RE: [WIRELESS-LAN] Prey Project- Open Source Device Tracking
There is a support community at https://groups.google.com/forum/#!forum/prey-security it's hard to tell if the complaints are legitimate reflections on the software, or user error issues. -Lee Badman Lee H. Badman Wireless/Network Engineer Information Technology and Services Adjunct Instructor, iSchool Syracuse University 315 443-3003 From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv [mailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU] On Behalf Of Heath Barnhart Sent: Tuesday, August 16, 2011 1:31 PM To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] Prey Project- Open Source Device Tracking No, but good find. I'm interested in feedback as well. Heath On 8/16/2011 11:24 AM, Lee H Badman wrote: This was brought to my attention this morning: http://preyproject.com Has anyone used it? Feedback? -Lee Badman Lee H. Badman Wireless/Network Engineer Information Technology and Services Adjunct Instructor, iSchool 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/. -- Heath Barnhart, CCNA Information Systems Services Washburn Univeristy Topeka, KS 66621 No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.comhttp://www.avg.com Version: 10.0.1392 / Virus Database: 1520/3837 - Release Date: 08/16/11 ** 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] Ruckus
Strictly out of scientific curiosity, is the reduction in APs while gaining coverage based on similar power settings in both hardware sets, and how do you answer the yeah, but what about client capacity concerns in dense areas? question when the number of APs and uplinks to the network is reduced? Again, no axe to grind, genuinely curious. I know Cisco's CAPWAP solution seems to strive to keep APs at less than full power. It's even a metric in the RMM panel in WCS AP's at maximum power and the lower your percentage the better things are considered to be, generally speaking. At the same time, we probably all have spaces where maybe 3 APs would fill the building, but three times that are used to keep cell size small and users per AP at a ratio that delivers higher client throughputs on the wireless shared media. In this case, we could certainly reduce our AP counts by upping the power, but it comes with trade-offs. I guess I'm wondering how much of the Ruckus advantages are philosophical (simply use less APs at higher power to cover same space) and how much is technical wizardry. Thanks- Lee Badman Lee H. Badman Wireless/Network Engineer Information Technology and Services Adjunct Instructor, iSchool Syracuse University 315 443-3003 From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv [mailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU] On Behalf Of Harry Rauch Sent: Tuesday, August 16, 2011 12:12 PM To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] Ruckus We have almost completely converted to Ruckus from Cisco and Extreme. We have had very little need for support; the things just work. We have reduced our AP numbers by over 30% with better coverage. Once installed in a dorm setting we have never had to go back other than one device that drowned from a leaking air-conditioner pan. Our dealer replaced the device at no cost even though water damage of this nature is not covered. The indoor models and outdoor function well and deliver outstanding data, video and VoIP. We are also using the wireless point-to-point bridge at a distance of 500 yards with throughput at 250MB. We have the p2p pair on portable stands; one had blown over during a very bad storm but was able to keep connectivity when hanging upside down with the main dome facing a wall 180 degrees away from it's partner. We didn't realize the issue for several days since it never went down. We use a Zone Director 1000 to establish a mesh group and to keep track of rogue devices. I would like a 3000 but we don't have that in our budget lines at the moment. We have over 100 APs throughout the campus. We have had them almost 2 years with no issues. Client problems have not been an issue. Amazing devices. Harry Rauch Sr. Network Analyst Eckerd College 4200 - 54th Ave S St. Petersburg, FL 33711 On 8/16/11 11:50 AM, Kellogg, Brian D. wrote: Looking for feedback from any institutions using Ruckus as their WLAN solution. Comments on their support, WAPs, Controllers, client problems and any other related topics would be appreciated. Thanks, Brian ** Participation and subscription information for this EDUCAUSE Constituent Group discussion list can be found at http://www.educause.edu/groups/. No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.comhttp://www.avg.com Version: 10.0.1392 / Virus Database: 1520/3837 - Release Date: 08/16/11 ** 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 Cisco Fat AP Shops in Need Of...
We have two previously loved WLSE management appliances about to go to the scrap pile, but I'd rather see them in use as they are da bomb for managing fat Cisco WLANs. I'm sure the price would be quite attractive if anyone has the need. I'll even do buy one, get one free (as far you know)! -Lee Lee H. Badman Wireless/Network Engineer Information Technology and Services Adjunct Instructor, iSchool 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] Ruckus
Yes, we ran both systems at max power to allow for greatest range; our densities in some lecture halls were over 150 active users for one array. Ruckus provides a link to Tom's Hardware Guide that has done some extensive testing of several front-line enterprises APs. The results may surprise you. Here's the link. http://www.ruckuswireless.com/press/releases/20110718-independent-test-reveals-ruckus-outperforms-others My suggestion would be to go to Tom's after reading the filtered version for a more extensive explanation. Harry Rauch Sr. Network Analyst Eckerd College 4200 - 54th Ave S St. Petersburg, FL 33711 On 8/17/11 8:02 AM, Lee H Badman wrote: Strictly out of scientific curiosity, is the reduction in APs while gaining coverage based on similar power settings in both hardware sets, and how do you answer the yeah, but what about client capacity concerns in dense areas? question when the number of APs and uplinks to the network is reduced? Again, no axe to grind, genuinely curious. I know Cisco's CAPWAP solution seems to strive to keep APs at less than full power. It's even a metric in the RMM panel in WCS AP's at maximum power and the lower your percentage the better things are considered to be, generally speaking. At the same time, we probably all have spaces where maybe 3 APs would fill the building, but three times that are used to keep cell size small and users per AP at a ratio that delivers higher client throughputs on the wireless shared media. In this case, we could certainly reduce our AP counts by upping the power, but it comes with trade-offs. I guess I'm wondering how much of the Ruckus advantages are philosophical (simply use less APs at higher power to cover same space) and how much is technical wizardry. Thanks- Lee Badman Lee H. Badman Wireless/Network Engineer Information Technology and Services Adjunct Instructor, iSchool Syracuse University 315 443-3003 *From:*The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv [mailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU] *On Behalf Of *Harry Rauch *Sent:* Tuesday, August 16, 2011 12:12 PM *To:* WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU *Subject:* Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] Ruckus We have almost completely converted to Ruckus from Cisco and Extreme. We have had very little need for support; the things just work. We have reduced our AP numbers by over 30% with better coverage. Once installed in a dorm setting we have never had to go back other than one device that drowned from a leaking air-conditioner pan. Our dealer replaced the device at no cost even though water damage of this nature is not covered. The indoor models and outdoor function well and deliver outstanding data, video and VoIP. We are also using the wireless point-to-point bridge at a distance of 500 yards with throughput at 250MB. We have the p2p pair on portable stands; one had blown over during a very bad storm but was able to keep connectivity when hanging upside down with the main dome facing a wall 180 degrees away from it's partner. We didn't realize the issue for several days since it never went down. We use a Zone Director 1000 to establish a mesh group and to keep track of rogue devices. I would like a 3000 but we don't have that in our budget lines at the moment. We have over 100 APs throughout the campus. We have had them almost 2 years with no issues. Client problems have not been an issue. Amazing devices. Harry Rauch Sr. Network Analyst Eckerd College 4200 - 54th Ave S St. Petersburg, FL 33711 On 8/16/11 11:50 AM, Kellogg, Brian D. wrote: Looking for feedback from any institutions using Ruckus as their WLAN solution. Comments on their support, WAPs, Controllers, client problems and any other related topics would be appreciated. Thanks, Brian ** Participation and subscription information for this EDUCAUSE Constituent Group discussion list can be found at http://www.educause.edu/groups/. No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com http://www.avg.com Version: 10.0.1392 / Virus Database: 1520/3837 - Release Date: 08/16/11 ** 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] Ruckus
Excellent information, Harry- Thanks. I have a feeling Cisco cringes to read that 3500 APs were tested with 4402s instead of 5508 controllers. -Lee Badman From: Harry Rauch [mailto:rauc...@eckerd.edu] Sent: Wednesday, August 17, 2011 8:22 AM To: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv Cc: Lee H Badman Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] Ruckus Yes, we ran both systems at max power to allow for greatest range; our densities in some lecture halls were over 150 active users for one array. Ruckus provides a link to Tom's Hardware Guide that has done some extensive testing of several front-line enterprises APs. The results may surprise you. Here's the link. http://www.ruckuswireless.com/press/releases/20110718-independent-test-reveals-ruckus-outperforms-others My suggestion would be to go to Tom's after reading the filtered version for a more extensive explanation. Harry Rauch Sr. Network Analyst Eckerd College 4200 - 54th Ave S St. Petersburg, FL 33711 On 8/17/11 8:02 AM, Lee H Badman wrote: Strictly out of scientific curiosity, is the reduction in APs while gaining coverage based on similar power settings in both hardware sets, and how do you answer the yeah, but what about client capacity concerns in dense areas? question when the number of APs and uplinks to the network is reduced? Again, no axe to grind, genuinely curious. I know Cisco's CAPWAP solution seems to strive to keep APs at less than full power. It's even a metric in the RMM panel in WCS AP's at maximum power and the lower your percentage the better things are considered to be, generally speaking. At the same time, we probably all have spaces where maybe 3 APs would fill the building, but three times that are used to keep cell size small and users per AP at a ratio that delivers higher client throughputs on the wireless shared media. In this case, we could certainly reduce our AP counts by upping the power, but it comes with trade-offs. I guess I'm wondering how much of the Ruckus advantages are philosophical (simply use less APs at higher power to cover same space) and how much is technical wizardry. Thanks- Lee Badman Lee H. Badman Wireless/Network Engineer Information Technology and Services Adjunct Instructor, iSchool Syracuse University 315 443-3003 From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv [mailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU] On Behalf Of Harry Rauch Sent: Tuesday, August 16, 2011 12:12 PM To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDUmailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] Ruckus We have almost completely converted to Ruckus from Cisco and Extreme. We have had very little need for support; the things just work. We have reduced our AP numbers by over 30% with better coverage. Once installed in a dorm setting we have never had to go back other than one device that drowned from a leaking air-conditioner pan. Our dealer replaced the device at no cost even though water damage of this nature is not covered. The indoor models and outdoor function well and deliver outstanding data, video and VoIP. We are also using the wireless point-to-point bridge at a distance of 500 yards with throughput at 250MB. We have the p2p pair on portable stands; one had blown over during a very bad storm but was able to keep connectivity when hanging upside down with the main dome facing a wall 180 degrees away from it's partner. We didn't realize the issue for several days since it never went down. We use a Zone Director 1000 to establish a mesh group and to keep track of rogue devices. I would like a 3000 but we don't have that in our budget lines at the moment. We have over 100 APs throughout the campus. We have had them almost 2 years with no issues. Client problems have not been an issue. Amazing devices. Harry Rauch Sr. Network Analyst Eckerd College 4200 - 54th Ave S St. Petersburg, FL 33711 On 8/16/11 11:50 AM, Kellogg, Brian D. wrote: Looking for feedback from any institutions using Ruckus as their WLAN solution. Comments on their support, WAPs, Controllers, client problems and any other related topics would be appreciated. Thanks, Brian ** Participation and subscription information for this EDUCAUSE Constituent Group discussion list can be found at http://www.educause.edu/groups/. No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.comhttp://www.avg.com Version: 10.0.1392 / Virus Database: 1520/3837 - Release Date: 08/16/11 ** 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/. No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.comhttp://www.avg.com Version: 10.0.1392 / Virus Database: 1520/3839 -
RE: Ruckus
We're looking seriously at Ruckus to solve our coverage issues simply due to the fact of where we had to install our APs in our dorms (in the hallways). Our initial tests show much improved SNR over most vendors to the edge of our dorms with their mid-range AP. We had another vendor test almost as good; Aruba (G SNR was a good bit lower but still above 30 in most places, but A was a little higher on average). These tests were in a pristine wireless environment; no sacks of water, books, etc... A lot of the performance difference on the omni antennas, which all use except Ruckus, has to do with the gain and thus the horizontal push from the antenna in our environment. We aren't looking to decrease our AP count. Brian From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv [mailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU] On Behalf Of Lee H Badman Sent: Wednesday, August 17, 2011 8:27 AM To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU Subject: Re: Ruckus Excellent information, Harry- Thanks. I have a feeling Cisco cringes to read that 3500 APs were tested with 4402s instead of 5508 controllers. -Lee Badman From: Harry Rauch [mailto:rauc...@eckerd.edu] Sent: Wednesday, August 17, 2011 8:22 AM To: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv Cc: Lee H Badman Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] Ruckus Yes, we ran both systems at max power to allow for greatest range; our densities in some lecture halls were over 150 active users for one array. Ruckus provides a link to Tom's Hardware Guide that has done some extensive testing of several front-line enterprises APs. The results may surprise you. Here's the link. http://www.ruckuswireless.com/press/releases/20110718-independent-test-reveals-ruckus-outperforms-others My suggestion would be to go to Tom's after reading the filtered version for a more extensive explanation. Harry Rauch Sr. Network Analyst Eckerd College 4200 - 54th Ave S St. Petersburg, FL 33711 On 8/17/11 8:02 AM, Lee H Badman wrote: Strictly out of scientific curiosity, is the reduction in APs while gaining coverage based on similar power settings in both hardware sets, and how do you answer the yeah, but what about client capacity concerns in dense areas? question when the number of APs and uplinks to the network is reduced? Again, no axe to grind, genuinely curious. I know Cisco's CAPWAP solution seems to strive to keep APs at less than full power. It's even a metric in the RMM panel in WCS AP's at maximum power and the lower your percentage the better things are considered to be, generally speaking. At the same time, we probably all have spaces where maybe 3 APs would fill the building, but three times that are used to keep cell size small and users per AP at a ratio that delivers higher client throughputs on the wireless shared media. In this case, we could certainly reduce our AP counts by upping the power, but it comes with trade-offs. I guess I'm wondering how much of the Ruckus advantages are philosophical (simply use less APs at higher power to cover same space) and how much is technical wizardry. Thanks- Lee Badman Lee H. Badman Wireless/Network Engineer Information Technology and Services Adjunct Instructor, iSchool Syracuse University 315 443-3003 From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv [mailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU] On Behalf Of Harry Rauch Sent: Tuesday, August 16, 2011 12:12 PM To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDUmailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] Ruckus We have almost completely converted to Ruckus from Cisco and Extreme. We have had very little need for support; the things just work. We have reduced our AP numbers by over 30% with better coverage. Once installed in a dorm setting we have never had to go back other than one device that drowned from a leaking air-conditioner pan. Our dealer replaced the device at no cost even though water damage of this nature is not covered. The indoor models and outdoor function well and deliver outstanding data, video and VoIP. We are also using the wireless point-to-point bridge at a distance of 500 yards with throughput at 250MB. We have the p2p pair on portable stands; one had blown over during a very bad storm but was able to keep connectivity when hanging upside down with the main dome facing a wall 180 degrees away from it's partner. We didn't realize the issue for several days since it never went down. We use a Zone Director 1000 to establish a mesh group and to keep track of rogue devices. I would like a 3000 but we don't have that in our budget lines at the moment. We have over 100 APs throughout the campus. We have had them almost 2 years with no issues. Client problems have not been an issue. Amazing devices. Harry Rauch Sr. Network Analyst Eckerd College 4200 - 54th Ave S St. Petersburg, FL 33711 On 8/16/11 11:50 AM, Kellogg, Brian D. wrote: Looking for feedback from any institutions using
Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] Ruckus
But in a real-world dorm scenario - microwaves, game consoles with wireless controllers, a wide variety of cell phones using the wireless, laptops that have Ad-hoc inadvertently turned on, etc. - the Ruckus has performed exceedingly well. Of course, for us, the cost factor was significant. We were able to go to the high-end 7962s and still be far less expensive. Many of our APs have been set and forget it; we monitor mainly using Solarwinds. Once a mesh is set it becomes autonomous unless you want to monkey with it. Our onsite visits to dorms has shrunk to the isolated non-Ruckus APs. Manpower cost reductions have been significant. Harry Rauch Sr. Network Analyst Eckerd College 4200 - 54th Ave S St. Petersburg, FL 33711 On 8/17/11 8:47 AM, Kellogg, Brian D. wrote: We're looking seriously at Ruckus to solve our coverage issues simply due to the fact of where we had to install our APs in our dorms (in the hallways). Our initial tests show much improved SNR over most vendors to the edge of our dorms with their mid-range AP. We had another vendor test almost as good; Aruba (G SNR was a good bit lower but still above 30 in most places, but A was a little higher on average). These tests were in a pristine wireless environment; no sacks of water, books, etc... A lot of the performance difference on the omni antennas, which all use except Ruckus, has to do with the gain and thus the horizontal push from the antenna in our environment. We aren't looking to decrease our AP count. Brian *From:*The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv [mailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU] *On Behalf Of *Lee H Badman *Sent:* Wednesday, August 17, 2011 8:27 AM *To:* WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU *Subject:* Re: Ruckus Excellent information, Harry- Thanks. I have a feeling Cisco cringes to read that 3500 APs were tested with 4402s instead of 5508 controllers. -Lee Badman *From:*Harry Rauch [mailto:rauc...@eckerd.edu] *Sent:* Wednesday, August 17, 2011 8:22 AM *To:* The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv *Cc:* Lee H Badman *Subject:* Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] Ruckus Yes, we ran both systems at max power to allow for greatest range; our densities in some lecture halls were over 150 active users for one array. Ruckus provides a link to Tom's Hardware Guide that has done some extensive testing of several front-line enterprises APs. The results may surprise you. Here's the link. http://www.ruckuswireless.com/press/releases/20110718-independent-test-reveals-ruckus-outperforms-others My suggestion would be to go to Tom's after reading the filtered version for a more extensive explanation. Harry Rauch Sr. Network Analyst Eckerd College 4200 - 54th Ave S St. Petersburg, FL 33711 On 8/17/11 8:02 AM, Lee H Badman wrote: Strictly out of scientific curiosity, is the reduction in APs while gaining coverage based on similar power settings in both hardware sets, and how do you answer the yeah, but what about client capacity concerns in dense areas? question when the number of APs and uplinks to the network is reduced? Again, no axe to grind, genuinely curious. I know Cisco's CAPWAP solution seems to strive to keep APs at less than full power. It's even a metric in the RMM panel in WCS AP's at maximum power and the lower your percentage the better things are considered to be, generally speaking. At the same time, we probably all have spaces where maybe 3 APs would fill the building, but three times that are used to keep cell size small and users per AP at a ratio that delivers higher client throughputs on the wireless shared media. In this case, we could certainly reduce our AP counts by upping the power, but it comes with trade-offs. I guess I'm wondering how much of the Ruckus advantages are philosophical (simply use less APs at higher power to cover same space) and how much is technical wizardry. Thanks- Lee Badman Lee H. Badman Wireless/Network Engineer Information Technology and Services Adjunct Instructor, iSchool Syracuse University 315 443-3003 *From:*The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv [mailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU] *On Behalf Of *Harry Rauch *Sent:* Tuesday, August 16, 2011 12:12 PM *To:* WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU mailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU *Subject:* Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] Ruckus We have almost completely converted to Ruckus from Cisco and Extreme. We have had very little need for support; the things just work. We have reduced our AP numbers by over 30% with better coverage. Once installed in a dorm setting we have never had to go back other than one device that drowned from a leaking air-conditioner pan. Our dealer replaced the device at no cost even though water damage of this nature is not covered. The indoor models and outdoor function well and deliver outstanding data, video and VoIP. We are also using the wireless point-to-point bridge at a distance
Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] Ruckus
The funny part about this article, Merikai is consistently horrible. On Wed, Aug 17, 2011 at 9:19 AM, Mike King m...@mpking.com wrote: I'm thinking the Unfiltered version is this one? http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/wi-fi-performance,2985.html (Which also references this article, (the first part in a 2 part series)) http://www.tomshardware.com/picturestory/571-wi-fi-beamforming-networking.html On Wed, Aug 17, 2011 at 8:47 AM, Kellogg, Brian D. bkell...@sbu.eduwrote: We’re looking seriously at Ruckus to solve our coverage issues simply due to the fact of where we had to install our APs in our dorms (in the hallways). Our initial tests show much improved SNR over most vendors to the edge of our dorms with their mid-range AP. We had another vendor test almost as good; Aruba (G SNR was a good bit lower but still above 30 in most places, but A was a little higher on average). These tests were in a pristine wireless environment; no sacks of water, books, etc… A lot of the performance difference on the omni antennas, which all use except Ruckus, has to do with the gain and thus the horizontal push from the antenna in our environment. We aren’t looking to decrease our AP count. ** ** ** ** Brian ** ** *From:* The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv [mailto: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU] *On Behalf Of *Lee H Badman *Sent:* Wednesday, August 17, 2011 8:27 AM *To:* WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU *Subject:* Re: Ruckus ** ** Excellent information, Harry- Thanks. I have a feeling Cisco cringes to read that 3500 APs were tested with 4402s instead of 5508 controllers.*** * ** ** -Lee Badman ** ** *From:* Harry Rauch [mailto:rauc...@eckerd.edu] *Sent:* Wednesday, August 17, 2011 8:22 AM *To:* The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv *Cc:* Lee H Badman *Subject:* Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] Ruckus ** ** Yes, we ran both systems at max power to allow for greatest range; our densities in some lecture halls were over 150 active users for one array. Ruckus provides a link to Tom's Hardware Guide that has done some extensive testing of several front-line enterprises APs. The results may surprise you. Here's the link. http://www.ruckuswireless.com/press/releases/20110718-independent-test-reveals-ruckus-outperforms-others My suggestion would be to go to Tom's after reading the filtered version for a more extensive explanation. Harry Rauch Sr. Network Analyst Eckerd College 4200 - 54th Ave S St. Petersburg, FL 33711 On 8/17/11 8:02 AM, Lee H Badman wrote: Strictly out of scientific curiosity, is the reduction in APs while gaining coverage based on similar power settings in both hardware sets, and how do you answer the “yeah, but what about client capacity concerns in dense areas?” question when the number of APs and uplinks to the network is reduced? Again, no axe to grind, genuinely curious. I know Cisco’s CAPWAP solution seems to strive to keep APs at less than full power. It’s even a metric in the RMM panel in WCS “AP’s at maximum power” and the lower your percentage the “better” things are considered to be, generally speaking. At the same time, we probably all have spaces where maybe 3 APs would fill the building, but three times that are used to keep cell size small and users per AP at a ratio that delivers higher client throughputs on the wireless shared media. In this case, we could certainly reduce our AP counts by upping the power, but it comes with trade-offs.** ** I guess I’m wondering how much of the Ruckus advantages are philosophical (simply use less APs at higher power to cover same space) and how much is technical wizardry. Thanks- Lee Badman Lee H. Badman Wireless/Network Engineer Information Technology and Services Adjunct Instructor, iSchool Syracuse University 315 443-3003 *From:* The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv [ mailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDUWIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU] *On Behalf Of *Harry Rauch *Sent:* Tuesday, August 16, 2011 12:12 PM *To:* WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU *Subject:* Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] Ruckus We have almost completely converted to Ruckus from Cisco and Extreme. We have had very little need for support; the things just work. We have reduced our AP numbers by over 30% with better coverage. Once installed in a dorm setting we have never had to go back other than one device that drowned from a leaking air-conditioner pan. Our dealer replaced the device at no cost even though water damage of this nature is not covered. The indoor models and outdoor function well and deliver outstanding data, video and VoIP. We are also using the wireless point-to-point bridge at a distance of 500 yards with throughput at 250MB. We have the p2p pair on
RE: [WIRELESS-LAN] Ruckus
Well... I might challenge that to a point. Though I didn't lab test, I did just put in a 35-AP Meraki environment in Syracuse University's London facility. Spot checking through the wireless APs I tested (basically FTP of large files and simple throughput tests) showed what I would expect in 11n environments. Again- nothing lab-quality about my work, just quick verification that a new-to-me product works. Wireless testing aside, I have found that the Meraki wireless and wired (MX-70) network was the absolute right solution for a remote site. The management and feature set are pretty impressive and three weeks in, we're quite happy so far. Lee H. Badman Wireless/Network Engineer Information Technology and Services Adjunct Instructor, iSchool Syracuse University 315 443-3003 From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv [mailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU] On Behalf Of Mike King Sent: Wednesday, August 17, 2011 9:20 AM To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] Ruckus The funny part about this article, Merikai is consistently horrible. On Wed, Aug 17, 2011 at 9:19 AM, Mike King m...@mpking.commailto:m...@mpking.com wrote: I'm thinking the Unfiltered version is this one? http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/wi-fi-performance,2985.html (Which also references this article, (the first part in a 2 part series)) http://www.tomshardware.com/picturestory/571-wi-fi-beamforming-networking.html On Wed, Aug 17, 2011 at 8:47 AM, Kellogg, Brian D. bkell...@sbu.edumailto:bkell...@sbu.edu wrote: We're looking seriously at Ruckus to solve our coverage issues simply due to the fact of where we had to install our APs in our dorms (in the hallways). Our initial tests show much improved SNR over most vendors to the edge of our dorms with their mid-range AP. We had another vendor test almost as good; Aruba (G SNR was a good bit lower but still above 30 in most places, but A was a little higher on average). These tests were in a pristine wireless environment; no sacks of water, books, etc... A lot of the performance difference on the omni antennas, which all use except Ruckus, has to do with the gain and thus the horizontal push from the antenna in our environment. We aren't looking to decrease our AP count. Brian From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv [mailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDUmailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU] On Behalf Of Lee H Badman Sent: Wednesday, August 17, 2011 8:27 AM To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDUmailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU Subject: Re: Ruckus Excellent information, Harry- Thanks. I have a feeling Cisco cringes to read that 3500 APs were tested with 4402s instead of 5508 controllers. -Lee Badman From: Harry Rauch [mailto:rauc...@eckerd.edumailto:rauc...@eckerd.edu] Sent: Wednesday, August 17, 2011 8:22 AM To: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv Cc: Lee H Badman Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] Ruckus Yes, we ran both systems at max power to allow for greatest range; our densities in some lecture halls were over 150 active users for one array. Ruckus provides a link to Tom's Hardware Guide that has done some extensive testing of several front-line enterprises APs. The results may surprise you. Here's the link. http://www.ruckuswireless.com/press/releases/20110718-independent-test-reveals-ruckus-outperforms-others My suggestion would be to go to Tom's after reading the filtered version for a more extensive explanation. Harry Rauch Sr. Network Analyst Eckerd College 4200 - 54th Ave S St. Petersburg, FL 33711 On 8/17/11 8:02 AM, Lee H Badman wrote: Strictly out of scientific curiosity, is the reduction in APs while gaining coverage based on similar power settings in both hardware sets, and how do you answer the yeah, but what about client capacity concerns in dense areas? question when the number of APs and uplinks to the network is reduced? Again, no axe to grind, genuinely curious. I know Cisco's CAPWAP solution seems to strive to keep APs at less than full power. It's even a metric in the RMM panel in WCS AP's at maximum power and the lower your percentage the better things are considered to be, generally speaking. At the same time, we probably all have spaces where maybe 3 APs would fill the building, but three times that are used to keep cell size small and users per AP at a ratio that delivers higher client throughputs on the wireless shared media. In this case, we could certainly reduce our AP counts by upping the power, but it comes with trade-offs. I guess I'm wondering how much of the Ruckus advantages are philosophical (simply use less APs at higher power to cover same space) and how much is technical wizardry. Thanks- Lee Badman Lee H. Badman Wireless/Network Engineer Information Technology and Services Adjunct Instructor, iSchool Syracuse University 315 443-3003tel:315%20443-3003 From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless
RE: [WIRELESS-LAN] Ruckus
Lee, one thing to be aware of is that these other companies (Ruckus, Xirrus, etc) use arrays, not access points. So there are multiple radios per unit. On a per-radio basis, the number of users may be similar to a single access point (we've found it to be higher by about 20-30%), but collectively you can get a good number of users per unit. Another thing to consider is the wiring to feed the AP. If you have an AP running 11n, do you give it a 100Mbs connection or 1Gbs? Which is the bigger waste of bandwidth? Now take a multi-radio device and ask the same question. If you have 4 radios @ 11n each, then a 1Gbs connection scales perfectly. Now the downside is, what if you only need to support 10-15 users. An array is overkill. -Brian From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv [mailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU] On Behalf Of Lee H Badman Sent: Wednesday, August 17, 2011 8:27 AM To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] Ruckus Excellent information, Harry- Thanks. I have a feeling Cisco cringes to read that 3500 APs were tested with 4402s instead of 5508 controllers. -Lee Badman From: Harry Rauch [mailto:rauc...@eckerd.edu]mailto:[mailto:rauc...@eckerd.edu] Sent: Wednesday, August 17, 2011 8:22 AM To: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv Cc: Lee H Badman Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] Ruckus Yes, we ran both systems at max power to allow for greatest range; our densities in some lecture halls were over 150 active users for one array. Ruckus provides a link to Tom's Hardware Guide that has done some extensive testing of several front-line enterprises APs. The results may surprise you. Here's the link. http://www.ruckuswireless.com/press/releases/20110718-independent-test-reveals-ruckus-outperforms-others My suggestion would be to go to Tom's after reading the filtered version for a more extensive explanation. Harry Rauch Sr. Network Analyst Eckerd College 4200 - 54th Ave S St. Petersburg, FL 33711 On 8/17/11 8:02 AM, Lee H Badman wrote: Strictly out of scientific curiosity, is the reduction in APs while gaining coverage based on similar power settings in both hardware sets, and how do you answer the yeah, but what about client capacity concerns in dense areas? question when the number of APs and uplinks to the network is reduced? Again, no axe to grind, genuinely curious. I know Cisco's CAPWAP solution seems to strive to keep APs at less than full power. It's even a metric in the RMM panel in WCS AP's at maximum power and the lower your percentage the better things are considered to be, generally speaking. At the same time, we probably all have spaces where maybe 3 APs would fill the building, but three times that are used to keep cell size small and users per AP at a ratio that delivers higher client throughputs on the wireless shared media. In this case, we could certainly reduce our AP counts by upping the power, but it comes with trade-offs. I guess I'm wondering how much of the Ruckus advantages are philosophical (simply use less APs at higher power to cover same space) and how much is technical wizardry. Thanks- Lee Badman Lee H. Badman Wireless/Network Engineer Information Technology and Services Adjunct Instructor, iSchool Syracuse University 315 443-3003 From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv [mailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU] On Behalf Of Harry Rauch Sent: Tuesday, August 16, 2011 12:12 PM To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDUmailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] Ruckus We have almost completely converted to Ruckus from Cisco and Extreme. We have had very little need for support; the things just work. We have reduced our AP numbers by over 30% with better coverage. Once installed in a dorm setting we have never had to go back other than one device that drowned from a leaking air-conditioner pan. Our dealer replaced the device at no cost even though water damage of this nature is not covered. The indoor models and outdoor function well and deliver outstanding data, video and VoIP. We are also using the wireless point-to-point bridge at a distance of 500 yards with throughput at 250MB. We have the p2p pair on portable stands; one had blown over during a very bad storm but was able to keep connectivity when hanging upside down with the main dome facing a wall 180 degrees away from it's partner. We didn't realize the issue for several days since it never went down. We use a Zone Director 1000 to establish a mesh group and to keep track of rogue devices. I would like a 3000 but we don't have that in our budget lines at the moment. We have over 100 APs throughout the campus. We have had them almost 2 years with no issues. Client problems have not been an issue. Amazing devices. Harry Rauch Sr. Network Analyst Eckerd College 4200 - 54th Ave S St. Petersburg, FL 33711 On 8/16/11 11:50 AM, Kellogg,
RE: Ruckus
Due to the directional antenna array Ruckus uses they recommend not using dynamic power management. Those that are using their APs; are you finding this to be viable in real world deployments? -Brian #2 From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv [mailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU] On Behalf Of Brian Helman Sent: Wednesday, August 17, 2011 9:59 AM To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU Subject: Re: Ruckus Lee, one thing to be aware of is that these other companies (Ruckus, Xirrus, etc) use arrays, not access points. So there are multiple radios per unit. On a per-radio basis, the number of users may be similar to a single access point (we've found it to be higher by about 20-30%), but collectively you can get a good number of users per unit. Another thing to consider is the wiring to feed the AP. If you have an AP running 11n, do you give it a 100Mbs connection or 1Gbs? Which is the bigger waste of bandwidth? Now take a multi-radio device and ask the same question. If you have 4 radios @ 11n each, then a 1Gbs connection scales perfectly. Now the downside is, what if you only need to support 10-15 users. An array is overkill. -Brian From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv [mailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU] On Behalf Of Lee H Badman Sent: Wednesday, August 17, 2011 8:27 AM To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] Ruckus Excellent information, Harry- Thanks. I have a feeling Cisco cringes to read that 3500 APs were tested with 4402s instead of 5508 controllers. -Lee Badman From: Harry Rauch [mailto:rauc...@eckerd.edu]mailto:[mailto:rauc...@eckerd.edu] Sent: Wednesday, August 17, 2011 8:22 AM To: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv Cc: Lee H Badman Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] Ruckus Yes, we ran both systems at max power to allow for greatest range; our densities in some lecture halls were over 150 active users for one array. Ruckus provides a link to Tom's Hardware Guide that has done some extensive testing of several front-line enterprises APs. The results may surprise you. Here's the link. http://www.ruckuswireless.com/press/releases/20110718-independent-test-reveals-ruckus-outperforms-others My suggestion would be to go to Tom's after reading the filtered version for a more extensive explanation. Harry Rauch Sr. Network Analyst Eckerd College 4200 - 54th Ave S St. Petersburg, FL 33711 On 8/17/11 8:02 AM, Lee H Badman wrote: Strictly out of scientific curiosity, is the reduction in APs while gaining coverage based on similar power settings in both hardware sets, and how do you answer the yeah, but what about client capacity concerns in dense areas? question when the number of APs and uplinks to the network is reduced? Again, no axe to grind, genuinely curious. I know Cisco's CAPWAP solution seems to strive to keep APs at less than full power. It's even a metric in the RMM panel in WCS AP's at maximum power and the lower your percentage the better things are considered to be, generally speaking. At the same time, we probably all have spaces where maybe 3 APs would fill the building, but three times that are used to keep cell size small and users per AP at a ratio that delivers higher client throughputs on the wireless shared media. In this case, we could certainly reduce our AP counts by upping the power, but it comes with trade-offs. I guess I'm wondering how much of the Ruckus advantages are philosophical (simply use less APs at higher power to cover same space) and how much is technical wizardry. Thanks- Lee Badman Lee H. Badman Wireless/Network Engineer Information Technology and Services Adjunct Instructor, iSchool Syracuse University 315 443-3003 From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv [mailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU] On Behalf Of Harry Rauch Sent: Tuesday, August 16, 2011 12:12 PM To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDUmailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] Ruckus We have almost completely converted to Ruckus from Cisco and Extreme. We have had very little need for support; the things just work. We have reduced our AP numbers by over 30% with better coverage. Once installed in a dorm setting we have never had to go back other than one device that drowned from a leaking air-conditioner pan. Our dealer replaced the device at no cost even though water damage of this nature is not covered. The indoor models and outdoor function well and deliver outstanding data, video and VoIP. We are also using the wireless point-to-point bridge at a distance of 500 yards with throughput at 250MB. We have the p2p pair on portable stands; one had blown over during a very bad storm but was able to keep connectivity when hanging upside down with the main dome facing a wall 180 degrees away from it's partner. We didn't realize the issue for several days since it never went down. We
RE: [WIRELESS-LAN] Ruckus
Agreed- and it is fascinating stuff. From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv [WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU] On Behalf Of Brian Helman [bhel...@salemstate.edu] Sent: Wednesday, August 17, 2011 9:59 AM To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] Ruckus Lee, one thing to be aware of is that these other companies (Ruckus, Xirrus, etc) use arrays, not access points. So there are multiple radios per unit. On a per-radio basis, the number of users may be similar to a single access point (we’ve found it to be higher by about 20-30%), but collectively you can get a good number of users per unit. Another thing to consider is the wiring to feed the AP. If you have an AP running 11n, do you give it a 100Mbs connection or 1Gbs? Which is the bigger waste of bandwidth? Now take a multi-radio device and ask the same question. If you have 4 radios @ 11n each, then a 1Gbs connection scales perfectly. Now the downside is, what if you only need to support 10-15 users. An array is overkill. -Brian From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv [mailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU] On Behalf Of Lee H Badman Sent: Wednesday, August 17, 2011 8:27 AM To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] Ruckus Excellent information, Harry- Thanks. I have a feeling Cisco cringes to read that 3500 APs were tested with 4402s instead of 5508 controllers. -Lee Badman From: Harry Rauch [mailto:rauc...@eckerd.edu]mailto:[mailto:rauc...@eckerd.edu] Sent: Wednesday, August 17, 2011 8:22 AM To: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv Cc: Lee H Badman Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] Ruckus Yes, we ran both systems at max power to allow for greatest range; our densities in some lecture halls were over 150 active users for one array. Ruckus provides a link to Tom's Hardware Guide that has done some extensive testing of several front-line enterprises APs. The results may surprise you. Here's the link. http://www.ruckuswireless.com/press/releases/20110718-independent-test-reveals-ruckus-outperforms-others My suggestion would be to go to Tom's after reading the filtered version for a more extensive explanation. Harry Rauch Sr. Network Analyst Eckerd College 4200 - 54th Ave S St. Petersburg, FL 33711 On 8/17/11 8:02 AM, Lee H Badman wrote: Strictly out of scientific curiosity, is the reduction in APs while gaining coverage based on similar power settings in both hardware sets, and how do you answer the “yeah, but what about client capacity concerns in dense areas?” question when the number of APs and uplinks to the network is reduced? Again, no axe to grind, genuinely curious. I know Cisco’s CAPWAP solution seems to strive to keep APs at less than full power. It’s even a metric in the RMM panel in WCS “AP’s at maximum power” and the lower your percentage the “better” things are considered to be, generally speaking. At the same time, we probably all have spaces where maybe 3 APs would fill the building, but three times that are used to keep cell size small and users per AP at a ratio that delivers higher client throughputs on the wireless shared media. In this case, we could certainly reduce our AP counts by upping the power, but it comes with trade-offs. I guess I’m wondering how much of the Ruckus advantages are philosophical (simply use less APs at higher power to cover same space) and how much is technical wizardry. Thanks- Lee Badman Lee H. Badman Wireless/Network Engineer Information Technology and Services Adjunct Instructor, iSchool Syracuse University 315 443-3003 From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv [mailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU] On Behalf Of Harry Rauch Sent: Tuesday, August 16, 2011 12:12 PM To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDUmailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] Ruckus We have almost completely converted to Ruckus from Cisco and Extreme. We have had very little need for support; the things just work. We have reduced our AP numbers by over 30% with better coverage. Once installed in a dorm setting we have never had to go back other than one device that drowned from a leaking air-conditioner pan. Our dealer replaced the device at no cost even though water damage of this nature is not covered. The indoor models and outdoor function well and deliver outstanding data, video and VoIP. We are also using the wireless point-to-point bridge at a distance of 500 yards with throughput at 250MB. We have the p2p pair on portable stands; one had blown over during a very bad storm but was able to keep connectivity when hanging upside down with the main dome facing a wall 180 degrees away from it's partner. We didn't realize the issue for several days since it never went down. We use a Zone Director 1000 to establish a mesh group and to keep track of rogue devices. I
Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] Ruckus
Real-world conditions almost always seem to shoot lab conditions in the foot. I think Tom's has done a follow-up recently that show some of the strengths and weaknesses of a wide variety of APs. I think the beam-forming concept used by Ruckus is very interesting as well as very effective. Harry Rauch Sr. Network Analyst Eckerd College 4200 - 54th Ave S St. Petersburg, FL 33711 On 8/17/11 9:20 AM, Mike King wrote: The funny part about this article, Merikai is consistently horrible. On Wed, Aug 17, 2011 at 9:19 AM, Mike King m...@mpking.com mailto:m...@mpking.com wrote: I'm thinking the Unfiltered version is this one? http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/wi-fi-performance,2985.html (Which also references this article, (the first part in a 2 part series)) http://www.tomshardware.com/picturestory/571-wi-fi-beamforming-networking.html On Wed, Aug 17, 2011 at 8:47 AM, Kellogg, Brian D. bkell...@sbu.edu mailto:bkell...@sbu.edu wrote: We’re looking seriously at Ruckus to solve our coverage issues simply due to the fact of where we had to install our APs in our dorms (in the hallways). Our initial tests show much improved SNR over most vendors to the edge of our dorms with their mid-range AP. We had another vendor test almost as good; Aruba (G SNR was a good bit lower but still above 30 in most places, but A was a little higher on average). These tests were in a pristine wireless environment; no sacks of water, books, etc… A lot of the performance difference on the omni antennas, which all use except Ruckus, has to do with the gain and thus the horizontal push from the antenna in our environment. We aren’t looking to decrease our AP count. Brian *From:*The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv [mailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU mailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU] *On Behalf Of *Lee H Badman *Sent:* Wednesday, August 17, 2011 8:27 AM *To:* WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU mailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU *Subject:* Re: Ruckus Excellent information, Harry- Thanks. I have a feeling Cisco cringes to read that 3500 APs were tested with 4402s instead of 5508 controllers. -Lee Badman *From:*Harry Rauch [mailto:rauc...@eckerd.edu mailto:rauc...@eckerd.edu] *Sent:* Wednesday, August 17, 2011 8:22 AM *To:* The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv *Cc:* Lee H Badman *Subject:* Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] Ruckus Yes, we ran both systems at max power to allow for greatest range; our densities in some lecture halls were over 150 active users for one array. Ruckus provides a link to Tom's Hardware Guide that has done some extensive testing of several front-line enterprises APs. The results may surprise you. Here's the link. http://www.ruckuswireless.com/press/releases/20110718-independent-test-reveals-ruckus-outperforms-others My suggestion would be to go to Tom's after reading the filtered version for a more extensive explanation. Harry Rauch Sr. Network Analyst Eckerd College 4200 - 54th Ave S St. Petersburg, FL 33711 On 8/17/11 8:02 AM, Lee H Badman wrote: Strictly out of scientific curiosity, is the reduction in APs while gaining coverage based on similar power settings in both hardware sets, and how do you answer the “yeah, but what about client capacity concerns in dense areas?” question when the number of APs and uplinks to the network is reduced? Again, no axe to grind, genuinely curious. I know Cisco’s CAPWAP solution seems to strive to keep APs at less than full power. It’s even a metric in the RMM panel in WCS “AP’s at maximum power” and the lower your percentage the “better” things are considered to be, generally speaking. At the same time, we probably all have spaces where maybe 3 APs would fill the building, but three times that are used to keep cell size small and users per AP at a ratio that delivers higher client throughputs on the wireless shared media. In this case, we could certainly reduce our AP counts by upping the power, but it comes with trade-offs. I guess I’m wondering how much of the Ruckus advantages are philosophical (simply use less APs at higher power to cover same space) and how much is technical wizardry. Thanks- Lee Badman Lee H. Badman Wireless/Network Engineer Information Technology and Services Adjunct Instructor, iSchool Syracuse University 315 443-3003 tel:315%20443-3003 *From:*The EDUCAUSE Wireless
Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] Ruckus
I have found that the issue of using full power doesn't seem to affect the day-to-day use. If I were using a Ruckus in a small office I have been tempted to reduce power but have found this to be less than useful. Harry Rauch Sr. Network Analyst Eckerd College 4200 - 54th Ave S St. Petersburg, FL 33711 On 8/17/11 10:07 AM, Kellogg, Brian D. wrote: Due to the directional antenna array Ruckus uses they recommend not using dynamic power management. Those that are using their APs; are you finding this to be viable in real world deployments? -Brian #2 *From:*The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv [mailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU] *On Behalf Of *Brian Helman *Sent:* Wednesday, August 17, 2011 9:59 AM *To:* WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU *Subject:* Re: Ruckus Lee, one thing to be aware of is that these other companies (Ruckus, Xirrus, etc) use arrays, not access points. So there are multiple radios per unit. On a per-radio basis, the number of users may be similar to a single access point (we've found it to be higher by about 20-30%), but collectively you can get a good number of users per unit. Another thing to consider is the wiring to feed the AP. If you have an AP running 11n, do you give it a 100Mbs connection or 1Gbs? Which is the bigger waste of bandwidth? Now take a multi-radio device and ask the same question. If you have 4 radios @ 11n each, then a 1Gbs connection scales perfectly. Now the downside is, what if you only need to support 10-15 users. An array is overkill. -Brian *From:*The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv [mailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU] *On Behalf Of *Lee H Badman *Sent:* Wednesday, August 17, 2011 8:27 AM *To:* WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU *Subject:* Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] Ruckus Excellent information, Harry- Thanks. I have a feeling Cisco cringes to read that 3500 APs were tested with 4402s instead of 5508 controllers. -Lee Badman *From:*Harry Rauch [mailto:rauc...@eckerd.edu] mailto:[mailto:rauc...@eckerd.edu] *Sent:* Wednesday, August 17, 2011 8:22 AM *To:* The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv *Cc:* Lee H Badman *Subject:* Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] Ruckus Yes, we ran both systems at max power to allow for greatest range; our densities in some lecture halls were over 150 active users for one array. Ruckus provides a link to Tom's Hardware Guide that has done some extensive testing of several front-line enterprises APs. The results may surprise you. Here's the link. http://www.ruckuswireless.com/press/releases/20110718-independent-test-reveals-ruckus-outperforms-others My suggestion would be to go to Tom's after reading the filtered version for a more extensive explanation. Harry Rauch Sr. Network Analyst Eckerd College 4200 - 54th Ave S St. Petersburg, FL 33711 On 8/17/11 8:02 AM, Lee H Badman wrote: Strictly out of scientific curiosity, is the reduction in APs while gaining coverage based on similar power settings in both hardware sets, and how do you answer the yeah, but what about client capacity concerns in dense areas? question when the number of APs and uplinks to the network is reduced? Again, no axe to grind, genuinely curious. I know Cisco's CAPWAP solution seems to strive to keep APs at less than full power. It's even a metric in the RMM panel in WCS AP's at maximum power and the lower your percentage the better things are considered to be, generally speaking. At the same time, we probably all have spaces where maybe 3 APs would fill the building, but three times that are used to keep cell size small and users per AP at a ratio that delivers higher client throughputs on the wireless shared media. In this case, we could certainly reduce our AP counts by upping the power, but it comes with trade-offs. I guess I'm wondering how much of the Ruckus advantages are philosophical (simply use less APs at higher power to cover same space) and how much is technical wizardry. Thanks- Lee Badman Lee H. Badman Wireless/Network Engineer Information Technology and Services Adjunct Instructor, iSchool Syracuse University 315 443-3003 *From:*The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv [mailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU] *On Behalf Of *Harry Rauch *Sent:* Tuesday, August 16, 2011 12:12 PM *To:* WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU mailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU *Subject:* Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] Ruckus We have almost completely converted to Ruckus from Cisco and Extreme. We have had very little need for support; the things just work. We have reduced our AP numbers by over 30% with better coverage. Once installed in a dorm setting we have never had to go back other than one device that drowned from a leaking air-conditioner pan. Our dealer replaced the device at no cost even though water damage of this nature is not covered. The indoor models and outdoor function well and deliver
Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] Ruckus
The question I have had with Ruckus is how their APs coordinate their beamforming activities so as to not contend for the same clients. It seems there would need to be a control plane to avoid AP contention. How does one survey for these APs? Do you factor in the beamforming (unicast frames, active survey) or not (broadcast frames, and passive survey)? Thanks, Bruce T. Johnson | Network Engineer | Partners Healthcare 617.726.9662 | bjohns...@partners.org -Original Message- From: Lee H Badman [lhbad...@syr.edu] Received: Wednesday, 17 Aug 2011, 10:08am To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU [WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU] Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] Ruckus Agreed- and it is fascinating stuff. From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv [WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU] On Behalf Of Brian Helman [bhel...@salemstate.edu] Sent: Wednesday, August 17, 2011 9:59 AM To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] Ruckus Lee, one thing to be aware of is that these other companies (Ruckus, Xirrus, etc) use arrays, not access points. So there are multiple radios per unit. On a per-radio basis, the number of users may be similar to a single access point (we’ve found it to be higher by about 20-30%), but collectively you can get a good number of users per unit. Another thing to consider is the wiring to feed the AP. If you have an AP running 11n, do you give it a 100Mbs connection or 1Gbs? Which is the bigger waste of bandwidth? Now take a multi-radio device and ask the same question. If you have 4 radios @ 11n each, then a 1Gbs connection scales perfectly. Now the downside is, what if you only need to support 10-15 users. An array is overkill. -Brian From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv [mailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU] On Behalf Of Lee H Badman Sent: Wednesday, August 17, 2011 8:27 AM To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] Ruckus Excellent information, Harry- Thanks. I have a feeling Cisco cringes to read that 3500 APs were tested with 4402s instead of 5508 controllers. -Lee Badman From: Harry Rauch [mailto:rauc...@eckerd.edu]mailto:[mailto:rauc...@eckerd.edu] Sent: Wednesday, August 17, 2011 8:22 AM To: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv Cc: Lee H Badman Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] Ruckus Yes, we ran both systems at max power to allow for greatest range; our densities in some lecture halls were over 150 active users for one array. Ruckus provides a link to Tom's Hardware Guide that has done some extensive testing of several front-line enterprises APs. The results may surprise you. Here's the link. http://www.ruckuswireless.com/press/releases/20110718-independent-test-reveals-ruckus-outperforms-others My suggestion would be to go to Tom's after reading the filtered version for a more extensive explanation. Harry Rauch Sr. Network Analyst Eckerd College 4200 - 54th Ave S St. Petersburg, FL 33711 On 8/17/11 8:02 AM, Lee H Badman wrote: Strictly out of scientific curiosity, is the reduction in APs while gaining coverage based on similar power settings in both hardware sets, and how do you answer the “yeah, but what about client capacity concerns in dense areas?” question when the number of APs and uplinks to the network is reduced? Again, no axe to grind, genuinely curious. I know Cisco’s CAPWAP solution seems to strive to keep APs at less than full power. It’s even a metric in the RMM panel in WCS “AP’s at maximum power” and the lower your percentage the “better” things are considered to be, generally speaking. At the same time, we probably all have spaces where maybe 3 APs would fill the building, but three times that are used to keep cell size small and users per AP at a ratio that delivers higher client throughputs on the wireless shared media. In this case, we could certainly reduce our AP counts by upping the power, but it comes with trade-offs. I guess I’m wondering how much of the Ruckus advantages are philosophical (simply use less APs at higher power to cover same space) and how much is technical wizardry. Thanks- Lee Badman Lee H. Badman Wireless/Network Engineer Information Technology and Services Adjunct Instructor, iSchool Syracuse University 315 443-3003 From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv [mailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU] On Behalf Of Harry Rauch Sent: Tuesday, August 16, 2011 12:12 PM To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDUmailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] Ruckus We have almost completely converted to Ruckus from Cisco and Extreme. We have had very little need for support; the things just work. We have reduced our AP numbers by over 30% with better coverage. Once installed in a dorm setting we have never had to go back other than one device that drowned from a leaking air-conditioner
RE: Ruckus
That is one of my concerns as well. I've not been able to find a good answer to it as yet. Brian -Original Message- From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv [mailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU] On Behalf Of Johnson, Bruce T. Sent: Wednesday, August 17, 2011 10:38 AM To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU Subject: Re: Ruckus The question I have had with Ruckus is how their APs coordinate their beamforming activities so as to not contend for the same clients. It seems there would need to be a control plane to avoid AP contention. How does one survey for these APs? Do you factor in the beamforming (unicast frames, active survey) or not (broadcast frames, and passive survey)? Thanks, Bruce T. Johnson | Network Engineer | Partners Healthcare 617.726.9662 | bjohns...@partners.org -Original Message- From: Lee H Badman [lhbad...@syr.edu] Received: Wednesday, 17 Aug 2011, 10:08am To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU [WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU] Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] Ruckus Agreed- and it is fascinating stuff. From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv [WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU] On Behalf Of Brian Helman [bhel...@salemstate.edu] Sent: Wednesday, August 17, 2011 9:59 AM To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] Ruckus Lee, one thing to be aware of is that these other companies (Ruckus, Xirrus, etc) use arrays, not access points. So there are multiple radios per unit. On a per-radio basis, the number of users may be similar to a single access point (we've found it to be higher by about 20-30%), but collectively you can get a good number of users per unit. Another thing to consider is the wiring to feed the AP. If you have an AP running 11n, do you give it a 100Mbs connection or 1Gbs? Which is the bigger waste of bandwidth? Now take a multi-radio device and ask the same question. If you have 4 radios @ 11n each, then a 1Gbs connection scales perfectly. Now the downside is, what if you only need to support 10-15 users. An array is overkill. -Brian From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv [mailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU] On Behalf Of Lee H Badman Sent: Wednesday, August 17, 2011 8:27 AM To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] Ruckus Excellent information, Harry- Thanks. I have a feeling Cisco cringes to read that 3500 APs were tested with 4402s instead of 5508 controllers. -Lee Badman From: Harry Rauch [mailto:rauc...@eckerd.edu]mailto:[mailto:rauc...@eckerd.edu] Sent: Wednesday, August 17, 2011 8:22 AM To: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv Cc: Lee H Badman Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] Ruckus Yes, we ran both systems at max power to allow for greatest range; our densities in some lecture halls were over 150 active users for one array. Ruckus provides a link to Tom's Hardware Guide that has done some extensive testing of several front-line enterprises APs. The results may surprise you. Here's the link. http://www.ruckuswireless.com/press/releases/20110718-independent-test-reveals-ruckus-outperforms-others My suggestion would be to go to Tom's after reading the filtered version for a more extensive explanation. Harry Rauch Sr. Network Analyst Eckerd College 4200 - 54th Ave S St. Petersburg, FL 33711 On 8/17/11 8:02 AM, Lee H Badman wrote: Strictly out of scientific curiosity, is the reduction in APs while gaining coverage based on similar power settings in both hardware sets, and how do you answer the yeah, but what about client capacity concerns in dense areas? question when the number of APs and uplinks to the network is reduced? Again, no axe to grind, genuinely curious. I know Cisco's CAPWAP solution seems to strive to keep APs at less than full power. It's even a metric in the RMM panel in WCS AP's at maximum power and the lower your percentage the better things are considered to be, generally speaking. At the same time, we probably all have spaces where maybe 3 APs would fill the building, but three times that are used to keep cell size small and users per AP at a ratio that delivers higher client throughputs on the wireless shared media. In this case, we could certainly reduce our AP counts by upping the power, but it comes with trade-offs. I guess I'm wondering how much of the Ruckus advantages are philosophical (simply use less APs at higher power to cover same space) and how much is technical wizardry. Thanks- Lee Badman Lee H. Badman Wireless/Network Engineer Information Technology and Services Adjunct Instructor, iSchool Syracuse University 315 443-3003 From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv [mailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU] On Behalf Of Harry Rauch Sent: Tuesday, August 16, 2011 12:12 PM To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDUmailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] Ruckus
From what I can tell they use the MAC address as a base identifier; in a mesh the system identifies the device and somehow decides and which AP has a better signal/connection. Unmeshed APs simply hold on to the device until the signal becomes too weak when another AP would be picked up by the computer. Ekahau has a free WiFi heatmap that we use to identify weak areas. There are many more out there but I like free and it does a good job for us. It is passive in nature. Harry Rauch Sr. Network Analyst Eckerd College 4200 - 54th Ave S St. Petersburg, FL 33711 On 8/17/11 10:38 AM, Johnson, Bruce T. wrote: The question I have had with Ruckus is how their APs coordinate their beamforming activities so as to not contend for the same clients. It seems there would need to be a control plane to avoid AP contention. How does one survey for these APs? Do you factor in the beamforming (unicast frames, active survey) or not (broadcast frames, and passive survey)? Thanks, Bruce T. Johnson | Network Engineer | Partners Healthcare 617.726.9662 | bjohns...@partners.org -Original Message- From: Lee H Badman [lhbad...@syr.edu] Received: Wednesday, 17 Aug 2011, 10:08am To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU [WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU] Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] Ruckus Agreed- and it is fascinating stuff. From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv [WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU] On Behalf Of Brian Helman [bhel...@salemstate.edu] Sent: Wednesday, August 17, 2011 9:59 AM To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] Ruckus Lee, one thing to be aware of is that these other companies (Ruckus, Xirrus, etc) use arrays, not access points. So there are multiple radios per unit. On a per-radio basis, the number of users may be similar to a single access point (we’ve found it to be higher by about 20-30%), but collectively you can get a good number of users per unit. Another thing to consider is the wiring to feed the AP. If you have an AP running 11n, do you give it a 100Mbs connection or 1Gbs? Which is the bigger waste of bandwidth? Now take a multi-radio device and ask the same question. If you have 4 radios @ 11n each, then a 1Gbs connection scales perfectly. Now the downside is, what if you only need to support 10-15 users. An array is overkill. -Brian From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv [mailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU] On Behalf Of Lee H Badman Sent: Wednesday, August 17, 2011 8:27 AM To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] Ruckus Excellent information, Harry- Thanks. I have a feeling Cisco cringes to read that 3500 APs were tested with 4402s instead of 5508 controllers. -Lee Badman From: Harry Rauch [mailto:rauc...@eckerd.edu]mailto:[mailto:rauc...@eckerd.edu] Sent: Wednesday, August 17, 2011 8:22 AM To: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv Cc: Lee H Badman Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] Ruckus Yes, we ran both systems at max power to allow for greatest range; our densities in some lecture halls were over 150 active users for one array. Ruckus provides a link to Tom's Hardware Guide that has done some extensive testing of several front-line enterprises APs. The results may surprise you. Here's the link. http://www.ruckuswireless.com/press/releases/20110718-independent-test-reveals-ruckus-outperforms-others My suggestion would be to go to Tom's after reading the filtered version for a more extensive explanation. Harry Rauch Sr. Network Analyst Eckerd College 4200 - 54th Ave S St. Petersburg, FL 33711 On 8/17/11 8:02 AM, Lee H Badman wrote: Strictly out of scientific curiosity, is the reduction in APs while gaining coverage based on similar power settings in both hardware sets, and how do you answer the “yeah, but what about client capacity concerns in dense areas?” question when the number of APs and uplinks to the network is reduced? Again, no axe to grind, genuinely curious. I know Cisco’s CAPWAP solution seems to strive to keep APs at less than full power. It’s even a metric in the RMM panel in WCS “AP’s at maximum power” and the lower your percentage the “better” things are considered to be, generally speaking. At the same time, we probably all have spaces where maybe 3 APs would fill the building, but three times that are used to keep cell size small and users per AP at a ratio that delivers higher client throughputs on the wireless shared media. In this case, we could certainly reduce our AP counts by upping the power, but it comes with trade-offs. I guess I’m wondering how much of the Ruckus advantages are philosophical (simply use less APs at higher power to cover same space) and how much is technical wizardry. Thanks- Lee Badman Lee H. Badman Wireless/Network Engineer Information Technology and Services Adjunct Instructor, iSchool Syracuse University 315
Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] Ruckus
In a general sense, I would question putting Ruckus and Xirrus in the same group as arrays. The two are quite different. From a radio hardware perspective, Ruckus APs are the same as any other access point, in that they offer combinations of single or dual radio 2.4 and 5 GHz APs. Their indoor APs max at two radios, like most other APs (e.g. Cisco, Aruba, etc.). Their array is not a radio array, it's an antenna array, dynamically changing physical antenna usage to shape the RF. On the other hand, Xirrus uses a true radio array, incorporating four or more radios into each box. Each radio is mapped, statically, to a directional antenna(or antennas, with MIMO). All directional antennas, taken together, then provide omni-directional coverage. With the Xirrus radio array, I agree completely with your point about backhaul considerations. With Ruckus, I wouldn't think of wired backhaul design differently than other APs. thanks, Marcus Burton Dir. of Product Development CWNP Lee, one thing to be aware of is that these other companies (Ruckus, Xirrus, etc) use arrays, not access points. So there are multiple radios per unit. On a per-radio basis, the number of users may be similar to a single access point (we?ve found it to be higher by about 20-30%), but collectively you can get a good number of users per unit. Another thing to consider is the wiring to feed the AP. If you have an AP running 11n, do you give it a 100Mbs connection or 1Gbs? Which is the bigger waste of bandwidth? Now take a multi-radio device and ask the same question. If you have 4 radios @ 11n each, then a 1Gbs connection scales perfectly. Now the downside is, what if you only need to support 10-15 users. An array is overkill. -Brian From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv [mailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU] On Behalf Of Lee H Badman Sent: Wednesday, August 17, 2011 8:27 AM To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] Ruckus Excellent information, Harry- Thanks. I have a feeling Cisco cringes to read that 3500 APs were tested with 4402s instead of 5508 controllers. -Lee Badman From: Harry Rauch [mailto:rauc...@eckerd.edu] Sent: Wednesday, August 17, 2011 8:22 AM To: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv Cc: Lee H Badman Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] Ruckus Yes, we ran both systems at max power to allow for greatest range; our densities in some lecture halls were over 150 active users for one array. Ruckus provides a link to Tom's Hardware Guide that has done some extensive testing of several front-line enterprises APs. The results may surprise you. Here's the link. http://www.ruckuswireless.com/press/releases/20110718-independent-test-reveals-ruckus-outperforms-others My suggestion would be to go to Tom's after reading the filtered version for a more extensive explanation. Harry Rauch Sr. Network Analyst Eckerd College 4200 - 54th Ave S St. Petersburg, FL 33711 On 8/17/11 8:02 AM, Lee H Badman wrote: Strictly out of scientific curiosity, is the reduction in APs while gaining coverage based on similar power settings in both hardware sets, and how do you answer the ?yeah, but what about client capacity concerns in dense areas?? question when the number of APs and uplinks to the network is reduced? Again, no axe to grind, genuinely curious. I know Cisco?s CAPWAP solution seems to strive to keep APs at less than full power. It?s even a metric in the RMM panel in WCS ?AP?s at maximum power? and the lower your percentage the ?better? things are considered to be, generally speaking. At the same time, we probably all have spaces where maybe 3 APs would fill the building, but three times that are used to keep cell size small and users per AP at a ratio that delivers higher client throughputs on the wireless shared media. In this case, we could certainly reduce our AP counts by upping the power, but it comes with trade-offs. I guess I?m wondering how much of the Ruckus advantages are philosophical (simply use less APs at higher power to cover same space) and how much is technical wizardry. Thanks- Lee Badman Lee H. Badman Wireless/Network Engineer Information Technology and Services Adjunct Instructor, iSchool Syracuse University 315 443-3003 From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv [mailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU] On Behalf Of Harry Rauch Sent: Tuesday, August 16, 2011 12:12 PM To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] Ruckus We have almost completely converted to Ruckus from Cisco and Extreme. We have had very little need for support; the things just work. We have reduced our AP numbers by over 30% with better coverage. Once installed in a dorm setting we have never had to go back other than one device that drowned from a leaking air-conditioner pan. Our dealer replaced the device at no cost even though water damage of this
Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] Ruckus
Thanks, That makes sense, since the client decides anyway. It seems this may make the decision less clear to clients without AP coordination, but perhaps not. The AP co-channel interference reduction offered by Ruckus is certainly appealing, especially for mesh. Thanks, Bruce T. Johnson | Network Engineer | Partners Healthcare 617.726.9662 | bjohns...@partners.org -Original Message- From: Harry Rauch [rauc...@eckerd.edu] Received: Wednesday, 17 Aug 2011, 10:49am To: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv [WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU] CC: Johnson, Bruce T. [bjohns...@partners.org] Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] Ruckus From what I can tell they use the MAC address as a base identifier; in a mesh the system identifies the device and somehow decides and which AP has a better signal/connection. Unmeshed APs simply hold on to the device until the signal becomes too weak when another AP would be picked up by the computer. Ekahau has a free WiFi heatmap that we use to identify weak areas. There are many more out there but I like free and it does a good job for us. It is passive in nature. Harry Rauch Sr. Network Analyst Eckerd College 4200 - 54th Ave S St. Petersburg, FL 33711 On 8/17/11 10:38 AM, Johnson, Bruce T. wrote: The question I have had with Ruckus is how their APs coordinate their beamforming activities so as to not contend for the same clients. It seems there would need to be a control plane to avoid AP contention. How does one survey for these APs? Do you factor in the beamforming (unicast frames, active survey) or not (broadcast frames, and passive survey)? Thanks, Bruce T. Johnson | Network Engineer | Partners Healthcare 617.726.9662 | bjohns...@partners.orgmailto:bjohns...@partners.org -Original Message- From: Lee H Badman [lhbad...@syr.edumailto:lhbad...@syr.edu] Received: Wednesday, 17 Aug 2011, 10:08am To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDUmailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU [WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDUmailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU] Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] Ruckus Agreed- and it is fascinating stuff. From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv [WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDUmailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU] On Behalf Of Brian Helman [bhel...@salemstate.edumailto:bhel...@salemstate.edu] Sent: Wednesday, August 17, 2011 9:59 AM To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDUmailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] Ruckus Lee, one thing to be aware of is that these other companies (Ruckus, Xirrus, etc) use arrays, not access points. So there are multiple radios per unit. On a per-radio basis, the number of users may be similar to a single access point (we’ve found it to be higher by about 20-30%), but collectively you can get a good number of users per unit. Another thing to consider is the wiring to feed the AP. If you have an AP running 11n, do you give it a 100Mbs connection or 1Gbs? Which is the bigger waste of bandwidth? Now take a multi-radio device and ask the same question. If you have 4 radios @ 11n each, then a 1Gbs connection scales perfectly. Now the downside is, what if you only need to support 10-15 users. An array is overkill. -Brian From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv [mailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU] On Behalf Of Lee H Badman Sent: Wednesday, August 17, 2011 8:27 AM To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDUmailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] Ruckus Excellent information, Harry- Thanks. I have a feeling Cisco cringes to read that 3500 APs were tested with 4402s instead of 5508 controllers. -Lee Badman From: Harry Rauch [mailto:rauc...@eckerd.edu]mailto:[mailto:rauc...@eckerd.edu]mailto:[mailto:rauc...@eckerd.edu] Sent: Wednesday, August 17, 2011 8:22 AM To: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv Cc: Lee H Badman Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] Ruckus Yes, we ran both systems at max power to allow for greatest range; our densities in some lecture halls were over 150 active users for one array. Ruckus provides a link to Tom's Hardware Guide that has done some extensive testing of several front-line enterprises APs. The results may surprise you. Here's the link. http://www.ruckuswireless.com/press/releases/20110718-independent-test-reveals-ruckus-outperforms-others My suggestion would be to go to Tom's after reading the filtered version for a more extensive explanation. Harry Rauch Sr. Network Analyst Eckerd College 4200 - 54th Ave S St. Petersburg, FL 33711 On 8/17/11 8:02 AM, Lee H Badman wrote: Strictly out of scientific curiosity, is the reduction in APs while gaining coverage based on similar power settings in both hardware sets, and how do you answer the “yeah, but what about client capacity concerns in dense areas?” question when the number of APs and uplinks to the
Re: Ruckus
Interesting eval of some older Ruckus gear by Stuart Cheshire: http://www.stuartcheshire.org/papers/Ruckus-WiFi-Evaluation.pdf He's an Apple engineer primarily responsible for Zeroconf, co-author of several RFCs, and wrote the classic Mac game Bolo! Go Google that, kids... -- Dan Young dyo...@mesd.k12.or.us Multnomah ESD - Technology Services 503-257-1562 On Tue, Aug 16, 2011 at 8:50 AM, Kellogg, Brian D. bkell...@sbu.edu wrote: Looking for feedback from any institutions using Ruckus as their WLAN solution. Comments on their support, WAPs, Controllers, client problems and any other related topics would be appreciated. Thanks, Brian ** 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/.
Aruba
Looking for thoughts on Aruba for the following: M3 controller 105 APs How is their support? What were the differentiators with Aruba that led to your institution choosing them over others? Stability of firmware in APs and controller? If we choose Aruba we most likely will not be able to afford a redundant controller so this is important for us. Overall satisfaction with the Aruba solution? Do you find the Policy Enforcement Firewall worth the price? Are you using it to identify gaming stations and allowing limited access for them successfully? thanks again, Brian ** Participation and subscription information for this EDUCAUSE Constituent Group discussion list can be found at http://www.educause.edu/groups/.
RE: Aruba
We have only deployed Aruba over the past few months through a campus refresh project so I will answer with that caveat. 1. We have deployed 2 6000 Chassis with 2 M3 Controllers each. Licensing was a little confusing at first, and so was the methodologies used in configuring. Coming from a Cisco shop, there are things that are done differently, so there was a learning curve (easily resolved through training) 2. Our campus is using the 134/135 series of access points so I can not comment on the 105s. I am happy with the 134/135 series of APs being used. 3. Support was a big concern for us during the transition, but no longer a concern. The engineers are quick to respond and have spent plenty of time making sure I understand the solution, and not just fix the problem. They are eager to understand our network and share the information amongst their engineers so I do not have to discuss our design every time I open a case. 4. They had the same bells and whistles as all of the other vendors we considered, but firewall rules at the AP were key, along with the ease of setting up packet captures. One thing that helped was the the amount of universities that have deployed Aruba,especially in Virginia. I attended a few user group meetings prior to the decision and was happy with what I found out. Plus, a large portion of the universities were similar to ours with a Cisco LAN and Aruba wireless. 5. Over the summer we have been able to work with the engineers at Aruba on controller code releases. We had minimal users on campus and during the transition were able to beta test various versions of code, as well as have Aruba engineers on site with monitoring their latest release before it went public. In my opinion, they do everything they can to make the code stable before it is released. 6. Even though it has only been a few months, and the students have just started arriving back on campus, I am very please with our decision to move to Aruba 7. Yes, and even more now with the release of the Android Network Toolkit I think I may be even more happy (http://blogs.computerworld.com/18755/killer_android_app_allows_the_clueless_to_hack_pwn_like_a_pen_tester) 8. We are identifying the gaming stations, successfully, but at this time we are only reporting and not limiting them. Feel free to contect me off line if you would like more details? Chip Greene Senior Network Specialist Univeristy of Richmond From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv [WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU] On Behalf Of Kellogg, Brian D. [bkell...@sbu.edu] Sent: Wednesday, August 17, 2011 6:41 PM To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU Subject: [WIRELESS-LAN] Aruba Looking for thoughts on Aruba for the following: M3 controller 105 APs How is their support? What were the differentiators with Aruba that led to your institution choosing them over others? Stability of firmware in APs and controller? If we choose Aruba we most likely will not be able to afford a redundant controller so this is important for us. Overall satisfaction with the Aruba solution? Do you find the Policy Enforcement Firewall worth the price? Are you using it to identify gaming stations and allowing limited access for them successfully? thanks again, Brian ** Participation and subscription information for this EDUCAUSE Constituent Group discussion list can be found at http://www.educause.edu/groups/. Information Services (including the HelpDesk) will NEVER ask for your password or other personal data via email. Messages requesting such details are fraudulent. DELETE THEM WITHOUT REPLY. ** Participation and subscription information for this EDUCAUSE Constituent Group discussion list can be found at http://www.educause.edu/groups/.
Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] Ruckus
Do you modify Mandatory/Supported the data rates on Ruckus APs? I suspect keeping lower Mandatory rates allows clients to associate at long range with broadcast frames sent omni-directionally, after which beamforming kicks in for unidirectional data frames at higher data rates. Thanks, Bruce T. Johnson | Network Engineer | Partners Healthcare 617.726.9662 | bjohns...@partners.org -Original Message- From: Harry Rauch [rauc...@eckerd.edu] Received: Wednesday, 17 Aug 2011, 10:49am To: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv [WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU] CC: Johnson, Bruce T. [bjohns...@partners.org] Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] Ruckus From what I can tell they use the MAC address as a base identifier; in a mesh the system identifies the device and somehow decides and which AP has a better signal/connection. Unmeshed APs simply hold on to the device until the signal becomes too weak when another AP would be picked up by the computer. Ekahau has a free WiFi heatmap that we use to identify weak areas. There are many more out there but I like free and it does a good job for us. It is passive in nature. Harry Rauch Sr. Network Analyst Eckerd College 4200 - 54th Ave S St. Petersburg, FL 33711 On 8/17/11 10:38 AM, Johnson, Bruce T. wrote: The question I have had with Ruckus is how their APs coordinate their beamforming activities so as to not contend for the same clients. It seems there would need to be a control plane to avoid AP contention. How does one survey for these APs? Do you factor in the beamforming (unicast frames, active survey) or not (broadcast frames, and passive survey)? Thanks, Bruce T. Johnson | Network Engineer | Partners Healthcare 617.726.9662 | bjohns...@partners.orgmailto:bjohns...@partners.org -Original Message- From: Lee H Badman [lhbad...@syr.edumailto:lhbad...@syr.edu] Received: Wednesday, 17 Aug 2011, 10:08am To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDUmailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU [WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDUmailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU] Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] Ruckus Agreed- and it is fascinating stuff. From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv [WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDUmailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU] On Behalf Of Brian Helman [bhel...@salemstate.edumailto:bhel...@salemstate.edu] Sent: Wednesday, August 17, 2011 9:59 AM To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDUmailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] Ruckus Lee, one thing to be aware of is that these other companies (Ruckus, Xirrus, etc) use arrays, not access points. So there are multiple radios per unit. On a per-radio basis, the number of users may be similar to a single access point (we’ve found it to be higher by about 20-30%), but collectively you can get a good number of users per unit. Another thing to consider is the wiring to feed the AP. If you have an AP running 11n, do you give it a 100Mbs connection or 1Gbs? Which is the bigger waste of bandwidth? Now take a multi-radio device and ask the same question. If you have 4 radios @ 11n each, then a 1Gbs connection scales perfectly. Now the downside is, what if you only need to support 10-15 users. An array is overkill. -Brian From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv [mailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU] On Behalf Of Lee H Badman Sent: Wednesday, August 17, 2011 8:27 AM To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDUmailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] Ruckus Excellent information, Harry- Thanks. I have a feeling Cisco cringes to read that 3500 APs were tested with 4402s instead of 5508 controllers. -Lee Badman From: Harry Rauch [mailto:rauc...@eckerd.edu]mailto:[mailto:rauc...@eckerd.edu]mailto:[mailto:rauc...@eckerd.edu] Sent: Wednesday, August 17, 2011 8:22 AM To: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv Cc: Lee H Badman Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] Ruckus Yes, we ran both systems at max power to allow for greatest range; our densities in some lecture halls were over 150 active users for one array. Ruckus provides a link to Tom's Hardware Guide that has done some extensive testing of several front-line enterprises APs. The results may surprise you. Here's the link. http://www.ruckuswireless.com/press/releases/20110718-independent-test-reveals-ruckus-outperforms-others My suggestion would be to go to Tom's after reading the filtered version for a more extensive explanation. Harry Rauch Sr. Network Analyst Eckerd College 4200 - 54th Ave S St. Petersburg, FL 33711 On 8/17/11 8:02 AM, Lee H Badman wrote: Strictly out of scientific curiosity, is the reduction in APs while gaining coverage based on similar power settings in both hardware sets, and how do you answer the “yeah, but what about client capacity concerns in dense areas?” question when the number of APs and
RE: Aruba
Hello, We've had Aruba for several years now and are very happy with them. We have 5 M3's, 1 Master 4 Locals, ~800 AP's (could do it with 3 M3's, history there...) the Master acts as a failover for the locals. We don't have redundancy on the Master at this time. Would like to, but at the same time, hasn't been an issue and the Locals run just fine if the Master drops out (Just can't make changes until you get the Master replaced or re-configure one of the Locals). We originally had SC-1 controllers, the M3 was a big improvement speed wise and the upgrade was straight forward. We started with AP 60's originally, over last few years have gone to a mixture of AP105's and AP125's. Both work great, We use the 105's for horizontal/ceiling and 125's for vertical mounts. The 105 can go vertical, but it's not optimal, the 125 can go either way. Just got our first batch of 135's, neat. (Also have some 175 Outdoor units we are testing). The bulk of our 105's are in the ResHalls, and they are surviving quite well. :) Support has been great, we typically jump on the bleeding edge of the code (Just went to 6.1.2.2), and TAC along with the local sales/engineering team are great to work with and eager to help. We had a big Bake Off several years ago with 22 other campuses within California (CSU system has 23 campuses, pretty independent with unique requirements / priorities), it was a pretty big effort, Aruba came out the clear winner. The top vendors had pretty similar feature sets that we needed, but Aruba matched everyone else and had those extra nuggets (PEF, Remote AP's, ARM, etc), and was cheaper than the comparable competition. The Aruba team / company presented well, and you could tell they had some passion for what they were doing, they were excited about the product and their capabilities / futures. Policy Enforcement Firewall ROCKS. Lots of ability to control the environment, not just inbound / outbound traffic, but user/vlan management, various protections against attacks, etc. PEF is well worth it if you need the flexibility and security. You could get by without it if you have a pretty static/simplistic design / needs, but I'd get it being a University, nothing is every simplistic. ;) Just getting started with 6.1.2.2 and fingerprinting hosts, but we also use SafeConnect/Impulse for NAC, they have a great integration with Aruba and right now we let them handle the console identification issues. We are in the process of the Aruba integration, so it's not deployed yet on wireless, still working on our deployment design, etc. We currently have SafeConnect in use for our wired ResHall network. Overall, very happy with Aruba, they have worked well, starting with the migration from our Legacy system (Thick Cisco 350's/1200's), to incorporation of new features and abilities with new firmware. Oh, almost forgot, great user community (AirHeads), and an equally great users conference, its small/focused on wireless, and the product leads are their along with the engineers, etc. Hope that helped, happy to chat more if you'd like any additional information. Carl Oakes Network Architect California State University Sacramento oake...@csus.edu From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv [WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU] On Behalf Of Kellogg, Brian D. [bkell...@sbu.edu] Sent: Wednesday, August 17, 2011 6:41 PM To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU Subject: [WIRELESS-LAN] Aruba Looking for thoughts on Aruba for the following: M3 controller 105 APs How is their support? What were the differentiators with Aruba that led to your institution choosing them over others? Stability of firmware in APs and controller? If we choose Aruba we most likely will not be able to afford a redundant controller so this is important for us. Overall satisfaction with the Aruba solution? Do you find the Policy Enforcement Firewall worth the price? Are you using it to identify gaming stations and allowing limited access for them successfully? thanks again, Brian ** Participation and subscription information for this EDUCAUSE Constituent Group discussion list can be found at http://www.educause.edu/groups/. Information Services (including the HelpDesk) will NEVER ask for your password or other personal data via email. Messages requesting such details are fraudulent. DELETE THEM WITHOUT REPLY. ** 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/.
