, ask a different one and you’ll get a different answer.  
Fish around until somebody tells you what you want to hear, then stop.  It 
works without fail.

From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv 
[mailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU] On Behalf Of Chuck Enfield
Sent: Friday, August 07, 2015 4:52 PM
To: 
WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDUmailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] Outdoor PoE

Sound advice, but I don’t think it’s practical or necessary to do that on a 
case-by case basis.  A system should be evaluate and approved for efficacy and 
safety over a specified range of conditions so that you can use it over and 
over.  This is what we’ve done for decades in the case of OSP telephone 
cabling.  I can’t see why every outdoor camera or AP would need to be a one-off.

From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv 
[mailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU] On Behalf Of Jeffrey D. Sessler
Sent: Friday, August 07, 2015 4:43 PM
To: 
WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDUmailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] Outdoor PoE

Sure, as long at the $88 SPD (surge protection device) actually does what is 
says it’s going to do , is installed correctly, and doesn’t in itself violate 
some other code requirement. It’s not an insurance policy If it’s not 
terminated to a properly sized earth ground or doesn’t comply with the IEEE 
Lightning protection zone requirements. The latter is especially important for 
802.3at (PoE+) Applications. Thus my recommendation to always consult with a 
qualified electrical engineer on such matters.


Jeff

From: 
wireless-lan@listserv.educause.edumailto:wireless-lan@listserv.educause.edu 
on behalf of Hector J Rios
Reply-To: 
wireless-lan@listserv.educause.edumailto:wireless-lan@listserv.educause.edu
Date: Friday, August 7, 2015 at 8:16 AM
To: 
wireless-lan@listserv.educause.edumailto:wireless-lan@listserv.educause.edu
Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] Outdoor PoE

Sounds like a risky proposition. ~ $88.00 for peace of mind is not that bad of 
an insurance policy.

-H

From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv 
[mailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU] On Behalf Of Jeffrey D. Sessler
Sent: Friday, August 07, 2015 10:06 AM
To: 
WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDUmailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] Outdoor PoE


If one is following electrical codes/best practices, are these devices needed? 
That is, externally mounted ethernet devices such as cameras and access points 
as supposed to be using STP and not UTP cable (providing a solid path to 
ground). The camera/ap should be grounded at it’s mount point and on the PSE 
side (switch, injector, etc.), In the case of a switch, it should have a 
separate ground lug that’s tied into a ground bus-bar.

I suspect If you follow the above, these additional devices may not be 
required. And if 

RE: [WIRELESS-LAN] SV: [WIRELESS-LAN] Attendance

[Robert Owens]

In large institutions this would not scale at all. Most of us do not have the 
man power to even begin to handle the management of such a thing. It would take 
some specific designed software to even keep track of it. Very small school 
with a few classrooms maybe.

Robert Owens
Kansas State University

From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv 
[mailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU] On Behalf Of Anders Nilsson
Sent: Monday, November 24, 2014 10:19 AM
To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
Subject: [WIRELESS-LAN] SV: [WIRELESS-LAN] Attendance

Aren't we all operating small RF-chips into our students nowadays?
Makes tracking people so much easier.  ;)
On a more serious note I totally agree with Mr. Badman here.
Getting rough stats is one thing, getting Attendance lists is a very different 
and more difficult thing.

Cheers
Anders Nilsson
Univ of Umeå

Från: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv 
[mailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU] För Lee H Badman
Skickat: den 24 november 2014 17:01
Till: 
WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDUmailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
Ämne: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] Attendance

I can think of a few concerns.

I give you my tablet to take to class, and I'm there without being there.

I give you my credentials to put on your device- you get seen as you, then 
me. We're both there without me being there.

Client devices may not connect to the AP in the room. There may be no AP in the 
room... how close to the room is close enough if I connect to the floor 
above/below or adjacent room/hallway? And who sorts it all out?

To me as an instructor, nothing is easier than good old paper sign-in. And if 
you didn't sign in, you weren't there. Period.

Not everything needs to have a tech edge on it, and I'm as tech geeky as it 
gets...


-Lee

Lee Badman
Wireless/Network Architect
ITS, Syracuse University
315.443.3003
(Blog: http://wirednot.wordpress.com)

From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv 
[mailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU] On Behalf Of Patrick Mauretti
Sent: Monday, November 24, 2014 10:11 AM
To: 
WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDUmailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] Attendance

Funny you should ask, as we are looking into doing the same thing here.  I'd 
love to see someone have it in place to know what the pitfalls might be.


Patrick Mauretti
Sr. Network Admin
Massasoit Community College
1 Massasoit Blvd
Brockton, MA 02302
508-588-9100 x1660
On the internet, nobody knows you're a dog.

From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv 
[mailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU] On Behalf Of Joe Rogers
Sent: Monday, November 24, 2014 6:16 AM
To: 
WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDUmailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
Subject: [WIRELESS-LAN] Attendance


Are any folks currently using their wireless networks to verify class 
attendance?  For example, are you checking that a wireless device authenticated 
by a student was in the classroom?
--

Joe Rogers
Associate Director, Network Engineering
University of South Florida - Information Technology
** Participation and subscription information for this EDUCAUSE 
Constituent Group discussion list can be found at 
http://www.educause.edu/groups/.
** Participation and subscription information for this EDUCAUSE 
Constituent Group discussion list can be found at 
http://www.educause.edu/groups/.
** Participation and subscription information for this EDUCAUSE 
Constituent Group discussion list can be found at 
http://www.educause.edu/groups/.
** Participation and subscription information for this EDUCAUSE 
Constituent Group discussion list can be found at 
http://www.educause.edu/groups/.

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

RE: [WIRELESS-LAN] It would seem FCC just declared WLAN quarantine features illegal

[Robert Owens]

This is probably way too much to ask for but I think we will be having problems 
until the FCC carves out an entirely new band allocation that has the space and 
width and technology to handle dense high user count, high bandwidth, 
environments. Would have to be low enough frequency so we would not have an AP 
every 10 feet but high enough that individual throughput would be high enough. 
Kind of like when we went from hubs to switches. I know I know I am dreaming. 
And then the equipment upgrades begin again. (Job Security)

Bob Owens
Kansas State University

From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv 
[mailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU] On Behalf Of Tindall, Dave
Sent: Tuesday, October 28, 2014 10:43 AM
To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] It would seem FCC just declared WLAN quarantine 
features illegal

I’ll vote for you Lee!!!  ☺What’s that you say… “being right has never got 
anyone elected…”?   “the FCC is above politics…”?  I thought it would be so 
simple…

Hahahaha….

Dave Tindall
Asst VP for Technology Services (CIO)
Seattle Pacific University
Computer  Information Systems
Phone: (206) 281-2239
Mobile:  (206) 940-1736
Fax: (206) 281-2850
Email: dtind...@spu.edumailto:dtind...@spu.edu
Web: www.spu.eduhttp://www.spu.edu/

From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv 
[mailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU] On Behalf Of Lee H Badman
Sent: Tuesday, October 28, 2014 6:48 AM
To: 
WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDUmailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] It would seem FCC just declared WLAN quarantine 
features illegal


​To me (and I am an Extra Class licensed ham, radio hobbyist, WLAN type, and 
government official who understands Part 15 and others) it seems like one thing 
that is overdue by the FCC is the recognition of the sheer importance of WLAN 
to modern business environments, and the need for businesses to be able to have 
local policy-based control over competing signals. Basically something that 
boils down to if you don't agree to our rules on Wi-Fi, 
stay/shop/visit/whatever somewhere else.



If we don't get something like this established, we're at the mercy of any 
number of factors laying waste to high-dollar wireless environments and 
services. To waive that off and say well, then don't use Wi-Fi is pretty 
dated in thought and contributes little to the discussion. Society has elevated 
WLAN to another place, the FCC needs to catch up and show creative leadership.



I'm Lee Badman, and I endorse this message.


Lee H. Badman
Network Architect/Wireless TME
ITS, Syracuse University
315.443.3003

From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv 
WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDUmailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU 
on behalf of David J Molta djmo...@syr.edumailto:djmo...@syr.edu
Sent: Tuesday, October 28, 2014 9:23 AM
To: 
WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDUmailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] It would seem FCC just declared WLAN quarantine 
features illegal

While I understand the concerns of enterprise Wi-Fi managers, I think it would 
be difficult for the FCC to modify these rules in a way that protects 
everyone’s interests. One option might be for the FCC to redefine rules for 2.4 
GHz such that only non-overlapping 20 MHz channels are permitted for non 
frequency hopping devices. That wouldn’t solve co-channel interference 
problems, but it would address the adjacent channel interference issues that 
cause the biggest problems. A few years ago, I had a couple students do some 
testing of the relative impact of co-channel and adjacent channel interference 
in the 2.4 GHz band. While the results weren’t conclusive (there are a lot of 
variables that are difficult to control for, especially the physical proximity 
of AP’s and client devices), they do show that you are better off with devices 
operating on the same channels than on adjacent channels:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1sbPPM93nbA

The real question in my mind is why manufacturers of MyFi devices choose to 
configure the default to a channel other than 1, 6 or 11. We’ve seen a lot of 
devices defaulting to channel 2, which really messes up performance on channel 
1.

This obviously isn’t as much of an issue in the 5 GHz bands since we don’t have 
adjacent channel interference to contend with. In these situations, a MyFi 
device operating in your air-space doesn’t introduce significant interference 
issues. Assuming it complies with FCC rules (if it is certified by the FCC, it 
should), it just looks like another 802.11 device contending for air time. You 
could make the argument that a MyFi device configured for maximum output power 
may cause co-channel interference with other cells in a micro-cellular 
deployment but the same thing can be said for client devices that default to 
maximum radio output power.

--
Dave Molta

RE: [WIRELESS-LAN] WLAN design presentation tips?

[Robert Owens]

One gotcha in hall designs is what your walls are made out of. Simple sheetrock 
fine. Concrete blocks not as fine. Lathe and plaster with metal mesh, Faraday 
cage. We have a music department with  some sort of sound deading material that 
completely kills RF.

-Original Message-
From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv 
[mailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU] On Behalf Of Kevin McCormick
Sent: Tuesday, October 21, 2014 1:47 PM
To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] WLAN design presentation tips?

We installed in the hallways due to cost, access for maintenance, and 
concern of vandalism in room. Coverage from hallway using our design was 
excellent. We designed the layout in Cisco Prime. Testing after install 
showed the wireless working very well in the rooms, even on 5 Ghz. 
Wireless just needs planning and design considerations for the location 
and environment.

-- 
Kevin McCormick
uTech Network Services
Western Illinois University


On 10/21/2014 12:47 PM, Williams, Matthew wrote:
 I've just started here at Kent State and I'm facing an uphill battle 
 regarding updating our WLAN design.  All APs are deployed in the hallways and 
 we're rolling out 802.11ac.  We'd like to move the APs into the rooms, but 
 the mere suggestion has been met with resistance.  I was just wondering if 
 any of you had any tips or suggestions for trying presenting the new model to 
 upper management.  Thanks for any suggestions that you might share!

 Respectfully,

 Matthew Williams
 Kent State University
 Network  Telecommunications Services
 Office: (330) 672-7246
 Mobile: (330) 469-0445


 **
 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] It would seem FCC just declared WLAN quarantine features illegal

[Robert Owens]

How would you like to have a house next to the Marriot? This type of RF 
quarantine on a large scale could lead to worse problems than the devices 
present themselves. I think  I am with the FCC on this one. We try to educate 
our users that they are causing problems for their fellow students and 
discourage it that way. Worst case I think we can still block a wired port on 
our network that they are connected to. Not going to affect cellular hotspots 
though.
Bob Owens

From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv 
[mailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU] On Behalf Of Daniel Eklund
Sent: Friday, October 03, 2014 1:30 PM
To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] It would seem FCC just declared WLAN quarantine 
features illegal

They're trying to enforce their rule making, which means this will likely end 
up in court.  But yeah, I agree that they're firing a warning shot that using 
quarantine features goes against their rules.  Can't go to jail for doing it, 
but they do have the authority to levy fines.

On Fri, Oct 3, 2014 at 2:22 PM, Lee H Badman 
lhbad...@syr.edumailto:lhbad...@syr.edu wrote:

What do you all think of this?
http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2014/10/after-blocking-personal-hotspot-at-hotel-marriott-to-pay-fcc-60/

- Lee Badman



--
[https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3843/14994996218_22694c5bbc_o.png]
** Participation and subscription information for this EDUCAUSE 
Constituent Group discussion list can be found at 
http://www.educause.edu/groups/.

RE: [WIRELESS-LAN] Xpressconnect and Windows 8

[Robert Owens]

If You are in the Cisco Controller based world. There is an update that
needs to be applied to your controllers. We did that this last weekend and
now are able to authenticate with the few Windows 8 test machines we have
with latest drivers.  Has to do with an incompatibility with 802.11w that
is required in Win 8. 

Robert Owens

Kansas State University.

 

From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv
[mailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU] On Behalf Of Lee H Badman
Sent: Wednesday, October 24, 2012 11:01 AM
To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] Xpressconnect and Windows 8

 

Seeing lots of upgraded Win 8 machines that fail on 802.1x with stock Win
8 driver, need to roll back to Win 7 driver or go to Intel, Broadcom, etc
for a driver that works.

 

 

  _  

From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv
[WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU] on behalf of Bryan Cassell
[bcass...@salemstate.edu]
Sent: Wednesday, October 24, 2012 11:30 AM
To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] Xpressconnect and Windows 8

We started using XpressConnect this year and haven't had any issues with
Windows 8 Costumer Preview. It was actually the test bed I used to
configure XpressConnect.  I also  just tested a PC on our domain with
Xpressconnect and it seemed to work just fine.  As for the drivers I am
unaware of any issues.  I used a generic usb wireless adapter (on a
Windows 8 VM and Desktop on the domain )and didn't install any drivers as
Windows found something acceptable I wouldn't call this a complete test as
it's not the final edition but would be interested to know what issues are
you seeing?

 

-Bryan Cassell


Bryan Cassell  | Network Technician, ITS/Networking Services | (:
978.542.2127

 

Salem State University, 70 Loring Ave., Salem Massachusetts 01970

 

 

 

From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv
[mailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU] On Behalf Of Gogan, James P
Sent: Wednesday, October 24, 2012 8:51 AM
To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] Xpressconnect and Windows 8

 

We've not gotten XpressConnect to work happily with Windows 8 yet, so I'm
interested in this as well.Have sent an email to Cloudpath Support on
this, but I'm guessing all Windows 8 questions are awaiting the official
Friday release.

 

-- Jim Gogan / UNC-Chapel Hill

 

From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv
[mailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU] On Behalf Of Peter P Morrissey
Sent: Wednesday, October 24, 2012 8:47 AM
To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
Subject: [WIRELESS-LAN] Xpressconnect and Windows 8

 

I'm curious if anyone has gotten Windows 8 devices configured for 1x,
using Xpressconnect. I realize there are lots of issues with 
Windows 8 drivers that make this complicated, so I'm just wondering how it
is working when the drivers are capable.

Thanks,

Pete Morrissey

 

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

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

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

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


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

RE: [WIRELESS-LAN] Xpressconnect and Windows 8

[Robert Owens]

We were in the same predicament with WISM 1s.  There is a new code release
7.0.235 that has the fix available from Cisco. Also has an updated Boot
Loader. No such luck with earlier releases.

Robert Owens

Kansas State University

 

From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv
[mailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU] On Behalf Of Danny Eaton
Sent: Wednesday, October 24, 2012 2:31 PM
To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] Xpressconnect and Windows 8

 

Any idea how this would be negated with controllers running 7.0.230.0, as
we do not have WiSM-2's, and therefore cannot go to the 7.2.x code.  

 

From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv
[mailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU] On Behalf Of Lee H Badman
Sent: Wednesday, October 24, 2012 2:09 PM
To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] Xpressconnect and Windows 8

 

I have just verified this- controller update to recommended version does
indeed bring compatibility with Win 8 standard native driver and
eliminates the need to go driver shopping for each machine.

 

Thanks, Robert. 

 

 

 

 

From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv
[mailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU] On Behalf Of Robert Owens
Sent: Wednesday, October 24, 2012 12:30 PM
To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] Xpressconnect and Windows 8

 

If You are in the Cisco Controller based world. There is an update that
needs to be applied to your controllers. We did that this last weekend and
now are able to authenticate with the few Windows 8 test machines we have
with latest drivers.  Has to do with an incompatibility with 802.11w that
is required in Win 8. 

Robert Owens

Kansas State University.

 

From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv
[mailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU] On Behalf Of Lee H Badman
Sent: Wednesday, October 24, 2012 11:01 AM
To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] Xpressconnect and Windows 8

 

Seeing lots of upgraded Win 8 machines that fail on 802.1x with stock Win
8 driver, need to roll back to Win 7 driver or go to Intel, Broadcom, etc
for a driver that works.

 

 

  _  

From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv
[WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU] on behalf of Bryan Cassell
[bcass...@salemstate.edu]
Sent: Wednesday, October 24, 2012 11:30 AM
To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] Xpressconnect and Windows 8

We started using XpressConnect this year and haven't had any issues with
Windows 8 Costumer Preview. It was actually the test bed I used to
configure XpressConnect.  I also  just tested a PC on our domain with
Xpressconnect and it seemed to work just fine.  As for the drivers I am
unaware of any issues.  I used a generic usb wireless adapter (on a
Windows 8 VM and Desktop on the domain )and didn't install any drivers as
Windows found something acceptable I wouldn't call this a complete test as
it's not the final edition but would be interested to know what issues are
you seeing?

 

-Bryan Cassell


Bryan Cassell  | Network Technician, ITS/Networking Services | (:
978.542.2127

 

Salem State University, 70 Loring Ave., Salem Massachusetts 01970

 

 

 

From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv
[mailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU] On Behalf Of Gogan, James P
Sent: Wednesday, October 24, 2012 8:51 AM
To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] Xpressconnect and Windows 8

 

We've not gotten XpressConnect to work happily with Windows 8 yet, so I'm
interested in this as well.Have sent an email to Cloudpath Support on
this, but I'm guessing all Windows 8 questions are awaiting the official
Friday release.

 

-- Jim Gogan / UNC-Chapel Hill

 

From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv
[mailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU] On Behalf Of Peter P Morrissey
Sent: Wednesday, October 24, 2012 8:47 AM
To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
Subject: [WIRELESS-LAN] Xpressconnect and Windows 8

 

I'm curious if anyone has gotten Windows 8 devices configured for 1x,
using Xpressconnect. I realize there are lots of issues with 
Windows 8 drivers that make this complicated, so I'm just wondering how it
is working when the drivers are capable.

Thanks,

Pete Morrissey

 

** 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

RE: [WIRELESS-LAN] Alternative POE injector for Ubiquiti wireless gear

[Robert Owens]

When I first investigated Ubiquiti they did not have POE readily available.
I have been using Laird POE18I injector successfully they also have a POE24i
model. I mostly have used with the Ubiquiti bullets. Be aware that some of
the Ubiquity products do not tolerate voltages above 24V even slightly. That
is why I used the 18V.

 

Bob Owens

Network Group

Kansas State University

 

From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv
[mailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU] On Behalf Of Coehoorn, Joel
Sent: Wednesday, July 20, 2011 9:02 AM
To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] Alternative POE injector for Ubiquiti wireless
gear

 

A quick check on Amazon shows they list for a mere $17 each:

http://www.amazon.com/Ubiquiti-POE-24-Power-Over-Ethernet/dp/B004EFHN66/ref=
sr_1_8?ie=UTF8
http://www.amazon.com/Ubiquiti-POE-24-Power-Over-Ethernet/dp/B004EFHN66/ref
=sr_1_8?ie=UTF8qid=1311170318sr=8-8 qid=1311170318sr=8-8

 

At that price, your solution might just be to get a stock of them so you can
switch them out quickly, and keep RMAing them.  Do that enough and the
company will get tired of fixing them and find a way to get you good stuff.

 




Joel Coehoorn

IT Director

402.363.5603





On Wed, Jul 20, 2011 at 8:35 AM, James F Eyrich eyr...@illinois.edu wrote:

Laird



On 7/20/2011 8:16 AM, Nathan Hay wrote:

We have several point-to-point wireless links on our campus using Ubiquiti
Bullet wireless access points.  These use a non-standard 24 V POE injector
to power them.

Less than a year after the install, almost all our POE injectors died.
We've been RMAing them, but it takes a long time and now the RMA units are
dying on me after just a few weeks.

Has anyone found a replacement injector from another company to use with the
Ubiquiti Bullets?

Thanks,

Nathan

Nathan P. Hay
Network Engineer | Information Technology
Cedarville University | www.cedarville.edu
937-766-7905
twitter:  @nathanphay

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

 

-- 
James Eyrich
Team Lead Network Design
Wireless Service Manager
CITES - Networking - Network Design and Support - Network Design Group
University of Illinois

eyr...@illinois.edu
217-265-6867



**
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] Self-assigned IP on Macs...

[Robert Owens]

We also have DHCP required set to off as well as IP Theft and reuse off and 
still have the problem show up. It seems after 1 to 5 tries the Mac will 
finally get a lease and work. Not a very popular workaround.

Robert Owens 
Kansas State University

- Original Message - 
  From: Hector J Rios 
  To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU 
  Sent: Friday, August 28, 2009 12:51 PM
  Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] Self-assigned IP on Macs...


   

  IP Theft and DHCP required are all turned off. We've never had them enabled. 
Still no luck. I've even tried it with the internal DHCP server in the WiSMs 
and it doesn't make a difference. We have Cisco and Apple involved. We'll give 
you guys an update if we find something.

   

  Hector

   

  ** 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] Self-assigned IP on Macs...

[Robert Owens]

We have seen a number of Mac's getting put into exclusion because they are 
trying to use an IP address that has already been assigned to another device. 
at least that is the implication from looking at the WISM logs. Does anyone 
know how apple handles DHCP leasing? Especially when they are just being 
powered up? We speculate that they are trying to attach to their previous IP 
when in the world of large networks that IP could be handed out to another 
client but don't know for sure.

Bob Owens
Kansas State University
  - Original Message - 
  From: Hector J Rios 
  To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU 
  Sent: Thursday, August 27, 2009 3:58 PM
  Subject: [WIRELESS-LAN] Self-assigned IP on Macs...


  Have you guys run into this issue? We run Cisco's lightweight APs on WiSMs 
running code 5.2.193. Mac will associate to our APs but just won't obtain an IP 
address. In the end it assigns itself a self-assigned IP. We are seeing this on 
a lot of new MacBooks and MacBookPros running 10.5.8. If we associate the 
computer to an autonomous AP it works fine. If we boot it in safe mode it works 
fine too. Everything else it just fails. 

   

  Thanks, 

   

  Hector Rios

  Louisiana State University

  ** 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] Cisco LWAPP- The change from WLAN Override to AP Groups- Pain?

[Robert Owens]

Question
  IF you create  AP groups VLAN ahead of time in the 4.x code and slowly 
migrate AP's into those groups on the controller (even though wlan override is 
still set and in use) will the upgrade retain those group settings even though 
wlan override goes away after the upgrade? If this would work it may be a way 
to do allot of the migration ahead of time so the actual upgrade is more 
seamless.

Robert Owens
Computing and Telecommunication Services
Network Group
Kansas State University
  - Original Message - 
  From: Dennis Xu 
  To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU 
  Sent: Friday, May 29, 2009 12:12 PM
  Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] Cisco LWAPP- The change from WLAN Override to AP 
Groups- Pain?


  Yes after the code upgrade, all the old WLAN override settings are gone and 
all the APs are put into default-group and broadcasting all SSIDs. Then you 
need to create AP groups and move APs to appropriate  groups.

  Dennis


  Lee H Badman wrote: 
Thanks, Hector (and Jeff and others).



That restart the AP thing is a prime beef of mine. means a routine change 
can only be done during an outage window, and is one more example of the 
disparity between the WCS UI and the Controller function.



We do have several WLANs that go to different APs in different 
combinations. After the code upgrade, all of the old WLAN Override settings are 
simply gone from the controllers and all APs, correct? And at that point, are 
all APs broadcasting all SSIDs, or none?



-Lee



Lee H. Badman

Wireless/Network Engineer

Information Technology and Services

Syracuse University

315 443-3003




From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv 
[mailto:wireless-...@listserv.educause.edu] On Behalf Of Hector J Rios
Sent: Friday, May 29, 2009 12:14 PM
To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] Cisco LWAPP- The change from WLAN Override to 
AP Groups- Pain?



Lee, 



We are using it and we like it. We are running 5.2.130 in WCS and 5.2.178 
in our controllers. 



If you are going to have several WLANs going to different APs, you have to 
create multiple groups and move all your APs into their appropriate groups. AP 
groups come with a default group that contains all the WLANs and all APs belong 
to that group unless you change it. So I highly recommend that you move all 
your APs off of the default group. You can create and push all your groups 
through WCS. On gotcha that we have found is that when you move an AP into a AP 
group, if you use WCS, it will restart the AP, if you use a controller, it 
doesn't. Don't know why.



Thanks, 



Hector Rios

Louisiana State University







From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv 
[mailto:wireless-...@listserv.educause.edu] On Behalf Of Lee H Badman
Sent: Friday, May 29, 2009 9:49 AM
To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
Subject: [WIRELESS-LAN] Cisco LWAPP- The change from WLAN Override to AP 
Groups- Pain?



Knowing that some have already gone down this road.



We are still on stable 4.2.code, have not jumped to 5 yet. It is our 
understanding that stable 5 code will be coming out soon, and we have several 
reasons to go to the 5 train (I realize 6 is also coming out, but may be too 
bleeding edge for us out of the gate). All of that aside, when we move out of 
4.2 into 5, we will thankfully put WLAN Override behind us. But is a feature we 
use extensively out of necessity, and so we'll most certainly need to use AP 
Groups in the more current code.



I'm wondering what the pain was in transitioning from WLAN Override to AP 
Groups on a large scale during the code upgrade, and if there were any 
particular issues of note during the process.



Thanks-



Lee



Lee H. Badman

Wireless/Network Engineer

Information Technology and Services

Syracuse University

315 443-3003



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

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


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

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

Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] Seeking recommendation for wireless bridge product

[Robert Owens]

I have been testing some of the new Ubiquiti Products for a point to point 
application. Specifically the new Bullet5 product. So far I have been impressed 
with their abilities but have just used them in a test setup so far. They have 
a very good price point. They are new enough that they are somewhat hard to 
find and have no long term history although the company has been in the 
Wireless ISP provider area for some time. Are current bridges are using Cisco.

Bob Owens
Kansas State University
  - Original Message - 
  From: Philippe Hanset 
  To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU 
  Sent: Wednesday, March 11, 2009 9:15 AM
  Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] Seeking recommendation for wireless bridge product


  Lih-Er,


  Considering your budget, you could:
  Acquire two linksys WRT54GL and load open-wrt, then use the WDS protocol,
  (2.4 GHz only!!!)


  or get two Proxim AP-4000 (Ebay has good deals on those), use WDS and enable 
the turbo mode.
  The Proxim has two radios. So we usually use one radio (the 5 Ghz) for 
bridging
  to the small structure and the other radio (2.4 GHz) for  Wi-Fi coverage.
  The bridge will pass multiple VLANs!


  Philippe Hanset
  Univ of TN






  On Mar 11, 2009, at 9:58 AM, Daniel Eklund wrote:


Lih-Er,

We have used the Proxim Tsunami Quickbridge product for some time now and 
are very happy with it.  However, it's going to cost you at least twice what 
you have budgeted.

- Original Message -
From: Lih-Er Wey we...@msu.edu
To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
Sent: Tuesday, March 10, 2009 5:54:41 PM GMT -05:00 US/Canada Eastern
Subject: [WIRELESS-LAN] Seeking recommendation for wireless bridge product


I need to bring network to a structure (2-story) in a field from a building 
(about 1000 feet away, 7-story).
It does not need high bandwidth. I would like to hear any product 
recommendation from you.
The budget range is under a $1000 for a pair of wireless bridge. I am more 
concern about the reliability and security sides
of the product.
By the way, does anyone have experience with NanoStation5 from Ubiquiti 
network?  It is quite inexpensive ($160 a pair).
Thanks!
Lih-Er Wey
Wireless Project, Network Management
Academic Technology Services
Michigan State University



__ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus 
signature database 3924 (20090310) __
The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.
http://www.eset.com


** 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 
athttp://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] Seeking recommendation for wireless bridge product

[Robert Owens]

As a follow up. I did do a test run with the Ubiquiti Bullets and set up a WDS 
link in their software and successfully carried 802.11q Trunk VLANs across the 
link between two Cisco switches.
Bob Owens
  - Original Message - 
  From: Robert Owens 
  To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU 
  Sent: Wednesday, March 11, 2009 10:09 AM
  Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] Seeking recommendation for wireless bridge product


  I have been testing some of the new Ubiquiti Products for a point to point 
application. Specifically the new Bullet5 product. So far I have been impressed 
with their abilities but have just used them in a test setup so far. They have 
a very good price point. They are new enough that they are somewhat hard to 
find and have no long term history although the company has been in the 
Wireless ISP provider area for some time. Are current bridges are using Cisco.

  Bob Owens
  Kansas State University
- Original Message - 
From: Philippe Hanset 
To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU 
Sent: Wednesday, March 11, 2009 9:15 AM
Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] Seeking recommendation for wireless bridge 
product


Lih-Er, 


Considering your budget, you could:
Acquire two linksys WRT54GL and load open-wrt, then use the WDS protocol,
(2.4 GHz only!!!)


or get two Proxim AP-4000 (Ebay has good deals on those), use WDS and 
enable the turbo mode.
The Proxim has two radios. So we usually use one radio (the 5 Ghz) for 
bridging
to the small structure and the other radio (2.4 GHz) for  Wi-Fi coverage.
The bridge will pass multiple VLANs!


Philippe Hanset
Univ of TN






On Mar 11, 2009, at 9:58 AM, Daniel Eklund wrote:


  Lih-Er,

  We have used the Proxim Tsunami Quickbridge product for some time now and 
are very happy with it.  However, it's going to cost you at least twice what 
you have budgeted.

  - Original Message -
  From: Lih-Er Wey we...@msu.edu
  To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
  Sent: Tuesday, March 10, 2009 5:54:41 PM GMT -05:00 US/Canada Eastern
  Subject: [WIRELESS-LAN] Seeking recommendation for wireless bridge product


  I need to bring network to a structure (2-story) in a field from a 
building (about 1000 feet away, 7-story).
  It does not need high bandwidth. I would like to hear any product 
recommendation from you.
  The budget range is under a $1000 for a pair of wireless bridge. I am 
more concern about the reliability and security sides
  of the product.
  By the way, does anyone have experience with NanoStation5 from Ubiquiti 
network?  It is quite inexpensive ($160 a pair).
  Thanks!
  Lih-Er Wey
  Wireless Project, Network Management
  Academic Technology Services
  Michigan State University



  __ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus 
signature database 3924 (20090310) __
  The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.
  http://www.eset.com


  ** 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 
athttp://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/.