RE: [WIRELESS-LAN] upgrade from 802.11n to 802.11ac

[Ian Lyons]

Quick thoughts

Rip and replace will get you partially there (N to AC).

However, if you never planned for 5.0ghz “circles” for your AP’s (signal) a rip 
and replace will leave holes.

I suggest *not* using a physical survey..atleast in the traditional sense. 
(Donning my Nomex Flight suit for the flame war to follow  ☺ )
Use Ekahau or Airwave by Aruba and create 55db “circles” for your Aps with only 
the 5.0 antennae on and map it out digitally. I will not disagree that a 
physical survey is the gold standard…but to do it right you are paying a 
company to walk around and do a very extensive intrusive (aka expensive) 
mapping.  A virtual mapping of your space will get you about 90% there at a 
fraction of the cost.  And I do not know anyone in Education that is swimming 
in money…

This gives you the amount of Ap’s needed and their locations, which you can 
hand off these sheets to your wiring team/vendor for installation.

Having said that in the 2 colleges I have worked at, ~+45-50% growth is a 
ballpark number I have seen for going from N to AC.

Ian
From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv 
[mailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU] On Behalf Of Trinklein, Jason R
Sent: Wednesday, December 6, 2017 2:27 PM
To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] upgrade from 802.11n to 802.11ac

We are upgrading from 802.11n to 802.11ac and have increased our AP count by 
25%-33% to move from coverage to density. We are moving to Aruba, ripping out 
our old gear and we have seen big improvements in bandwidth in our expanded and 
upgraded buildings. 1:1 replacements are sufficient for spaces where density is 
either not an issue or the AP layout was already done for density.

--
Jason Trinklein
Wireless Engineering Manager
College of Charleston
81 St. Philip Street | Office 311D | Charleston, SC 29403
trinkle...@cofc.edu<mailto:trinkle...@cofc.edu> | (843) 300–8009

From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv 
<WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU<mailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU>> 
on behalf of Ying Zhang <yin...@unb.ca<mailto:yin...@unb.ca>>
Reply-To: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv 
<WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU<mailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU>>
Date: Wednesday, December 6, 2017 at 12:34 PM
To: 
"WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU<mailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU>" 
<WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU<mailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU>>
Subject: [WIRELESS-LAN] upgrade from 802.11n to 802.11ac

Hi,

We are looking at a campus wide wireless upgrade from 802.11n to 802.11ac. Just 
wondering for anyone out there who has done this before, do you have an 
approximate number (in percentage) with regards to # of additional APs in a 
mainly coverage-based design.

Thanks in advance.

Ying

University of New Brunswick
** Participation and subscription information for this EDUCAUSE 
Constituent Group discussion list can be found at 
http://www.educause.edu/discuss<https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.educause.edu%2Fdiscuss=02%7C01%7C%7Cf50b679eec5e439ed69208d53ccf9b9b%7Ce285d438dbba4a4c941c593ba422deac%7C0%7C0%7C636481784721988409=HwNVfZc8F7gRhyJ6Rf9EvKSbLIHqVAp9SDCBq1haar4%3D=0>.
** 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] upgrade from 802.11n to 802.11ac

[Ying Zhang]

Thanks for everyone who replied. A lot of great input and things to think 
about. I think we now have a rough idea on the increases for different 
scenarios and type of areas.

From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv 
[mailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU] On Behalf Of Trinklein, Jason R
Sent: Wednesday, December 06, 2017 3:27 PM
To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] upgrade from 802.11n to 802.11ac

We are upgrading from 802.11n to 802.11ac and have increased our AP count by 
25%-33% to move from coverage to density. We are moving to Aruba, ripping out 
our old gear and we have seen big improvements in bandwidth in our expanded and 
upgraded buildings. 1:1 replacements are sufficient for spaces where density is 
either not an issue or the AP layout was already done for density.

--
Jason Trinklein
Wireless Engineering Manager
College of Charleston
81 St. Philip Street | Office 311D | Charleston, SC 29403
trinkle...@cofc.edu<mailto:trinkle...@cofc.edu> | (843) 300–8009

From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv 
<WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU<mailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU>> 
on behalf of Ying Zhang <yin...@unb.ca<mailto:yin...@unb.ca>>
Reply-To: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv 
<WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU<mailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU>>
Date: Wednesday, December 6, 2017 at 12:34 PM
To: 
"WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU<mailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU>" 
<WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU<mailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU>>
Subject: [WIRELESS-LAN] upgrade from 802.11n to 802.11ac

Hi,

We are looking at a campus wide wireless upgrade from 802.11n to 802.11ac. Just 
wondering for anyone out there who has done this before, do you have an 
approximate number (in percentage) with regards to # of additional APs in a 
mainly coverage-based design.

Thanks in advance.

Ying

University of New Brunswick
** Participation and subscription information for this EDUCAUSE 
Constituent Group discussion list can be found at 
http://www.educause.edu/discuss<https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.educause.edu%2Fdiscuss=02%7C01%7C%7Cf50b679eec5e439ed69208d53ccf9b9b%7Ce285d438dbba4a4c941c593ba422deac%7C0%7C0%7C636481784721988409=HwNVfZc8F7gRhyJ6Rf9EvKSbLIHqVAp9SDCBq1haar4%3D=0>.
** 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] upgrade from 802.11n to 802.11ac

[Trinklein, Jason R]

We are upgrading from 802.11n to 802.11ac and have increased our AP count by 
25%-33% to move from coverage to density. We are moving to Aruba, ripping out 
our old gear and we have seen big improvements in bandwidth in our expanded and 
upgraded buildings. 1:1 replacements are sufficient for spaces where density is 
either not an issue or the AP layout was already done for density.

--
Jason Trinklein
Wireless Engineering Manager
College of Charleston
81 St. Philip Street | Office 311D | Charleston, SC 29403
trinkle...@cofc.edu<mailto:trinkle...@cofc.edu> | (843) 300–8009

From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv 
<WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU> on behalf of Ying Zhang <yin...@unb.ca>
Reply-To: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv 
<WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU>
Date: Wednesday, December 6, 2017 at 12:34 PM
To: "WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU" <WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU>
Subject: [WIRELESS-LAN] upgrade from 802.11n to 802.11ac

Hi,

We are looking at a campus wide wireless upgrade from 802.11n to 802.11ac. Just 
wondering for anyone out there who has done this before, do you have an 
approximate number (in percentage) with regards to # of additional APs in a 
mainly coverage-based design.

Thanks in advance.

Ying

University of New Brunswick
** Participation and subscription information for this EDUCAUSE 
Constituent Group discussion list can be found at 
http://www.educause.edu/discuss<https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.educause.edu%2Fdiscuss=02%7C01%7C%7Cf50b679eec5e439ed69208d53ccf9b9b%7Ce285d438dbba4a4c941c593ba422deac%7C0%7C0%7C636481784721988409=HwNVfZc8F7gRhyJ6Rf9EvKSbLIHqVAp9SDCBq1haar4%3D=0>.

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

Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] upgrade from 802.11n to 802.11ac

[Jeffrey D. Sessler]

If it’s a coverage-based design, all of your gains in 11ac are in 5GHz, so your 
performance gains have a lot to do with density i.e. if the WAPs are still 
installed in hallways you may not see the gains you are expecting. If you’re 
making the jump to 11ac it’s best to redesign around performance and density 
rather than coverage.

Jeff

From: "wireless-lan@listserv.educause.edu" <WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU> 
on behalf of Ying Zhang <yin...@unb.ca>
Reply-To: "wireless-lan@listserv.educause.edu" 
<WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU>
Date: Wednesday, December 6, 2017 at 9:34 AM
To: "wireless-lan@listserv.educause.edu" <WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU>
Subject: [WIRELESS-LAN] upgrade from 802.11n to 802.11ac

Hi,

We are looking at a campus wide wireless upgrade from 802.11n to 802.11ac. Just 
wondering for anyone out there who has done this before, do you have an 
approximate number (in percentage) with regards to # of additional APs in a 
mainly coverage-based design.

Thanks in advance.

Ying

University of New Brunswick
** 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: upgrade from 802.11n to 802.11ac

[Rob Harris]

Sorry,

As we upgraded, we did a 1 for 1 swap as we went, making sure to do whole areas 
at a time wherever we could.

After an upgrade, we did surveys to verify coverage and tuning.

Since we're an Aruba shop, we do have arm enabled which helps with channel 
assignment.

Good luck!

[The Culinary Institute of America]
Robert Harris
Manager - Telecom, Networks, & AV Services
Culinary Institute of America
1946 Campus Drive
Hyde Park, NY
845-451-1681
www.ciachef.edu<http://www.ciachef.edu/>
Food is Life
Create and Savor Yours.(tm)

Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail.

From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv 
[mailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU] On Behalf Of Ying Zhang
Sent: Wednesday, December 6, 2017 12:44 PM
To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] upgrade from 802.11n to 802.11ac

Thanks Robert. We are going to do a proper site survey and RF design for sure. 
Right now just looking for an approximate number for budgeting purpose.

From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv 
[mailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU] On Behalf Of Rob Harris
Sent: Wednesday, December 06, 2017 1:38 PM
To: 
WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU<mailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU>
Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] upgrade from 802.11n to 802.11ac

You're really going to want to have a survey done and a proper design built.

I recommend Aruba networks, their products have worked very well for us and 
their support is top shelf.

[The Culinary Institute of America]
Robert Harris
Manager - Telecom, Networks, & AV Services
Culinary Institute of America
1946 Campus Drive
Hyde Park, NY
845-451-1681
www.ciachef.edu<http://www.ciachef.edu/>
Food is Life
Create and Savor Yours.(tm)

Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail.

From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv 
[mailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU] On Behalf Of Ying Zhang
Sent: Wednesday, December 6, 2017 12:34 PM
To: 
WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU<mailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU>
Subject: [WIRELESS-LAN] upgrade from 802.11n to 802.11ac

Hi,

We are looking at a campus wide wireless upgrade from 802.11n to 802.11ac. Just 
wondering for anyone out there who has done this before, do you have an 
approximate number (in percentage) with regards to # of additional APs in a 
mainly coverage-based design.

Thanks in advance.

Ying

University of New Brunswick
** 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.

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

Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] upgrade from 802.11n to 802.11ac

[Dan Lauing]

For our campus, the difference between .11n and .11ac lags behind the speed
at which density has increased.

That is to say, it's pointless to say we had 30 clients working fine on
.11n in this much space and now we're going to 30 clients on .11ac in the
same area, because that's almost never the case. Every year, we just get
more and more wireless clients.

For us, it's almost 300% in some dorms, and 200% in classrooms over our
previous installment.

On Wed, Dec 6, 2017 at 11:48 AM, Bucklaew, Jerry <j...@buffalo.edu> wrote:

> We just completed this.   As a rough estimate we doubled our density.  We
> were roughly 4,000 SF per access point and we went to around 2,00 SF.
> Those are of course just rough estimates and the old “you should survey”
> applies to at least some buildings.
>
>
>
> *From:* The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv [mailto:
> WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU] *On Behalf Of *Ying Zhang
> *Sent:* Wednesday, December 6, 2017 12:34 PM
> *To:* WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
> *Subject:* [WIRELESS-LAN] upgrade from 802.11n to 802.11ac
>
>
>
> Hi,
>
>
>
> We are looking at a campus wide wireless upgrade from 802.11n to 802.11ac.
> Just wondering for anyone out there who has done this before, do you have
> an approximate number (in percentage) with regards to # of additional APs
> in a mainly coverage-based design.
>
>
>
> Thanks in advance.
>
>
>
> Ying
>
>
>
> University of New Brunswick
>
> ** 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.
>
>


-- 

dan b. lauing ii | CWNA, CWAP
Wireless Network Administrator
Mississippi College

-- 



*CONFIDENTIALITY STATEMENT:*  

This communication may contain confidential information.  If you are not the 
intended recipient or if you are not authorized to receive this communication, 
please notify and return the message to the sender, *then delete this 
communication including any attachments*.  Unauthorized reviewing, forwarding, 
copying, distributing or using this information is strictly prohibited.




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

RE: upgrade from 802.11n to 802.11ac

[Bucklaew, Jerry]

We just completed this.   As a rough estimate we doubled our density.  We were 
roughly 4,000 SF per access point and we went to around 2,00 SF.   Those are of 
course just rough estimates and the old "you should survey" applies to at least 
some buildings.

From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv 
[mailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU] On Behalf Of Ying Zhang
Sent: Wednesday, December 6, 2017 12:34 PM
To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
Subject: [WIRELESS-LAN] upgrade from 802.11n to 802.11ac

Hi,

We are looking at a campus wide wireless upgrade from 802.11n to 802.11ac. Just 
wondering for anyone out there who has done this before, do you have an 
approximate number (in percentage) with regards to # of additional APs in a 
mainly coverage-based design.

Thanks in advance.

Ying

University of New Brunswick
** 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: upgrade from 802.11n to 802.11ac

[Ying Zhang]

Thanks Robert. We are going to do a proper site survey and RF design for sure. 
Right now just looking for an approximate number for budgeting purpose.

From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv 
[mailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU] On Behalf Of Rob Harris
Sent: Wednesday, December 06, 2017 1:38 PM
To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] upgrade from 802.11n to 802.11ac

You're really going to want to have a survey done and a proper design built.

I recommend Aruba networks, their products have worked very well for us and 
their support is top shelf.

[The Culinary Institute of America]
Robert Harris
Manager - Telecom, Networks, & AV Services
Culinary Institute of America
1946 Campus Drive
Hyde Park, NY
845-451-1681
www.ciachef.edu<http://www.ciachef.edu/>
Food is Life
Create and Savor Yours.(tm)

Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail.

From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv 
[mailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU] On Behalf Of Ying Zhang
Sent: Wednesday, December 6, 2017 12:34 PM
To: 
WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU<mailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU>
Subject: [WIRELESS-LAN] upgrade from 802.11n to 802.11ac

Hi,

We are looking at a campus wide wireless upgrade from 802.11n to 802.11ac. Just 
wondering for anyone out there who has done this before, do you have an 
approximate number (in percentage) with regards to # of additional APs in a 
mainly coverage-based design.

Thanks in advance.

Ying

University of New Brunswick
** 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: upgrade from 802.11n to 802.11ac

[Rob Harris]

You're really going to want to have a survey done and a proper design built.

I recommend Aruba networks, their products have worked very well for us and 
their support is top shelf.

[The Culinary Institute of America]
Robert Harris
Manager - Telecom, Networks, & AV Services
Culinary Institute of America
1946 Campus Drive
Hyde Park, NY
845-451-1681
www.ciachef.edu<http://www.ciachef.edu/>
Food is Life
Create and Savor Yours.(tm)

Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail.

From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv 
[mailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU] On Behalf Of Ying Zhang
Sent: Wednesday, December 6, 2017 12:34 PM
To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
Subject: [WIRELESS-LAN] upgrade from 802.11n to 802.11ac

Hi,

We are looking at a campus wide wireless upgrade from 802.11n to 802.11ac. Just 
wondering for anyone out there who has done this before, do you have an 
approximate number (in percentage) with regards to # of additional APs in a 
mainly coverage-based design.

Thanks in advance.

Ying

University of New Brunswick
** 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.

upgrade from 802.11n to 802.11ac

[Ying Zhang]

Hi,

We are looking at a campus wide wireless upgrade from 802.11n to 802.11ac. Just 
wondering for anyone out there who has done this before, do you have an 
approximate number (in percentage) with regards to # of additional APs in a 
mainly coverage-based design.

Thanks in advance.

Ying

University of New Brunswick

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

Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] Older Apple devices and issues with 802.11N(2.4Ghz)

[Dustin Howard]

After updating Cisco, they said that we were hitting two documented bugs 
- CSCug27515 and CSCug65693.  Cisco indicated that this was a bug on 
Apples side and that these Apples device could experience problems on 
any network supporting A-MPDU...


Thanks,
Dustin Howard
Network Support Specialist
Information Technology Services
Truman State University
100 E. Normal Ave.
Kirksville, MO 63501
Office - (660) 785-4165
Cell - (660) 341-7869

On 07/20/2017 10:03 PM, Dustin Howard wrote:

I think the following would be interesting to share...

To recap - I found when I disable all 802.11N data rates on the Cisco 
1602i, 1602e, or 1702i radios and force these client to use B/G, they 
work as expected.  Once I enable any MCS data rates the problem 
presents itself. I think that proves the problem is related to 802.11N.


Knowing that I decided to do a packet capture on the crippled iPad 4th 
generation.  I noticed a trend of packets being retransmitted. In 
every instance, the packets that were retransmitted are 11 bytes 
larger than the packets that are not retransmitted.  After close 
comparison I noticed that all retransmitted packets include A-MPDU 
status in the radiotap header.  I just got done doing some testing 
tonight and found that if I disable A-MPDU support on the controller, 
everything works fine!  I went ahead and disabled both A-MPDU and 
A-MSDU frame aggregation for the 802.11b network until we have a 
resolution.


We experienced issues with Apple devices including iPad 3rd and 4th 
gen, iphone 5c and 5s, and some Macbook Pros.


Thanks,
Dustin Howard
Network Support Specialist
Information Technology Services
Truman State University
100 E. Normal Ave.
Kirksville, MO 63501
Office - (660) 785-4165
Cell - (660) 341-7869

On 07/17/2017 04:44 PM, Dustin Howard wrote:
Thank you for you reply.  I have tried a few different data rate 
combinations including 12 mandatory and lower ones disabled.  It 
didn't seem to help.


Thanks,
Dustin Howard
Network Support Specialist
Information Technology Services
Truman State University
100 E. Normal Ave.
Kirksville, MO 63501
Office - (660) 785-4165
Cell - (660) 341-7869

On 07/17/2017 04:10 PM, Thomas Carter wrote:
How are your data rates configured? I seem to recall something about 
Apple devices that used to be picky about it. We don't have Cisco, 
but we have 12 as Mandatory and everything lower disabled for NG.


Thomas Carter
Network & Operations Manager / IT
Austin College
900 North Grand Avenue
Sherman, TX 75090
Phone: 903-813-2564
www.austincollege.edu


-Original Message-
From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv 
[mailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU] On Behalf Of Dustin Howard

Sent: Monday, July 17, 2017 3:28 PM
To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
Subject: [WIRELESS-LAN] Older Apple devices and issues with 
802.11N(2.4Ghz)


I'm having an issue with some Apple devices and was wondering if 
anybody has experienced similar or if you have a similar environment 
and all is working well...


My environment is 5508 controllers (8.0.140.17) with 1600 series and 
1702i APs.  We have 1242 AP so cannot upgrade past 8.0..


I am having an issue with what seems to be only older Apple devices 
on N(2.4Ghz).  The devices authenticate/DHCP just fine but are very 
slow and only seem to work for a few minutes until you have to 
restart the wireless card.  Loading a video is impossible...pings 
timeout and have very high latency. Most the time the client cannot 
even ping the gateway.  I have been able to recreate this with iPad, 
3rd and 4th Generations, an older Macbook Pro and an iPhone 5c while 
using 1602i, 1602e, and 1702i APs.  I haven't confirmed any other 
brands having this problem.


The devices mentioned above work great if I disable the N data rates 
on the AP radio.  I had two users that were crippled with this 
issue, so I disabled the N data rates for one building over the 
weekend.  The users said their devices worked great over the 
weekend.  They also work well on the 5Ghz band but we have areas 
that rely on the 2.4Ghz coverage. If this issue is not resolved 
before school starts, then I'm afraid will have to disable N data 
rates globally for the 2.4Ghz band.


Appreciate any feedback!

--
Thanks,
Dustin Howard
Network Support Specialist
Information Technology Services
Truman State University
100 E. Normal Ave.
Kirksville, MO 63501
Office - (660) 785-4165
Cell - (660) 341-7869

**
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.


**
Participation and subscription informa

Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] Older Apple devices and issues with 802.11N(2.4Ghz)

[Dustin Howard]

I think the following would be interesting to share...

To recap - I found when I disable all 802.11N data rates on the Cisco 
1602i, 1602e, or 1702i radios and force these client to use B/G, they 
work as expected.  Once I enable any MCS data rates the problem presents 
itself. I think that proves the problem is related to 802.11N.


Knowing that I decided to do a packet capture on the crippled iPad 4th 
generation.  I noticed a trend of packets being retransmitted. In every 
instance, the packets that were retransmitted are 11 bytes larger than 
the packets that are not retransmitted.  After close comparison I 
noticed that all retransmitted packets include A-MPDU status in the 
radiotap header.  I just got done doing some testing tonight and found 
that if I disable A-MPDU support on the controller, everything works 
fine!  I went ahead and disabled both A-MPDU and A-MSDU frame 
aggregation for the 802.11b network until we have a resolution.


We experienced issues with Apple devices including iPad 3rd and 4th gen, 
iphone 5c and 5s, and some Macbook Pros.


Thanks,
Dustin Howard
Network Support Specialist
Information Technology Services
Truman State University
100 E. Normal Ave.
Kirksville, MO 63501
Office - (660) 785-4165
Cell - (660) 341-7869

On 07/17/2017 04:44 PM, Dustin Howard wrote:
Thank you for you reply.  I have tried a few different data rate 
combinations including 12 mandatory and lower ones disabled.  It 
didn't seem to help.


Thanks,
Dustin Howard
Network Support Specialist
Information Technology Services
Truman State University
100 E. Normal Ave.
Kirksville, MO 63501
Office - (660) 785-4165
Cell - (660) 341-7869

On 07/17/2017 04:10 PM, Thomas Carter wrote:
How are your data rates configured? I seem to recall something about 
Apple devices that used to be picky about it. We don't have Cisco, 
but we have 12 as Mandatory and everything lower disabled for NG.


Thomas Carter
Network & Operations Manager / IT
Austin College
900 North Grand Avenue
Sherman, TX 75090
Phone: 903-813-2564
www.austincollege.edu


-Original Message-
From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv 
[mailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU] On Behalf Of Dustin Howard

Sent: Monday, July 17, 2017 3:28 PM
To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
Subject: [WIRELESS-LAN] Older Apple devices and issues with 
802.11N(2.4Ghz)


I'm having an issue with some Apple devices and was wondering if 
anybody has experienced similar or if you have a similar environment 
and all is working well...


My environment is 5508 controllers (8.0.140.17) with 1600 series and 
1702i APs.  We have 1242 AP so cannot upgrade past 8.0..


I am having an issue with what seems to be only older Apple devices 
on N(2.4Ghz).  The devices authenticate/DHCP just fine but are very 
slow and only seem to work for a few minutes until you have to 
restart the wireless card.  Loading a video is impossible...pings 
timeout and have very high latency.  Most the time the client cannot 
even ping the gateway.  I have been able to recreate this with iPad, 
3rd and 4th Generations, an older Macbook Pro and an iPhone 5c while 
using 1602i, 1602e, and 1702i APs.  I haven't confirmed any other 
brands having this problem.


The devices mentioned above work great if I disable the N data rates 
on the AP radio.  I had two users that were crippled with this issue, 
so I disabled the N data rates for one building over the weekend.  
The users said their devices worked great over the weekend.  They 
also work well on the 5Ghz band but we have areas that rely on the 
2.4Ghz coverage. If this issue is not resolved before school starts, 
then I'm afraid will have to disable N data rates globally for the 
2.4Ghz band.


Appreciate any feedback!

--
Thanks,
Dustin Howard
Network Support Specialist
Information Technology Services
Truman State University
100 E. Normal Ave.
Kirksville, MO 63501
Office - (660) 785-4165
Cell - (660) 341-7869

**
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.


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

Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] Older Apple devices and issues with 802.11N(2.4Ghz)

[Dustin Howard]

Thank you for you reply.  I have tried a few different data rate 
combinations including 12 mandatory and lower ones disabled.  It didn't 
seem to help.


Thanks,
Dustin Howard
Network Support Specialist
Information Technology Services
Truman State University
100 E. Normal Ave.
Kirksville, MO 63501
Office - (660) 785-4165
Cell - (660) 341-7869

On 07/17/2017 04:10 PM, Thomas Carter wrote:

How are your data rates configured? I seem to recall something about Apple 
devices that used to be picky about it. We don't have Cisco, but we have 12 as 
Mandatory and everything lower disabled for NG.

Thomas Carter
Network & Operations Manager / IT
Austin College
900 North Grand Avenue
Sherman, TX 75090
Phone: 903-813-2564
www.austincollege.edu


-Original Message-
From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv 
[mailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU] On Behalf Of Dustin Howard
Sent: Monday, July 17, 2017 3:28 PM
To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
Subject: [WIRELESS-LAN] Older Apple devices and issues with 802.11N(2.4Ghz)

I'm having an issue with some Apple devices and was wondering if anybody has 
experienced similar or if you have a similar environment and all is working 
well...

My environment is 5508 controllers (8.0.140.17) with 1600 series and 1702i APs. 
 We have 1242 AP so cannot upgrade past 8.0..

I am having an issue with what seems to be only older Apple devices on 
N(2.4Ghz).  The devices authenticate/DHCP just fine but are very slow and only 
seem to work for a few minutes until you have to restart the wireless card.  
Loading a video is impossible...pings timeout and have very high latency.  Most 
the time the client cannot even ping the gateway.  I have been able to recreate 
this with iPad, 3rd and 4th Generations, an older Macbook Pro and an iPhone 5c 
while using 1602i, 1602e, and 1702i APs.  I haven't confirmed any other brands 
having this problem.

The devices mentioned above work great if I disable the N data rates on the AP 
radio.  I had two users that were crippled with this issue, so I disabled the N 
data rates for one building over the weekend.  The users said their devices 
worked great over the weekend.  They also work well on the 5Ghz band but we 
have areas that rely on the 2.4Ghz coverage. If this issue is not resolved 
before school starts, then I'm afraid will have to disable N data rates 
globally for the 2.4Ghz band.

Appreciate any feedback!

--
Thanks,
Dustin Howard
Network Support Specialist
Information Technology Services
Truman State University
100 E. Normal Ave.
Kirksville, MO 63501
Office - (660) 785-4165
Cell - (660) 341-7869

**
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] Older Apple devices and issues with 802.11N(2.4Ghz)

[Thomas Carter]

How are your data rates configured? I seem to recall something about Apple 
devices that used to be picky about it. We don't have Cisco, but we have 12 as 
Mandatory and everything lower disabled for NG.

Thomas Carter
Network & Operations Manager / IT
Austin College
900 North Grand Avenue 
Sherman, TX 75090
Phone: 903-813-2564
www.austincollege.edu


-Original Message-
From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv 
[mailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU] On Behalf Of Dustin Howard
Sent: Monday, July 17, 2017 3:28 PM
To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
Subject: [WIRELESS-LAN] Older Apple devices and issues with 802.11N(2.4Ghz)

I'm having an issue with some Apple devices and was wondering if anybody has 
experienced similar or if you have a similar environment and all is working 
well...

My environment is 5508 controllers (8.0.140.17) with 1600 series and 1702i APs. 
 We have 1242 AP so cannot upgrade past 8.0..

I am having an issue with what seems to be only older Apple devices on 
N(2.4Ghz).  The devices authenticate/DHCP just fine but are very slow and only 
seem to work for a few minutes until you have to restart the wireless card.  
Loading a video is impossible...pings timeout and have very high latency.  Most 
the time the client cannot even ping the gateway.  I have been able to recreate 
this with iPad, 3rd and 4th Generations, an older Macbook Pro and an iPhone 5c 
while using 1602i, 1602e, and 1702i APs.  I haven't confirmed any other brands 
having this problem.

The devices mentioned above work great if I disable the N data rates on the AP 
radio.  I had two users that were crippled with this issue, so I disabled the N 
data rates for one building over the weekend.  The users said their devices 
worked great over the weekend.  They also work well on the 5Ghz band but we 
have areas that rely on the 2.4Ghz coverage. If this issue is not resolved 
before school starts, then I'm afraid will have to disable N data rates 
globally for the 2.4Ghz band.

Appreciate any feedback!

--
Thanks,
Dustin Howard
Network Support Specialist
Information Technology Services
Truman State University
100 E. Normal Ave.
Kirksville, MO 63501
Office - (660) 785-4165
Cell - (660) 341-7869

**
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] Older Apple devices and issues with 802.11N(2.4Ghz)

[Jeremy Gibbs]

What MBR do you have set for the 2.4 Ghz?




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


On Mon, Jul 17, 2017 at 4:27 PM, Dustin Howard  wrote:

> I'm having an issue with some Apple devices and was wondering if anybody
> has experienced similar or if you have a similar environment and all is
> working well...
>
> My environment is 5508 controllers (8.0.140.17) with 1600 series and 1702i
> APs.  We have 1242 AP so cannot upgrade past 8.0..
>
> I am having an issue with what seems to be only older Apple devices on
> N(2.4Ghz).  The devices authenticate/DHCP just fine but are very slow and
> only seem to work for a few minutes until you have to restart the wireless
> card.  Loading a video is impossible...pings timeout and have very high
> latency.  Most the time the client cannot even ping the gateway.  I have
> been able to recreate this with iPad, 3rd and 4th Generations, an older
> Macbook Pro and an iPhone 5c while using 1602i, 1602e, and 1702i APs.  I
> haven't confirmed any other brands having this problem.
>
> The devices mentioned above work great if I disable the N data rates on
> the AP radio.  I had two users that were crippled with this issue, so I
> disabled the N data rates for one building over the weekend.  The users
> said their devices worked great over the weekend.  They also work well on
> the 5Ghz band but we have areas that rely on the 2.4Ghz coverage. If this
> issue is not resolved before school starts, then I'm afraid will have to
> disable N data rates globally for the 2.4Ghz band.
>
> Appreciate any feedback!
>
> --
> Thanks,
> Dustin Howard
> Network Support Specialist
> Information Technology Services
> Truman State University
> 100 E. Normal Ave.
> Kirksville, MO 63501
> Office - (660) 785-4165
> Cell - (660) 341-7869
>
> **
> 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] 802.11n frame aggregation vulnerability

[Joshua Wright]

 http://securityaffairs.co/wordpress/38234/hacking/802-11n-flaw.html
 
 Fortunately, there are several methods to mitigate the attacks, including 
 MAC layer encryption, disabling Aggregated Mac Protocol Data Unit (A-MPDU) 
 frame aggregation, configuring the system to drop corrupted A-MPDUs, the use 
 of Language-theoretic security (LangSec) stacks, modulation switching, and 
 the use of deep packet inspection.”

My understanding of this flaw is not that it exposes secured networks in any 
new way; rather it increases the exposure of open networks.  Using A-MPDU 
injection, an attacker who compromises a remote Windows or OS X system can 
perform low-level packet injection attacks, which would otherwise be limited to 
local attackers.

-Josh

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



signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail

802.11n frame aggregation vulnerability

[Julian Y Koh]

http://securityaffairs.co/wordpress/38234/hacking/802-11n-flaw.html

Fortunately, there are several methods to mitigate the attacks, including MAC 
layer encryption, disabling Aggregated Mac Protocol Data Unit (A-MPDU) frame 
aggregation, configuring the system to drop corrupted A-MPDUs, the use of 
Language-theoretic security (LangSec) stacks, modulation switching, and the use 
of deep packet inspection.”

Comments?

-- 
Julian Y. Koh
Associate Director, Telecommunications and Network Services
Northwestern University Information Technology (NUIT)

2001 Sheridan Road #G-166
Evanston, IL 60208
847-467-5780
NUIT Web Site: http://www.it.northwestern.edu/
PGP Public Key:http://bt.ittns.northwestern.edu/julian/pgppubkey.html

Fwd: Issues with recent Intel chipsets with 5GHz 802.11n Greenfield?

[trent . hurt]

Fyi

Forwarding this from another list in case anyone encounters this

Sent from my iPhone

Begin forwarded message:

From: Robin Breathe rbrea...@brookes.ac.ukmailto:rbrea...@brookes.ac.uk
Date: September 25, 2014 at 8:26:13 AM EDT
To: wireless-ad...@jiscmail.ac.ukmailto:wireless-ad...@jiscmail.ac.uk
Subject: Issues with recent Intel chipsets with 5GHz 802.11n Greenfield?
Reply-To: Wireless Issues in the JANET community 
wireless-ad...@jiscmail.ac.ukmailto:wireless-ad...@jiscmail.ac.uk

Afternoon all,

We've recently identified an problem with the Intel Dual-Band Wireless-AC 7260 
chipset (and likely other recent Intel Centrino chipsets), as found in a range 
of recent laptops, including the Dell Latitude E7740, leading to difficulty 
associating to our eduroam SSID followed by sporadic and recurring 
dropoutshttps://communities.intel.com/community/tech/wireless or all-out 
failure to associate and/or complete authentication. It seems we're not alone 
as Portsmouth also have a support page on the topic 
(http://ithelp.port.ac.uk/questions/385/Known+issues+connecting+to+the+wireless+network+(Eduroam))
 where they appear to haven given up on getting devices with the 7260 to 
connect to eduroam at all, and others on the Intel forums seem to be having 
similar problems extending even to Linux clients. The latest Windows drivers 
(17.1.0) on Windows 7 at least appear to make no difference.

Troubleshooting at our site, where we have a significant deployment of Aerohive 
APs offering eduroam over both 2.4G (802.11g/n clients only) and 5G (802.11n 
clients only) radios (gently band-steering to 5G), we have so far identified 
two workarounds. The first – truly vile – was to disable VHT/HT modes in the 
driver and so force 2.4G/802.11g operation in our environment. The second is 
simply unfortunate and involves configuring the driver to prefer the 2.4G band. 
The nature of both workarounds leads me to hypothesise that the root cause of 
issues with the latest Intel chipsets may be that their current drivers are not 
be coping with 802.11n Greenfield; having the client prefer 2.4G simply 
sidesteps the issue as its not in Greenfield mode.

Has anyone else experienced these or similar problems with the latest batch of 
Intel chipsets (with or without 802.11n Greenfield), or have any alternate 
hypotheses as to the root cause of this behaviour? Has anyone else identified a 
superior workaround (short of disabling Greenfield mode)?

Regards,
Robin
--
Robin Breathe
Chief Technology Officer, OBIS, Oxford Brookes University – 01865 483685

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

Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] 802.11N Design

[Ron Walczak]

Ekahau has a built in selection of client adapters that simulate end user
results - you can select various laptop, IPphones, etc.  Still waiting for
an ipad/droid selection.  You can manually reduce client power to customize.

As user densities increase - shift your process to creation of small cells
at low power to reduce the number of active  (shared) associations per AP.
 I survey at 25 mW for 5.8G and 12.5 mW for 2.4G.  This is the same
strategy used by cellular carriers and DAS systems.

-- 

Ron WalczakPMP, RCDD, CWNA/CWSP
Walczak Technology Consultants, Inc
(724) 865-2740

Worry looks around; sorry looks back; faith looks up; virtue looks forward -
Unknown

Not to speak is to speak.  Not to act is to act. -  Dietrich Bonhoeffer *
**
*
The great aim of education is not knowledge but action. *- Herbert Spencer
*
*
**Anyone can count the seeds in an apple;
but only God can count the apples in a seed*.

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

RTL8191SE and 802.11n

[Andrew Clark]

Hello,

we've had trouble reports from laptops with the Realtek RTL8191SE
chipset (2.4ghz only) when using 802.11n.  The card appears to be able
to connect to an SSID, get an IP address, but not pass traffic in a
stable fashion for a meaningful length of time.  After disabling
802.11n support in the driver, the card works just fine with 802.11g.

Anyone else out there with an 802.11n network seeing this problem?

-- 
Andrew D. Clark
Network Operations Engineer
University of Minnesota, Networking/Telecom Services
2218 University Ave SE
Minneapolis, MN 55414-3029
Phone: 612-626-4880

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

RE: [WIRELESS-LAN] RTL8191SE and 802.11n

[Fishel Erps]

Andrew,

I've seen this behavior from a Panasonic Toughbook in a wireless
environment comprised of Apple Base Stations.  Disabling the N support in
the driver fixed the problem as well - although in my case, it was an Intel
WLAN card.  In the end, a newer driver solved the problem.
 




___
___

Fishel Erps
Sr. Network  Infrastructure Engineer
School of Visual Arts
LL:   212-592-2416
Cell: 646-201-2766
Fax:  732-626-6532
E-Mail: fe...@sva.edu
___
___


-Original Message-
From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv
[mailto:wireless-...@listserv.educause.edu] On Behalf Of Andrew Clark
Sent: Tuesday, October 05, 2010 5:56 PM
To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
Subject: [WIRELESS-LAN] RTL8191SE and 802.11n

Hello,

we've had trouble reports from laptops with the Realtek RTL8191SE
chipset (2.4ghz only) when using 802.11n.  The card appears to be able
to connect to an SSID, get an IP address, but not pass traffic in a
stable fashion for a meaningful length of time.  After disabling
802.11n support in the driver, the card works just fine with 802.11g.

Anyone else out there with an 802.11n network seeing this problem?

-- 
Andrew D. Clark
Network Operations Engineer
University of Minnesota, Networking/Telecom Services
2218 University Ave SE
Minneapolis, MN 55414-3029
Phone: 612-626-4880

**
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/.

Network World story on 802.11n one-year later....

[JCox]

Dear Stan,

My editor has me researching a story for Monday's print issue on 802.11n trends 
in the market and the enterprise especially. A key part of the story is getting 
some feedback from large-scale 11n sites.

I have a few details on Emory's recent 11n upgrade, based on our previous 
emails. At the risk of repetition, I was hoping to find out a bit more...

- which vendor are you using for 11n? how many 11n APs you have installed, and 
how they're configured (1 or 2 radios, which bands, 20 or 40 MHz channels etc), 
and approximate number of 11n clients currently?

- Do you see any notable changes between 11abg and 11n, apart from the 
bandwidth/throughput?

- what kind of data rates and throughput are you getting typically from your 
11n APs? Do you have a target or minimal throughput for users?

- any changes you've made since the initial deployment -- tweaks, configuration 
changes, etc to optimize throughput or other changes?

- were there any accompanying infrastructure changes -- such as 1-Gig Ethernet 
to the APs, changes in wiring-closet or other switches, new management or 
security approaches or changes?

- how and with what products are you managing the WLAN?

- any 11n best practices that your team has developed, which you'd be willing 
to share?

Thanks for considering this request. If you prefer, we could talk briefly by 
phone on Thursday

Regards,
John Cox
Senior Editor
Network World


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

RE: [WIRELESS-LAN] Any issues with iPhone 4 and 2.4GHz 802.11n?

[JCox]

David,

Thank you.

Soso far: upgrading the AP infrastructure to 11n; the WLAN is open to 
anyone to connect; but no problems to date with 11n in the 2.4 GHz band for 
these clients (channel assignments/access; or IP address allocation).

No authentication at all? I'm guessing the WLAN is firewalled from the 
admin/backend systems, and that students/whomevers would be accessing Web-based 
resources?

Any analysis or impressions of the kind of traffic these 17K iOS devices are 
generating -- how much is video, data, etc?

Regards,
John Cox
Senior Editor
Network World

From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv 
[mailto:wireless-...@listserv.educause.edu] On Behalf Of David R. Morton
Sent: Wednesday, August 25, 2010 11:43 AM
To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] Any issues with iPhone 4 and 2.4GHz 802.11n?

John,

We are just beginning our 802.11n migration, but to date we haven't seen 
anything that is causing concern. On the IP address side, our wifi network is 
open to any device to connect and access on-campus resources; so we do need to 
make sure that there are enough addresses available for them to connect. Based 
on our logs, we see approximately 71k unique devices (MAC addresses that have 
registered with our system) in a given 60 day period. Of those around 17k were 
identified as running iOS (based on the browser user agent string).

Please let me know if you have any further questions

David





David Morton
Director, Mobile Communication Strategies
University of Washington
dmor...@u.washington.edumailto:dmor...@u.washington.edu
tel 206.221.7814


--
www.freshlymobile.com
  a fresh look at mobility
--

On Aug 24, 2010, at 2:29 PM, j...@nww.commailto:j...@nww.com wrote:


Thanks, David.

I assume your WLAN is 11n? Do you mind telling me your vendor?

18,000 iOS devices?! Do you see any *potential* issues with, say, fairly high 
numbers of iPhone 4's concentrated in a given area of the WLAN?

Also, someone raised the issue of IP address exhaustion (due in part, I think, 
to higher roaming/connecting/reconnecting) with smartphones and tablets. Are 
you seeing any issues around this?


Regards,
John Cox
Senior Editor
Network World

From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv 
[mailto:wireless-...@listserv.educause.edu] On Behalf Of David R. Morton
Sent: Tuesday, August 24, 2010 11:37 AM
To: 
WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDUmailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] Any issues with iPhone 4 and 2.4GHz 802.11n?

John, Yea Apple isn't always the best at providing detailed stats. The iPhone 4 
does do .11n in the 2.4GHz space with a 1x1 antenna (at least as far as I've 
seen). There should be a bit of performance increase over the older models due 
to a few efficiencies with 11n. We haven't run any detailed tests ourselves, 
but so far haven't seen any real issues. Also I've published some of our wifi 
usage stats (including iPhone) to my blog at 
www.freshlymobile.comhttp://www.freshlymobile.com (click on UW Mobile stats 
at the top for the most recent look).

Take care

David



David Morton
Director, Mobile Communication Strategies
University of Washington
dmor...@u.washington.edumailto:dmor...@u.washington.edu
tel 206.221.7814


--
www.freshlymobile.comhttp://www.freshlymobile.com
  a fresh look at mobility
--

On Aug 24, 2010, at 8:03 AM, j...@nww.commailto:j...@nww.com wrote:



Stan,

What kind of 11n data rates and throughput are you seeing in the 2.4 band?

Also, I think iPhone 4 has only a single Wi-Fi antenna, so it doesn't benefit 
(or benefit as much) as a 2x2 or 3x3 MIMO laptop. Have you done any i4 
performance metrics?

I'm trying to get 11n implementation details from Apple, but so far they've 
only referred me to the Web i4 spec sheet.

Regards,
John Cox
Senior Editor
Network World

From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv 
[mailto:wireless-...@listserv.educause.edu] On Behalf Of Brooks, Stan
Sent: Tuesday, August 24, 2010 11:00 AM
To: 
WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDUmailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] Any issues with iPhone 4 and 2.4GHz 802.11n?

John,

At Emory University, we've just completed upgrading our ResHalls to 802.11n and 
are now working on our academic buildings as part of a system-wide upgrade to 
802.11n.  We've moved from single radio b/g  APs to dual radio a/b/g/n APs.  We 
are running 802.11n (backwards compatible to b/g) on our 2.4GHz radios, but 
without the 40MHz (high-throughput) channel plan.  In fact I (and most wireless 
engineers) would advise against running 40MHz channels at 2.4GHz.  We do run 
the 40MHz channels in the 5GHz band, however.

That said, 802.11n with standard 20MHz channels does give

Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] Any issues with iPhone 4 and 2.4GHz 802.11n?

[Chris Murphy]

John,

I think the only issue is that .11n devices will loose some performance having 
to share the band with .11g/b devices.  Currently we run about a 50-50 split on 
the 2.4 band between .11n and .11g devices with no particular problems.

-Chris


On Aug 24, 2010, at 10:08 AM, j...@nww.commailto:j...@nww.com 
j...@nww.commailto:j...@nww.com wrote:

Chris,

Thanks. Your observation on 40Mhz limiting the channel options in 2.4 band fits 
with what I've learned also.

As I mentioned in my direct reply, your email reminded me -- and I should have 
thought of this -- that of course the same 3-channel limitation exists for 
11b/g iPhones.

But…what I'm wondering is if the iPhone 4's demand or preference for 11n makes 
the situation more problematic, especially in a mixed-client environment -- 
when b/g iPhones are associating to the same 11n access point?

Regards,
John Cox
Senior Editor
Network World

From: Chris Murphy [mailto:ch...@mit.edu]
Sent: Monday, August 23, 2010 7:28 PM
To: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv
Cc: John Cox
Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] Any issues with iPhone 4 and 2.4GHz 802.11n?

John,

I don't think there is much of an issue here, unless there is a requirement 
that the iPhone 4's need the bandwidth possible using 40Mhz channels.  Just 
about every design guideline I've seen, and every conversation I've had with 
engineers at various networking companies, considers using 40Mhz channels at 
2.4Ghz to be a bad idea, due to the loss of what little flexibility one has 
with channel layout as well as with adverse effects on neighboring networks in 
crowded areas (the anti-social effect), so here at least we never considered 
it.

-Chris

On Aug 23, 2010, at 9:12 AM, 
mailto:j...@nww.comj...@nww.commailto:j...@nww.com 
mailto:j...@nww.comj...@nww.commailto:j...@nww.com wrote:


Folks,

I was talking to a higher education IT guy last week; they have a lot of 
iPhones, and are rollling out iPhone 4's to new freshman and to faculty. As 
part of this, they upgraded the campus WLAN to 802.11n.

BUT, after iPhone 4 was announced, they realized its 11n support was ONLY for 
the 2.4 GHz band (with of course only 3 non-overlapping channels, and tradeoffs 
if you merge two of them into one 40MHz channel).

In SOME locations, they're having to do some fancy juggling of access points, 
channel and power settings.

Juggling 3 channels in a crowded location clearly is NOT new. But the fact that 
this is occurring in 11n with a popular client device that often relies on WLAN 
access, seems noteworthy.

I was wondering if anyone else is running into similar issues with iPhone 4 and 
11n?

I'm going to be writing this up as a Network World story today or early 
Tuesday. If you're interested in emailing/talking briefly with me about this, 
please just copy any listserv response to (or email me directly at) my NW 
email: mailto:john_...@nww.com john_...@nww.commailto:john_...@nww.com.

Thanks!

Regards,
John Cox
__

J o h n   C o x
Senior Editor
Main: 508.766.5301 | Direct: 508.766.5422
Office at home: 978-834-0554

NETWORKWORLD
Maximize Your Return on IT
492 Old Connecticut Path | Framingham, MA 01701-9002
__
NetworkWorld.comhttp://www.networkworld.com/ | 2009 Media 
Guidehttp://www.networkworld.com/media/ | Conferences and 
Eventshttp://www.networkworld.com/events/


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


===
Chris Murphy
Network Engineer
MIT Information Services  Technology
Room W92-191
77 Massachusetts Avenue
Cambridge, MA  02139
mailto:ch...@mit.educh...@mit.edumailto:ch...@mit.edu

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

RE: [WIRELESS-LAN] Any issues with iPhone 4 and 2.4GHz 802.11n?

[Brooks, Stan]

John,

At Emory University, we've just completed upgrading our ResHalls to 802.11n and 
are now working on our academic buildings as part of a system-wide upgrade to 
802.11n.  We've moved from single radio b/g  APs to dual radio a/b/g/n APs.  We 
are running 802.11n (backwards compatible to b/g) on our 2.4GHz radios, but 
without the 40MHz (high-throughput) channel plan.  In fact I (and most wireless 
engineers) would advise against running 40MHz channels at 2.4GHz.  We do run 
the 40MHz channels in the 5GHz band, however.

That said, 802.11n with standard 20MHz channels does give marked improvement 
over 802.11b/g because of other dot11n technologies - multiple special streams, 
frame aggregation, etc.

 - Stan Brooks - CWNA/CWSP
  Emory University
  University Technology Services
  404.727.0226
AIM/Y!/Twitter: WLANstan
   MSN: wlans...@hotmail.commailto:wlans...@hotmail.com
GoogleTalk: wlans...@gmail.commailto:wlans...@gmail.com

From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv 
[mailto:wireless-...@listserv.educause.edu] On Behalf Of j...@nww.com
Sent: Tuesday, August 24, 2010 10:08 AM
To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] Any issues with iPhone 4 and 2.4GHz 802.11n?

Chris,

Thanks. Your observation on 40Mhz limiting the channel options in 2.4 band fits 
with what I've learned also.

As I mentioned in my direct reply, your email reminded me -- and I should have 
thought of this -- that of course the same 3-channel limitation exists for 
11b/g iPhones.

But...what I'm wondering is if the iPhone 4's demand or preference for 11n 
makes the situation more problematic, especially in a mixed-client environment 
-- when b/g iPhones are associating to the same 11n access point?

Regards,
John Cox
Senior Editor
Network World

From: Chris Murphy [mailto:ch...@mit.edu]
Sent: Monday, August 23, 2010 7:28 PM
To: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv
Cc: John Cox
Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] Any issues with iPhone 4 and 2.4GHz 802.11n?

John,

I don't think there is much of an issue here, unless there is a requirement 
that the iPhone 4's need the bandwidth possible using 40Mhz channels.  Just 
about every design guideline I've seen, and every conversation I've had with 
engineers at various networking companies, considers using 40Mhz channels at 
2.4Ghz to be a bad idea, due to the loss of what little flexibility one has 
with channel layout as well as with adverse effects on neighboring networks in 
crowded areas (the anti-social effect), so here at least we never considered 
it.

-Chris

On Aug 23, 2010, at 9:12 AM, j...@nww.commailto:j...@nww.com 
j...@nww.commailto:j...@nww.com wrote:

Folks,

I was talking to a higher education IT guy last week; they have a lot of 
iPhones, and are rollling out iPhone 4's to new freshman and to faculty. As 
part of this, they upgraded the campus WLAN to 802.11n.

BUT, after iPhone 4 was announced, they realized its 11n support was ONLY for 
the 2.4 GHz band (with of course only 3 non-overlapping channels, and tradeoffs 
if you merge two of them into one 40MHz channel).

In SOME locations, they're having to do some fancy juggling of access points, 
channel and power settings.

Juggling 3 channels in a crowded location clearly is NOT new. But the fact that 
this is occurring in 11n with a popular client device that often relies on WLAN 
access, seems noteworthy.

I was wondering if anyone else is running into similar issues with iPhone 4 and 
11n?

I'm going to be writing this up as a Network World story today or early 
Tuesday. If you're interested in emailing/talking briefly with me about this, 
please just copy any listserv response to (or email me directly at) my NW 
email: john_...@nww.commailto:john_...@nww.com.

Thanks!

Regards,
John Cox
__

J o h n   C o x
Senior Editor
Main: 508.766.5301 | Direct: 508.766.5422
Office at home: 978-834-0554

NETWORKWORLD
Maximize Your Return on IT
492 Old Connecticut Path | Framingham, MA 01701-9002
__
NetworkWorld.comhttp://www.networkworld.com/ | 2009 Media 
Guidehttp://www.networkworld.com/media/ | Conferences and 
Eventshttp://www.networkworld.com/events/


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


===
Chris Murphy
Network Engineer
MIT Information Services  Technology
Room W92-191
77 Massachusetts Avenue
Cambridge, MA  02139
ch...@mit.edumailto:ch...@mit.edu

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


This e-mail message (including any attachments) is for the sole use of
the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential and privileged

RE: [WIRELESS-LAN] Any issues with iPhone 4 and 2.4GHz 802.11n?

[JCox]

Stan,

What kind of 11n data rates and throughput are you seeing in the 2.4 band?

Also, I think iPhone 4 has only a single Wi-Fi antenna, so it doesn't benefit 
(or benefit as much) as a 2x2 or 3x3 MIMO laptop. Have you done any i4 
performance metrics?

I'm trying to get 11n implementation details from Apple, but so far they've 
only referred me to the Web i4 spec sheet.

Regards,
John Cox
Senior Editor
Network World

From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv 
[mailto:wireless-...@listserv.educause.edu] On Behalf Of Brooks, Stan
Sent: Tuesday, August 24, 2010 11:00 AM
To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] Any issues with iPhone 4 and 2.4GHz 802.11n?

John,

At Emory University, we've just completed upgrading our ResHalls to 802.11n and 
are now working on our academic buildings as part of a system-wide upgrade to 
802.11n.  We've moved from single radio b/g  APs to dual radio a/b/g/n APs.  We 
are running 802.11n (backwards compatible to b/g) on our 2.4GHz radios, but 
without the 40MHz (high-throughput) channel plan.  In fact I (and most wireless 
engineers) would advise against running 40MHz channels at 2.4GHz.  We do run 
the 40MHz channels in the 5GHz band, however.

That said, 802.11n with standard 20MHz channels does give marked improvement 
over 802.11b/g because of other dot11n technologies - multiple special streams, 
frame aggregation, etc.

 - Stan Brooks - CWNA/CWSP
  Emory University
  University Technology Services
  404.727.0226
AIM/Y!/Twitter: WLANstan
   MSN: wlans...@hotmail.commailto:wlans...@hotmail.com
GoogleTalk: wlans...@gmail.commailto:wlans...@gmail.com

From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv 
[mailto:wireless-...@listserv.educause.edu] On Behalf Of j...@nww.com
Sent: Tuesday, August 24, 2010 10:08 AM
To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] Any issues with iPhone 4 and 2.4GHz 802.11n?

Chris,

Thanks. Your observation on 40Mhz limiting the channel options in 2.4 band fits 
with what I've learned also.

As I mentioned in my direct reply, your email reminded me -- and I should have 
thought of this -- that of course the same 3-channel limitation exists for 
11b/g iPhones.

But...what I'm wondering is if the iPhone 4's demand or preference for 11n 
makes the situation more problematic, especially in a mixed-client environment 
-- when b/g iPhones are associating to the same 11n access point?

Regards,
John Cox
Senior Editor
Network World

From: Chris Murphy [mailto:ch...@mit.edu]
Sent: Monday, August 23, 2010 7:28 PM
To: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv
Cc: John Cox
Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] Any issues with iPhone 4 and 2.4GHz 802.11n?

John,

I don't think there is much of an issue here, unless there is a requirement 
that the iPhone 4's need the bandwidth possible using 40Mhz channels.  Just 
about every design guideline I've seen, and every conversation I've had with 
engineers at various networking companies, considers using 40Mhz channels at 
2.4Ghz to be a bad idea, due to the loss of what little flexibility one has 
with channel layout as well as with adverse effects on neighboring networks in 
crowded areas (the anti-social effect), so here at least we never considered 
it.

-Chris

On Aug 23, 2010, at 9:12 AM, j...@nww.commailto:j...@nww.com 
j...@nww.commailto:j...@nww.com wrote:

Folks,

I was talking to a higher education IT guy last week; they have a lot of 
iPhones, and are rollling out iPhone 4's to new freshman and to faculty. As 
part of this, they upgraded the campus WLAN to 802.11n.

BUT, after iPhone 4 was announced, they realized its 11n support was ONLY for 
the 2.4 GHz band (with of course only 3 non-overlapping channels, and tradeoffs 
if you merge two of them into one 40MHz channel).

In SOME locations, they're having to do some fancy juggling of access points, 
channel and power settings.

Juggling 3 channels in a crowded location clearly is NOT new. But the fact that 
this is occurring in 11n with a popular client device that often relies on WLAN 
access, seems noteworthy.

I was wondering if anyone else is running into similar issues with iPhone 4 and 
11n?

I'm going to be writing this up as a Network World story today or early 
Tuesday. If you're interested in emailing/talking briefly with me about this, 
please just copy any listserv response to (or email me directly at) my NW 
email: john_...@nww.commailto:john_...@nww.com.

Thanks!

Regards,
John Cox
__

J o h n   C o x
Senior Editor
Main: 508.766.5301 | Direct: 508.766.5422
Office at home: 978-834-0554

NETWORKWORLD
Maximize Your Return on IT
492 Old Connecticut Path | Framingham, MA 01701-9002
__
NetworkWorld.comhttp://www.networkworld.com/ | 2009 Media 
Guidehttp://www.networkworld.com/media/ | Conferences and 
Eventshttp://www.networkworld.com

RE: [WIRELESS-LAN] Any issues with iPhone 4 and 2.4GHz 802.11n?

[Brooks, Stan]

Good point, John.

The iPhone is only a 1x1 MiMo, so no special stream boost. There is still the 
reduced guard time and frame aggregation that will give better performance 
compared to 802.11b/g.

I'm still digging out from (a very successful) Back-to-School weekend, but we 
are seeing approximately 1/3 of our total ResNet users running 802.11n in 5GHz, 
1/3 running 802.11n in 2.4GHz, and 1/3 running 802.11g.  I don't have any 
breakout for the iPhones specifically but can say that iDevices (iPads, 
iPhones, iPod Touches) accounted for a little over 8% or our total clients 
registered over the weekend.

 - Stan Brooks - CWNA/CWSP
  Emory University
  University Technology Services
  404.727.0226
AIM/Y!/Twitter: WLANstan
   MSN: wlans...@hotmail.commailto:wlans...@hotmail.com
GoogleTalk: wlans...@gmail.commailto:wlans...@gmail.com

From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv 
[mailto:wireless-...@listserv.educause.edu] On Behalf Of j...@nww.com
Sent: Tuesday, August 24, 2010 11:04 AM
To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] Any issues with iPhone 4 and 2.4GHz 802.11n?

Stan,

What kind of 11n data rates and throughput are you seeing in the 2.4 band?

Also, I think iPhone 4 has only a single Wi-Fi antenna, so it doesn't benefit 
(or benefit as much) as a 2x2 or 3x3 MIMO laptop. Have you done any i4 
performance metrics?

I'm trying to get 11n implementation details from Apple, but so far they've 
only referred me to the Web i4 spec sheet.

Regards,
John Cox
Senior Editor
Network World

From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv 
[mailto:wireless-...@listserv.educause.edu] On Behalf Of Brooks, Stan
Sent: Tuesday, August 24, 2010 11:00 AM
To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] Any issues with iPhone 4 and 2.4GHz 802.11n?

John,

At Emory University, we've just completed upgrading our ResHalls to 802.11n and 
are now working on our academic buildings as part of a system-wide upgrade to 
802.11n.  We've moved from single radio b/g  APs to dual radio a/b/g/n APs.  We 
are running 802.11n (backwards compatible to b/g) on our 2.4GHz radios, but 
without the 40MHz (high-throughput) channel plan.  In fact I (and most wireless 
engineers) would advise against running 40MHz channels at 2.4GHz.  We do run 
the 40MHz channels in the 5GHz band, however.

That said, 802.11n with standard 20MHz channels does give marked improvement 
over 802.11b/g because of other dot11n technologies - multiple special streams, 
frame aggregation, etc.

 - Stan Brooks - CWNA/CWSP
  Emory University
  University Technology Services
  404.727.0226
AIM/Y!/Twitter: WLANstan
   MSN: wlans...@hotmail.commailto:wlans...@hotmail.com
GoogleTalk: wlans...@gmail.commailto:wlans...@gmail.com

From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv 
[mailto:wireless-...@listserv.educause.edu] On Behalf Of j...@nww.com
Sent: Tuesday, August 24, 2010 10:08 AM
To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] Any issues with iPhone 4 and 2.4GHz 802.11n?

Chris,

Thanks. Your observation on 40Mhz limiting the channel options in 2.4 band fits 
with what I've learned also.

As I mentioned in my direct reply, your email reminded me -- and I should have 
thought of this -- that of course the same 3-channel limitation exists for 
11b/g iPhones.

But...what I'm wondering is if the iPhone 4's demand or preference for 11n 
makes the situation more problematic, especially in a mixed-client environment 
-- when b/g iPhones are associating to the same 11n access point?

Regards,
John Cox
Senior Editor
Network World

From: Chris Murphy [mailto:ch...@mit.edu]
Sent: Monday, August 23, 2010 7:28 PM
To: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv
Cc: John Cox
Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] Any issues with iPhone 4 and 2.4GHz 802.11n?

John,

I don't think there is much of an issue here, unless there is a requirement 
that the iPhone 4's need the bandwidth possible using 40Mhz channels.  Just 
about every design guideline I've seen, and every conversation I've had with 
engineers at various networking companies, considers using 40Mhz channels at 
2.4Ghz to be a bad idea, due to the loss of what little flexibility one has 
with channel layout as well as with adverse effects on neighboring networks in 
crowded areas (the anti-social effect), so here at least we never considered 
it.

-Chris

On Aug 23, 2010, at 9:12 AM, j...@nww.commailto:j...@nww.com 
j...@nww.commailto:j...@nww.com wrote:

Folks,

I was talking to a higher education IT guy last week; they have a lot of 
iPhones, and are rollling out iPhone 4's to new freshman and to faculty. As 
part of this, they upgraded the campus WLAN to 802.11n.

BUT, after iPhone 4 was announced, they realized its 11n support was ONLY for 
the 2.4 GHz band (with of course only 3 non-overlapping channels, and tradeoffs 
if you merge two of them into one 40MHz

Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] Any issues with iPhone 4 and 2.4GHz 802.11n?

[David R. Morton]

John, Yea Apple isn't always the best at providing detailed stats. The iPhone 4 
does do .11n in the 2.4GHz space with a 1x1 antenna (at least as far as I've 
seen). There should be a bit of performance increase over the older models due 
to a few efficiencies with 11n. We haven't run any detailed tests ourselves, 
but so far haven't seen any real issues. Also I've published some of our wifi 
usage stats (including iPhone) to my blog at 
www.freshlymobile.comhttp://www.freshlymobile.com (click on UW Mobile stats 
at the top for the most recent look).

Take care

David



David Morton
Director, Mobile Communication Strategies
University of Washington
dmor...@u.washington.edumailto:dmor...@u.washington.edu
tel 206.221.7814


--
www.freshlymobile.com
  a fresh look at mobility
--

On Aug 24, 2010, at 8:03 AM, j...@nww.commailto:j...@nww.com wrote:

Stan,

What kind of 11n data rates and throughput are you seeing in the 2.4 band?

Also, I think iPhone 4 has only a single Wi-Fi antenna, so it doesn't benefit 
(or benefit as much) as a 2x2 or 3x3 MIMO laptop. Have you done any i4 
performance metrics?

I'm trying to get 11n implementation details from Apple, but so far they've 
only referred me to the Web i4 spec sheet.

Regards,
John Cox
Senior Editor
Network World

From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv 
[mailto:wireless-...@listserv.educause.edu] On Behalf Of Brooks, Stan
Sent: Tuesday, August 24, 2010 11:00 AM
To: 
WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDUmailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] Any issues with iPhone 4 and 2.4GHz 802.11n?

John,

At Emory University, we’ve just completed upgrading our ResHalls to 802.11n and 
are now working on our academic buildings as part of a system-wide upgrade to 
802.11n.  We’ve moved from single radio b/g  APs to dual radio a/b/g/n APs.  We 
are running 802.11n (backwards compatible to b/g) on our 2.4GHz radios, but 
without the 40MHz (high-throughput) channel plan.  In fact I (and most wireless 
engineers) would advise against running 40MHz channels at 2.4GHz.  We do run 
the 40MHz channels in the 5GHz band, however.

That said, 802.11n with standard 20MHz channels does give marked improvement 
over 802.11b/g because of other dot11n technologies – multiple special streams, 
frame aggregation, etc.

 - Stan Brooks - CWNA/CWSP
  Emory University
  University Technology Services
  404.727.0226
AIM/Y!/Twitter: WLANstan
   MSN: wlans...@hotmail.commailto:wlans...@hotmail.com
GoogleTalk: wlans...@gmail.commailto:wlans...@gmail.com

From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv 
[mailto:wireless-...@listserv.educause.edu] On Behalf Of 
j...@nww.commailto:j...@nww.com
Sent: Tuesday, August 24, 2010 10:08 AM
To: 
WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDUmailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] Any issues with iPhone 4 and 2.4GHz 802.11n?

Chris,

Thanks. Your observation on 40Mhz limiting the channel options in 2.4 band fits 
with what I've learned also.

As I mentioned in my direct reply, your email reminded me -- and I should have 
thought of this -- that of course the same 3-channel limitation exists for 
11b/g iPhones.

But…what I'm wondering is if the iPhone 4's demand or preference for 11n makes 
the situation more problematic, especially in a mixed-client environment -- 
when b/g iPhones are associating to the same 11n access point?

Regards,
John Cox
Senior Editor
Network World

From: Chris Murphy [mailto:ch...@mit.edu]
Sent: Monday, August 23, 2010 7:28 PM
To: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv
Cc: John Cox
Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] Any issues with iPhone 4 and 2.4GHz 802.11n?

John,

I don't think there is much of an issue here, unless there is a requirement 
that the iPhone 4's need the bandwidth possible using 40Mhz channels.  Just 
about every design guideline I've seen, and every conversation I've had with 
engineers at various networking companies, considers using 40Mhz channels at 
2.4Ghz to be a bad idea, due to the loss of what little flexibility one has 
with channel layout as well as with adverse effects on neighboring networks in 
crowded areas (the anti-social effect), so here at least we never considered 
it.

-Chris

On Aug 23, 2010, at 9:12 AM, j...@nww.commailto:j...@nww.com 
j...@nww.commailto:j...@nww.com wrote:

Folks,

I was talking to a higher education IT guy last week; they have a lot of 
iPhones, and are rollling out iPhone 4's to new freshman and to faculty. As 
part of this, they upgraded the campus WLAN to 802.11n.

BUT, after iPhone 4 was announced, they realized its 11n support was ONLY for 
the 2.4 GHz band (with of course only 3 non-overlapping channels, and tradeoffs 
if you merge two of them into one 40MHz channel).

In SOME locations, they're having to do some fancy juggling of access points

RE: [WIRELESS-LAN] Any issues with iPhone 4 and 2.4GHz 802.11n?

[JCox]

Thanks, Chris.

Any idea what kind of WLAN throughput your iPhone 4 clients are getting?

Regards,
John Cox
Senior Editor
Network World

From: Chris Murphy [mailto:ch...@mit.edu]
Sent: Tuesday, August 24, 2010 10:26 AM
To: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv
Cc: WIRELESS-LAN@listserv.educause.edu; John Cox
Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] Any issues with iPhone 4 and 2.4GHz 802.11n?

John,

I think the only issue is that .11n devices will loose some performance having 
to share the band with .11g/b devices.  Currently we run about a 50-50 split on 
the 2.4 band between .11n and .11g devices with no particular problems.

-Chris


On Aug 24, 2010, at 10:08 AM, j...@nww.commailto:j...@nww.com 
j...@nww.commailto:j...@nww.com wrote:
Chris,

Thanks. Your observation on 40Mhz limiting the channel options in 2.4 band fits 
with what I've learned also.

As I mentioned in my direct reply, your email reminded me -- and I should have 
thought of this -- that of course the same 3-channel limitation exists for 
11b/g iPhones.

But…what I'm wondering is if the iPhone 4's demand or preference for 11n makes 
the situation more problematic, especially in a mixed-client environment -- 
when b/g iPhones are associating to the same 11n access point?

Regards,
John Cox
Senior Editor
Network World

From: Chris Murphy [mailto:ch...@mit.edu]
Sent: Monday, August 23, 2010 7:28 PM
To: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv
Cc: John Cox
Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] Any issues with iPhone 4 and 2.4GHz 802.11n?

John,

I don't think there is much of an issue here, unless there is a requirement 
that the iPhone 4's need the bandwidth possible using 40Mhz channels.  Just 
about every design guideline I've seen, and every conversation I've had with 
engineers at various networking companies, considers using 40Mhz channels at 
2.4Ghz to be a bad idea, due to the loss of what little flexibility one has 
with channel layout as well as with adverse effects on neighboring networks in 
crowded areas (the anti-social effect), so here at least we never considered 
it.

-Chris

On Aug 23, 2010, at 9:12 AM, j...@nww.commailto:j...@nww.com 
j...@nww.commailto:j...@nww.com wrote:



Folks,

I was talking to a higher education IT guy last week; they have a lot of 
iPhones, and are rollling out iPhone 4's to new freshman and to faculty. As 
part of this, they upgraded the campus WLAN to 802.11n.

BUT, after iPhone 4 was announced, they realized its 11n support was ONLY for 
the 2.4 GHz band (with of course only 3 non-overlapping channels, and tradeoffs 
if you merge two of them into one 40MHz channel).

In SOME locations, they're having to do some fancy juggling of access points, 
channel and power settings.

Juggling 3 channels in a crowded location clearly is NOT new. But the fact that 
this is occurring in 11n with a popular client device that often relies on WLAN 
access, seems noteworthy.

I was wondering if anyone else is running into similar issues with iPhone 4 and 
11n?

I'm going to be writing this up as a Network World story today or early 
Tuesday. If you're interested in emailing/talking briefly with me about this, 
please just copy any listserv response to (or email me directly at) my NW 
email: john_...@nww.commailto:john_...@nww.com.

Thanks!

Regards,
John Cox
__

J o h n   C o x
Senior Editor
Main: 508.766.5301 | Direct: 508.766.5422
Office at home: 978-834-0554

NETWORKWORLD
Maximize Your Return on IT
492 Old Connecticut Path | Framingham, MA 01701-9002
__
NetworkWorld.comhttp://www.networkworld.com/ | 2009 Media 
Guidehttp://www.networkworld.com/media/ | Conferences and 
Eventshttp://www.networkworld.com/events/


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


===
Chris Murphy
Network Engineer
MIT Information Services  Technology
Room W92-191
77 Massachusetts Avenue
Cambridge, MA  02139
ch...@mit.edumailto:ch...@mit.edu

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

RE: [WIRELESS-LAN] Any issues with iPhone 4 and 2.4GHz 802.11n?

[JCox]

Thanks, Stan. Congrats on the weekend's success!

Regards,
John Cox
Senior Editor
Network World

From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv 
[mailto:wireless-...@listserv.educause.edu] On Behalf Of Brooks, Stan
Sent: Tuesday, August 24, 2010 11:28 AM
To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] Any issues with iPhone 4 and 2.4GHz 802.11n?

Good point, John.

The iPhone is only a 1x1 MiMo, so no special stream boost. There is still the 
reduced guard time and frame aggregation that will give better performance 
compared to 802.11b/g.

I'm still digging out from (a very successful) Back-to-School weekend, but we 
are seeing approximately 1/3 of our total ResNet users running 802.11n in 5GHz, 
1/3 running 802.11n in 2.4GHz, and 1/3 running 802.11g.  I don't have any 
breakout for the iPhones specifically but can say that iDevices (iPads, 
iPhones, iPod Touches) accounted for a little over 8% or our total clients 
registered over the weekend.

 - Stan Brooks - CWNA/CWSP
  Emory University
  University Technology Services
  404.727.0226
AIM/Y!/Twitter: WLANstan
   MSN: wlans...@hotmail.commailto:wlans...@hotmail.com
GoogleTalk: wlans...@gmail.commailto:wlans...@gmail.com

From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv 
[mailto:wireless-...@listserv.educause.edu] On Behalf Of j...@nww.com
Sent: Tuesday, August 24, 2010 11:04 AM
To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] Any issues with iPhone 4 and 2.4GHz 802.11n?

Stan,

What kind of 11n data rates and throughput are you seeing in the 2.4 band?

Also, I think iPhone 4 has only a single Wi-Fi antenna, so it doesn't benefit 
(or benefit as much) as a 2x2 or 3x3 MIMO laptop. Have you done any i4 
performance metrics?

I'm trying to get 11n implementation details from Apple, but so far they've 
only referred me to the Web i4 spec sheet.

Regards,
John Cox
Senior Editor
Network World

From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv 
[mailto:wireless-...@listserv.educause.edu] On Behalf Of Brooks, Stan
Sent: Tuesday, August 24, 2010 11:00 AM
To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] Any issues with iPhone 4 and 2.4GHz 802.11n?

John,

At Emory University, we've just completed upgrading our ResHalls to 802.11n and 
are now working on our academic buildings as part of a system-wide upgrade to 
802.11n.  We've moved from single radio b/g  APs to dual radio a/b/g/n APs.  We 
are running 802.11n (backwards compatible to b/g) on our 2.4GHz radios, but 
without the 40MHz (high-throughput) channel plan.  In fact I (and most wireless 
engineers) would advise against running 40MHz channels at 2.4GHz.  We do run 
the 40MHz channels in the 5GHz band, however.

That said, 802.11n with standard 20MHz channels does give marked improvement 
over 802.11b/g because of other dot11n technologies - multiple special streams, 
frame aggregation, etc.

 - Stan Brooks - CWNA/CWSP
  Emory University
  University Technology Services
  404.727.0226
AIM/Y!/Twitter: WLANstan
   MSN: wlans...@hotmail.commailto:wlans...@hotmail.com
GoogleTalk: wlans...@gmail.commailto:wlans...@gmail.com

From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv 
[mailto:wireless-...@listserv.educause.edu] On Behalf Of j...@nww.com
Sent: Tuesday, August 24, 2010 10:08 AM
To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] Any issues with iPhone 4 and 2.4GHz 802.11n?

Chris,

Thanks. Your observation on 40Mhz limiting the channel options in 2.4 band fits 
with what I've learned also.

As I mentioned in my direct reply, your email reminded me -- and I should have 
thought of this -- that of course the same 3-channel limitation exists for 
11b/g iPhones.

But...what I'm wondering is if the iPhone 4's demand or preference for 11n 
makes the situation more problematic, especially in a mixed-client environment 
-- when b/g iPhones are associating to the same 11n access point?

Regards,
John Cox
Senior Editor
Network World

From: Chris Murphy [mailto:ch...@mit.edu]
Sent: Monday, August 23, 2010 7:28 PM
To: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv
Cc: John Cox
Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] Any issues with iPhone 4 and 2.4GHz 802.11n?

John,

I don't think there is much of an issue here, unless there is a requirement 
that the iPhone 4's need the bandwidth possible using 40Mhz channels.  Just 
about every design guideline I've seen, and every conversation I've had with 
engineers at various networking companies, considers using 40Mhz channels at 
2.4Ghz to be a bad idea, due to the loss of what little flexibility one has 
with channel layout as well as with adverse effects on neighboring networks in 
crowded areas (the anti-social effect), so here at least we never considered 
it.

-Chris

On Aug 23, 2010, at 9:12 AM, j...@nww.commailto:j...@nww.com 
j...@nww.commailto:j...@nww.com wrote:

Folks,

I was talking to a higher

RE: [WIRELESS-LAN] Any issues with iPhone 4 and 2.4GHz 802.11n?

[JCox]

Thanks, David.

I assume your WLAN is 11n? Do you mind telling me your vendor?

18,000 iOS devices?! Do you see any *potential* issues with, say, fairly high 
numbers of iPhone 4's concentrated in a given area of the WLAN?

Also, someone raised the issue of IP address exhaustion (due in part, I think, 
to higher roaming/connecting/reconnecting) with smartphones and tablets. Are 
you seeing any issues around this?


Regards,
John Cox
Senior Editor
Network World

From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv 
[mailto:wireless-...@listserv.educause.edu] On Behalf Of David R. Morton
Sent: Tuesday, August 24, 2010 11:37 AM
To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] Any issues with iPhone 4 and 2.4GHz 802.11n?

John, Yea Apple isn't always the best at providing detailed stats. The iPhone 4 
does do .11n in the 2.4GHz space with a 1x1 antenna (at least as far as I've 
seen). There should be a bit of performance increase over the older models due 
to a few efficiencies with 11n. We haven't run any detailed tests ourselves, 
but so far haven't seen any real issues. Also I've published some of our wifi 
usage stats (including iPhone) to my blog at 
www.freshlymobile.comhttp://www.freshlymobile.com (click on UW Mobile stats 
at the top for the most recent look).

Take care

David



David Morton
Director, Mobile Communication Strategies
University of Washington
dmor...@u.washington.edumailto:dmor...@u.washington.edu
tel 206.221.7814


--
www.freshlymobile.com
  a fresh look at mobility
--

On Aug 24, 2010, at 8:03 AM, j...@nww.commailto:j...@nww.com wrote:


Stan,

What kind of 11n data rates and throughput are you seeing in the 2.4 band?

Also, I think iPhone 4 has only a single Wi-Fi antenna, so it doesn't benefit 
(or benefit as much) as a 2x2 or 3x3 MIMO laptop. Have you done any i4 
performance metrics?

I'm trying to get 11n implementation details from Apple, but so far they've 
only referred me to the Web i4 spec sheet.

Regards,
John Cox
Senior Editor
Network World

From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv 
[mailto:wireless-...@listserv.educause.edu] On Behalf Of Brooks, Stan
Sent: Tuesday, August 24, 2010 11:00 AM
To: 
WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDUmailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] Any issues with iPhone 4 and 2.4GHz 802.11n?

John,

At Emory University, we've just completed upgrading our ResHalls to 802.11n and 
are now working on our academic buildings as part of a system-wide upgrade to 
802.11n.  We've moved from single radio b/g  APs to dual radio a/b/g/n APs.  We 
are running 802.11n (backwards compatible to b/g) on our 2.4GHz radios, but 
without the 40MHz (high-throughput) channel plan.  In fact I (and most wireless 
engineers) would advise against running 40MHz channels at 2.4GHz.  We do run 
the 40MHz channels in the 5GHz band, however.

That said, 802.11n with standard 20MHz channels does give marked improvement 
over 802.11b/g because of other dot11n technologies - multiple special streams, 
frame aggregation, etc.

 - Stan Brooks - CWNA/CWSP
  Emory University
  University Technology Services
  404.727.0226
AIM/Y!/Twitter: WLANstan
   MSN: wlans...@hotmail.commailto:wlans...@hotmail.com
GoogleTalk: wlans...@gmail.commailto:wlans...@gmail.com

From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv 
[mailto:wireless-...@listserv.educause.edu] On Behalf Of 
j...@nww.commailto:j...@nww.com
Sent: Tuesday, August 24, 2010 10:08 AM
To: 
WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDUmailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] Any issues with iPhone 4 and 2.4GHz 802.11n?

Chris,

Thanks. Your observation on 40Mhz limiting the channel options in 2.4 band fits 
with what I've learned also.

As I mentioned in my direct reply, your email reminded me -- and I should have 
thought of this -- that of course the same 3-channel limitation exists for 
11b/g iPhones.

But...what I'm wondering is if the iPhone 4's demand or preference for 11n 
makes the situation more problematic, especially in a mixed-client environment 
-- when b/g iPhones are associating to the same 11n access point?

Regards,
John Cox
Senior Editor
Network World

From: Chris Murphy [mailto:ch...@mit.edu]
Sent: Monday, August 23, 2010 7:28 PM
To: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv
Cc: John Cox
Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] Any issues with iPhone 4 and 2.4GHz 802.11n?

John,

I don't think there is much of an issue here, unless there is a requirement 
that the iPhone 4's need the bandwidth possible using 40Mhz channels.  Just 
about every design guideline I've seen, and every conversation I've had with 
engineers at various networking companies, considers using 40Mhz channels at 
2.4Ghz to be a bad idea, due to the loss of what little flexibility one has 
with channel layout as well

Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] Any issues with iPhone 4 and 2.4GHz 802.11n?

[Jeffrey Sessler]

John,


On my Cisco 802.11n deployment, both an iPhone 4 or iPad average about
28Mbs against various bandwidth testers.


Jeff 

Jeffrey D Sessler
Director
Information Technology
Scripps College
 

  08/24/10 2:20 PM 
Thanks, Chris.

Any idea what kind of WLAN throughput your iPhone 4 clients are getting?

Regards,
John Cox
Senior Editor
Network World

From: Chris Murphy [mailto:ch...@mit.edu]
Sent: Tuesday, August 24, 2010 10:26 AM
To: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv
Cc: WIRELESS-LAN@listserv.educause.edu; John Cox
Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] Any issues with iPhone 4 and 2.4GHz 802.11n?

John,

I think the only issue is that .11n devices will loose some performance
having to share the band with .11g/b devices.  Currently we run about a
50-50 split on the 2.4 band between .11n and .11g devices with no
particular problems.

-Chris


On Aug 24, 2010, at 10:08 AM, j...@nww.com  wrote:
Chris,

Thanks. Your observation on 40Mhz limiting the channel options in 2.4
band fits with what I've learned also.

As I mentioned in my direct reply, your email reminded me -- and I
should have thought of this -- that of course the same 3-channel
limitation exists for 11b/g iPhones.

But…what I'm wondering is if the iPhone 4's demand or preference for 11n
makes the situation more problematic, especially in a mixed-client
environment -- when b/g iPhones are associating to the same 11n access
point?

Regards,
John Cox
Senior Editor
Network World

From: Chris Murphy [mailto:ch...@mit.edu]
Sent: Monday, August 23, 2010 7:28 PM
To: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv
Cc: John Cox
Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] Any issues with iPhone 4 and 2.4GHz 802.11n?

John,

I don't think there is much of an issue here, unless there is a
requirement that the iPhone 4's need the bandwidth possible using 40Mhz
channels.  Just about every design guideline I've seen, and every
conversation I've had with engineers at various networking companies,
considers using 40Mhz channels at 2.4Ghz to be a bad idea, due to the
loss of what little flexibility one has with channel layout as well as
with adverse effects on neighboring networks in crowded areas (the
anti-social effect), so here at least we never considered it.

-Chris

On Aug 23, 2010, at 9:12 AM,   wrote:



Folks,

I was talking to a higher education IT guy last week; they have a lot of
iPhones, and are rollling out iPhone 4's to new freshman and to faculty.
As part of this, they upgraded the campus WLAN to 802.11n.

BUT, after iPhone 4 was announced, they realized its 11n support was
ONLY for the 2.4 GHz band (with of course only 3 non-overlapping
channels, and tradeoffs if you merge two of them into one 40MHz
channel).

In SOME locations, they're having to do some fancy juggling of access
points, channel and power settings.

Juggling 3 channels in a crowded location clearly is NOT new. But the
fact that this is occurring in 11n with a popular client device that
often relies on WLAN access, seems noteworthy.

I was wondering if anyone else is running into similar issues with
iPhone 4 and 11n?

I'm going to be writing this up as a Network World story today or
early Tuesday. If you're interested in emailing/talking briefly with me
about this, please just copy any listserv response to (or email me
directly at) my NW email: john_...@nww.com.

Thanks!

Regards,
John Cox
__

J o h n   C o x
Senior Editor
Main: 508.766.5301 | Direct: 508.766.5422
Office at home: 978-834-0554

NETWORKWORLD
Maximize Your Return on IT
492 Old Connecticut Path | Framingham, MA 01701-9002
__
NetworkWorld.com | 2009 Media Guide | Conferences and Events


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


==ch...@mit.edu

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

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

Any issues with iPhone 4 and 2.4GHz 802.11n?

[JCox]

Folks,

I was talking to a higher education IT guy last week; they have a lot of 
iPhones, and are rollling out iPhone 4's to new freshman and to faculty. As 
part of this, they upgraded the campus WLAN to 802.11n.

BUT, after iPhone 4 was announced, they realized its 11n support was ONLY for 
the 2.4 GHz band (with of course only 3 non-overlapping channels, and tradeoffs 
if you merge two of them into one 40MHz channel).

In SOME locations, they're having to do some fancy juggling of access points, 
channel and power settings.

Juggling 3 channels in a crowded location clearly is NOT new. But the fact that 
this is occurring in 11n with a popular client device that often relies on WLAN 
access, seems noteworthy.

I was wondering if anyone else is running into similar issues with iPhone 4 and 
11n?

I'm going to be writing this up as a Network World story today or early 
Tuesday. If you're interested in emailing/talking briefly with me about this, 
please just copy any listserv response to (or email me directly at) my NW 
email: john_...@nww.commailto:john_...@nww.com.

Thanks!

Regards,
John Cox
__

J o h n   C o x
Senior Editor
Main: 508.766.5301 | Direct: 508.766.5422
Office at home: 978-834-0554

NETWORKWORLD
Maximize Your Return on IT
492 Old Connecticut Path | Framingham, MA 01701-9002
__
NetworkWorld.comhttp://www.networkworld.com/ | 2009 Media 
Guidehttp://www.networkworld.com/media/ | Conferences and 
Eventshttp://www.networkworld.com/events/



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

Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] Any issues with iPhone 4 and 2.4GHz 802.11n?

[Chris Murphy]

John,

I don't think there is much of an issue here, unless there is a requirement 
that the iPhone 4's need the bandwidth possible using 40Mhz channels.  Just 
about every design guideline I've seen, and every conversation I've had with 
engineers at various networking companies, considers using 40Mhz channels at 
2.4Ghz to be a bad idea, due to the loss of what little flexibility one has 
with channel layout as well as with adverse effects on neighboring networks in 
crowded areas (the anti-social effect), so here at least we never considered 
it.

-Chris

On Aug 23, 2010, at 9:12 AM, j...@nww.commailto:j...@nww.com 
j...@nww.commailto:j...@nww.com wrote:

Folks,

I was talking to a higher education IT guy last week; they have a lot of 
iPhones, and are rollling out iPhone 4's to new freshman and to faculty. As 
part of this, they upgraded the campus WLAN to 802.11n.

BUT, after iPhone 4 was announced, they realized its 11n support was ONLY for 
the 2.4 GHz band (with of course only 3 non-overlapping channels, and tradeoffs 
if you merge two of them into one 40MHz channel).

In SOME locations, they're having to do some fancy juggling of access points, 
channel and power settings.

Juggling 3 channels in a crowded location clearly is NOT new. But the fact that 
this is occurring in 11n with a popular client device that often relies on WLAN 
access, seems noteworthy.

I was wondering if anyone else is running into similar issues with iPhone 4 and 
11n?

I'm going to be writing this up as a Network World story today or early 
Tuesday. If you're interested in emailing/talking briefly with me about this, 
please just copy any listserv response to (or email me directly at) my NW 
email: john_...@nww.commailto:john_...@nww.com.

Thanks!

Regards,
John Cox
__

J o h n   C o x
Senior Editor
Main: 508.766.5301 | Direct: 508.766.5422
Office at home: 978-834-0554

NETWORKWORLD
Maximize Your Return on IT
492 Old Connecticut Path | Framingham, MA 01701-9002
__
NetworkWorld.comhttp://www.networkworld.com/ | 2009 Media 
Guidehttp://www.networkworld.com/media/ | Conferences and 
Eventshttp://www.networkworld.com/events/


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


===
Chris Murphy
Network Engineer
MIT Information Services  Technology
Room W92-191
77 Massachusetts Avenue
Cambridge, MA  02139
ch...@mit.edumailto:ch...@mit.edu


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

Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] 802.11n phased deployment approaches

[James F Eyrich]

With Meru it is strongly suggested to do entire buildings at a time.

Beyond Meru's suggestions based on how their tech works I still think it 
is a good idea.


User experience would be consistent for the whole building instead of 
only having better connections in the strategic locations.


I also have concerns if bonded channels are deployed on N near standard 
A APs.


-jim



On 6/3/2010 9:03 AM, Steve Hess wrote:

For anyone who has done a phased deployment of 802.11n gear to replace b/g/a,  
what have you found to be most effective, a whole building (or floor perhaps) 
approach or putting N in strategic locations with nearby b/g/a AP's?  Any 
gotcha's or learning experience with either approach?  We're an Alcatel (Aruba) 
shop so direct experience with that gear would be great.


Thanks,

Steve

--
-
Steve Hess
Network Administrator
Wheaton College
Phone: 508-286-3404
Fax: 508-286-8270
-


** 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/.

Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] 802.11n phased deployment approaches

[Caroline Owens]

I agree with Jim...I think you can do it, it's just more work and more 
room for error
For example, if you are going to have APs within hearing distance of 
each other with different band configurations (like b/g vs b/g/n) they 
need to be on separate ESS profiles

at least that's my understanding...

Caroline Owens
Networking and Telecommunications
Saint Joseph's University

On 6/3/2010 10:42 AM, James F Eyrich wrote:

With Meru it is strongly suggested to do entire buildings at a time.

Beyond Meru's suggestions based on how their tech works I still think 
it is a good idea.


User experience would be consistent for the whole building instead of 
only having better connections in the strategic locations.


I also have concerns if bonded channels are deployed on N near 
standard A APs.


-jim



On 6/3/2010 9:03 AM, Steve Hess wrote:
For anyone who has done a phased deployment of 802.11n gear to 
replace b/g/a,  what have you found to be most effective, a whole 
building (or floor perhaps) approach or putting N in strategic 
locations with nearby b/g/a AP's?  Any gotcha's or learning 
experience with either approach?  We're an Alcatel (Aruba) shop so 
direct experience with that gear would be great.



Thanks,

Steve

--
-
Steve Hess
Network Administrator
Wheaton College
Phone: 508-286-3404
Fax: 508-286-8270
-


** 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] 802.11n phased deployment approaches

[Chris Drever]

Steve,

It would depend greatly on the system you are using. With the Aruba Wireless
system A/B/G coexist very well with N in the same building. The Adaptive
Radio Management 2.0 steers users to the best AP for their card's abilities.
It will sense and adjust power and channels automatically. We are currently
in a phased rollout of N all over campus, we simply place them where they
are needed and ARM handle the rest. 

One caveat that I would warn you about is that most N AP require more power
than an ABG would so if you are using power injectors you may need to
upgrade those at the same time. If you are using injectors that are 802.3af
you will probably need to replace them with 802.3at compliant injectors. 

Chris Drever - PSU Networking


-Original Message-
From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv
[mailto:wireless-...@listserv.educause.edu] On Behalf Of James F Eyrich
Sent: Thursday, June 03, 2010 10:43 AM
To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] 802.11n phased deployment approaches

With Meru it is strongly suggested to do entire buildings at a time.

Beyond Meru's suggestions based on how their tech works I still think it 
is a good idea.

User experience would be consistent for the whole building instead of 
only having better connections in the strategic locations.

I also have concerns if bonded channels are deployed on N near standard 
A APs.

-jim



On 6/3/2010 9:03 AM, Steve Hess wrote:
 For anyone who has done a phased deployment of 802.11n gear to replace
b/g/a,  what have you found to be most effective, a whole building (or floor
perhaps) approach or putting N in strategic locations with nearby b/g/a
AP's?  Any gotcha's or learning experience with either approach?  We're an
Alcatel (Aruba) shop so direct experience with that gear would be great.


 Thanks,

 Steve

 --
 -
 Steve Hess
 Network Administrator
 Wheaton College
 Phone: 508-286-3404
 Fax: 508-286-8270
 -


 ** 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/.

Fwd: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] 802.11n phased deployment approaches

[Caroline Owens]

I should have been more specific - I was talking about Meru ...sorry
about that!

 Original Message 

  

  Subject: 
  Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] 802.11n phased deployment approaches


  Date: 
  Thu, 3 Jun 2010 11:02:10 -0400


  From: 
  Caroline Owens ow...@sju.edu


  Reply-To: 
  The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv
WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU


  To: 
  WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU

  



I agree with Jim...I think you can do it, it's just more work and more 
room for error
For example, if you are going to have APs within hearing distance of 
each other with different band configurations (like b/g vs b/g/n) they 
need to be on separate ESS profiles
at least that's my understanding...

Caroline Owens
Networking and Telecommunications
Saint Joseph's University

On 6/3/2010 10:42 AM, James F Eyrich wrote:
 With Meru it is strongly suggested to do entire buildings at a time.

 Beyond Meru's suggestions based on how their tech works I still think 
 it is a good idea.

 User experience would be consistent for the whole building instead of 
 only having better connections in the strategic locations.

 I also have concerns if bonded channels are deployed on N near 
 standard A APs.

 -jim



 On 6/3/2010 9:03 AM, Steve Hess wrote:
 For anyone who has done a phased deployment of 802.11n gear to 
 replace b/g/a,  what have you found to be most effective, a whole 
 building (or floor perhaps) approach or putting N in strategic 
 locations with nearby b/g/a AP's?  Any gotcha's or learning 
 experience with either approach?  We're an Alcatel (Aruba) shop so 
 direct experience with that gear would be great.


 Thanks,

 Steve

 -- 
 -
 Steve Hess
 Network Administrator
 Wheaton College
 Phone: 508-286-3404
 Fax: 508-286-8270
 -


 ** 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] 802.11n configuration on Cisco

[Johnson, Bruce T.]

Is the AP configured with 2 transmit antennas?  Try rebooting/ 
resetting the AP to factory default?  Toggling ClientLink?


Bruce T. Johnson | Network Engineer | Partners Healthcare |  
617.726.9662 bjohns...@partners.org


On Apr 13, 2010, at 11:33 AM, Mike King m...@mpking.com wrote:

Ok.   I had my controller tweaked to where I liked it, but I forgot  
to hit the save configuration settings button, and the controller  
got rebooted in my test lab.


I've replicated my tweaks,  (40 Mhz 802.11a channels, Client Link  
enabled on both bands, disabled 1, 2, 5.5, 6Mbps on the 802.11b/g  
band)


But I only seem to be able to associate at 150Mbps and I'm about 15  
feet away from the access point.  I had 300 Mpbs before the reboot.


What am I missing?

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



The information in this e-mail is intended only for the person to whom it is
addressed. If you believe this e-mail was sent to you in error and the e-mail
contains patient information, please contact the Partners Compliance HelpLine at
http://www.partners.org/complianceline . If the e-mail was sent to you in error
but does not contain patient information, please contact the sender and properly
dispose of the e-mail.

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

RE: [WIRELESS-LAN] 802.11n configuration on Cisco

[Sullivan, Ryan]

Is you security configured as either open or WPA using AES? Under the 
controller GUI WLANsEdit page footnotes -
7 WMM and open or AES security should be enabled to support higher 11n rates

Hope this helps,

Ryan Sullivan
Datacommunications
ACT, UCSD
858-822-5602

-Original Message-
From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv 
[mailto:wireless-...@listserv.educause.edu] On Behalf Of Johnson, Bruce T.
Sent: Friday, April 16, 2010 3:15 PM
To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] 802.11n configuration on Cisco

Is the AP configured with 2 transmit antennas?  Try rebooting/ 
resetting the AP to factory default?  Toggling ClientLink?

Bruce T. Johnson | Network Engineer | Partners Healthcare |  
617.726.9662 bjohns...@partners.org

On Apr 13, 2010, at 11:33 AM, Mike King m...@mpking.com wrote:

 Ok.   I had my controller tweaked to where I liked it, but I forgot  
 to hit the save configuration settings button, and the controller  
 got rebooted in my test lab.

 I've replicated my tweaks,  (40 Mhz 802.11a channels, Client Link  
 enabled on both bands, disabled 1, 2, 5.5, 6Mbps on the 802.11b/g  
 band)

 But I only seem to be able to associate at 150Mbps and I'm about 15  
 feet away from the access point.  I had 300 Mpbs before the reboot.

 What am I missing?

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


The information in this e-mail is intended only for the person to whom it is
addressed. If you believe this e-mail was sent to you in error and the e-mail
contains patient information, please contact the Partners Compliance HelpLine at
http://www.partners.org/complianceline . If the e-mail was sent to you in error
but does not contain patient information, please contact the sender and properly
dispose of the e-mail.

**
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/.

802.11n configuration on Cisco

[Mike King]

Ok.   I had my controller tweaked to where I liked it, but I forgot to hit
the save configuration settings button, and the controller got rebooted in
my test lab.

I've replicated my tweaks,  (40 Mhz 802.11a channels, Client Link enabled
on both bands, disabled 1, 2, 5.5, 6Mbps on the 802.11b/g band)

But I only seem to be able to associate at 150Mbps and I'm about 15 feet
away from the access point.  I had 300 Mpbs before the reboot.

What am I missing?

Mike

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

Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] 802.11n configuration on Cisco

[Chris Murphy]

Mike,

Make sure WMM Policy is set to allowed for the WLAN config.

-Chris

On Apr 13, 2010, at 11:23 AM, Mike King m...@mpking.commailto:m...@mpking.com 
wrote:

Ok.   I had my controller tweaked to where I liked it, but I forgot to hit the 
save configuration settings button, and the controller got rebooted in my test 
lab.

I've replicated my tweaks,  (40 Mhz 802.11a channels, Client Link enabled on 
both bands, disabled 1, 2, 5.5, 6Mbps on the 802.11b/g band)

But I only seem to be able to associate at 150Mbps and I'm about 15 feet away 
from the access point.  I had 300 Mpbs before the reboot.

What am I missing?

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


===
Chris Murphy
Network Engineer
MIT Information Services  Technology
Room W92-191
77 Massachusetts Avenue
Cambridge, MA  02139
ch...@mit.edumailto:ch...@mit.edu


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

Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] 802.11n configuration on Cisco

[Mike King]

Yep, I have that set to allowed.

On Tue, Apr 13, 2010 at 12:05 PM, Chris Murphy ch...@mit.edu wrote:

 Mike,

 Make sure WMM Policy is set to allowed for the WLAN config.

 -Chris




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

RE: [WIRELESS-LAN] 802.11n configuration on Cisco

[Hector J Rios]

Wireless  802.11a/n or 802.11b/g/n  High Throughput (802.11n)

 

Also, have you made sure that the APs are actually using 40Mhz channels?
WirelessAccessPointsRadios802.11a/n

 

Finally, what channels have you selected? Remember that some clients
don't support UNII 2 and UNII-2e bands.

 

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/.

802.11n AP recommendations

[Tom Lowry]

We have a robotics research group that wants the highest-speed wireless 
connections possible.  All the equipment is in the same room -- approximately 
50'x 50'.


Many consumer grade 802.11n APs seem to top out at well below 100Mbps.  If 
anyone can recommend equipment that can achieve higher throughput, please let me 
know.  I won't say price is no object, but we need to consider the options.


Thanks,
Tom Lowry
Department of Computer Science
University of Arizona

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

RE: [WIRELESS-LAN] 802.11n AP recommendations

[Lee H Badman]

Tom, I have played with Cisco 11n on a fat 1140 (not CAPWAP) and it does pretty 
well- like a true 130 Mbps throughput testing with an older early Mac in simple 
testing. Nice enterprise-class AP and when not CAPWAP can be used stand-alone 
(no controller dependency).


-Lee

 
 

-Original Message-
From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv 
[mailto:wireless-...@listserv.educause.edu] On Behalf Of Tom Lowry
Sent: Thursday, April 08, 2010 2:41 PM
To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
Subject: [WIRELESS-LAN] 802.11n AP recommendations

We have a robotics research group that wants the highest-speed wireless 
connections possible.  All the equipment is in the same room -- approximately 
50'x 50'.

Many consumer grade 802.11n APs seem to top out at well below 100Mbps.  If 
anyone can recommend equipment that can achieve higher throughput, please let 
me 
know.  I won't say price is no object, but we need to consider the options.

Thanks,
Tom Lowry
Department of Computer Science
University of Arizona

**
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] 802.11n AP recommendations

[Lee H Badman]

Sorry- meant to say early 11n Mac, not early Mac.


 
 

-Original Message-
From: Lee H Badman 
Sent: Thursday, April 08, 2010 3:21 PM
To: 'The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv'
Subject: RE: [WIRELESS-LAN] 802.11n AP recommendations

Tom, I have played with Cisco 11n on a fat 1140 (not CAPWAP) and it does pretty 
well- like a true 130 Mbps throughput testing with an older early Mac in simple 
testing. Nice enterprise-class AP and when not CAPWAP can be used stand-alone 
(no controller dependency).


-Lee

 
 

-Original Message-
From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv 
[mailto:wireless-...@listserv.educause.edu] On Behalf Of Tom Lowry
Sent: Thursday, April 08, 2010 2:41 PM
To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
Subject: [WIRELESS-LAN] 802.11n AP recommendations

We have a robotics research group that wants the highest-speed wireless 
connections possible.  All the equipment is in the same room -- approximately 
50'x 50'.

Many consumer grade 802.11n APs seem to top out at well below 100Mbps.  If 
anyone can recommend equipment that can achieve higher throughput, please let 
me 
know.  I won't say price is no object, but we need to consider the options.

Thanks,
Tom Lowry
Department of Computer Science
University of Arizona

**
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] 802.11n AP recommendations

[Bruce Marshall]

Hello,
We needed to wireless enable a math lab for a 100 workstations and we ended up 
using 4 Aruba A/P's and controller running 802.11N. We are seeing throughput in 
excess of 200meg at the workstations and they have experienced no issues with 
them. We have them secured with Certificates on both ends also.

I would contact them and see if they can do a proof of concept for you as they 
did here. We are actually a Cisco shop with A/P's but I could not get them to 
guarantee success in the environment that we have them in. Aruba said No 
problem and they delivered on that statement.
Bruce

Bruce Marshall
Director of Network  Infrastructure Services
Valencia Community College

-Original Message-
From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv 
[mailto:wireless-...@listserv.educause.edu] On Behalf Of Tom Lowry
Sent: Thursday, April 08, 2010 2:41 PM
To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
Subject: [WIRELESS-LAN] 802.11n AP recommendations

We have a robotics research group that wants the highest-speed wireless 
connections possible.  All the equipment is in the same room -- approximately 
50'x 50'.

Many consumer grade 802.11n APs seem to top out at well below 100Mbps.  If 
anyone can recommend equipment that can achieve higher throughput, please let 
me 
know.  I won't say price is no object, but we need to consider the options.

Thanks,
Tom Lowry
Department of Computer Science
University of Arizona

**
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] 802.11n AP recommendations

[Voll, Toivo]

We benchmarked a Cisco 1142 and an Aruba AP125 (both controller based) a while 
back. They had basically identical performance, although they did vary a bit 
depending on how many concurrent traffic streams you had, how many clients you 
had, whether traffic was uni- or bi-directional etc. One vendor was better at 
one thing, the other at another, but neither did clearly better or worse at the 
end.

Obviously, you run into issues such as being able to utilize both 2.4 and 5 Ghz 
bands to spread the load, possible interference from within or outside of the 
room, client capabilities etc. If the client doesn't have enough chains, 
there's not much you can do on the AP end to change that. One big tweak is to 
kill all the slower legacy protocols and transmit rates if you can, and 
minimize any multicast / broadcast traffic making it onto the air. Also, if you 
can deploy multiple APs to further reduce the number of clients per AP / 
channel, the more bandwidth you have per client.

Also, considering you're within a room, you probably do not want to be running 
full power, so even 15.4W of PoE ought to allow for all chains to operate with 
both vendors, but you might want to confirm that.

--
Toivo Voll
University of South Florida
Information Technology Communications




-Original Message-
From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv 
[mailto:wireless-...@listserv.educause.edu] On Behalf Of Tom Lowry
Sent: Thursday, April 08, 2010 2:41 PM
To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
Subject: [WIRELESS-LAN] 802.11n AP recommendations

We have a robotics research group that wants the highest-speed wireless 
connections possible.  All the equipment is in the same room -- approximately 
50'x 50'.

Many consumer grade 802.11n APs seem to top out at well below 100Mbps.  If 
anyone can recommend equipment that can achieve higher throughput, please let 
me 
know.  I won't say price is no object, but we need to consider the options.

Thanks,
Tom Lowry
Department of Computer Science
University of Arizona

**
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] 802.11n AP recommendations

[Jason Cook]

We are also a cisco shop and have both 1142 and 1252 AP's on capwap.

We've also recently evaluated Meru wireless gear and found it very 
competitive.


You will definitely want to investigate user devices to ensure 
throughput. For desktops we have older 2.4 only Belkin USB's (F5D8051) 
that work very well (setup and stability) but throughput struggles in 
comparison to a similar aged Linksys (WUSB600n) that supports both 2.4 
and 5. the Intel 5300 series in laptops has caused many an issue on N, 
this appears to be resolved and the issues we experienced were stability 
rather than throughput problems.


I would also think planning for 5ghz instead of 2.4 as the primary 
option is a good idea.


On 9/04/2010 4:10 AM, Tom Lowry wrote:
We have a robotics research group that wants the highest-speed 
wireless connections possible.  All the equipment is in the same room 
-- approximately 50'x 50'.


Many consumer grade 802.11n APs seem to top out at well below 
100Mbps.  If anyone can recommend equipment that can achieve higher 
throughput, please let me know.  I won't say price is no object, but 
we need to consider the options.


Thanks,
Tom Lowry
Department of Computer Science
University of Arizona

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


--
Jason Cook
Technology Services
The University of Adelaide, AUSTRALIA 5005
Ph: +61 8 8313 4800
e-mail: jason.c...@adelaide.edu.au

CRICOS Provider Number 00123M
---
This email message is intended only for the addressee(s)
and contains information which may be confidential and/or
copyright.  If you are not the intended recipient please
do not read, save, forward, disclose, or copy the contents
of this email. If this email has been sent to you in error,
please notify the sender by reply email and delete this
email and any copies or links to this email completely and
immediately from your system.  No representation is made
that this email is free of viruses.  Virus scanning is
recommended and is the responsibility of the recipient.

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

Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] 802.11n AP recommendations

[Philippe Hanset]

Tom,

One detail that I forgot to mention.
It seems obvious but we got bitten by it many times!
Make sure to use Gigabit ports on switches that uplink the APs.
And if you use a midspan power-injector, also make sure that it supports
Gigabit Ethernet!

Philippe
Univ. of TN


On Apr 8, 2010, at 2:40 PM, Tom Lowry wrote:

We have a robotics research group that wants the highest-speed  
wireless connections possible.  All the equipment is in the same  
room -- approximately 50'x 50'.


Many consumer grade 802.11n APs seem to top out at well below  
100Mbps.  If anyone can recommend equipment that can achieve higher  
throughput, please let me know.  I won't say price is no object, but  
we need to consider the options.


Thanks,
Tom Lowry
Department of Computer Science
University of Arizona

**
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: 802.11n Solutions

[Osborne, Bruce W. (NS)]

Frank,

We have running Aruba's centralized 802.11n solution here at Liberty University 
for the past year. Early on, there were some stability  scalability issues, 
but they have been resolved.

I know that this summer, during our testing for Video over wireless, we had 20 
clients simultaneously receiving unicast streaming 3 megabit video, all on a 
single access point. At the time, this was on unreleased code that has since 
been released.

Our wireless technician may have more information, but he is currently away on 
holiday break,

Bruce Osborne
Network Engineer
Liberty University 

-Original Message-
From: Frank Bulk [mailto:frnk...@iname.com] 
Sent: Saturday, December 19, 2009 4:18 PM
Subject: Re: 802.11n Solutions

The feature gaps you mention suggest that despite all the years that this
solution has had to bake, it does not have feature parity with its
competitors.  It appears to be more than just a difference in architecture.

I find it interesting that 2+ years after the introduction of 802.11n APs
and ensuing debate regarding of centralized versus distributed, that the
debate has simmered down and the throughput of the controllers has met
everyone's needs or the vendor has a reasonable method for scalability.  Has
anyone seen a dual-radio 802.11n AP with a sustained throughput of even 20
Mbps over a 5-minute polling period?  

From what I read on this list, client/AP interoperability and AP/controller
software stability are the top two technical issues that wireless
administrators face.

Frank

-Original Message-
From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv
[mailto:wireless-...@listserv.educause.edu] On Behalf Of Jason Mueller
Sent: Wednesday, December 16, 2009 11:25 AM
To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] 802.11n Solutions

Pablo,

Our experience with the HP MSM765 controller is mixed. It has a  
conceptually different architecture than most of the other controller  
models out there. One key difference is that the controller works much  
better in an environment where you forward traffic from wireless users  
directly at the AP rather than tunneling user traffic back to the  
controller (distributed rather than centralized model). There are both  
pros and cons to this approach. The HP support engineers have  
encouraged us to use the distributed approach with this product for  
our primary SSID (WPA2-enterprise/AES).

There is no *simple* association of an SSID to a VLAN, if you tunnel  
traffic to the controller. You can assign VLANs to an SSID at the  
controller, but there are two ways to do it and caveats that go along  
with both. There are a couple of roadmap features that might be very  
powerful in terms of fixing this issue, but nothing that has been  
realized in current production code. An SSID - VLAN relationship is  
easy to construct, if you bridge traffic at the AP rather than the  
controller. In fact, if you are using a distributed model, you can set  
the VLAN - SSID relationship for all APs, a group of APs, or  
individually at a single AP  (and you can have a mix based on simple  
inheritance rules). In our testing case, we have a different VLAN for  
our primary SSID per building.

We have had several issues with their web-based captive portal, but I  
don't think there is a perfect captive portal in any controller-based  
solution. You should note that you must forward traffic to the  
controller, if you want to use the captive portal. We have also had  
some performance issues when tunneling traffic to the controller.

We would really like to see user load balancing across both APs and  
bands rolled into the product (no band steering and no active user  
balancing across APs). You can set the maximum number of users you  
want per radio, but that value is set across an entire SSID on a  
controller rather than being applied per a group of APs (i.e., there  
is no way to vary this setting by geographic region or AP type other  
than adding an additional controller).

The RF management is fairly rudimentary, but I am sure this is being  
worked on diligently.

There is currently no N+1 redundancy, but you might well imagine that  
this is also an issue they are diligently working on. You can get some  
redundancy now by simply assigning multiple controller addresses to  
the APs.

The MSM422 itself has done well in our pilot and testing (~100 APs).  
We have been supporting about 800 simultaneous users in our library  
during the busiest two weeks of the year.

We have had a reasonable response on the engineering and support side.

I think this is a great fit for small to medium sized deployments. But  
you will need to consider whether the product scales appropriately for  
your environment. I encourage you to contact an HP sales  
representative that might be able to give you more detailed  
information about the product roadmap and future features.

If you want to know some more specifics about our

RE: [WIRELESS-LAN] 802.11n Solutions

[Frank Bulk]

The feature gaps you mention suggest that despite all the years that this
solution has had to bake, it does not have feature parity with its
competitors.  It appears to be more than just a difference in architecture.

I find it interesting that 2+ years after the introduction of 802.11n APs
and ensuing debate regarding of centralized versus distributed, that the
debate has simmered down and the throughput of the controllers has met
everyone's needs or the vendor has a reasonable method for scalability.  Has
anyone seen a dual-radio 802.11n AP with a sustained throughput of even 20
Mbps over a 5-minute polling period?  

From what I read on this list, client/AP interoperability and AP/controller
software stability are the top two technical issues that wireless
administrators face.

Frank

-Original Message-
From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv
[mailto:wireless-...@listserv.educause.edu] On Behalf Of Jason Mueller
Sent: Wednesday, December 16, 2009 11:25 AM
To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] 802.11n Solutions

Pablo,

Our experience with the HP MSM765 controller is mixed. It has a  
conceptually different architecture than most of the other controller  
models out there. One key difference is that the controller works much  
better in an environment where you forward traffic from wireless users  
directly at the AP rather than tunneling user traffic back to the  
controller (distributed rather than centralized model). There are both  
pros and cons to this approach. The HP support engineers have  
encouraged us to use the distributed approach with this product for  
our primary SSID (WPA2-enterprise/AES).

There is no *simple* association of an SSID to a VLAN, if you tunnel  
traffic to the controller. You can assign VLANs to an SSID at the  
controller, but there are two ways to do it and caveats that go along  
with both. There are a couple of roadmap features that might be very  
powerful in terms of fixing this issue, but nothing that has been  
realized in current production code. An SSID - VLAN relationship is  
easy to construct, if you bridge traffic at the AP rather than the  
controller. In fact, if you are using a distributed model, you can set  
the VLAN - SSID relationship for all APs, a group of APs, or  
individually at a single AP  (and you can have a mix based on simple  
inheritance rules). In our testing case, we have a different VLAN for  
our primary SSID per building.

We have had several issues with their web-based captive portal, but I  
don't think there is a perfect captive portal in any controller-based  
solution. You should note that you must forward traffic to the  
controller, if you want to use the captive portal. We have also had  
some performance issues when tunneling traffic to the controller.

We would really like to see user load balancing across both APs and  
bands rolled into the product (no band steering and no active user  
balancing across APs). You can set the maximum number of users you  
want per radio, but that value is set across an entire SSID on a  
controller rather than being applied per a group of APs (i.e., there  
is no way to vary this setting by geographic region or AP type other  
than adding an additional controller).

The RF management is fairly rudimentary, but I am sure this is being  
worked on diligently.

There is currently no N+1 redundancy, but you might well imagine that  
this is also an issue they are diligently working on. You can get some  
redundancy now by simply assigning multiple controller addresses to  
the APs.

The MSM422 itself has done well in our pilot and testing (~100 APs).  
We have been supporting about 800 simultaneous users in our library  
during the busiest two weeks of the year.

We have had a reasonable response on the engineering and support side.

I think this is a great fit for small to medium sized deployments. But  
you will need to consider whether the product scales appropriately for  
your environment. I encourage you to contact an HP sales  
representative that might be able to give you more detailed  
information about the product roadmap and future features.

If you want to know some more specifics about our experience, contact  
me off-list.

-Jason

**
Jason Mueller
Network Design Engineer
Indiana University, UITS
812-856-5720
jasmu...@indiana.edu
**

On Dec 16, 2009, at 6:55 AM, Pablo J. Rebollo-Sosa wrote:

 Hi,

 We are looking for 802.11n solutions.  I would like know more about
 Enterasys and HP solutions experience.

 Best regards,

 Pablo J. Rebollo

 **
 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: 802.11n Solutions

[Osborne, Bruce W. (NS)]

Pablo,

We here at Liberty University recently migrated to Aruba's 802.11n solution. I 
am sure that we have a larger, more complex deployment than you have, but Aruba 
has solutions for various sized deployments.

Aruba's technical support is dedicated, thorough, and very customer focused. If 
a customer not satisfied, they have all the contact information to contact 
their global director of support directly.

Feel free to contact me offline for more information.

Bruce Osborne
Network Engineer
Liberty University

-Original Message-
From: Pablo J. Rebollo-Sosa [mailto:pablo.rebo...@upr.edu] 
Sent: Wednesday, December 16, 2009 6:55 AM
Subject: 802.11n Solutions

Hi,

We are looking for 802.11n solutions.  I would like know more about
Enterasys and HP solutions experience.

Best regards,

Pablo J. Rebollo

**
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/.

802.11n Solutions

[Pablo J. Rebollo-Sosa]

Hi,

We are looking for 802.11n solutions.  I would like know more about
Enterasys and HP solutions experience.

Best regards,

Pablo J. Rebollo

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

RE: [WIRELESS-LAN] 802.11n Solutions

[Tupker, Mike]

We recently did a site survey with a HP MSM422 and found it to be a pretty good 
device. Good signal strength compared to our old Proruve AP 420s. We have not 
tested the controller for the MSM422s yet.

Mike Tupker
Systems Administrator
Mount Mercy College
319-244-8489

-Original Message-
From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv 
[mailto:wireless-...@listserv.educause.edu] On Behalf Of Pablo J. Rebollo-Sosa
Sent: Wednesday, December 16, 2009 5:55 AM
To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
Subject: [WIRELESS-LAN] 802.11n Solutions

Hi,

We are looking for 802.11n solutions.  I would like know more about
Enterasys and HP solutions experience.

Best regards,

Pablo J. Rebollo

**
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] 802.11n Solutions

[Lee H Badman]

Pablo-

How big is your expected deployment? There are some interesting choices 
depending on required scale.

-Lee

-Original Message-
From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv 
[mailto:wireless-...@listserv.educause.edu] On Behalf Of Pablo J. Rebollo-Sosa
Sent: Wednesday, December 16, 2009 6:55 AM
To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
Subject: [WIRELESS-LAN] 802.11n Solutions

Hi,

We are looking for 802.11n solutions.  I would like know more about
Enterasys and HP solutions experience.

Best regards,

Pablo J. Rebollo

**
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] 802.11n Solutions

[Jason Mueller]

Pablo,

Our experience with the HP MSM765 controller is mixed. It has a  
conceptually different architecture than most of the other controller  
models out there. One key difference is that the controller works much  
better in an environment where you forward traffic from wireless users  
directly at the AP rather than tunneling user traffic back to the  
controller (distributed rather than centralized model). There are both  
pros and cons to this approach. The HP support engineers have  
encouraged us to use the distributed approach with this product for  
our primary SSID (WPA2-enterprise/AES).


There is no *simple* association of an SSID to a VLAN, if you tunnel  
traffic to the controller. You can assign VLANs to an SSID at the  
controller, but there are two ways to do it and caveats that go along  
with both. There are a couple of roadmap features that might be very  
powerful in terms of fixing this issue, but nothing that has been  
realized in current production code. An SSID - VLAN relationship is  
easy to construct, if you bridge traffic at the AP rather than the  
controller. In fact, if you are using a distributed model, you can set  
the VLAN - SSID relationship for all APs, a group of APs, or  
individually at a single AP  (and you can have a mix based on simple  
inheritance rules). In our testing case, we have a different VLAN for  
our primary SSID per building.


We have had several issues with their web-based captive portal, but I  
don't think there is a perfect captive portal in any controller-based  
solution. You should note that you must forward traffic to the  
controller, if you want to use the captive portal. We have also had  
some performance issues when tunneling traffic to the controller.


We would really like to see user load balancing across both APs and  
bands rolled into the product (no band steering and no active user  
balancing across APs). You can set the maximum number of users you  
want per radio, but that value is set across an entire SSID on a  
controller rather than being applied per a group of APs (i.e., there  
is no way to vary this setting by geographic region or AP type other  
than adding an additional controller).


The RF management is fairly rudimentary, but I am sure this is being  
worked on diligently.


There is currently no N+1 redundancy, but you might well imagine that  
this is also an issue they are diligently working on. You can get some  
redundancy now by simply assigning multiple controller addresses to  
the APs.


The MSM422 itself has done well in our pilot and testing (~100 APs).  
We have been supporting about 800 simultaneous users in our library  
during the busiest two weeks of the year.


We have had a reasonable response on the engineering and support side.

I think this is a great fit for small to medium sized deployments. But  
you will need to consider whether the product scales appropriately for  
your environment. I encourage you to contact an HP sales  
representative that might be able to give you more detailed  
information about the product roadmap and future features.


If you want to know some more specifics about our experience, contact  
me off-list.


-Jason

**
Jason Mueller
Network Design Engineer
Indiana University, UITS
812-856-5720
jasmu...@indiana.edu
**

On Dec 16, 2009, at 6:55 AM, Pablo J. Rebollo-Sosa wrote:


Hi,

We are looking for 802.11n solutions.  I would like know more about
Enterasys and HP solutions experience.

Best regards,

Pablo J. Rebollo

**
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] 802.11n Solutions

[Pablo J. Rebollo-Sosa]

He Lee,

We currently own a wireless system with over a 150 autonomous APs.  Now
we are working to move the infrastructure to 11n and to have a
technology to manage the APs in a centralized way.

Pablo

Lee H Badman wrote:
 Pablo-

 How big is your expected deployment? There are some interesting choices 
 depending on required scale.

 -Lee

 -Original Message-
 From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv 
 [mailto:wireless-...@listserv.educause.edu] On Behalf Of Pablo J. Rebollo-Sosa
 Sent: Wednesday, December 16, 2009 6:55 AM
 To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
 Subject: [WIRELESS-LAN] 802.11n Solutions

 Hi,

 We are looking for 802.11n solutions.  I would like know more about
 Enterasys and HP solutions experience.

 Best regards,

 Pablo J. Rebollo

 **
 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] 802.11n Solutions

[SuperPass]

We have good line of antennas for the N radio. Many customers are very happy 
with the performance, thought  it might help you to source good antennas. 
Check here:

http://www.superpass.com/SP-MIMO.html
http://www.superpass.com/SP-DIV.html

Regards


John Chen
SuperPass Company Inc.
135 Dearborn Place
Waterloo, ON, N2J 4N5 Canada
Tel: 1-519-886-5186
Fax: 1-519-886-1622
E-mail: i...@superpass.com
http://www.superpass.com
http://www.superpassantenna.com/
- Original Message - 
From: Pablo J. Rebollo-Sosa pablo.rebo...@upr.edu

To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
Sent: Wednesday, December 16, 2009 6:55 AM
Subject: [WIRELESS-LAN] 802.11n Solutions



Hi,

We are looking for 802.11n solutions.  I would like know more about
Enterasys and HP solutions experience.

Best regards,

Pablo J. Rebollo

**
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] 802.11n Solutions

[Lee H Badman]

Pablo-

For the size of your deployment, it may be worth your time to look at both 
Meraki and AiroHive product lines. They take interesting alternative approaches 
to the thin wireless paradigm.

-Lee

From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv 
[wireless-...@listserv.educause.edu] On Behalf Of Pablo J. Rebollo-Sosa 
[pablo.rebo...@upr.edu]
Sent: Wednesday, December 16, 2009 1:24 PM
To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU

Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] 802.11n Solutions

He Lee,

We currently own a wireless system with over a 150 autonomous APs.  Now
we are working to move the infrastructure to 11n and to have a
technology to manage the APs in a centralized way.

Pablo

Lee H Badman wrote:
 Pablo-

 How big is your expected deployment? There are some interesting choices 
 depending on required scale.

 -Lee

 -Original Message-
 From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv 
 [mailto:wireless-...@listserv.educause.edu] On Behalf Of Pablo J. Rebollo-Sosa
 Sent: Wednesday, December 16, 2009 6:55 AM
 To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
 Subject: [WIRELESS-LAN] 802.11n Solutions

 Hi,

 We are looking for 802.11n solutions.  I would like know more about
 Enterasys and HP solutions experience.

 Best regards,

 Pablo J. Rebollo

 **
 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] 802.11n Solutions

[John Rodkey]

I'd be happy to talk with anyone about our deployment of Meraki at Westmont.

John Rodkey
Associate director of IT
Westmont College

On Wed, Dec 16, 2009 at 11:49 AM, Lee H Badman lhbad...@syr.edu wrote:

 Pablo-

 For the size of your deployment, it may be worth your time to look at both
 Meraki and AiroHive product lines. They take interesting alternative
 approaches to the thin wireless paradigm.

 -Lee
 
 From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv [
 wireless-...@listserv.educause.edu] On Behalf Of Pablo J. Rebollo-Sosa [
 pablo.rebo...@upr.edu]
 Sent: Wednesday, December 16, 2009 1:24 PM
 To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU

 Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] 802.11n Solutions

 He Lee,

 We currently own a wireless system with over a 150 autonomous APs.  Now
 we are working to move the infrastructure to 11n and to have a
 technology to manage the APs in a centralized way.

 Pablo

 Lee H Badman wrote:
  Pablo-
 
  How big is your expected deployment? There are some interesting choices
 depending on required scale.
 
  -Lee
 
  -Original Message-
  From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv [mailto:
 wireless-...@listserv.educause.edu] On Behalf Of Pablo J. Rebollo-Sosa
  Sent: Wednesday, December 16, 2009 6:55 AM
  To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
  Subject: [WIRELESS-LAN] 802.11n Solutions
 
  Hi,
 
  We are looking for 802.11n solutions.  I would like know more about
  Enterasys and HP solutions experience.
 
  Best regards,
 
  Pablo J. Rebollo
 
  **
  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] 802.11n antenna

[fred]

Nathan,
I am using one now connected to a Cisco 1252. It works just OK. This was 
the highest gain I could find in an outdoor MIMO antenna. I have a 
challenging application where the distance is several hundred feet 
shooting down from a tall building into a ground level coffee shop.  
Over a shorter distance with fewer obstructions, the Terrawave unit 
should work well enough.  We are also testing an Aerohive mesh along the 
same path but we were able to put one mesh AP inside the coffee shop. 
That setup uses a much higher gain(non MIMO) antenna for the backhaul to 
the mesh AP. We are early in the test but it looks promising.

Thanks,
Fred

Nathan Hay wrote:

Is anyone use the 802.11n MIMO antennas from TerraWave?
 
http://www.terrawaveonline.com
 
I'm particularly interested in the outdoor patch antenna and the 
outdoor omni antenna that has 6 leads for the 6 antennas inside of them.
 
The application is outdoor 802.11n coverage.  If you are doing 802.11n 
outdoors, but with another product, I'd be interested in hearing about it.
 
We have Meru wireless on our campus.
 
Nathan
 
 
 
 
 
 
Nathan P. Hay

Network Engineer
Computer Services
Cedarville University
www.cedarville.edu http://www.cedarville.edu/ ** 
Participation and subscription information for this EDUCAUSE 
Constituent Group discussion list can be found at 
http://www.educause.edu/groups/.




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

attachment: fred.vcf

802.11n antenna

[Nathan Hay]

Is anyone use the 802.11n MIMO antennas from TerraWave?
 
http://www.terrawaveonline.com
 
I'm particularly interested in the outdoor patch antenna and the outdoor omni 
antenna that has 6 leads for the 6 antennas inside of them.
 
The application is outdoor 802.11n coverage.  If you are doing 802.11n 
outdoors, but with another product, I'd be interested in hearing about it.
 
We have Meru wireless on our campus.
 
Nathan
 
 
 
 
 
 
Nathan P. Hay
Network Engineer
Computer Services
Cedarville University
www.cedarville.edu

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

How is 802.11n changing the campus? Or is it?

[JCox]

As a reporter for Network World, I'm putting together this week a package of 
stories in anticipation of the expected all-but-final ratification of the 
802.11n standard by week's end.

Campuses have been leading the way both in large-scale WLAN adoption in general 
and in 11n in particular (the draft 2 of the standard).

I'd like to leverage that experience for the stories I'm researching, as well 
as spark some worthwhile discussion on the listserv.

Is 11n changing the campus, and if so how? One issue that's already come up is 
the matter of the growing percentage of unused wired Ethernet ports, and the 
question of whether to continue with the traditional pattern of wired edge 
access investments (or perhaps WHEN to discontinue it, and to what degree?).

But are their other changes happening, both in the IT infrastructure and in 
user behaviours -- the way students/faculty/staff are using the network, and 
the kind of applications they run over it?

Is 11n accelerating adoption of other technologies, such 802.1x, expanded 
gigabit Ethernet infrastructure, endpoint security, or others?

Are you finding issues or challenges with 11n that you haven't with 11abg? For 
example, there's evidence that 11n's propagation seems less predictable than 
abg.

Has migrating to 11n met your expectations for performance or coverage or both? 
Or other institutional goals?

As part of my 11n content package, I'm hoping to get feedback from a group of 
college/university IT folks, who've been working with the draft 2 11n gear for 
awhile, perhaps creating either a best practices or practical tips listing 
for other readers.

So, while I'm hoping that this post will lead to some listserv comments, if 
you're interested in passing on some advice, suggestions, tips, then please 
feel free to contact me directly at john_...@nww.commailto:john_...@nww.com, 
to into a bit more detail, either via email or a phone call.

Thanks for this opportunity to post here.

Regards,
John Cox
__

J o h n   C o x
Senior Editor
Main: 508.766.5301 | Direct: 508.766.5422
Office at home: 978-834-0554

NETWORKWORLD
Maximize Your Return on IT
492 Old Connecticut Path | Framingham, MA 01701-9002
__
NetworkWorld.comhttp://www.networkworld.com/ | 2009 Media 
Guidehttp://www.networkworld.com/media/ | Conferences and 
Eventshttp://www.networkworld.com/events/



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

RE: [WIRELESS-LAN] 802.11n testplans

[Barber, Matt]

Hi Bruce,

We didn't have a formal test plan, but have had many experiences I am
more than willing to share.

Surveying was pretty interesting, as we deployed before there were any
11n capable tools available.  Back in the summer of 2007, we pretty much
just had to make some assumptions and then survey with what we had.  Our
goal was for full 5 GHz coverage, but without knowing exactly how the 5
GHz 11n coverage was going to look, we surveyed and deployed for 11a.
We made the incredibly safe assumption that 11n coverage would be equal
to or greater than 11a.  The end result was a pretty dense environment
all around.  Since we deployed Meru single-channel, the overlapping AP
coverage helps as opposed to hinders our deployment.  This may not be
the case with other vendors, but I don't have any personal experience
with anything else.  This approach left legacy clients covered just
fine.

In the summer of 2008 we had a chance to use the new version of Ekahau
to do some testing of 3x3 vs 2x2 antenna configurations.  We have been
running on 2x2 with normal 802.3af power since we deployed in October
2007.  We found that bumping up to 3x3 significantly improved the data
rates for clients at further distances.  The difference was enough that
we went ahead and got 802.3at (assuming the standard gets all wrapped
up) injectors.  

In terms of considering legacy clients for deployments, it may be useful
to see how legacy clients behave with an 11n AP at 3x3.  If you survey
and deploy for full coverage at 5GHz with 3x3, 11g clients may end up
fully covered anyways.  If I were to do a new deployment today, that is
how I would survey.  Depending on your client mix, you may be able to
even deal with only decent 11g coverage as the number of 11n clients
grows.

I hope this helps. I would love to hear how 11n deployments and
surveying are going for the group at large.  Is everyone still surveying
based on legacy clients, or do 11g clients end up working fine if you
target 5 GHz 11n?

Matt Barber
Network Analyst
Morrisville State College
315-684-6053


-Original Message-
From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv
[mailto:wireless-...@listserv.educause.edu] On Behalf Of Johnson, Bruce
T
Sent: Wednesday, January 28, 2009 11:36 AM
To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
Subject: [WIRELESS-LAN] 802.11n testplans

Toivo et al,
 
Great comments.  Does anyone have any 802.11n testplans they are willing
to
share? 
 
802.11n Survey experiences?  Has it turned the traditional survey
methodology on
its head, or do we still have to consider legacy and so the n simply
stands
for Nice (if you have it).
 
Anyone with experience with the Ixia WLAN Test suite?  Does it have
802.11n
capability?
 
Thanks all,
 
Bruce T. Johnson | Network Engineer | Partners Healthcare 
Network Engineering | 617.726.9662 | Pager: 31633 |
bjohns...@partners.org



From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv on behalf
of Toivo
Voll
Sent: Wed 1/28/2009 9:48 AM
To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] Comments about Aruba and Cisco



Some tests we found worthwhile:
-Check to see if multicast works like you expect.
-Related to multicast and in general, check to see if fragmentation
also leads to reordering of fragments and if your applications can
live with this.
-Test client throughput in various scenarios (Single client, multiple
clients, multiple clients some of which are legacy, bonded N channels
vs. unbonded, as many client cards as possible) and with varying
number of TCP streams per client. In particular with 802.11n the
throughput behavior between Aruba and Cisco was quite different
depending on the number of concurrent streams a client was sending /
receiving.
-Test WPA2 authentication with whatever authentication backend you
wish to use, including roaming between APs. Unless you get several
controllers, you may not be able to see whether the hand-off between
APs on different controllers introduces longer delays.
-Run some customer support scenarios trying to find out whether a
client is working right, seeing what might be the cause for bad
performance, and look at logging of information within the various
systems.
-You didn't mention the scale of your deployment, but see what
additional pieces you might need to go full-scale, such as how many
APs/Controllers one WCS box can handle before you need several and
Navigator. I'm not sure what the equivalent in Aruba parlance is.
-You mentioned you're looking at the 1200 series (our new Ciscos are
1142s) but also look at mounting and physical security options as well
as harmonious life with your Friendly Fire Marshall on your gear in
regards to plenum issues.
-If you are planning to use PoE gear in a mixed-vendor environment,
test the behavior of that as well. You'd think this would be
easy-peasy but we didn't find this to necessarily be the case.
-If you're using rogue detection features, see whether

RE: [WIRELESS-LAN] 802.11n testplans

[Johnson, Bruce T]

Thank you Matt,
 
I appreciate the feedback and may want to get more of your Meru experiences
offline.  A 5GHz RSSI (PHY) survey seems to be the common denominator for legacy
and .11n clients.  Its likely this provides adequate coverage for 2.4GHz
clients.  In fact it may be overkill for 2.4GHz, given the better penetration. 
 
Assuming equitable power levels (some vendors are more strict than others when
it comes to 5GHz max power levels with non-captured antennas) equal cell sizing
can be approximated.   Do you happen to know if Meru has any power limits in
5GHz for their APs? 
 
Bruce T. Johnson | Network Engineer | Partners Healthcare 
Network Engineering | 617.726.9662 | Pager: 31633 | bjohns...@partners.org



From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv on behalf of
Barber, Matt
Sent: Thu 1/29/2009 9:20 AM
To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] 802.11n testplans



Hi Bruce,

We didn't have a formal test plan, but have had many experiences I am
more than willing to share.

Surveying was pretty interesting, as we deployed before there were any
11n capable tools available.  Back in the summer of 2007, we pretty much
just had to make some assumptions and then survey with what we had.  Our
goal was for full 5 GHz coverage, but without knowing exactly how the 5
GHz 11n coverage was going to look, we surveyed and deployed for 11a.
We made the incredibly safe assumption that 11n coverage would be equal
to or greater than 11a.  The end result was a pretty dense environment
all around.  Since we deployed Meru single-channel, the overlapping AP
coverage helps as opposed to hinders our deployment.  This may not be
the case with other vendors, but I don't have any personal experience
with anything else.  This approach left legacy clients covered just
fine.

In the summer of 2008 we had a chance to use the new version of Ekahau
to do some testing of 3x3 vs 2x2 antenna configurations.  We have been
running on 2x2 with normal 802.3af power since we deployed in October
2007.  We found that bumping up to 3x3 significantly improved the data
rates for clients at further distances.  The difference was enough that
we went ahead and got 802.3at (assuming the standard gets all wrapped
up) injectors. 

In terms of considering legacy clients for deployments, it may be useful
to see how legacy clients behave with an 11n AP at 3x3.  If you survey
and deploy for full coverage at 5GHz with 3x3, 11g clients may end up
fully covered anyways.  If I were to do a new deployment today, that is
how I would survey.  Depending on your client mix, you may be able to
even deal with only decent 11g coverage as the number of 11n clients
grows.

I hope this helps. I would love to hear how 11n deployments and
surveying are going for the group at large.  Is everyone still surveying
based on legacy clients, or do 11g clients end up working fine if you
target 5 GHz 11n?

Matt Barber
Network Analyst
Morrisville State College
315-684-6053


-Original Message-
From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv
[mailto:wireless-...@listserv.educause.edu] On Behalf Of Johnson, Bruce
T
Sent: Wednesday, January 28, 2009 11:36 AM
To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
Subject: [WIRELESS-LAN] 802.11n testplans

Toivo et al,

Great comments.  Does anyone have any 802.11n testplans they are willing
to
share?

802.11n Survey experiences?  Has it turned the traditional survey
methodology on
its head, or do we still have to consider legacy and so the n simply
stands
for Nice (if you have it).

Anyone with experience with the Ixia WLAN Test suite?  Does it have
802.11n
capability?

Thanks all,

Bruce T. Johnson | Network Engineer | Partners Healthcare
Network Engineering | 617.726.9662 | Pager: 31633 |
bjohns...@partners.org



From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv on behalf
of Toivo
Voll
Sent: Wed 1/28/2009 9:48 AM
To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] Comments about Aruba and Cisco



Some tests we found worthwhile:
-Check to see if multicast works like you expect.
-Related to multicast and in general, check to see if fragmentation
also leads to reordering of fragments and if your applications can
live with this.
-Test client throughput in various scenarios (Single client, multiple
clients, multiple clients some of which are legacy, bonded N channels
vs. unbonded, as many client cards as possible) and with varying
number of TCP streams per client. In particular with 802.11n the
throughput behavior between Aruba and Cisco was quite different
depending on the number of concurrent streams a client was sending /
receiving.
-Test WPA2 authentication with whatever authentication backend you
wish to use, including roaming between APs. Unless you get several
controllers, you may not be able to see whether the hand-off between
APs on different controllers introduces longer delays

RE: [WIRELESS-LAN] 802.11n testplans

[Lee H Badman]

I had an interesting exchange with Ekahau (we use them and AirMagnet)
about how 11n should change surveys, cell representations, etc. I don't
want to speak for them, but beyond data rates, overall survey
representations really won't change much. There are nuances to this of
course, but to try to quantify MIMO's dynamic nature into something that
can be looked at as there- that's how the cell changes! that you take
as gospel is risky business. I snicker a bit at 50% bigger cells! or
9 times the performance of advertising claims...

-Lee

Lee H. Badman
Wireless/Network Engineer
Information Technology and Services
Syracuse University
315 443-3003

-Original Message-
From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv
[mailto:wireless-...@listserv.educause.edu] On Behalf Of Johnson, Bruce
T
Sent: Thursday, January 29, 2009 10:25 AM
To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] 802.11n testplans

Thank you Matt,
 
I appreciate the feedback and may want to get more of your Meru
experiences
offline.  A 5GHz RSSI (PHY) survey seems to be the common denominator
for legacy
and .11n clients.  Its likely this provides adequate coverage for 2.4GHz
clients.  In fact it may be overkill for 2.4GHz, given the better
penetration. 
 
Assuming equitable power levels (some vendors are more strict than
others when
it comes to 5GHz max power levels with non-captured antennas) equal cell
sizing
can be approximated.   Do you happen to know if Meru has any power
limits in
5GHz for their APs? 
 
Bruce T. Johnson | Network Engineer | Partners Healthcare 
Network Engineering | 617.726.9662 | Pager: 31633 |
bjohns...@partners.org



From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv on behalf
of
Barber, Matt
Sent: Thu 1/29/2009 9:20 AM
To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] 802.11n testplans



Hi Bruce,

We didn't have a formal test plan, but have had many experiences I am
more than willing to share.

Surveying was pretty interesting, as we deployed before there were any
11n capable tools available.  Back in the summer of 2007, we pretty much
just had to make some assumptions and then survey with what we had.  Our
goal was for full 5 GHz coverage, but without knowing exactly how the 5
GHz 11n coverage was going to look, we surveyed and deployed for 11a.
We made the incredibly safe assumption that 11n coverage would be equal
to or greater than 11a.  The end result was a pretty dense environment
all around.  Since we deployed Meru single-channel, the overlapping AP
coverage helps as opposed to hinders our deployment.  This may not be
the case with other vendors, but I don't have any personal experience
with anything else.  This approach left legacy clients covered just
fine.

In the summer of 2008 we had a chance to use the new version of Ekahau
to do some testing of 3x3 vs 2x2 antenna configurations.  We have been
running on 2x2 with normal 802.3af power since we deployed in October
2007.  We found that bumping up to 3x3 significantly improved the data
rates for clients at further distances.  The difference was enough that
we went ahead and got 802.3at (assuming the standard gets all wrapped
up) injectors. 

In terms of considering legacy clients for deployments, it may be useful
to see how legacy clients behave with an 11n AP at 3x3.  If you survey
and deploy for full coverage at 5GHz with 3x3, 11g clients may end up
fully covered anyways.  If I were to do a new deployment today, that is
how I would survey.  Depending on your client mix, you may be able to
even deal with only decent 11g coverage as the number of 11n clients
grows.

I hope this helps. I would love to hear how 11n deployments and
surveying are going for the group at large.  Is everyone still surveying
based on legacy clients, or do 11g clients end up working fine if you
target 5 GHz 11n?

Matt Barber
Network Analyst
Morrisville State College
315-684-6053


-Original Message-
From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv
[mailto:wireless-...@listserv.educause.edu] On Behalf Of Johnson, Bruce
T
Sent: Wednesday, January 28, 2009 11:36 AM
To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
Subject: [WIRELESS-LAN] 802.11n testplans

Toivo et al,

Great comments.  Does anyone have any 802.11n testplans they are willing
to
share?

802.11n Survey experiences?  Has it turned the traditional survey
methodology on
its head, or do we still have to consider legacy and so the n simply
stands
for Nice (if you have it).

Anyone with experience with the Ixia WLAN Test suite?  Does it have
802.11n
capability?

Thanks all,

Bruce T. Johnson | Network Engineer | Partners Healthcare
Network Engineering | 617.726.9662 | Pager: 31633 |
bjohns...@partners.org



From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv on behalf
of Toivo
Voll
Sent: Wed 1/28/2009 9:48 AM
To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN

RE: [WIRELESS-LAN] 802.11n testplans

[Barber, Matt]

I had to check the configuration guide, but the 5 GHz maximum power
levels for the radios are documented as follows for the US:

Channel 36-48: 23 dBm
Channel 52-140: 30 dBm
Channel 149-165: 36 dBm


Matt Barber
Network Analyst
Morrisville State College
315-684-6053


-Original Message-
From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv
[mailto:wireless-...@listserv.educause.edu] On Behalf Of Johnson, Bruce
T
Sent: Thursday, January 29, 2009 10:25 AM
To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] 802.11n testplans

Thank you Matt,
 
I appreciate the feedback and may want to get more of your Meru
experiences
offline.  A 5GHz RSSI (PHY) survey seems to be the common denominator
for legacy
and .11n clients.  Its likely this provides adequate coverage for 2.4GHz
clients.  In fact it may be overkill for 2.4GHz, given the better
penetration. 
 
Assuming equitable power levels (some vendors are more strict than
others when
it comes to 5GHz max power levels with non-captured antennas) equal cell
sizing
can be approximated.   Do you happen to know if Meru has any power
limits in
5GHz for their APs? 
 
Bruce T. Johnson | Network Engineer | Partners Healthcare 
Network Engineering | 617.726.9662 | Pager: 31633 |
bjohns...@partners.org



From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv on behalf
of
Barber, Matt
Sent: Thu 1/29/2009 9:20 AM
To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] 802.11n testplans



Hi Bruce,

We didn't have a formal test plan, but have had many experiences I am
more than willing to share.

Surveying was pretty interesting, as we deployed before there were any
11n capable tools available.  Back in the summer of 2007, we pretty much
just had to make some assumptions and then survey with what we had.  Our
goal was for full 5 GHz coverage, but without knowing exactly how the 5
GHz 11n coverage was going to look, we surveyed and deployed for 11a.
We made the incredibly safe assumption that 11n coverage would be equal
to or greater than 11a.  The end result was a pretty dense environment
all around.  Since we deployed Meru single-channel, the overlapping AP
coverage helps as opposed to hinders our deployment.  This may not be
the case with other vendors, but I don't have any personal experience
with anything else.  This approach left legacy clients covered just
fine.

In the summer of 2008 we had a chance to use the new version of Ekahau
to do some testing of 3x3 vs 2x2 antenna configurations.  We have been
running on 2x2 with normal 802.3af power since we deployed in October
2007.  We found that bumping up to 3x3 significantly improved the data
rates for clients at further distances.  The difference was enough that
we went ahead and got 802.3at (assuming the standard gets all wrapped
up) injectors. 

In terms of considering legacy clients for deployments, it may be useful
to see how legacy clients behave with an 11n AP at 3x3.  If you survey
and deploy for full coverage at 5GHz with 3x3, 11g clients may end up
fully covered anyways.  If I were to do a new deployment today, that is
how I would survey.  Depending on your client mix, you may be able to
even deal with only decent 11g coverage as the number of 11n clients
grows.

I hope this helps. I would love to hear how 11n deployments and
surveying are going for the group at large.  Is everyone still surveying
based on legacy clients, or do 11g clients end up working fine if you
target 5 GHz 11n?

Matt Barber
Network Analyst
Morrisville State College
315-684-6053


-Original Message-
From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv
[mailto:wireless-...@listserv.educause.edu] On Behalf Of Johnson, Bruce
T
Sent: Wednesday, January 28, 2009 11:36 AM
To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
Subject: [WIRELESS-LAN] 802.11n testplans

Toivo et al,

Great comments.  Does anyone have any 802.11n testplans they are willing
to
share?

802.11n Survey experiences?  Has it turned the traditional survey
methodology on
its head, or do we still have to consider legacy and so the n simply
stands
for Nice (if you have it).

Anyone with experience with the Ixia WLAN Test suite?  Does it have
802.11n
capability?

Thanks all,

Bruce T. Johnson | Network Engineer | Partners Healthcare
Network Engineering | 617.726.9662 | Pager: 31633 |
bjohns...@partners.org



From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv on behalf
of Toivo
Voll
Sent: Wed 1/28/2009 9:48 AM
To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] Comments about Aruba and Cisco



Some tests we found worthwhile:
-Check to see if multicast works like you expect.
-Related to multicast and in general, check to see if fragmentation
also leads to reordering of fragments and if your applications can
live with this.
-Test client throughput in various scenarios (Single client, multiple
clients, multiple clients some of which

RE: [WIRELESS-LAN] 802.11n testplans

[Barber, Matt]

Yeah, that is something I should have mentioned.  The coverage maps look
extremely interesting with MIMO playing a factor.  If you have seen any
11n data rate maps with the strange pockets of coverage showing up as
you move away from the APs, that was what we were seeing in real
testing.  Rather than just expand like a sphere or donuts like you
might see in 11g or 11a, we saw pockets of strong signal pop up further
away due to reflections and amplifications of the signal with MIMO.  We
were seeing fairly normal coverage from the AP up to a certain point,
but at the edges things look very different.

I agree with Lee's risky business assessment.  There is no way to just
say you will get twice the signal strength or something.  I do think
you will generally see some increase, but quantifying that is really
hard.  If you can, use a coverage tool and test it out for yourself.
Your specific buildings and environments will have a significant impact
on the results.  That drove our decision to assume the worst-case and go
from there.

Matt Barber
Network Analyst
Morrisville State College
315-684-6053


-Original Message-
From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv
[mailto:wireless-...@listserv.educause.edu] On Behalf Of Lee H Badman
Sent: Thursday, January 29, 2009 10:42 AM
To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] 802.11n testplans

I had an interesting exchange with Ekahau (we use them and AirMagnet)
about how 11n should change surveys, cell representations, etc. I don't
want to speak for them, but beyond data rates, overall survey
representations really won't change much. There are nuances to this of
course, but to try to quantify MIMO's dynamic nature into something that
can be looked at as there- that's how the cell changes! that you take
as gospel is risky business. I snicker a bit at 50% bigger cells! or
9 times the performance of advertising claims...

-Lee

Lee H. Badman
Wireless/Network Engineer
Information Technology and Services
Syracuse University
315 443-3003

-Original Message-
From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv
[mailto:wireless-...@listserv.educause.edu] On Behalf Of Johnson, Bruce
T
Sent: Thursday, January 29, 2009 10:25 AM
To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] 802.11n testplans

Thank you Matt,
 
I appreciate the feedback and may want to get more of your Meru
experiences
offline.  A 5GHz RSSI (PHY) survey seems to be the common denominator
for legacy
and .11n clients.  Its likely this provides adequate coverage for 2.4GHz
clients.  In fact it may be overkill for 2.4GHz, given the better
penetration. 
 
Assuming equitable power levels (some vendors are more strict than
others when
it comes to 5GHz max power levels with non-captured antennas) equal cell
sizing
can be approximated.   Do you happen to know if Meru has any power
limits in
5GHz for their APs? 
 
Bruce T. Johnson | Network Engineer | Partners Healthcare 
Network Engineering | 617.726.9662 | Pager: 31633 |
bjohns...@partners.org



From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv on behalf
of
Barber, Matt
Sent: Thu 1/29/2009 9:20 AM
To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] 802.11n testplans



Hi Bruce,

We didn't have a formal test plan, but have had many experiences I am
more than willing to share.

Surveying was pretty interesting, as we deployed before there were any
11n capable tools available.  Back in the summer of 2007, we pretty much
just had to make some assumptions and then survey with what we had.  Our
goal was for full 5 GHz coverage, but without knowing exactly how the 5
GHz 11n coverage was going to look, we surveyed and deployed for 11a.
We made the incredibly safe assumption that 11n coverage would be equal
to or greater than 11a.  The end result was a pretty dense environment
all around.  Since we deployed Meru single-channel, the overlapping AP
coverage helps as opposed to hinders our deployment.  This may not be
the case with other vendors, but I don't have any personal experience
with anything else.  This approach left legacy clients covered just
fine.

In the summer of 2008 we had a chance to use the new version of Ekahau
to do some testing of 3x3 vs 2x2 antenna configurations.  We have been
running on 2x2 with normal 802.3af power since we deployed in October
2007.  We found that bumping up to 3x3 significantly improved the data
rates for clients at further distances.  The difference was enough that
we went ahead and got 802.3at (assuming the standard gets all wrapped
up) injectors. 

In terms of considering legacy clients for deployments, it may be useful
to see how legacy clients behave with an 11n AP at 3x3.  If you survey
and deploy for full coverage at 5GHz with 3x3, 11g clients may end up
fully covered anyways.  If I were to do a new deployment today, that is
how I would survey.  Depending on your client mix, you may be able

RE: [WIRELESS-LAN] 802.11n testplans

[Johnson, Bruce T]

Cisco LWAPP AP Maximum Transmit Power and Channel settings link,
 
http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/wireless/access_point/channels/lwapp/reference/g
uide/lw_chp2.html
 
Bruce T. Johnson | Network Engineer | Partners Healthcare 
Network Engineering | 617.726.9662 | Pager: 31633 | bjohns...@partners.org



From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv on behalf of
Barber, Matt
Sent: Thu 1/29/2009 11:07 AM
To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] 802.11n testplans



Yeah, that is something I should have mentioned.  The coverage maps look
extremely interesting with MIMO playing a factor.  If you have seen any
11n data rate maps with the strange pockets of coverage showing up as
you move away from the APs, that was what we were seeing in real
testing.  Rather than just expand like a sphere or donuts like you
might see in 11g or 11a, we saw pockets of strong signal pop up further
away due to reflections and amplifications of the signal with MIMO.  We
were seeing fairly normal coverage from the AP up to a certain point,
but at the edges things look very different.

I agree with Lee's risky business assessment.  There is no way to just
say you will get twice the signal strength or something.  I do think
you will generally see some increase, but quantifying that is really
hard.  If you can, use a coverage tool and test it out for yourself.
Your specific buildings and environments will have a significant impact
on the results.  That drove our decision to assume the worst-case and go
from there.

Matt Barber
Network Analyst
Morrisville State College
315-684-6053


-Original Message-
From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv
[mailto:wireless-...@listserv.educause.edu] On Behalf Of Lee H Badman
Sent: Thursday, January 29, 2009 10:42 AM
To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] 802.11n testplans

I had an interesting exchange with Ekahau (we use them and AirMagnet)
about how 11n should change surveys, cell representations, etc. I don't
want to speak for them, but beyond data rates, overall survey
representations really won't change much. There are nuances to this of
course, but to try to quantify MIMO's dynamic nature into something that
can be looked at as there- that's how the cell changes! that you take
as gospel is risky business. I snicker a bit at 50% bigger cells! or
9 times the performance of advertising claims...

-Lee

Lee H. Badman
Wireless/Network Engineer
Information Technology and Services
Syracuse University
315 443-3003

-Original Message-
From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv
[mailto:wireless-...@listserv.educause.edu] On Behalf Of Johnson, Bruce
T
Sent: Thursday, January 29, 2009 10:25 AM
To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] 802.11n testplans

Thank you Matt,

I appreciate the feedback and may want to get more of your Meru
experiences
offline.  A 5GHz RSSI (PHY) survey seems to be the common denominator
for legacy
and .11n clients.  Its likely this provides adequate coverage for 2.4GHz
clients.  In fact it may be overkill for 2.4GHz, given the better
penetration.

Assuming equitable power levels (some vendors are more strict than
others when
it comes to 5GHz max power levels with non-captured antennas) equal cell
sizing
can be approximated.   Do you happen to know if Meru has any power
limits in
5GHz for their APs?

Bruce T. Johnson | Network Engineer | Partners Healthcare
Network Engineering | 617.726.9662 | Pager: 31633 |
bjohns...@partners.org



From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv on behalf
of
Barber, Matt
Sent: Thu 1/29/2009 9:20 AM
To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] 802.11n testplans



Hi Bruce,

We didn't have a formal test plan, but have had many experiences I am
more than willing to share.

Surveying was pretty interesting, as we deployed before there were any
11n capable tools available.  Back in the summer of 2007, we pretty much
just had to make some assumptions and then survey with what we had.  Our
goal was for full 5 GHz coverage, but without knowing exactly how the 5
GHz 11n coverage was going to look, we surveyed and deployed for 11a.
We made the incredibly safe assumption that 11n coverage would be equal
to or greater than 11a.  The end result was a pretty dense environment
all around.  Since we deployed Meru single-channel, the overlapping AP
coverage helps as opposed to hinders our deployment.  This may not be
the case with other vendors, but I don't have any personal experience
with anything else.  This approach left legacy clients covered just
fine.

In the summer of 2008 we had a chance to use the new version of Ekahau
to do some testing of 3x3 vs 2x2 antenna configurations.  We have been
running on 2x2 with normal 802.3af power since we deployed in October
2007.  We found that bumping up to 3x3

[WIRELESS-LAN] 802.11n testplans

[Johnson, Bruce T]

Toivo et al,
 
Great comments.  Does anyone have any 802.11n testplans they are willing to
share? 
 
802.11n Survey experiences?  Has it turned the traditional survey methodology on
its head, or do we still have to consider legacy and so the n simply stands
for Nice (if you have it).
 
Anyone with experience with the Ixia WLAN Test suite?  Does it have 802.11n
capability?
 
Thanks all,
 
Bruce T. Johnson | Network Engineer | Partners Healthcare 
Network Engineering | 617.726.9662 | Pager: 31633 | bjohns...@partners.org



From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv on behalf of Toivo
Voll
Sent: Wed 1/28/2009 9:48 AM
To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] Comments about Aruba and Cisco



Some tests we found worthwhile:
-Check to see if multicast works like you expect.
-Related to multicast and in general, check to see if fragmentation
also leads to reordering of fragments and if your applications can
live with this.
-Test client throughput in various scenarios (Single client, multiple
clients, multiple clients some of which are legacy, bonded N channels
vs. unbonded, as many client cards as possible) and with varying
number of TCP streams per client. In particular with 802.11n the
throughput behavior between Aruba and Cisco was quite different
depending on the number of concurrent streams a client was sending /
receiving.
-Test WPA2 authentication with whatever authentication backend you
wish to use, including roaming between APs. Unless you get several
controllers, you may not be able to see whether the hand-off between
APs on different controllers introduces longer delays.
-Run some customer support scenarios trying to find out whether a
client is working right, seeing what might be the cause for bad
performance, and look at logging of information within the various
systems.
-You didn't mention the scale of your deployment, but see what
additional pieces you might need to go full-scale, such as how many
APs/Controllers one WCS box can handle before you need several and
Navigator. I'm not sure what the equivalent in Aruba parlance is.
-You mentioned you're looking at the 1200 series (our new Ciscos are
1142s) but also look at mounting and physical security options as well
as harmonious life with your Friendly Fire Marshall on your gear in
regards to plenum issues.
-If you are planning to use PoE gear in a mixed-vendor environment,
test the behavior of that as well. You'd think this would be
easy-peasy but we didn't find this to necessarily be the case.
-If you're using rogue detection features, see whether the alerts are
valid, and in a case of multiple rogues you'd like to contain whether
you can correctly un-contain some or add new rogues to the containment
list.
-Test for controller failures and AP behavior -- also make sure to see
what happens when the downed controller is brought back.

--
Toivo Voll
Network Administrator
Information Technology Communications
University of South Florida



On Tue, Jan 27, 2009 at 8:59 PM, Johnson, Ken ken.john...@med.fsu.edu wrote:
 All,

 I am a member of an evaluation team at Florida State University considering
 Cisco and Aruba wireless products. We are focusing on LWAPs and controllers.
 For evaluation configuration and pricing purposes, we have requested from
 the companies information and pricing relating to configurations with 128
 and 1200 APs. The Aruba LWAP is the AP125 while Cisco LWAP is the recently
 release 1142. The Aruba controller is the M3 while the Cisco product is the
 WiSM. There are other aspects, too. I know many of you have experience with
 Cisco and Aruba and have gone through similar experiences. I am interested
 in learning about any observations and experiences you have that we should
 consider in our efforts. Please send me your thoughts.

 Thanks.

 Ken

 ~~

 Ken Johnson

 Director, Information Technology

 FSU College of Medicine

 1115 Call Street

 Tallahassee, FL 32306-4300

 e-mail: ken.john...@med.fsu.edu

 phone: 850.644.9396

 cell: 850.443.7300

 fax: 850.644.5584



 Please note: Florida has very broad public records laws.

 Most written communications to or from state/university

 employees and students are public records and available

 to the public and media upon request. Your e-mail

 communications may therefore be subject to public disclosure.



 ** 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/.




The information in this e-mail is intended only for the person to whom it is
addressed. If you believe this e-mail was sent to you in error and the e-mail
contains patient information, please contact the Partners Compliance HelpLine at
http://www.partners.org

To 802.11n or not to 802.11n?

[Toivo Voll]

One benefit of N is improved radio performance thanks to more antennas
and MIMO, even with legacy clients. Especially in difficult buildings,
with a lot of cast concrete utility chases and such this can be pretty
helpful, based on our testing. That being said, in Cisco-land we can
buy about three 1131 ABG APs for the price of one 1141 ABGN AP, not to
mention the gig (or gig PoE) expense. If controller capacity, wiring
and maintenance costs aren't a problem, density may be a better
solution at the present. It really depends on your particular
situation and management's policy.

-- 
Toivo Voll
Network Administrator
Information Technology Communications
University of South Florida


On Mon, Dec 8, 2008 at 10:46 AM, James Moskwa [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 My personal thought on this is to wait. Upgrading to N is bigger than just
 replacing the wireless gear. You also need to make sure your infrastructure
 can support the high backhaul speeds that are required to properly support
 the new bandwidth you would be providing to the end user by going to N.

 We are a b/g/a shop at this point in time and see no real benefit (other
 than it is cool) to upgrade to N.

 Unless you have an overwhelming business requirement for N (not on the
 student access side), then I agree with Lee that setting tight for a while
 is a prudent move.

 Regards,
 -- Jim

 Jim Moskwa
 Manager Networks  Security
 Information Technology Department
 Johnson  Wales University
 8 Abbott Park Place
 Providence, RI 02903
 Office: 401-598-1556
 Fax: 401-598-1329
 Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

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

RE: [WIRELESS-LAN] 802.11n and WPA/WPA2...

[Paynter, Jeffrey]

We have 1,300 + APs with a mix of 1131AGs, 1242s, and 1250s.  We
broadcast our SSIDs and one of them is using Layer 2 security WPA +
WPA2.  WPA is set for TKIP only and WPA2 is set for AES only.  We have
not had any problems even in limited 802.11n testing.  We are running
WCS 4.2.81.0 and WiSM 4.2.61.0

Jeffrey M. Paynter
University of Rochester Medical Center

-Original Message-
From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Hector J Rios
Sent: Wednesday, June 18, 2008 1:06 PM
To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
Subject: [WIRELESS-LAN] 802.11n and WPA/WPA2...

So, we've been testing 802.11n with a couple of Cisco 1250 radios. In
order to support it on our 802.1X/WPA/TKIP WLAN, we had to add WPA2 to
our layer 2 security parameters. So now we support either WPA or WPA2.
We are finding out that some systems don't like this. Specifically,
Windows Vista and Windows Mobile 5.0. We have tested this with
controllers running 4.2.130 and 4.2.61 and we get the same issue. Since
we don't want to broadcast another SSID, we decided to turn off WPA2 for
right now. 

Is anybody else experiencing this? If so, did you opt for broadcasting a
separate SSID with WPA2 only, and still keep your WPA SSID? Or did you
just decide to support WPA2 only? How about those using Aruba, Trapeze,
etc. are you having a similar issue with the combination of WPA/WPA2 in
the same WLAN?

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] 802.11n and WPA/WPA2...

[Hector J Rios]

Jeffrey, 

Can you confirm that your setup has worked with Vista and Windows
mobile? 

I did find out that at least on two Vista machines, upgrading to SP1
solved the issue.

Hector 



-Original Message-
From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Paynter,
Jeffrey
Sent: Thursday, June 19, 2008 8:32 AM
To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] 802.11n and WPA/WPA2...

We have 1,300 + APs with a mix of 1131AGs, 1242s, and 1250s.  We
broadcast our SSIDs and one of them is using Layer 2 security WPA +
WPA2.  WPA is set for TKIP only and WPA2 is set for AES only.  We have
not had any problems even in limited 802.11n testing.  We are running
WCS 4.2.81.0 and WiSM 4.2.61.0

Jeffrey M. Paynter
University of Rochester Medical Center

-Original Message-
From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Hector J Rios
Sent: Wednesday, June 18, 2008 1:06 PM
To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
Subject: [WIRELESS-LAN] 802.11n and WPA/WPA2...

So, we've been testing 802.11n with a couple of Cisco 1250 radios. In
order to support it on our 802.1X/WPA/TKIP WLAN, we had to add WPA2 to
our layer 2 security parameters. So now we support either WPA or WPA2.
We are finding out that some systems don't like this. Specifically,
Windows Vista and Windows Mobile 5.0. We have tested this with
controllers running 4.2.130 and 4.2.61 and we get the same issue. Since
we don't want to broadcast another SSID, we decided to turn off WPA2 for
right now. 

Is anybody else experiencing this? If so, did you opt for broadcasting a
separate SSID with WPA2 only, and still keep your WPA SSID? Or did you
just decide to support WPA2 only? How about those using Aruba, Trapeze,
etc. are you having a similar issue with the combination of WPA/WPA2 in
the same WLAN?

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/.

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

RE: [WIRELESS-LAN] 802.11n and WPA/WPA2...

[Paynter, Jeffrey]

Hector,

It does work with Vista pre/post SP1 and Windows mobile 5 (have not
tested 6).

Jeff

-Original Message-
From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Hector J Rios
Sent: Thursday, June 19, 2008 9:41 AM
To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] 802.11n and WPA/WPA2...

Jeffrey, 

Can you confirm that your setup has worked with Vista and Windows
mobile? 

I did find out that at least on two Vista machines, upgrading to SP1
solved the issue.

Hector 



-Original Message-
From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Paynter,
Jeffrey
Sent: Thursday, June 19, 2008 8:32 AM
To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] 802.11n and WPA/WPA2...

We have 1,300 + APs with a mix of 1131AGs, 1242s, and 1250s.  We
broadcast our SSIDs and one of them is using Layer 2 security WPA +
WPA2.  WPA is set for TKIP only and WPA2 is set for AES only.  We have
not had any problems even in limited 802.11n testing.  We are running
WCS 4.2.81.0 and WiSM 4.2.61.0

Jeffrey M. Paynter
University of Rochester Medical Center

-Original Message-
From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Hector J Rios
Sent: Wednesday, June 18, 2008 1:06 PM
To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
Subject: [WIRELESS-LAN] 802.11n and WPA/WPA2...

So, we've been testing 802.11n with a couple of Cisco 1250 radios. In
order to support it on our 802.1X/WPA/TKIP WLAN, we had to add WPA2 to
our layer 2 security parameters. So now we support either WPA or WPA2.
We are finding out that some systems don't like this. Specifically,
Windows Vista and Windows Mobile 5.0. We have tested this with
controllers running 4.2.130 and 4.2.61 and we get the same issue. Since
we don't want to broadcast another SSID, we decided to turn off WPA2 for
right now. 

Is anybody else experiencing this? If so, did you opt for broadcasting a
separate SSID with WPA2 only, and still keep your WPA SSID? Or did you
just decide to support WPA2 only? How about those using Aruba, Trapeze,
etc. are you having a similar issue with the combination of WPA/WPA2 in
the same WLAN?

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/.

**
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/.

802.11n and WPA/WPA2...

[Hector J Rios]

So, we've been testing 802.11n with a couple of Cisco 1250 radios. In
order to support it on our 802.1X/WPA/TKIP WLAN, we had to add WPA2 to
our layer 2 security parameters. So now we support either WPA or WPA2.
We are finding out that some systems don't like this. Specifically,
Windows Vista and Windows Mobile 5.0. We have tested this with
controllers running 4.2.130 and 4.2.61 and we get the same issue. Since
we don't want to broadcast another SSID, we decided to turn off WPA2 for
right now. 

Is anybody else experiencing this? If so, did you opt for broadcasting a
separate SSID with WPA2 only, and still keep your WPA SSID? Or did you
just decide to support WPA2 only? How about those using Aruba, Trapeze,
etc. are you having a similar issue with the combination of WPA/WPA2 in
the same WLAN?

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/.

RE: [WIRELESS-LAN] 802.11n and WPA/WPA2...

[Chanowski, John]

We've been doing similar kinds of testing so I hope this helps. We use
802.1X/WEP but we didn't want different SSIDs for n and for a/b/g so we
created a new WLAN for n with a different profile name but the same SSID
as for a/b/g. In limited testing so far this seems to work fine. All
clients see the same SSID, but users who can do n will get to do n on
the new WLAN, and all the old clients who can't do n will still get to
do WEP without any client configuration changes.

-Original Message-
From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Hector J Rios
Sent: Wednesday, June 18, 2008 1:06 PM
To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
Subject: [WIRELESS-LAN] 802.11n and WPA/WPA2...

So, we've been testing 802.11n with a couple of Cisco 1250 radios. In
order to support it on our 802.1X/WPA/TKIP WLAN, we had to add WPA2 to
our layer 2 security parameters. So now we support either WPA or WPA2.
We are finding out that some systems don't like this. Specifically,
Windows Vista and Windows Mobile 5.0. We have tested this with
controllers running 4.2.130 and 4.2.61 and we get the same issue. Since
we don't want to broadcast another SSID, we decided to turn off WPA2 for
right now. 

Is anybody else experiencing this? If so, did you opt for broadcasting a
separate SSID with WPA2 only, and still keep your WPA SSID? Or did you
just decide to support WPA2 only? How about those using Aruba, Trapeze,
etc. are you having a similar issue with the combination of WPA/WPA2 in
the same WLAN?

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: 802.11n and WPA/WPA2...

[Nathan Hay]

We are deploying some 802.11n this summer and have converted our WPA SSIDs over 
to WPA2, except for one SSID that supports devices like the Wii, iPod Touch, 
iPhone, etc.  We also offer a clear SSID for students who can't do WPA2 or 
choose not to use that network. 
 
Nathan
 
Nathan P. Hay
Network Engineer
Computer Services
Cedarville University
www.cedarville.edu ( http://www.cedarville.edu/ ) 

 Hector J Rios [EMAIL PROTECTED] 6/18/2008 1:05 PM 
So, we've been testing 802.11n with a couple of Cisco 1250 radios. In
order to support it on our 802.1X/WPA/TKIP WLAN, we had to add WPA2 to
our layer 2 security parameters. So now we support either WPA or WPA2.
We are finding out that some systems don't like this. Specifically,
Windows Vista and Windows Mobile 5.0. We have tested this with
controllers running 4.2.130 and 4.2.61 and we get the same issue. Since
we don't want to broadcast another SSID, we decided to turn off WPA2 for
right now. 

Is anybody else experiencing this? If so, did you opt for broadcasting a
separate SSID with WPA2 only, and still keep your WPA SSID? Or did you
just decide to support WPA2 only? How about those using Aruba, Trapeze,
etc. are you having a similar issue with the combination of WPA/WPA2 in
the same WLAN?

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] 802.11n and WPA/WPA2...

[Frank Bulk - iNAME]

I believe what's your doing is called mixed-mode encryption, and you're
right, some clients deal with it better than others.  When I was doing more
testing, that's a combination I would specifically try out.  WEP/WPA and
WEP/WPA2 and cleaner combinations to be running together, but I don't
consider WEP to be a viable security implementation in higher ed.

I can offer no solutions other than trying another client card/driver and
see if you can discover a pattern.

Frank

-Original Message-
From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Hector J Rios
Sent: Wednesday, June 18, 2008 12:06 PM
To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
Subject: [WIRELESS-LAN] 802.11n and WPA/WPA2...

So, we've been testing 802.11n with a couple of Cisco 1250 radios. In
order to support it on our 802.1X/WPA/TKIP WLAN, we had to add WPA2 to
our layer 2 security parameters. So now we support either WPA or WPA2.
We are finding out that some systems don't like this. Specifically,
Windows Vista and Windows Mobile 5.0. We have tested this with
controllers running 4.2.130 and 4.2.61 and we get the same issue. Since
we don't want to broadcast another SSID, we decided to turn off WPA2 for
right now.

Is anybody else experiencing this? If so, did you opt for broadcasting a
separate SSID with WPA2 only, and still keep your WPA SSID? Or did you
just decide to support WPA2 only? How about those using Aruba, Trapeze,
etc. are you having a similar issue with the combination of WPA/WPA2 in
the same WLAN?

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: 802.11n WPA2/AES requirement

[Nathan Hay]

From my testing and from the systems engineer of the vendor's equipment
that I was testing, an 802.11n client with WPA2/AES can connect at
802.11n rates, but if that same 802.11n client connects using WPA/TKIP,
it gets a/b/g rates even though client and AP are both 802.11n.  So yes,
an N client can connect to an N AP with WPA/TKIP or WPA2/AES, but the
max data rate will be different (54 vs. 300).  Based on this, we plan to
migrate to WPA2/AES on our current a/b/g network to prepare for the
mixed environment we will have next school year.  We plan to deploy
802.11n in a new building that opens next school year and maybe in one
or two other buildings, but the majority of our buildings (including all
dorms) will be a/b/g.
 
Hope that helps,
 
Nathan
 
 
 
Nathan P. Hay
Network Engineer
Computer Services
Cedarville University
www.cedarville.edu ( http://www.cedarville.edu/ ) 

 Keith Moores [EMAIL PROTECTED] 3/16/2008 4:04 PM 
Just wondering what encryption type those of you that have started  
moving to (testing with) 802.11n APs are using?

I'm trying to confirm that N clients connecting to N APs must use WPA2/

AES to connect with encryption.

If an N AP accepts both WPA/TKIP and WPA2/AES can an N client connect 

set to either albeit only at 802.11n HT rates when using WPA2/AES?


-Keith


Keith Moores
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Network Systems Senior Engineer
ITC-Communications and Systems Division
University of Virginia, ITC-2015 Ivy RdPhone  (434)
924-0621
Box 400324, Charlottesville, VA 22904-4324 Fax(434)
982-4715

**
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] 802.11n WPA2/AES requirement

[Barber, Matt]

Hi Keith,

In my experience, you are correct.  Per Draft 2.0 (I believe), 11n
clients must use either clear or WPA2/AES to operate at HT rates.  My
11n clients here will connect at WPA, but only at 11a/g rates.  

Something to be aware of for sure, especially if you want to support
older devices that can't do WPA2.  Running separate SSIDs may be the
only way to get all clients on and still provide HT rates for 11n
clients.

Take care,

Matt Barber
Network Analyst / PC Support
Morrisville State College
315-684-6053


-Original Message-
From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Keith Moores
Sent: Sunday, March 16, 2008 4:05 PM
To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
Subject: [WIRELESS-LAN] 802.11n WPA2/AES requirement

Just wondering what encryption type those of you that have started  
moving to (testing with) 802.11n APs are using?

I'm trying to confirm that N clients connecting to N APs must use WPA2/ 
AES to connect with encryption.

If an N AP accepts both WPA/TKIP and WPA2/AES can an N client connect  
set to either albeit only at 802.11n HT rates when using WPA2/AES?


-Keith


Keith Moores mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Network Systems Senior Engineer
ITC-Communications and Systems Division
University of Virginia, ITC-2015 Ivy RdPhone  (434) 924-0621
Box 400324, Charlottesville, VA 22904-4324 Fax(434) 982-4715

**
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] 802.11n WPA2/AES requirement

[Winders, Timothy A]

We're looking at the same thing.  The only problem, is the native
Windows XP supplicant does not support WPA2/AES.  XP SP3 adds this
compatibility.   So, for now, we have added a new SSID which is not
broadcast and is WPA2/AES.  We are manually setting up clients to
connect to that to test N and A/B/G interoperability.  So far, things
seem to be working well.  I expect to leave our configuration in this
mode for at least another year, then we'll flip/flop the SSIDs for the
WPA2/AES is broadcast and the WPA/TKIP is not.  Then after another year,
I expect to phase out the WPA/TKIP SSID completely.

 

 

Tim Winders | Associate Dean of Information Technology | South Plains
College

 

From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Nathan Hay
Sent: Monday, March 17, 2008 7:10 AM
To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] 802.11n WPA2/AES requirement

 

From my testing and from the systems engineer of the vendor's equipment
that I was testing, an 802.11n client with WPA2/AES can connect at
802.11n rates, but if that same 802.11n client connects using WPA/TKIP,
it gets a/b/g rates even though client and AP are both 802.11n.  So yes,
an N client can connect to an N AP with WPA/TKIP or WPA2/AES, but the
max data rate will be different (54 vs. 300).  Based on this, we plan to
migrate to WPA2/AES on our current a/b/g network to prepare for the
mixed environment we will have next school year.  We plan to deploy
802.11n in a new building that opens next school year and maybe in one
or two other buildings, but the majority of our buildings (including all
dorms) will be a/b/g.

 

Hope that helps,

 

Nathan

 

 

 

Nathan P. Hay
Network Engineer
Computer Services
Cedarville University
www.cedarville.edu http://www.cedarville.edu/  

 Keith Moores [EMAIL PROTECTED] 3/16/2008 4:04 PM 
Just wondering what encryption type those of you that have started  
moving to (testing with) 802.11n APs are using?

I'm trying to confirm that N clients connecting to N APs must use WPA2/ 
AES to connect with encryption.

If an N AP accepts both WPA/TKIP and WPA2/AES can an N client connect  
set to either albeit only at 802.11n HT rates when using WPA2/AES?


-Keith


Keith Moores mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Network S! ystems Senior Engineer
ITC-Communications and Systems Division
University of Virginia, ITC-2015 Ivy RdPhone  (434) 924-0621
Box 400324, Charlottesville, VA 22904-4324 Fax(434) 982-4715

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

802.11n WPA2/AES requirement

[Keith Moores]

Just wondering what encryption type those of you that have started  
moving to (testing with) 802.11n APs are using?


I'm trying to confirm that N clients connecting to N APs must use WPA2/ 
AES to connect with encryption.


If an N AP accepts both WPA/TKIP and WPA2/AES can an N client connect  
set to either albeit only at 802.11n HT rates when using WPA2/AES?



-Keith


Keith Moores mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Network Systems Senior Engineer
ITC-Communications and Systems Division
University of Virginia, ITC-2015 Ivy RdPhone  (434) 924-0621
Box 400324, Charlottesville, VA 22904-4324 Fax(434) 982-4715

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

RE: [WIRELESS-LAN] 802.11n

[Lee Weers]

Another midspan device is Panduit's.  They say they can power the 1252
without any problem.  I know they could deliver up to 30 watts per port
and are gig capable.

http://www.panduit.com/search/search_results.asp?N=501Ntk=AllNtt=m
idspanNty=1D=midspanNtx=mode+matchallpartialDx=mode+matchallpartial
Nu=P_RollupKey 

-Original Message-
From: Jonn Martell [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Monday, January 14, 2008 1:02 PM
To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] 802.11n

I won't speak for Bret but considering the cost differential of 11xx and
12xx models in Cisco, I'm not sure there is a cost/benefit value of
deploying the 1250 at this point?

Fundamentally, the biggest hurdle I see for Cisco's 802.11n strategy is
the fact that you can't use installed 802.3af (POE) infrastructure!
That means that the thousands of ports installed in some environments
can't be used to power the new Cisco 802.11n dual radio APs.

Fine, the new installation can install the new POE Plus (to be?)
standard but at what cost?

It seems that some vendors are supporting bonding multiple POE ports to
provide the POE Plus output required for the dual radio support but it
seems that Cisco has decided not to go this route (at least for now
until they hear from the installed base! :-)

Also wonder what type of mid-span POE 802.3af to 802.3at devices will
exists in the coming year to address this shortfall. Hope there aren't
any patent issues on what should be commodity devices based on
standards.

... Jonn Martell (wearing a consultant hat)
 CWNE
 martell.ca


The cost/benefit

On 1/14/08, Frank Bulk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 Bret:

 What do you perceive the risks to be?

 There's no doubt that the price is higher, though the price/Mbps is
lower.
 The standard is already viable, there's no question in my mind 
 regarding that, though 2008 won't be the year that 802.11n APs match 
 the price of enterprise 802.11b/g APs today.

 Frank

 -Original Message-
 From: Bret Jones [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Sent: Monday, January 14, 2008 5:50 AM
 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
 Subject: RE: [WIRELESS-LAN] 802.11n

 1. The technology is very new in the enterprise market and when 
 rolling out thousands of AP's is just too risky at this point.

 2. The cost is much higher for now

 I do expect the standard and cost will become much more viable over 
 the next year and will consider this again in 2009

 Thanks Bret

 Bret Jones
 Managing Director
 Technology Operations and Engineering
 The George Washington University
 801 22nd Street NW, Suite B148
 Washington, DC 20052
 Phone: (202)994-5548
 Fax: (202)994-0730
 Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]


 -Original Message-
 From: Frank Bulk - iNAME [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Sent: Saturday, January 12, 2008 1:02 PM
 To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
 Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] 802.11n

 Can I ask why you've decided to skip 802.11n at this time?  Do you 
 have plans to do a round of hardware replacements in 3 years, and take

 advantage of lower 802.11b/g AP pricing?

 Frank

 -Original Message-
 From: Bret Jones [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Sent: Saturday, January 12, 2008 4:12 AM
 To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
 Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] 802.11n

 We are doing a large AP rollout in 2008 (1500 AP's) we are going with 
 Cisco, but not with n, we will not be putting the AP's under 
 smartnet because it is expensive and much more cost effective to just 
 replace AP's when they fail.  The failure rate for us has been very 
 low I think 3 out of 1000 in the last 2 years.  We will have smartnet
on the other components i.e.
 controllers and location appliances.

 Thanks Bret

 Bret Jones
 Managing Director
 Technology Operations and Engineering
 The George Washington University
 801 22nd Street NW, Suite B148
 Washington, DC 20052
 Phone: (202)994-5548
 Fax: (202)994-0730
 Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]


 -Original Message-
 From: Jonn Martell [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Sent: Friday, January 11, 2008 5:46 PM
 To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
 Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] 802.11n

 This is where size and your relationship to your Cisco AM is
important.

 I don't think that you should have to put all your APs on Smartnet if 
 you do local sparing. At one of my last EDU, we had 2000+ APs deployed

 and only a handful on Smartnet (required to call TAC)

 If your Cisco AM doesn't understand this, that's when competition 
 starts to look really interesting!  Forcing maintenance on the small 
 stuff is ridiculous especially for thin APs that are controlled by the

 controllers (these APs aren't autonomous anymore).

 If you want to stay with Cisco, then waiting for the WiFi 802.11n
 compliance certification is likely your best bet.

 ... Jonn Martell

 On 1/11/08, Lee H Badman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 
 
 
  Hi Lee-
 
 
 
  Where I find fault with this is the requirement to keep APs under 
  maintenance. Our

RE: [WIRELESS-LAN] 802.11n

[Bret Jones]

Frank 

I do not agree that the n solution is viable in a large enterprise at this
point.  My customers expect stability and reliability and while I encourage
innovation I have no confidence that such a large rollout of n AP's is wise
or justifiable. 

Thanks Bret

Bret Jones
Managing Director
Technology Operations and Engineering
The George Washington University
801 22nd Street NW, Suite B148
Washington, DC 20052
Phone: (202)994-5548
Fax: (202)994-0730
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

-Original Message-
From: Frank Bulk - iNAME [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Monday, January 14, 2008 9:30 PM
To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] 802.11n

Jonn:

According to Cisco, if you have particular models of the 3750E, 4500, and
6500, you may be able to power their new 802.11n APs with full features.  If
that's not workable solution in a customer's environment, then standalone
PoE adapters are also a possibility.  As Dave has mentioned elsewhere, only
those organizations that have scheduled upgrades, have a particular
performance need, or want investment protection for a new installation,
should be seriously considering 802.11n earlier this year.  

Which vendor bonds multiple PoE ports for powering 802.11n APs?  IIRC, Aruba
is using it for quick failover and Trapeze for network connectivity, not
power.

For those who want to go to 802.3at today and are willing to stomach a
mid-span device, there are some choices out there:
http://ipcommunications.tmcnet.com/news/2008/01/07/366635.htm?p=ims
http://voip-buzz.com/2006/07/01/phihong%E2%80%99s-one-port-midspan-supports-
high-speed-wireless-access-points/

Frank

-Original Message-
From: Jonn Martell [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Monday, January 14, 2008 1:02 PM
To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] 802.11n

I won't speak for Bret but considering the cost differential of 11xx
and 12xx models in Cisco, I'm not sure there is a cost/benefit value
of deploying the 1250 at this point?

Fundamentally, the biggest hurdle I see for Cisco's 802.11n strategy
is the fact that you can't use installed 802.3af (POE) infrastructure!
That means that the thousands of ports installed in some environments
can't be used to power the new Cisco 802.11n dual radio APs.

Fine, the new installation can install the new POE Plus (to be?)
standard but at what cost?

It seems that some vendors are supporting bonding multiple POE ports
to provide the POE Plus output required for the dual radio support but
it seems that Cisco has decided not to go this route (at least for now
until they hear from the installed base! :-)

Also wonder what type of mid-span POE 802.3af to 802.3at devices will
exists in the coming year to address this shortfall. Hope there aren't
any patent issues on what should be commodity devices based on
standards.

... Jonn Martell (wearing a consultant hat)
 CWNE
 martell.ca


The cost/benefit

On 1/14/08, Frank Bulk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 Bret:

 What do you perceive the risks to be?

 There's no doubt that the price is higher, though the price/Mbps is lower.
 The standard is already viable, there's no question in my mind regarding
 that, though 2008 won't be the year that 802.11n APs match the price of
 enterprise 802.11b/g APs today.

 Frank

 -Original Message-
 From: Bret Jones [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Sent: Monday, January 14, 2008 5:50 AM
 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
 Subject: RE: [WIRELESS-LAN] 802.11n

 1. The technology is very new in the enterprise market and when rolling
out
 thousands of AP's is just too risky at this point.

 2. The cost is much higher for now

 I do expect the standard and cost will become much more viable over the
next
 year and will consider this again in 2009

 Thanks Bret

 Bret Jones
 Managing Director
 Technology Operations and Engineering
 The George Washington University
 801 22nd Street NW, Suite B148
 Washington, DC 20052
 Phone: (202)994-5548
 Fax: (202)994-0730
 Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]


 -Original Message-
 From: Frank Bulk - iNAME [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Sent: Saturday, January 12, 2008 1:02 PM
 To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
 Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] 802.11n

 Can I ask why you've decided to skip 802.11n at this time?  Do you have
 plans to do a round of hardware replacements in 3 years, and take
advantage
 of lower 802.11b/g AP pricing?

 Frank

 -Original Message-
 From: Bret Jones [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Sent: Saturday, January 12, 2008 4:12 AM
 To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
 Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] 802.11n

 We are doing a large AP rollout in 2008 (1500 AP's) we are going with
Cisco,
 but not with n, we will not be putting the AP's under smartnet because
it
 is expensive and much more cost effective to just replace AP's when they
 fail.  The failure rate for us has been very low I think 3 out of 1000 in
 the last 2 years.  We will have smartnet on the other

RE: [WIRELESS-LAN] 802.11n

[Frank Bulk]

Bret:

What do you perceive the risks to be?

There's no doubt that the price is higher, though the price/Mbps is lower.
The standard is already viable, there's no question in my mind regarding
that, though 2008 won't be the year that 802.11n APs match the price of
enterprise 802.11b/g APs today.

Frank

-Original Message-
From: Bret Jones [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Monday, January 14, 2008 5:50 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
Subject: RE: [WIRELESS-LAN] 802.11n

1. The technology is very new in the enterprise market and when rolling out
thousands of AP's is just too risky at this point.

2. The cost is much higher for now

I do expect the standard and cost will become much more viable over the next
year and will consider this again in 2009

Thanks Bret

Bret Jones
Managing Director
Technology Operations and Engineering
The George Washington University
801 22nd Street NW, Suite B148
Washington, DC 20052
Phone: (202)994-5548
Fax: (202)994-0730
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]


-Original Message-
From: Frank Bulk - iNAME [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, January 12, 2008 1:02 PM
To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] 802.11n

Can I ask why you've decided to skip 802.11n at this time?  Do you have
plans to do a round of hardware replacements in 3 years, and take advantage
of lower 802.11b/g AP pricing?

Frank

-Original Message-
From: Bret Jones [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, January 12, 2008 4:12 AM
To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] 802.11n

We are doing a large AP rollout in 2008 (1500 AP's) we are going with Cisco,
but not with n, we will not be putting the AP's under smartnet because it
is expensive and much more cost effective to just replace AP's when they
fail.  The failure rate for us has been very low I think 3 out of 1000 in
the last 2 years.  We will have smartnet on the other components i.e.
controllers and location appliances.

Thanks Bret

Bret Jones
Managing Director
Technology Operations and Engineering
The George Washington University
801 22nd Street NW, Suite B148
Washington, DC 20052
Phone: (202)994-5548
Fax: (202)994-0730
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]


-Original Message-
From: Jonn Martell [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, January 11, 2008 5:46 PM
To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] 802.11n

This is where size and your relationship to your Cisco AM is important.

I don't think that you should have to put all your APs on Smartnet if
you do local sparing. At one of my last EDU, we had 2000+ APs deployed
and only a handful on Smartnet (required to call TAC)

If your Cisco AM doesn't understand this, that's when competition
starts to look really interesting!  Forcing maintenance on the small
stuff is ridiculous especially for thin APs that are controlled by the
controllers (these APs aren't autonomous anymore).

If you want to stay with Cisco, then waiting for the WiFi 802.11n
compliance certification is likely your best bet.

... Jonn Martell

On 1/11/08, Lee H Badman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:



 Hi Lee-



 Where I find fault with this is the requirement to keep APs under
 maintenance. Our model has always been that the APs are cheap enough and
 reliable enough that it's more cost effective to keep a dozen spares on
hand
 than to keep 1600 APs on maintenance.  so in my opinion, Smartnet isn't
the
 right silver bullet for protection against changes to the standard- but I
do
 concede that every environment has their own circumstances.



 Lee


 


 From: Lee Weers [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Sent: Friday, January 11, 2008 11:46 AM
 To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
 Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] 802.11n




 We have a campus wide wireless project just starting that we are going to
do
 802.11n everywhere we can place a Cisco 1252.  We couldn't get a guarantee
 from Cisco that there won't be a hardware change.  Just that if the AP is
 under smartnet they will then do the upgrade for free.



 I have also heard the same thing from Xirrus with their AP arrays.  If
they
 are under maintenance then they will send you the 802.11n radios to swap
 out.






 


 From: Lee H Badman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Sent: Friday, January 11, 2008 9:39 AM
 To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
 Subject: [WIRELESS-LAN] 802.11n

 Wondering who is taking the early plunge on 802.11n, who's system you are
 going with (beyond small pilots), and if you are requiring commitment from
 the manufacturer that if the standard does change in ways that make
 pre-standard hardware incompatible, free replacements would be provided?



 On list or off is OK- just trying to gather data for our own 11n research.



 Kind regards-



 Lee H. Badman

 Wireless/Network Engineer

 Information Technology and Services

 Syracuse University

 315 443-3003



 ** Participation

Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] 802.11n

[Jonn Martell]

I won't speak for Bret but considering the cost differential of 11xx
and 12xx models in Cisco, I'm not sure there is a cost/benefit value
of deploying the 1250 at this point?

Fundamentally, the biggest hurdle I see for Cisco's 802.11n strategy
is the fact that you can't use installed 802.3af (POE) infrastructure!
That means that the thousands of ports installed in some environments
can't be used to power the new Cisco 802.11n dual radio APs.

Fine, the new installation can install the new POE Plus (to be?)
standard but at what cost?

It seems that some vendors are supporting bonding multiple POE ports
to provide the POE Plus output required for the dual radio support but
it seems that Cisco has decided not to go this route (at least for now
until they hear from the installed base! :-)

Also wonder what type of mid-span POE 802.3af to 802.3at devices will
exists in the coming year to address this shortfall. Hope there aren't
any patent issues on what should be commodity devices based on
standards.

... Jonn Martell (wearing a consultant hat)
 CWNE
 martell.ca


The cost/benefit

On 1/14/08, Frank Bulk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 Bret:

 What do you perceive the risks to be?

 There's no doubt that the price is higher, though the price/Mbps is lower.
 The standard is already viable, there's no question in my mind regarding
 that, though 2008 won't be the year that 802.11n APs match the price of
 enterprise 802.11b/g APs today.

 Frank

 -Original Message-
 From: Bret Jones [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Sent: Monday, January 14, 2008 5:50 AM
 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
 Subject: RE: [WIRELESS-LAN] 802.11n

 1. The technology is very new in the enterprise market and when rolling out
 thousands of AP's is just too risky at this point.

 2. The cost is much higher for now

 I do expect the standard and cost will become much more viable over the next
 year and will consider this again in 2009

 Thanks Bret

 Bret Jones
 Managing Director
 Technology Operations and Engineering
 The George Washington University
 801 22nd Street NW, Suite B148
 Washington, DC 20052
 Phone: (202)994-5548
 Fax: (202)994-0730
 Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]


 -Original Message-
 From: Frank Bulk - iNAME [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Sent: Saturday, January 12, 2008 1:02 PM
 To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
 Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] 802.11n

 Can I ask why you've decided to skip 802.11n at this time?  Do you have
 plans to do a round of hardware replacements in 3 years, and take advantage
 of lower 802.11b/g AP pricing?

 Frank

 -Original Message-
 From: Bret Jones [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Sent: Saturday, January 12, 2008 4:12 AM
 To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
 Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] 802.11n

 We are doing a large AP rollout in 2008 (1500 AP's) we are going with Cisco,
 but not with n, we will not be putting the AP's under smartnet because it
 is expensive and much more cost effective to just replace AP's when they
 fail.  The failure rate for us has been very low I think 3 out of 1000 in
 the last 2 years.  We will have smartnet on the other components i.e.
 controllers and location appliances.

 Thanks Bret

 Bret Jones
 Managing Director
 Technology Operations and Engineering
 The George Washington University
 801 22nd Street NW, Suite B148
 Washington, DC 20052
 Phone: (202)994-5548
 Fax: (202)994-0730
 Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]


 -Original Message-
 From: Jonn Martell [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Sent: Friday, January 11, 2008 5:46 PM
 To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
 Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] 802.11n

 This is where size and your relationship to your Cisco AM is important.

 I don't think that you should have to put all your APs on Smartnet if
 you do local sparing. At one of my last EDU, we had 2000+ APs deployed
 and only a handful on Smartnet (required to call TAC)

 If your Cisco AM doesn't understand this, that's when competition
 starts to look really interesting!  Forcing maintenance on the small
 stuff is ridiculous especially for thin APs that are controlled by the
 controllers (these APs aren't autonomous anymore).

 If you want to stay with Cisco, then waiting for the WiFi 802.11n
 compliance certification is likely your best bet.

 ... Jonn Martell

 On 1/11/08, Lee H Badman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 
 
 
  Hi Lee-
 
 
 
  Where I find fault with this is the requirement to keep APs under
  maintenance. Our model has always been that the APs are cheap enough and
  reliable enough that it's more cost effective to keep a dozen spares on
 hand
  than to keep 1600 APs on maintenance.  so in my opinion, Smartnet isn't
 the
  right silver bullet for protection against changes to the standard- but I
 do
  concede that every environment has their own circumstances.
 
 
 
  Lee
 
 
  
 
 
  From: Lee Weers [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
  Sent: Friday, January 11, 2008 11:46 AM
  To: WIRELESS-LAN

Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] 802.11n

[Philippe Hanset]

 My question to you: how many of you will go with a single-radio
 802.11n-capable AP?  That appears to make a $200+ difference, per AP.

Do you mean just one radio for the AP total, or just one n capable for the
AP and a non n capable as well?

one radio to serve b/g clients (not n capable)
another to serve n clients at 5 Ghz
all of it running under 802.3af seems pretty agreable to me!
I will not deploy this solution extensively, but definitely
serve departments that want the latest and greatest!
What gets interesting in this case is the coverage/survey!
do you survey for b/g a prey that n will cover at least that much!
(that's our plan...)

Two vendors that have visited with us are already offering
similar solutions!

On the user side, I noticed that Apple provides n on every laptop,
but not too many vendors have this broad approach!
Will our user have to get 802.11n USB adapter...?

Philippe Hanset
Univ of TN.



 Frank

 -Original Message-
 From: Jonn Martell [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Sent: Friday, January 11, 2008 10:19 AM
 To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
 Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] 802.11n

 It's interesting, Cisco, which still dominates the WLAN market has
 come out with the 1250 which I would seriously consider as the
 recommended option to the 1131.

 Haven't seen EDU pricing for it and with competition from Aruba and
 Meru hot on their tails, I'm hoping it's aggressive.

 The jury is still out on the RF cloud method of the Merus of the world
 but with all the channels available at 5GHz, it makes most sense (in
 my opinion) to use all the channels and have a controller
 automatically manage them.

 They had a good webinar which should be available sometime today at
 http://www.cisco.com/pcgi-bin/sreg2/register/banner.pl?LANGUAGE=EMETHOD=OT
 OPIC_CODE=6463PRIORITY_CODE=156007_13

  ... Jonn Martell, CWNE #47

 On 1/11/08, Lee H Badman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 
 
 
  Wondering who is taking the early plunge on 802.11n, who's system you are
  going with (beyond small pilots), and if you are requiring commitment from
  the manufacturer that if the standard does change in ways that make
  pre-standard hardware incompatible, free replacements would be provided?
 
 
 
  On list or off is OK- just trying to gather data for our own 11n research.
 
 
 
  Kind regards-
 
 
 
  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/.

RE: [WIRELESS-LAN] 802.11n

[Frank Bulk - iNAME]

I was asking about a single radio AP (could be dual-band, operating at 2.4
or 5 GHz), not a dual-radio AP.

I think your approach extracts the best performance, but perhaps there are
many more who want a separate overlay operating at 5 GHz, eventually
migrating away and turning down the 2.4 GHz gear.

Frank

-Original Message-
From: Philippe Hanset [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Monday, January 14, 2008 3:48 PM
To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] 802.11n

 My question to you: how many of you will go with a single-radio
 802.11n-capable AP?  That appears to make a $200+ difference, per AP.

Do you mean just one radio for the AP total, or just one n capable for the
AP and a non n capable as well?

one radio to serve b/g clients (not n capable)
another to serve n clients at 5 Ghz
all of it running under 802.3af seems pretty agreable to me!
I will not deploy this solution extensively, but definitely
serve departments that want the latest and greatest!
What gets interesting in this case is the coverage/survey!
do you survey for b/g a prey that n will cover at least that much!
(that's our plan...)

Two vendors that have visited with us are already offering
similar solutions!

On the user side, I noticed that Apple provides n on every laptop,
but not too many vendors have this broad approach!
Will our user have to get 802.11n USB adapter...?

Philippe Hanset
Univ of TN.



 Frank

 -Original Message-
 From: Jonn Martell [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Sent: Friday, January 11, 2008 10:19 AM
 To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
 Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] 802.11n

 It's interesting, Cisco, which still dominates the WLAN market has
 come out with the 1250 which I would seriously consider as the
 recommended option to the 1131.

 Haven't seen EDU pricing for it and with competition from Aruba and
 Meru hot on their tails, I'm hoping it's aggressive.

 The jury is still out on the RF cloud method of the Merus of the world
 but with all the channels available at 5GHz, it makes most sense (in
 my opinion) to use all the channels and have a controller
 automatically manage them.

 They had a good webinar which should be available sometime today at

http://www.cisco.com/pcgi-bin/sreg2/register/banner.pl?LANGUAGE=EMETHOD=OT
 OPIC_CODE=6463PRIORITY_CODE=156007_13

  ... Jonn Martell, CWNE #47

 On 1/11/08, Lee H Badman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 
 
 
  Wondering who is taking the early plunge on 802.11n, who's system you
are
  going with (beyond small pilots), and if you are requiring commitment
from
  the manufacturer that if the standard does change in ways that make
  pre-standard hardware incompatible, free replacements would be provided?
 
 
 
  On list or off is OK- just trying to gather data for our own 11n
research.
 
 
 
  Kind regards-
 
 
 
  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] 802.11n

[Frank Bulk - iNAME]

Just to emphasize on what Dave is saying here - we're already seeing a
feature gap between generation 1 and generation 2 802.11n chipsets/APs in
regards to power consumption.  We know that they'll continue to improve
power consumption, IEEE 802.3at will be added to the APs, another spatial
stream added to the higher-end models, and beam-forming might happen in
2009, too.  We have become used to a relatively stable RF feature set with
802.11b/g chipsets over the last 3-4 years, with the emphasis by WLAN
vendors on management, roaming, security, etc and chipset manufactures
benefiting from designing smaller dies and greater volumes.  But because
802.11n is as nascent as it is, with similar RF work being done for LTE and
WiMAX-m, the capabilities of the radios themselves will not remain static
and enterprise WLAN vendors with exploit this with every new round of runs.

 

Frank

 

 

From: Dave Molta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Friday, January 11, 2008 11:24 AM
To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] 802.11n

 

I think Peter has the right perspective here. The risk that a Draft
2.0/Wi-Fi Certified AP purchased today would be incompatible with the final
standard is quite low. However, the likelihood is high that an 11n AP
purchased a year from now, based on second or third-generation 11n silicon,
will provide better functionality at a lower cost. 

 

I realize that this isn't a particularly profound statement from an IT
management perspective. I've always lived by the simple rule of avoiding the
.0 release. To the extent that you consider current 11n AP's to be version
1.0 - and some might debate that point - it would probably be advisable for
most to focus on pilot deployments of 11n and wait a while for large
production deployments. Unfortunately, internal build-out pressure and
capital budgets sometimes don't afford you to luxury of waiting for the
second release.

 

dm

 

  _  

From: Peter P Morrissey [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Friday, January 11, 2008 11:47 AM
To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] 802.11n

 

I would think you have to separate features from interoperability for this
discussion.

What do you really want to guarantee?

 

I doubt any vendor is going to guarantee that they will support things like
the three spatial streams that were mentioned. I'm not sure what 11n will be
in the end, I know discussions of upwards of 600mbps were discussed at one
point.

 

However, even now, you buy however much of even the existing features that
you want.

You can buy different combinations of radios and antennae and turn on
different features depending upon what you pay for and how much power you
can get to the device.

 

I would think that any guarantee (assuming that it would be legally
possible) would only guarantee the existing features are interoperable with
later versions of the standard.

 

I would also think that vendors aren't going to let the IEEE come up with a
version of the standard that is not backwards compatible with previous
versions given the role that the WiFi Alliance has taken in building
momentum towards  the interoperability is what really matters especially if
it takes the IEEE forever to hammer something out approach. 

 

Peter Morrissey

Syracuse University

 

 

 

  _  

From: Jamie Savage [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Friday, January 11, 2008 11:26 AM
To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] 802.11n

 


exactly!...that's why I doubt any manufacturer would sign an
agreement with the appropriate legalese guaranteeing the upgrade at this
stage.the finalization of the standard is justl too far away 

James Savage   York University   
Senior Communications Tech.   108 Steacie Building
[EMAIL PROTECTED]4700 Keele Street
ph: 416-736-2100 ext. 22605Toronto, Ontario
fax: 416-736-5701M3J 1P3, CANADA 


Lelio Fulgenzi [EMAIL PROTECTED] 

01/11/2008 11:12 AM 


Please respond to
The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv
WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU


To

WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU 


cc

 


Subject

Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] 802.11n

 


 

 




Even if they do guarentee in writing, what recourse do you have? 
  
I'll bet you'd have to get legal reps involved before anything was drafted
in order to be usable in court. 
  
Just my two cents. 
- Original Message - 
From: Jamie Savage mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]  
To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU 
Sent: Friday, January 11, 2008 11:07 AM 
Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] 802.11n 


.my thoughts exactly...guaranteed in writing please! 


James Savage   York University   
Senior Communications Tech.   108 Steacie Building
 mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]4700
Keele Street
ph: 416

802.11n

[Lee H Badman]

Wondering who is taking the early plunge on 802.11n, who's system you
are going with (beyond small pilots), and if you are requiring
commitment from the manufacturer that if the standard does change in
ways that make pre-standard hardware incompatible, free replacements
would be provided?
 
On list or off is OK- just trying to gather data for our own 11n
research.
 
Kind regards-
 
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/.

RE: [WIRELESS-LAN] 802.11n

[Lee H Badman]

Actually, we did get a verbal commitment to that very notion yesterday
from one of the more visible 11n vendors, but would have to see if that
would be put in writing if we ever did proceed down that road.
 
Lee 


From: Jamie Savage [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Friday, January 11, 2008 10:45 AM
To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] 802.11n
 

I'd be interested in results being posted on-list...I've not yet
heard of any manufacturer who is guaranteeing free upgrades to the
finalized standard...only,...'should be', 'probably' etc...etc..
I'd be surprised to hear that any of them would commit at this stage. 

.thx.J 

James Savage   York University

Senior Communications Tech.   108 Steacie Building
[EMAIL PROTECTED]4700 Keele Street
ph: 416-736-2100 ext. 22605Toronto, Ontario
fax: 416-736-5701M3J 1P3, CANADA 


Lee H Badman [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
01/11/2008 10:39 AM 
Please respond to
The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv
WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
To
WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU 
cc
 
Subject
[WIRELESS-LAN] 802.11n
 
 
 



Wondering who is taking the early plunge on 802.11n, who's system you
are going with (beyond small pilots), and if you are requiring
commitment from the manufacturer that if the standard does change in
ways that make pre-standard hardware incompatible, free replacements
would be provided? 
  
On list or off is OK- just trying to gather data for our own 11n
research. 
  
Kind regards- 
  
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/.

Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] 802.11n

[Jamie Savage]

.my thoughts exactly...guaranteed in writing please!


James Savage   York University 
Senior Communications Tech.   108 Steacie Building
[EMAIL PROTECTED]4700 Keele Street
ph: 416-736-2100 ext. 22605Toronto, Ontario
fax: 416-736-5701M3J 1P3, CANADA 



Lee H Badman [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
01/11/2008 10:55 AM
Please respond to
The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv 
WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU


To
WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
cc

Subject
Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] 802.11n






Actually, we did get a verbal commitment to that very notion yesterday 
from one of the more visible 11n vendors, but would have to see if that 
would be put in writing if we ever did proceed down that road.
 
Lee 

From: Jamie Savage [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Friday, January 11, 2008 10:45 AM
To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] 802.11n
 

I'd be interested in results being posted on-list...I've not yet 
heard of any manufacturer who is guaranteeing free upgrades to the 
finalized standard...only,...'should be', 'probably' etc...etc..   I'd 
be surprised to hear that any of them would commit at this stage. 

.thx.J 

James Savage   York University 
Senior Communications Tech.   108 Steacie Building
[EMAIL PROTECTED]4700 Keele Street
ph: 416-736-2100 ext. 22605Toronto, Ontario
fax: 416-736-5701M3J 1P3, CANADA 


Lee H Badman [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
01/11/2008 10:39 AM 


Please respond to
The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv 
WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU



To
WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU 
cc
 
Subject
[WIRELESS-LAN] 802.11n
 


 
 




Wondering who is taking the early plunge on 802.11n, who?s system you are 
going with (beyond small pilots), and if you are requiring commitment from 
the manufacturer that if the standard does change in ways that make 
pre-standard hardware incompatible, free replacements would be provided? 
  
On list or off is OK- just trying to gather data for our own 11n research. 

  
Kind regards- 
  
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/.

RE: [WIRELESS-LAN] 802.11n

[Peter P Morrissey]

I would think you have to separate features from interoperability for
this discussion.

What do you really want to guarantee?

 

I doubt any vendor is going to guarantee that they will support things
like the three spatial streams that were mentioned. I'm not sure what
11n will be in the end, I know discussions of upwards of 600mbps were
discussed at one point.

 

However, even now, you buy however much of even the existing features
that you want.

You can buy different combinations of radios and antennae and turn on
different features depending upon what you pay for and how much power
you can get to the device.

 

I would think that any guarantee (assuming that it would be legally
possible) would only guarantee the existing features are interoperable
with later versions of the standard.

 

I would also think that vendors aren't going to let the IEEE come up
with a version of the standard that is not backwards compatible with
previous versions given the role that the WiFi Alliance has taken in
building momentum towards  the interoperability is what really matters
especially if it takes the IEEE forever to hammer something out
approach. 

 

Peter Morrissey

Syracuse University

 

 

 



From: Jamie Savage [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Friday, January 11, 2008 11:26 AM
To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] 802.11n

 


exactly!...that's why I doubt any manufacturer would sign an
agreement with the appropriate legalese guaranteeing the upgrade at this
stage.the finalization of the standard is justl too far away 

James Savage   York University

Senior Communications Tech.   108 Steacie Building
[EMAIL PROTECTED]4700 Keele Street
ph: 416-736-2100 ext. 22605Toronto, Ontario
fax: 416-736-5701M3J 1P3, CANADA 



Lelio Fulgenzi [EMAIL PROTECTED] 

01/11/2008 11:12 AM 

Please respond to
The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv
WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU

To

WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU 

cc

 

Subject

Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] 802.11n

 

 

 




Even if they do guarentee in writing, what recourse do you have? 
  
I'll bet you'd have to get legal reps involved before anything was
drafted in order to be usable in court. 
  
Just my two cents. 
- Original Message - 
From: Jamie Savage mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]  
To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU 
Sent: Friday, January 11, 2008 11:07 AM 
Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] 802.11n 


.my thoughts exactly...guaranteed in writing please! 


James Savage   York University

Senior Communications Tech.   108 Steacie Building
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
4700 Keele Street
ph: 416-736-2100 ext. 22605Toronto, Ontario
fax: 416-736-5701M3J 1P3, CANADA 

Lee H Badman [EMAIL PROTECTED] 

01/11/2008 10:55 AM 

Please respond to
The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv
WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU

 

To

WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU 

cc

 

Subject

Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] 802.11n

 

 

 





Actually, we did get a verbal commitment to that very notion yesterday
from one of the more visible 11n vendors, but would have to see if that
would be put in writing if we ever did proceed down that road. 

Lee 



From: Jamie Savage [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Friday, January 11, 2008 10:45 AM
To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] 802.11n 


I'd be interested in results being posted on-list...I've not yet
heard of any manufacturer who is guaranteeing free upgrades to the
finalized standard...only,...'should be', 'probably' etc...etc..
I'd be surprised to hear that any of them would commit at this stage. 

.thx.J 

James Savage   York University

Senior Communications Tech.   108 Steacie Building
[EMAIL PROTECTED]4700 Keele Street
ph: 416-736-2100 ext. 22605Toronto, Ontario
fax: 416-736-5701M3J 1P3, CANADA 

Lee H Badman [EMAIL PROTECTED] 

01/11/2008 10:39 AM 

 

Please respond to
The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv
WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU

 

To

WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU 

cc

  

Subject

[WIRELESS-LAN] 802.11n

 

  

 




Wondering who is taking the early plunge on 802.11n, who's system you
are going with (beyond small pilots), and if you are requiring
commitment from the manufacturer that if the standard does change in
ways that make pre-standard hardware incompatible, free replacements
would be provided? 

  

On list or off is OK- just trying to gather data for our own 11n
research. 

  

Kind regards- 

  

Lee H. Badman 

Wireless/Network Engineer 

Information Technology and Services

Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] 802.11n

[Daniel Eklund]

Doug Payne wrote:

 I wonder if you'll have more issues now that Aruba has acquired AirWave?
 
 http://www.arubanetworks.com/company/news/release.php?id=56

Hopefully not, but in 2 years or so I won't have a multivendor wireless
network, so it may not matter if Meru can improve their management software
in that time.  OTOH, I would seriously consider staying with AirWave if the
product remains useful and vendor neutral because I do like it.

-- 
Daniel Eklund
Director, Network Engineering
Wayne State University
Detroit, MI 48201
Phone: 313-577-5558
Fax: 313-577-5577

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

Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] 802.11n

[Dale W. Carder]

On Jan 11, 2008, at 9:48 AM, Lee H Badman wrote:

Actually, we did get a verbal commitment to that very notion  
yesterday from one of the more visible 11n vendors, but would have  
to see if that would be put in writing if we ever did proceed down  
that road.


For hardware or software replacement?

Rumors of hardware that can do (3) spatial streams
is only now hitting the trade rags.

Dale

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

Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] 802.11n

[Jonn Martell]

This is where size and your relationship to your Cisco AM is important.

I don't think that you should have to put all your APs on Smartnet if
you do local sparing. At one of my last EDU, we had 2000+ APs deployed
and only a handful on Smartnet (required to call TAC)

If your Cisco AM doesn't understand this, that's when competition
starts to look really interesting!  Forcing maintenance on the small
stuff is ridiculous especially for thin APs that are controlled by the
controllers (these APs aren't autonomous anymore).

If you want to stay with Cisco, then waiting for the WiFi 802.11n
compliance certification is likely your best bet.

... Jonn Martell

On 1/11/08, Lee H Badman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:



 Hi Lee-



 Where I find fault with this is the requirement to keep APs under
 maintenance. Our model has always been that the APs are cheap enough and
 reliable enough that it's more cost effective to keep a dozen spares on hand
 than to keep 1600 APs on maintenance…  so in my opinion, Smartnet isn't the
 right silver bullet for protection against changes to the standard- but I do
 concede that every environment has their own circumstances.



 Lee


 


 From: Lee Weers [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Sent: Friday, January 11, 2008 11:46 AM
 To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
 Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] 802.11n




 We have a campus wide wireless project just starting that we are going to do
 802.11n everywhere we can place a Cisco 1252.  We couldn't get a guarantee
 from Cisco that there won't be a hardware change.  Just that if the AP is
 under smartnet they will then do the upgrade for free.



 I have also heard the same thing from Xirrus with their AP arrays.  If they
 are under maintenance then they will send you the 802.11n radios to swap
 out.






 


 From: Lee H Badman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Sent: Friday, January 11, 2008 9:39 AM
 To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
 Subject: [WIRELESS-LAN] 802.11n

 Wondering who is taking the early plunge on 802.11n, who's system you are
 going with (beyond small pilots), and if you are requiring commitment from
 the manufacturer that if the standard does change in ways that make
 pre-standard hardware incompatible, free replacements would be provided?



 On list or off is OK- just trying to gather data for our own 11n research.



 Kind regards-



 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/.

RE: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] 802.11n tied to 802.3at

[Frank Bulk - iNAME]

Do any of the bands have lesser/no DFS requirements?  If so, those are will
be more attractive.

Frank

-Original Message-
From: Jon Freeman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Monday, November 19, 2007 6:32 AM
To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] 802.11n tied to 802.3at

The most used indoor bands will likely be the two lower bands
(5.150-5.250 and 5.250-5.350 which have power in the 40mW and 200mW
levels respectively), the two upper bands will likely be used more
frequently outdoors (due to their higher upper power level limits of
1000mW and 800mW).

There are other factors such as station supplicant/radio support for the
added bands (newer devices should support all of them - but they're new
so you should double check).

Still, some of the upper bands might be used indoors in higher capacity
applications.  And who doesn't want more capacity?

Jon

-Original Message-
From: Dale W. Carder [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, November 18, 2007 9:10 PM
To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] 802.11n tied to 802.3at

On Nov 18, 2007, at 7:06 PM, Kevin Miller wrote:

 One thing to note is that 300Mbps as a symbol rate is only possible
 with 40MHz channels (versus the 20MHz standard width for 802.11a/b/
 g) .. which in 2.4GHz takes you from 3 non-overlapping to 1 non-
 overlapping. In 5GHz you have at least 8 40MHz non-overlapping
 channels.

Likewise, does anyone have a feel for which bands within
5GHz will be commonly used indoors?

Dale

**
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] 802.11n tied to 802.3at

[Jon Freeman]

None that I'm aware of - the only one of particular concern (and only in
Europe), is the 5.470-5.725 band since it's required there to run .11h
to ensure no interference with their aircraft radar systems.

Frankly, the only place you'd see this is in an airport in Europe and
the only device that needs to worry about it are AP and Stations in use
at those locations.  We have yet to see a instance in Europe that has
had this issue.

As higher level standards in 802.11 call for more AP control, this will
become more valuable in ensuring less co-channel interference across
heterogeneous environments.  But, it will also mean less need for IT
intervention as the access device will make these complex decisions
themselves - thus removing needs for high level RF expertise. 

Regards,

Jon

-Original Message-
From: Frank Bulk - iNAME [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Monday, November 19, 2007 5:49 AM
To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] 802.11n tied to 802.3at

Do any of the bands have lesser/no DFS requirements?  If so, those are
will
be more attractive.

Frank

-Original Message-
From: Jon Freeman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Monday, November 19, 2007 6:32 AM
To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] 802.11n tied to 802.3at

The most used indoor bands will likely be the two lower bands
(5.150-5.250 and 5.250-5.350 which have power in the 40mW and 200mW
levels respectively), the two upper bands will likely be used more
frequently outdoors (due to their higher upper power level limits of
1000mW and 800mW).

There are other factors such as station supplicant/radio support for the
added bands (newer devices should support all of them - but they're new
so you should double check).

Still, some of the upper bands might be used indoors in higher capacity
applications.  And who doesn't want more capacity?

Jon

-Original Message-
From: Dale W. Carder [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, November 18, 2007 9:10 PM
To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] 802.11n tied to 802.3at

On Nov 18, 2007, at 7:06 PM, Kevin Miller wrote:

 One thing to note is that 300Mbps as a symbol rate is only possible
 with 40MHz channels (versus the 20MHz standard width for 802.11a/b/
 g) .. which in 2.4GHz takes you from 3 non-overlapping to 1 non-
 overlapping. In 5GHz you have at least 8 40MHz non-overlapping
 channels.

Likewise, does anyone have a feel for which bands within
5GHz will be commonly used indoors?

Dale

**
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/.