Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] Mixing ac AP types
I take the stand that mixing AP models in a building/location a terrible idea. It can make it troublesome to diagnose clients with intermittent connectivity issues because the problem may in fact be an incompatibility with a given AP model. As the client roams in the area, they bounce between AP models, and experience inconsistent behavior. This sort of intermittent issue may go undiagnosed, the user is unhappy, and a first-level user support may spin in circles trying to figure it out. If the AP's are all the same, the issues related to AP model and client compatibility will be consistent - either consistently good or consistently bad. So, if you can, standardize on one model. You could switch between models on a building-by-building basis, but again, you do have the chance for inconsistent client behavior, especially if there is coverage overlap between the two - say in green spaces. The cost of using a single AP model is, in my option, only a tiny portion of the overall cost of supplying the service. By mixing AP models, you simply transfer any potential savings to increased costs for the wireless/network management staff. I'd prefer to do everything up front (even if it costs more) to ensure the service's success and the consistency of the user experience. Jeff >>> On Friday, February 06, 2015 at 12:50 AM, in message , Oliver Elliott wrote: Hi John We're doing something similar and haven't seen any issues, and don't expect to. We have a lecture theatre with 3702e APs, then 2702i APs in the foyer. We plan to then use 1702i APs for the sparesely populated areas. The only difference tends to be the number of radios, with the exception of the 1702i which uses software based cleanair with a limited feature-set. Oli On 6 February 2015 at 01:44, James Andrewartha wrote: On 05/02/15 22:50, Cosgrove, John wrote: > I am designing a new wireless placement for a 5 story building and I > have been considering mixing 802.11ac AP types. Is the switching existing? If so, 802.3af vs at would also inform the decision. > Meaning. Some Cisco 1702’s,2702’s and 3702’s. Placement depending on > estimated client densities. > > Example. Conference rooms may have 3702’s yet open areas with less > people population may have a 1702 or 2702. I'm not particularly familiar with the Cisco range, but http://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/td/docs/wireless/technology/apdeploy/8-0/Cisco_Aironet_3700AP.html (which covers [123][67]00[ei]) seems to have a pretty good feature comparison. Lee, note it says "A single GbE cable is fine for Wave-1. While it is true 802.11ac (Wave-2) will exceed GbE speeds, there is no need or requirement for cabling greater then GbE for 802.11ac Wave-1. Installers wishing to future proof new installations should consider pulling CAT-6a cables and either another CAT6a or a CAT5e cable (this allows you to fall back to 2 GbE ports) for some iterations of Wave-2 and/or support 10GbE should this emerge as the method. 10GbE has some challenges such as PoE standardization. Again, for the foreseeable future, a single GbE is all that is needed." Plus Cisco appear to have announced multi-gigabit switches for Q2: http://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/solutions/enterprise-networks/catalyst-multigigabit-switching/index.html > I usually hear from people to “Keep it all consistent and the same” and > I remember in the old days if you mixed “G” in with “b-only” ap’s often > clients would grab the “G” and never let go no matter how bad the signal > got. I am thinking if I at least keep things in the same “family” of > technology it should work out. I don't think there would be a problem mixing AP types within the same technology, from the client point of view it'd just be another roaming decision. There is more information about how clients decide to roam now, eg http://support.apple.com/en-au/HT203068 and it seems to be mostly RSSI based. So if you account for the smaller coverage provided by the lower-end models (per the diagrams in the above Cisco document) then there shouldn't be any problems. See also http://community.arubanetworks.com/aruba/attachments/aruba/WLAN-Pro-Conf-EU-2014/1/1/WLANPro_EU_MobileDevices%20v1.0-airheads.pdf for more info on what handover is like now (thanks to powersaving) and how it should be in an ideal world with 802.11k. > AP’s are a huge multiplier in a project cost and I was wondering if > anyone else looked at approaching it this way. I have a similar challenge in that I'm going to be upgrading some of our n APs to ac this year. In terms of reducing cost, we have a fairly dense deployment and so I'm still wishing for APs with a single 802.11ac 5GHz radio since I turn off a fair few of my 2.4Ghz radios already, and my client base is 80% 5GHz. Since we're a K-12 1:1 iPad school, I can at least predict where the ac clients are going to be as we go through our 3 year refresh cycle. -- James Andrewartha Network & Projects Engineer Christ Church Grammar School Claremont, Western Austral
Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] Mixing ac AP types
Hi John We're doing something similar and haven't seen any issues, and don't expect to. We have a lecture theatre with 3702e APs, then 2702i APs in the foyer. We plan to then use 1702i APs for the sparesely populated areas. The only difference tends to be the number of radios, with the exception of the 1702i which uses software based cleanair with a limited feature-set. Oli On 6 February 2015 at 01:44, James Andrewartha wrote: > On 05/02/15 22:50, Cosgrove, John wrote: > > I am designing a new wireless placement for a 5 story building and I > > have been considering mixing 802.11ac AP types. > > Is the switching existing? If so, 802.3af vs at would also inform the > decision. > > > Meaning. Some Cisco 1702’s,2702’s and 3702’s. Placement depending on > > estimated client densities. > > > > Example. Conference rooms may have 3702’s yet open areas with less > > people population may have a 1702 or 2702. > > I'm not particularly familiar with the Cisco range, but > > http://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/td/docs/wireless/technology/apdeploy/8-0/Cisco_Aironet_3700AP.html > (which covers [123][67]00[ei]) seems to have a pretty good feature > comparison. > > Lee, note it says "A single GbE cable is fine for Wave-1. While it is > true 802.11ac (Wave-2) will exceed GbE speeds, there is no need or > requirement for cabling greater then GbE for 802.11ac Wave-1. Installers > wishing to future proof new installations should consider pulling CAT-6a > cables and either another CAT6a or a CAT5e cable (this > allows you to fall back to 2 GbE ports) for some iterations of Wave-2 > and/or support 10GbE should this emerge as the method. 10GbE has some > challenges such as PoE standardization. Again, for the foreseeable > future, a single GbE is all that is needed." > > Plus Cisco appear to have announced multi-gigabit switches for Q2: > > http://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/solutions/enterprise-networks/catalyst-multigigabit-switching/index.html > > > I usually hear from people to “Keep it all consistent and the same” and > > I remember in the old days if you mixed “G” in with “b-only” ap’s often > > clients would grab the “G” and never let go no matter how bad the signal > > got. I am thinking if I at least keep things in the same “family” of > > technology it should work out. > > I don't think there would be a problem mixing AP types within the same > technology, from the client point of view it'd just be another roaming > decision. There is more information about how clients decide to roam > now, eg http://support.apple.com/en-au/HT203068 and it seems to be > mostly RSSI based. So if you account for the smaller coverage provided > by the lower-end models (per the diagrams in the above Cisco document) > then there shouldn't be any problems. > > See also > > http://community.arubanetworks.com/aruba/attachments/aruba/WLAN-Pro-Conf-EU-2014/1/1/WLANPro_EU_MobileDevices%20v1.0-airheads.pdf > for more info on what handover is like now (thanks to powersaving) and > how it should be in an ideal world with 802.11k. > > > AP’s are a huge multiplier in a project cost and I was wondering if > > anyone else looked at approaching it this way. > > I have a similar challenge in that I'm going to be upgrading some of our > n APs to ac this year. In terms of reducing cost, we have a fairly dense > deployment and so I'm still wishing for APs with a single 802.11ac 5GHz > radio since I turn off a fair few of my 2.4Ghz radios already, and my > client base is 80% 5GHz. Since we're a K-12 1:1 iPad school, I can at > least predict where the ac clients are going to be as we go through our > 3 year refresh cycle. > > -- > James Andrewartha > Network & Projects Engineer > Christ Church Grammar School > Claremont, Western Australia > Ph. (08) 9442 1757 > Mob. 0424 160 877 > > ** > Participation and subscription information for this EDUCAUSE Constituent > Group discussion list can be found at http://www.educause.edu/groups/. > -- Oliver Elliott Senior Network Specialist IT Services University of Bristol e: oliver.elli...@bristol.ac.uk t: 0117 39 (41131) ** Participation and subscription information for this EDUCAUSE Constituent Group discussion list can be found at http://www.educause.edu/groups/.
Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] Mixing ac AP types
On 05/02/15 22:50, Cosgrove, John wrote: > I am designing a new wireless placement for a 5 story building and I > have been considering mixing 802.11ac AP types. Is the switching existing? If so, 802.3af vs at would also inform the decision. > Meaning. Some Cisco 1702’s,2702’s and 3702’s. Placement depending on > estimated client densities. > > Example. Conference rooms may have 3702’s yet open areas with less > people population may have a 1702 or 2702. I'm not particularly familiar with the Cisco range, but http://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/td/docs/wireless/technology/apdeploy/8-0/Cisco_Aironet_3700AP.html (which covers [123][67]00[ei]) seems to have a pretty good feature comparison. Lee, note it says "A single GbE cable is fine for Wave-1. While it is true 802.11ac (Wave-2) will exceed GbE speeds, there is no need or requirement for cabling greater then GbE for 802.11ac Wave-1. Installers wishing to future proof new installations should consider pulling CAT-6a cables and either another CAT6a or a CAT5e cable (this allows you to fall back to 2 GbE ports) for some iterations of Wave-2 and/or support 10GbE should this emerge as the method. 10GbE has some challenges such as PoE standardization. Again, for the foreseeable future, a single GbE is all that is needed." Plus Cisco appear to have announced multi-gigabit switches for Q2: http://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/solutions/enterprise-networks/catalyst-multigigabit-switching/index.html > I usually hear from people to “Keep it all consistent and the same” and > I remember in the old days if you mixed “G” in with “b-only” ap’s often > clients would grab the “G” and never let go no matter how bad the signal > got. I am thinking if I at least keep things in the same “family” of > technology it should work out. I don't think there would be a problem mixing AP types within the same technology, from the client point of view it'd just be another roaming decision. There is more information about how clients decide to roam now, eg http://support.apple.com/en-au/HT203068 and it seems to be mostly RSSI based. So if you account for the smaller coverage provided by the lower-end models (per the diagrams in the above Cisco document) then there shouldn't be any problems. See also http://community.arubanetworks.com/aruba/attachments/aruba/WLAN-Pro-Conf-EU-2014/1/1/WLANPro_EU_MobileDevices%20v1.0-airheads.pdf for more info on what handover is like now (thanks to powersaving) and how it should be in an ideal world with 802.11k. > AP’s are a huge multiplier in a project cost and I was wondering if > anyone else looked at approaching it this way. I have a similar challenge in that I'm going to be upgrading some of our n APs to ac this year. In terms of reducing cost, we have a fairly dense deployment and so I'm still wishing for APs with a single 802.11ac 5GHz radio since I turn off a fair few of my 2.4Ghz radios already, and my client base is 80% 5GHz. Since we're a K-12 1:1 iPad school, I can at least predict where the ac clients are going to be as we go through our 3 year refresh cycle. -- James Andrewartha Network & Projects Engineer Christ Church Grammar School Claremont, Western Australia Ph. (08) 9442 1757 Mob. 0424 160 877 ** Participation and subscription information for this EDUCAUSE Constituent Group discussion list can be found at http://www.educause.edu/groups/.
