Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] 5GHz Channel Width

2016-12-01 Thread Jeffrey D. Sessler 
Prior to DBS, I used a fixed 40 Mhz plan across the board for eight plus years 
with no obvious problems attributed to channel width.

Jeff

From: "wireless-lan@listserv.educause.edu" <WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU> 
on behalf of Mike Atkins <matk...@nd.edu>
Reply-To: "wireless-lan@listserv.educause.edu" 
<WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU>
Date: Thursday, December 1, 2016 at 4:35 AM
To: "wireless-lan@listserv.educause.edu" <WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU>
Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] 5GHz Channel Width

For those with large deployments of 40 or 80 MHz channel use, have you heard 
any complaints from users having issues staying connected?  (specifically older 
laptops and android devices)  I mean issues not specific to coverage or roaming 
or anything like that.  I noticed some strange occurrences on a few test 
devices that are a bit older but that could be related to something I did to 
the devices at some point in time.  I have not done much investigation yet.  I 
was just curious if others had some experience/observations.




Mike Atkins
Network Engineer
Office of Information Technology
University of Notre Dame
Phone: 574-631-7210


   .__o
   - _-\_<,
   ---  (*)/'(*)

From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv 
[mailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU<mailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU>]
 On Behalf Of Jeffrey D. Sessler
Sent: Thursday, December 01, 2016 3:12 AM
To: 
WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU<mailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU>
Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] 5GHz Channel Width

Our environment (residential) is about 80% Mac and I’ve not run into issues 
with DBS. With a dense deployment, it’s rare that there would be a reason to 
force a client to another AP as the number of clients per AP is very low i.e. a 
sticky client isn’t an issue. In less dense deployments it’s likely all radios 
will be at 80Mhz, making it a non-issue.

If the AP placement is done well from the start, it’s hard to fathom a 
situation where DBS is going to make a truly bad decision. If it sees an influx 
of 11g clients, it’s going to reduce width. If the environment is mostly all 
11n and 11ac (as it is at my university), it’s going to favor 80Mhz.

In general, I favor letting the software make the decisions and only change 
that if I can demonstrate that it’s causing harm.

From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv 
[mailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU] On Behalf Of Jake Snyder
Sent: Wednesday, November 30, 2016 4:40 PM
To: 
WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU<mailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU>
Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] 5GHz Channel Width

One things to keep in mind is that certain device manufacturers preference 
wider channels.  Apple in the Mac OS X products for instance, will always 
prefer an 80MHz channel over a 40MHz channel.  As well as a 40MHz channel over 
a 20MHz channel.  Things like DBS can lead to stickier clients, as you are now 
mixing channel widths.  This leads you to trying things like Opt-R in order to 
force now sticky clients to other APs, which will likely be less successful 
since OS X doesn’t support 802.11v.  This means DEAUTH, ironically which the OS 
X devices don’t handle as well as their PC brethren…


https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT206207

Selection criteria for band, network, and roam candidates
OS X always defaults to the 5GHz band over the 2.4GHz band, as long as the RSSI 
for a 5GHz network is -68 dBm or better.
If multiple 5GHz SSIDs meet this level, OS X chooses a network based on these 
criteria:
802.11ac is always preferred over 802.11n or 802.11a
802.11n is always preferred over 802.11a
80 MHz channel width is always preferred over 40 MHz or 20 MHz
40 MHz channel width is always preferred over 20 MHz

All in all, I would suggest not doing DBS in OS X heavy environments.  My 
preference is to take each building and decide whether it can be leveraged in 
20, 40 or 80, and configure the whole building that way.

For how to decide if you can get away with 20 vs 40 vs 80, my preference is to 
pick the channels you want to use, and start with a survey.  Let’s say you want 
to enable UNII 1 and UNII 3.  That’s 8x 20MHz Channels.  Could i go to 40MHz?  
If i can get away with 4 channels, then yes.  Or I could add channels until i 
get to the number of channels needed to maintain channels separation.   This 
varies wildly based on density of APs in a building.  Eventually you run out of 
channels that you can add and then must either deal with co-channel 
interference or drop down to a narrower width.

Start with 20MHz
How many channels do i need with my current design to maintain channel 
separation? (Survey may be necessary)
Do i have twice that many channels enabled at the current channel width?
If yes, increase channel width to 2x current channel width.
If no, do i feel comfortable adding channels to get to twice

RE: [WIRELESS-LAN] 5GHz Channel Width

2016-12-01 Thread Mike Atkins 
For those with large deployments of 40 or 80 MHz channel use, have you
heard any complaints from users having issues staying connected?
(specifically older laptops and android devices)  I mean issues not
specific to coverage or roaming or anything like that.  I noticed some
strange occurrences on a few test devices that are a bit older but that
could be related to something I did to the devices at some point in time.
I have not done much investigation yet.  I was just curious if others had
some experience/observations.









*Mike Atkins *

Network Engineer

Office of Information Technology

University of Notre Dame

Phone: 574-631-7210





   .__o

   - _-\_<,

   ---  (*)/'(*)



*From:* The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv [mailto:
WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU] *On Behalf Of *Jeffrey D. Sessler
*Sent:* Thursday, December 01, 2016 3:12 AM
*To:* WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
*Subject:* Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] 5GHz Channel Width



Our environment (residential) is about 80% Mac and I’ve not run into issues
with DBS. With a dense deployment, it’s rare that there would be a reason
to force a client to another AP as the number of clients per AP is very low
i.e. a sticky client isn’t an issue. In less dense deployments it’s likely
all radios will be at 80Mhz, making it a non-issue.



If the AP placement is done well from the start, it’s hard to fathom a
situation where DBS is going to make a truly bad decision. If it sees an
influx of 11g clients, it’s going to reduce width. If the environment is
mostly all 11n and 11ac (as it is at my university), it’s going to favor
80Mhz.



In general, I favor letting the software make the decisions and only change
that if I can demonstrate that it’s causing harm.



*From:* The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv [
mailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
<WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU>] *On Behalf Of *Jake Snyder
*Sent:* Wednesday, November 30, 2016 4:40 PM
*To:* WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
*Subject:* Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] 5GHz Channel Width



One things to keep in mind is that certain device manufacturers preference
wider channels.  Apple in the Mac OS X products for instance, will always
prefer an 80MHz channel over a 40MHz channel.  As well as a 40MHz channel
over a 20MHz channel.  Things like DBS can lead to stickier clients, as you
are now mixing channel widths.  This leads you to trying things like Opt-R
in order to force now sticky clients to other APs, which will likely be
less successful since OS X doesn’t support 802.11v.  This means DEAUTH,
ironically which the OS X devices don’t handle as well as their PC brethren…





https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT206207


Selection criteria for band, network, and roam candidates

OS X always defaults to the 5GHz band over the 2.4GHz band, as long as the
RSSI for a 5GHz network is -68 dBm or better.

If multiple 5GHz SSIDs meet this level, OS X chooses a network based on
these criteria:

1.   802.11ac is always preferred over 802.11n or 802.11a

2.   802.11n is always preferred over 802.11a

3.   80 MHz channel width is always preferred over 40 MHz or 20 MHz

4.   40 MHz channel width is always preferred over 20 MHz



All in all, I would suggest not doing DBS in OS X heavy environments.  My
preference is to take each building and decide whether it can be leveraged
in 20, 40 or 80, and configure the whole building that way.



For how to decide if you can get away with 20 vs 40 vs 80, my preference is
to pick the channels you want to use, and start with a survey.  Let’s say
you want to enable UNII 1 and UNII 3.  That’s 8x 20MHz Channels.  Could i
go to 40MHz?  If i can get away with 4 channels, then yes.  Or I could add
channels until i get to the number of channels needed to maintain channels
separation.   This varies wildly based on density of APs in a building.
Eventually you run out of channels that you can add and then must either
deal with co-channel interference or drop down to a narrower width.



Start with 20MHz

How many channels do i need with my current design to maintain channel
separation? (Survey may be necessary)

Do i have twice that many channels enabled at the current channel width?

If yes, increase channel width to 2x current channel width.

If no, do i feel comfortable adding channels to get to twice that?

If yes, add channels and increase channel width to 2x current channel width.



Hope this helps



Thanks

Jake Snyder







On Nov 30, 2016, at 12:03 PM, Jeffrey D. Sessler <j...@scrippscollege.edu>
wrote:



Depending on the building construction, and assuming you are using DFS
channels, running 40Mhz and even 80Mhz is very likely with no downside.
5GHz does not propagate very well, so a static 20Mhz plan in anything but
big open spaces is IMHO unnecessary.



If you are a Cisco customer, enabling DFS (Dynamic Bandwidth Selection) is
likely the best choice for maximizing the use of the 5Ghz space. DFS w

RE: [WIRELESS-LAN] 5GHz Channel Width

2016-12-01 Thread Jeffrey D. Sessler 
Our environment (residential) is about 80% Mac and I’ve not run into issues 
with DBS. With a dense deployment, it’s rare that there would be a reason to 
force a client to another AP as the number of clients per AP is very low i.e. a 
sticky client isn’t an issue. In less dense deployments it’s likely all radios 
will be at 80Mhz, making it a non-issue.

If the AP placement is done well from the start, it’s hard to fathom a 
situation where DBS is going to make a truly bad decision. If it sees an influx 
of 11g clients, it’s going to reduce width. If the environment is mostly all 
11n and 11ac (as it is at my university), it’s going to favor 80Mhz.

In general, I favor letting the software make the decisions and only change 
that if I can demonstrate that it’s causing harm.

From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv 
[mailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU] On Behalf Of Jake Snyder
Sent: Wednesday, November 30, 2016 4:40 PM
To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] 5GHz Channel Width

One things to keep in mind is that certain device manufacturers preference 
wider channels.  Apple in the Mac OS X products for instance, will always 
prefer an 80MHz channel over a 40MHz channel.  As well as a 40MHz channel over 
a 20MHz channel.  Things like DBS can lead to stickier clients, as you are now 
mixing channel widths.  This leads you to trying things like Opt-R in order to 
force now sticky clients to other APs, which will likely be less successful 
since OS X doesn’t support 802.11v.  This means DEAUTH, ironically which the OS 
X devices don’t handle as well as their PC brethren…


https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT206207

Selection criteria for band, network, and roam candidates
OS X always defaults to the 5GHz band over the 2.4GHz band, as long as the RSSI 
for a 5GHz network is -68 dBm or better.
If multiple 5GHz SSIDs meet this level, OS X chooses a network based on these 
criteria:
1.   802.11ac is always preferred over 802.11n or 802.11a
2.   802.11n is always preferred over 802.11a
3.   80 MHz channel width is always preferred over 40 MHz or 20 MHz
4.   40 MHz channel width is always preferred over 20 MHz

All in all, I would suggest not doing DBS in OS X heavy environments.  My 
preference is to take each building and decide whether it can be leveraged in 
20, 40 or 80, and configure the whole building that way.

For how to decide if you can get away with 20 vs 40 vs 80, my preference is to 
pick the channels you want to use, and start with a survey.  Let’s say you want 
to enable UNII 1 and UNII 3.  That’s 8x 20MHz Channels.  Could i go to 40MHz?  
If i can get away with 4 channels, then yes.  Or I could add channels until i 
get to the number of channels needed to maintain channels separation.   This 
varies wildly based on density of APs in a building.  Eventually you run out of 
channels that you can add and then must either deal with co-channel 
interference or drop down to a narrower width.

Start with 20MHz
How many channels do i need with my current design to maintain channel 
separation? (Survey may be necessary)
Do i have twice that many channels enabled at the current channel width?
If yes, increase channel width to 2x current channel width.
If no, do i feel comfortable adding channels to get to twice that?
If yes, add channels and increase channel width to 2x current channel width.

Hope this helps

Thanks
Jake Snyder



On Nov 30, 2016, at 12:03 PM, Jeffrey D. Sessler 
<j...@scrippscollege.edu<mailto:j...@scrippscollege.edu>> wrote:

Depending on the building construction, and assuming you are using DFS 
channels, running 40Mhz and even 80Mhz is very likely with no downside. 5GHz 
does not propagate very well, so a static 20Mhz plan in anything but big open 
spaces is IMHO unnecessary.

If you are a Cisco customer, enabling DFS (Dynamic Bandwidth Selection) is 
likely the best choice for maximizing the use of the 5Ghz space. DFS will 
dynamically adjust width based on the client make up and other factors, and 
I’ve found it to be far better than a human design since the environment is 
never static.

I have a newly completed 110-bed residential hall with a very dense deployment 
of APs (105 AP’s total), most are in-room/suite. With DFS enabled, a clear 
majority of the in-room APs run at 80MHz. In more public and/or open spaces, 
they tend to adjust to 20Mhz or 40Mhz. Most of the clients in this residence 
hall are 11.ac and report a 1300 or 1170 Mbps connection speed.

Jeff




From: 
"wireless-lan@listserv.educause.edu<mailto:wireless-lan@listserv.educause.edu>" 
<WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU<mailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU>> 
on behalf of "Trinklein, Jason R" 
<trinkle...@cofc.edu<mailto:trinkle...@cofc.edu>>
Reply-To: 
"wireless-lan@listserv.educause.edu<mailto:wireless-lan@listserv.educause.edu>" 
<WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU<mai

Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] 5GHz Channel Width

2016-11-30 Thread Jake Snyder 
One things to keep in mind is that certain device manufacturers preference 
wider channels.  Apple in the Mac OS X products for instance, will always 
prefer an 80MHz channel over a 40MHz channel.  As well as a 40MHz channel over 
a 20MHz channel.  Things like DBS can lead to stickier clients, as you are now 
mixing channel widths.  This leads you to trying things like Opt-R in order to 
force now sticky clients to other APs, which will likely be less successful 
since OS X doesn’t support 802.11v.  This means DEAUTH, ironically which the OS 
X devices don’t handle as well as their PC brethren…


https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT206207 


Selection criteria for band, network, and roam candidates

OS X always defaults to the 5GHz band over the 2.4GHz band, as long as the RSSI 
for a 5GHz network is -68 dBm or better.
If multiple 5GHz SSIDs meet this level, OS X chooses a network based on these 
criteria:
802.11ac is always preferred over 802.11n or 802.11a
802.11n is always preferred over 802.11a
80 MHz channel width is always preferred over 40 MHz or 20 MHz
40 MHz channel width is always preferred over 20 MHz 

All in all, I would suggest not doing DBS in OS X heavy environments.  My 
preference is to take each building and decide whether it can be leveraged in 
20, 40 or 80, and configure the whole building that way.

For how to decide if you can get away with 20 vs 40 vs 80, my preference is to 
pick the channels you want to use, and start with a survey.  Let’s say you want 
to enable UNII 1 and UNII 3.  That’s 8x 20MHz Channels.  Could i go to 40MHz?  
If i can get away with 4 channels, then yes.  Or I could add channels until i 
get to the number of channels needed to maintain channels separation.   This 
varies wildly based on density of APs in a building.  Eventually you run out of 
channels that you can add and then must either deal with co-channel 
interference or drop down to a narrower width.

Start with 20MHz
How many channels do i need with my current design to maintain channel 
separation? (Survey may be necessary)
Do i have twice that many channels enabled at the current channel width?
If yes, increase channel width to 2x current channel width.
If no, do i feel comfortable adding channels to get to twice that?
If yes, add channels and increase channel width to 2x current channel width.

Hope this helps

Thanks
Jake Snyder



> On Nov 30, 2016, at 12:03 PM, Jeffrey D. Sessler  
> wrote:
> 
> Depending on the building construction, and assuming you are using DFS 
> channels, running 40Mhz and even 80Mhz is very likely with no downside. 5GHz 
> does not propagate very well, so a static 20Mhz plan in anything but big open 
> spaces is IMHO unnecessary.
>  
> If you are a Cisco customer, enabling DFS (Dynamic Bandwidth Selection) is 
> likely the best choice for maximizing the use of the 5Ghz space. DFS will 
> dynamically adjust width based on the client make up and other factors, and 
> I’ve found it to be far better than a human design since the environment is 
> never static.
>  
> I have a newly completed 110-bed residential hall with a very dense 
> deployment of APs (105 AP’s total), most are in-room/suite. With DFS enabled, 
> a clear majority of the in-room APs run at 80MHz. In more public and/or open 
> spaces, they tend to adjust to 20Mhz or 40Mhz. Most of the clients in this 
> residence hall are 11.ac and report a 1300 or 1170 Mbps connection speed.
>  
> Jeff
>  
>  
>  
>  
> From: "wireless-lan@listserv.educause.edu 
> " 
>  > on behalf of "Trinklein, Jason 
> R" >
> Reply-To: "wireless-lan@listserv.educause.edu 
> " 
>  >
> Date: Tuesday, November 29, 2016 at 1:35 PM
> To: "wireless-lan@listserv.educause.edu 
> " 
>  >
> Subject: [WIRELESS-LAN] 5GHz Channel Width
>  
> Hi All,
>  
> I was just reading a blog article that heavily recommends not to use 40Mhz 
> channel width in multi-floor environments, particularly where many 5GHz 
> radios are used (particularly in our case with Xirrus multi-radio APs). Our 
> campus presently uses 20MHz channel width in all buildings. We are testing 
> and considering 40MHz width because of the bandwidth benefits for clients. 
> What do you use on your campus? Have you found that setting a 40MHz channel 
> width on your 5GHz radios has caused too much interference?
>  
> Here is the article:
> http://divdyn.com/dual-5ghz-radio-aps /
>  
> Your thoughts are appreciated.
> -- 
> Jason Trinklein
> Wireless Engineering Manager

RE: [WIRELESS-LAN] 5GHz Channel Width

2016-11-30 Thread Jason Cook 
I’m really only starting to play in this space over the last year but below is 
my thoughts.

Ideally you want same channels as far away from each other as possible, 
interference signal levels travels further than acceptable coverage (so you 
might target 25SNR for signal but I think something like 4 SNR can be decoded 
and therefore shares airtime). Using 2e helps to achieve distance between 
re-used channels. You can do manual or rely on auto, depending on who you talk 
to you’ll get different answers on preference. If it’s working and users are 
happy…. It’s a great start. We use auto, but I’m getting fed up of seeing the 
same channel used on adjacent AP’s even on single story buildings… (cisco 8.0 
code). Having said that we don’t get many complaints from users about wireless 
problems so any issues that exist aren’t bad enough to incur any wrath….. Users 
do have a tendency to not report wireless problems though. And performance 
issues caused by CCI probably fit the bill of not being reported.

We are playing with manual designs and are using Ekahau Site Survey to design 
these.   If you don’t have access to them at this stage I know some that use 
the vendor auto to set the initial channel/power, then set to manual and make 
adjustments as see fit.

Testing is the only way to really know if your not getting CCI. Aircheck G2 has 
been mentioned in the other post as a good handheld solution. Metageek tools 
like Chanalyser might be one of the cheapest options for a RF spectrum analyser 
but I believe something like airmagnets solution is considerably better (at a 
cost). But have a look at the tools mentioned in the other post. Anything is 
better than nothing. You basically want to identify how many of your AP’s can 
be seen on channel X from the location your testing. If there is channel 
overlap and it’s not the same channel as the AP that is covering that area, it 
may not be a big issue.

Yes wattage options change per channel, it’s such a pain for manual config ☺ 
Cisco do this very frustratingly by providing power levels that change but the 
actual power is invisible in the GUI. I think that’s going to be “fixed” in a 
future release.





--
Jason Cook
Technology Services
The University of Adelaide, AUSTRALIA 5005
Ph: +61 8 8313 4800

From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv 
[mailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU] On Behalf Of Lee H Badman
Sent: Thursday, 1 December 2016 12:39 AM
To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] 5GHz Channel Width

Hi Donald,

I’m not quite following the questions. Where we are very dense and likely to 
risk channel overlap with 40, we use 20. Examples- our stadium, dense 
residential environments, very RF porous buildings that are also dense. In 5 
GHz, we *generally* let RRM pick channel, but often overrule it on power. Most 
max power differences allowed across the individual 5 GHz channels don’t come 
into play in our *generally* low-power cells. And we are not yet using DFS 
channels whole-hog, but do have pilot spaces in use.

Our way certainly isn’t the only way, but has proven reliable for us over time.

-Lee

Lee Badman | CWNE #200 | Network Architect

Information Technology Services
206 Machinery Hall
120 Smith Drive
Syracuse, New York 13244
t 315.443.3003   f 315.443.4325   e lhbad...@syr.edu<mailto:lhbad...@syr.edu> w 
its.syr.edu
SYRACUSE UNIVERSITY
syr.edu

From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv 
[mailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU] On Behalf Of Donald Ambrose
Sent: Wednesday, November 30, 2016 7:24 AM
To: 
WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU<mailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU>
Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] 5GHz Channel Width

Any advice on manually setting up the 5 Ghz channels? Also I would like to use 
the DFS channels so that I can get a wider range to choose from. But I have 
noticed that the wattage correspond to the channel I choose in this band .So 
would it be advisable to use two 165s close enough or should I design the 
channel selection keeping the distance into consideration as well.

Thanks
Donald Ambrose

From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv 
[mailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU] On Behalf Of Lee H Badman
Sent: Tuesday, November 29, 2016 7:58 PM
To: 
WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU<mailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU>
Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] 5GHz Channel Width

20 in our dense spaces, 40 where it can be done safely- about 50/50.

Lee Badman (mobile)

On Nov 29, 2016, at 6:09 PM, Jason Cook 
<jason.c...@adelaide.edu.au<mailto:jason.c...@adelaide.edu.au>> wrote:
It all comes down to requirements & design, if you can have 0 channel overlap 
while using 40Mhz then go for it… This is likely to be quite a challenge in 
multi-floor environments. Using tools like Ekahau Site Survey and Airmagnet 
survey will help design and verify these installs.

We went from 20 to 40 a f

Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] 5GHz Channel Width

2016-11-30 Thread Jeffrey D. Sessler 
Depending on the building construction, and assuming you are using DFS 
channels, running 40Mhz and even 80Mhz is very likely with no downside. 5GHz 
does not propagate very well, so a static 20Mhz plan in anything but big open 
spaces is IMHO unnecessary.

If you are a Cisco customer, enabling DFS (Dynamic Bandwidth Selection) is 
likely the best choice for maximizing the use of the 5Ghz space. DFS will 
dynamically adjust width based on the client make up and other factors, and 
I’ve found it to be far better than a human design since the environment is 
never static.

I have a newly completed 110-bed residential hall with a very dense deployment 
of APs (105 AP’s total), most are in-room/suite. With DFS enabled, a clear 
majority of the in-room APs run at 80MHz. In more public and/or open spaces, 
they tend to adjust to 20Mhz or 40Mhz. Most of the clients in this residence 
hall are 11.ac and report a 1300 or 1170 Mbps connection speed.

Jeff




From: "wireless-lan@listserv.educause.edu"  
on behalf of "Trinklein, Jason R" 
Reply-To: "wireless-lan@listserv.educause.edu" 

Date: Tuesday, November 29, 2016 at 1:35 PM
To: "wireless-lan@listserv.educause.edu" 
Subject: [WIRELESS-LAN] 5GHz Channel Width

Hi All,

I was just reading a blog article that heavily recommends not to use 40Mhz 
channel width in multi-floor environments, particularly where many 5GHz radios 
are used (particularly in our case with Xirrus multi-radio APs). Our campus 
presently uses 20MHz channel width in all buildings. We are testing and 
considering 40MHz width because of the bandwidth benefits for clients. What do 
you use on your campus? Have you found that setting a 40MHz channel width on 
your 5GHz radios has caused too much interference?

Here is the article:
http://divdyn.com/dual-5ghz-radio-aps/

Your thoughts are appreciated.
--
Jason Trinklein
Wireless Engineering Manager
College of Charleston
81 St. Philip Street | Office 311D | Charleston, SC 29403
trinkle...@cofc.edu | (843) 300–8009
** 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] 5GHz Channel Width

2016-11-30 Thread Lee H Badman 
Hi Donald,

I’m not quite following the questions. Where we are very dense and likely to 
risk channel overlap with 40, we use 20. Examples- our stadium, dense 
residential environments, very RF porous buildings that are also dense. In 5 
GHz, we *generally* let RRM pick channel, but often overrule it on power. Most 
max power differences allowed across the individual 5 GHz channels don’t come 
into play in our *generally* low-power cells. And we are not yet using DFS 
channels whole-hog, but do have pilot spaces in use.

Our way certainly isn’t the only way, but has proven reliable for us over time.

-Lee

Lee Badman | CWNE #200 | Network Architect

Information Technology Services
206 Machinery Hall
120 Smith Drive
Syracuse, New York 13244
t 315.443.3003   f 315.443.4325   e lhbad...@syr.edu<mailto:lhbad...@syr.edu> w 
its.syr.edu
SYRACUSE UNIVERSITY
syr.edu

From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv 
[mailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU] On Behalf Of Donald Ambrose
Sent: Wednesday, November 30, 2016 7:24 AM
To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] 5GHz Channel Width

Any advice on manually setting up the 5 Ghz channels? Also I would like to use 
the DFS channels so that I can get a wider range to choose from. But I have 
noticed that the wattage correspond to the channel I choose in this band .So 
would it be advisable to use two 165s close enough or should I design the 
channel selection keeping the distance into consideration as well.

Thanks
Donald Ambrose

From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv 
[mailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU] On Behalf Of Lee H Badman
Sent: Tuesday, November 29, 2016 7:58 PM
To: 
WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU<mailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU>
Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] 5GHz Channel Width

20 in our dense spaces, 40 where it can be done safely- about 50/50.

Lee Badman (mobile)

On Nov 29, 2016, at 6:09 PM, Jason Cook 
<jason.c...@adelaide.edu.au<mailto:jason.c...@adelaide.edu.au>> wrote:
It all comes down to requirements & design, if you can have 0 channel overlap 
while using 40Mhz then go for it… This is likely to be quite a challenge in 
multi-floor environments. Using tools like Ekahau Site Survey and Airmagnet 
survey will help design and verify these installs.

We went from 20 to 40 a few years back, but move back to 20 by default early 
last year. We have a few 40Mhz locations where we can, we could probably do a 
lot more but unless we have time to design and test we leave things at 20.

Here’s come CWNE’s talking about it
https://vimeo.com/158370545
Starts 27:50
Though the rest of the video is pretty interesting too


--
Jason Cook
Technology Services
The University of Adelaide, AUSTRALIA 5005
Ph: +61 8 8313 4800

From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv 
[mailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU] On Behalf Of Trinklein, Jason R
Sent: Wednesday, 30 November 2016 8:05 AM
To: 
WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU<mailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU>
Subject: [WIRELESS-LAN] 5GHz Channel Width

Hi All,

I was just reading a blog article that heavily recommends not to use 40Mhz 
channel width in multi-floor environments, particularly where many 5GHz radios 
are used (particularly in our case with Xirrus multi-radio APs). Our campus 
presently uses 20MHz channel width in all buildings. We are testing and 
considering 40MHz width because of the bandwidth benefits for clients. What do 
you use on your campus? Have you found that setting a 40MHz channel width on 
your 5GHz radios has caused too much interference?

Here is the article:
http://divdyn.com/dual-5ghz-radio-aps/

Your thoughts are appreciated.
--
Jason Trinklein
Wireless Engineering Manager
College of Charleston
81 St. Philip Street | Office 311D | Charleston, SC 29403
trinkle...@cofc.edu<mailto:trinkle...@cofc.edu> | (843) 300–8009
** 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/.
This communication together with any attachments is for the exclusive and 
confidential use of the addressee(s). Any other distribution, use or 
reproduction without the sender’s prior consent is unauthorized and strictly 
prohibited. If you have received this message in error, please notify the 
sender immediately and delete or shred the message without making any copies.
** Participation and subscription information for this EDUCAUSE 
Constituent Group discussion list can be found at 
http://www.educause.edu/groups/.

**
Participation and su

RE: [WIRELESS-LAN] 5GHz Channel Width

2016-11-30 Thread Donald Ambrose 
Any advice on manually setting up the 5 Ghz channels? Also I would like to use 
the DFS channels so that I can get a wider range to choose from. But I have 
noticed that the wattage correspond to the channel I choose in this band .So 
would it be advisable to use two 165s close enough or should I design the 
channel selection keeping the distance into consideration as well.

Thanks
Donald Ambrose

From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv 
[mailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU] On Behalf Of Lee H Badman
Sent: Tuesday, November 29, 2016 7:58 PM
To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] 5GHz Channel Width

20 in our dense spaces, 40 where it can be done safely- about 50/50.

Lee Badman (mobile)

On Nov 29, 2016, at 6:09 PM, Jason Cook 
<jason.c...@adelaide.edu.au<mailto:jason.c...@adelaide.edu.au>> wrote:
It all comes down to requirements & design, if you can have 0 channel overlap 
while using 40Mhz then go for it… This is likely to be quite a challenge in 
multi-floor environments. Using tools like Ekahau Site Survey and Airmagnet 
survey will help design and verify these installs.

We went from 20 to 40 a few years back, but move back to 20 by default early 
last year. We have a few 40Mhz locations where we can, we could probably do a 
lot more but unless we have time to design and test we leave things at 20.

Here’s come CWNE’s talking about it
https://vimeo.com/158370545
Starts 27:50
Though the rest of the video is pretty interesting too


--
Jason Cook
Technology Services
The University of Adelaide, AUSTRALIA 5005
Ph: +61 8 8313 4800

From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv 
[mailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU] On Behalf Of Trinklein, Jason R
Sent: Wednesday, 30 November 2016 8:05 AM
To: 
WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU<mailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU>
Subject: [WIRELESS-LAN] 5GHz Channel Width

Hi All,

I was just reading a blog article that heavily recommends not to use 40Mhz 
channel width in multi-floor environments, particularly where many 5GHz radios 
are used (particularly in our case with Xirrus multi-radio APs). Our campus 
presently uses 20MHz channel width in all buildings. We are testing and 
considering 40MHz width because of the bandwidth benefits for clients. What do 
you use on your campus? Have you found that setting a 40MHz channel width on 
your 5GHz radios has caused too much interference?

Here is the article:
http://divdyn.com/dual-5ghz-radio-aps/

Your thoughts are appreciated.
--
Jason Trinklein
Wireless Engineering Manager
College of Charleston
81 St. Philip Street | Office 311D | Charleston, SC 29403
trinkle...@cofc.edu<mailto:trinkle...@cofc.edu> | (843) 300–8009
** 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/.
This communication together with any attachments is for the exclusive and 
confidential use of the addressee(s). Any other distribution, use or 
reproduction without the sender’s prior consent is unauthorized and strictly 
prohibited. If you have received this message in error, please notify the 
sender immediately and delete or shred the message without making any copies.

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

Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] 5GHz Channel Width

2016-11-29 Thread Bucklaew, Jerry 
We run 40mhz in 5ghz for all our ap's (around 4,000).  We monitor channel 
utilization and interference but so far it 
looks fine. Our argument was 40 or 80 and we decided to play it safe and do 
just 40.

>
>
> Hi All,
>
>
>
> I was just reading a blog article that heavily recommends *not* to use 40Mhz 
> channel width in multi-floor environments,
> particularly where many 5GHz radios are used (particularly in our case with 
> Xirrus multi-radio APs). Our campus
> presently uses 20MHz channel width in all buildings. We are testing and 
> considering 40MHz width because of the bandwidth
> benefits for clients. What do you use on your campus? Have you found that 
> setting a 40MHz channel width on your 5GHz
> radios has caused too much interference?
>
>

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

Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] 5GHz Channel Width

2016-11-29 Thread James Andrewartha 
We’re running a 20MHz channel plan due to our AP density (one per classroom), 
over summer I’m going to look at enabling 40MHz in the less-dense non-teaching 
areas. Whenever I try out DFS channels they always get radared out within a day.

While troubleshooting a performance issue recently I was trying out a 40MHz 
channel width and noticed it was a lot noisier outside the channel bands:

[cid:image001.png@01D24AF6.151C4470]

Picture from Chanalzyer Pro with a Wi-Spy DBx. So that’s another reason to 
avoid 40MHz channels unless you actually get out there and check the RF to 
confirm your channel plan works in practice.

As for dual-radio 5GHz APs, I still think they’re stupid and vendors should be 
making single-radio 5GHz APs. OK, some already do, but they’re low-performance 
(2x2), not high-end (4x4). A single-radio 5GHz AP will fit within 802.3af even 
at 4x4, won’t have internal interference, and will allow better AP positioning. 
Yes, you do need to run an extra cable (although not if you’re already using 
dual-radio APs with 2.4GHz turned off), and it’ll still use a full AP license, 
but at least give us that option *gets off hobby horse*.

--
James Andrewartha
Network & Projects Engineer
Christ Church Grammar School
Claremont, Western Australia
Ph. (08) 9442 1757
Mob. 0424 160 877

From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv 
 on behalf of "Trinklein, Jason R" 

Reply-To: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv 

Date: Wednesday, 30 November 2016 at 5:35 am
To: "WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU" 
Subject: [WIRELESS-LAN] 5GHz Channel Width

Hi All,

I was just reading a blog article that heavily recommends not to use 40Mhz 
channel width in multi-floor environments, particularly where many 5GHz radios 
are used (particularly in our case with Xirrus multi-radio APs). Our campus 
presently uses 20MHz channel width in all buildings. We are testing and 
considering 40MHz width because of the bandwidth benefits for clients. What do 
you use on your campus? Have you found that setting a 40MHz channel width on 
your 5GHz radios has caused too much interference?

Here is the article:
http://divdyn.com/dual-5ghz-radio-aps/

Your thoughts are appreciated.
--
Jason Trinklein
Wireless Engineering Manager
College of Charleston
81 St. Philip Street | Office 311D | Charleston, SC 29403
trinkle...@cofc.edu | (843) 300–8009
** 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] 5GHz Channel Width

2016-11-29 Thread Lee H Badman 
20 in our dense spaces, 40 where it can be done safely- about 50/50.

Lee Badman (mobile)

On Nov 29, 2016, at 6:09 PM, Jason Cook 
> wrote:

It all comes down to requirements & design, if you can have 0 channel overlap 
while using 40Mhz then go for it... This is likely to be quite a challenge in 
multi-floor environments. Using tools like Ekahau Site Survey and Airmagnet 
survey will help design and verify these installs.

We went from 20 to 40 a few years back, but move back to 20 by default early 
last year. We have a few 40Mhz locations where we can, we could probably do a 
lot more but unless we have time to design and test we leave things at 20.

Here's come CWNE's talking about it
https://vimeo.com/158370545
Starts 27:50
Though the rest of the video is pretty interesting too


--
Jason Cook
Technology Services
The University of Adelaide, AUSTRALIA 5005
Ph: +61 8 8313 4800

From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv 
[mailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU] On Behalf Of Trinklein, Jason R
Sent: Wednesday, 30 November 2016 8:05 AM
To: 
WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
Subject: [WIRELESS-LAN] 5GHz Channel Width

Hi All,

I was just reading a blog article that heavily recommends not to use 40Mhz 
channel width in multi-floor environments, particularly where many 5GHz radios 
are used (particularly in our case with Xirrus multi-radio APs). Our campus 
presently uses 20MHz channel width in all buildings. We are testing and 
considering 40MHz width because of the bandwidth benefits for clients. What do 
you use on your campus? Have you found that setting a 40MHz channel width on 
your 5GHz radios has caused too much interference?

Here is the article:
http://divdyn.com/dual-5ghz-radio-aps/

Your thoughts are appreciated.
--
Jason Trinklein
Wireless Engineering Manager
College of Charleston
81 St. Philip Street | Office 311D | Charleston, SC 29403
trinkle...@cofc.edu | (843) 300-8009
** 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] 5GHz Channel Width

2016-11-29 Thread Heller, Josh 
For those who are using only 20 MHz in the 5 GHz space, I’d be interested to 
know what your channel planning looks like.

Thank you,
Josh Heller
Kutztown University

From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv 
[mailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU] On Behalf Of GT Hill
Sent: Tuesday, November 29, 2016 5:49 PM
To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] 5GHz Channel Width

I have seen real data where changing from 20/40 to 20 MHz only improved network 
congestion by 30+%. I would say based on data that I see, a default config of 
20 MHz channelization is a good best practice with 40 MHz done strategically if 
necessary. Just my $.02.

GT

From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv 
<WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU<mailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU>> 
on behalf of "Trinklein, Jason R" 
<trinkle...@cofc.edu<mailto:trinkle...@cofc.edu>>
Reply-To: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv 
<WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU<mailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU>>
Date: Tuesday, November 29, 2016 at 7:35 PM
To: 
<WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU<mailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU>>
Subject: [WIRELESS-LAN] 5GHz Channel Width

Hi All,

I was just reading a blog article that heavily recommends not to use 40Mhz 
channel width in multi-floor environments, particularly where many 5GHz radios 
are used (particularly in our case with Xirrus multi-radio APs). Our campus 
presently uses 20MHz channel width in all buildings. We are testing and 
considering 40MHz width because of the bandwidth benefits for clients. What do 
you use on your campus? Have you found that setting a 40MHz channel width on 
your 5GHz radios has caused too much interference?

Here is the article:
http://divdyn.com/dual-5ghz-radio-aps/

Your thoughts are appreciated.
--
Jason Trinklein
Wireless Engineering Manager
College of Charleston
81 St. Philip Street | Office 311D | Charleston, SC 29403
trinkle...@cofc.edu<mailto:trinkle...@cofc.edu> | (843) 300–8009
** 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] 5GHz Channel Width

2016-11-29 Thread GT Hill 
I have seen real data where changing from 20/40 to 20 MHz only improved network 
congestion by 30+%. I would say based on data that I see, a default config of 
20 MHz channelization is a good best practice with 40 MHz done strategically if 
necessary. Just my $.02. 

GT

From:  The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv 
 on behalf of "Trinklein, Jason R" 

Reply-To:  The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv 

Date:  Tuesday, November 29, 2016 at 7:35 PM
To:  
Subject:  [WIRELESS-LAN] 5GHz Channel Width

Hi All,

I was just reading a blog article that heavily recommends not to use 40Mhz 
channel width in multi-floor environments, particularly where many 5GHz radios 
are used (particularly in our case with Xirrus multi-radio APs). Our campus 
presently uses 20MHz channel width in all buildings. We are testing and 
considering 40MHz width because of the bandwidth benefits for clients. What do 
you use on your campus? Have you found that setting a 40MHz channel width on 
your 5GHz radios has caused too much interference?

Here is the article:
http://divdyn.com/dual-5ghz-radio-aps/

Your thoughts are appreciated.
-- 
Jason Trinklein
Wireless Engineering Manager
College of Charleston
81 St. Philip Street | Office 311D | Charleston, SC 29403
trinkle...@cofc.edu | (843) 300–8009
** 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] 5GHz Channel Width

2016-11-29 Thread Chuck Enfield 
Where we’ve carefully located APs, matched Tx power and available rates to 
the AP layout, and use DFS channels we’ve had no trouble using 40Mhz 
channels.  Were we have a legacy layout without optimized RF settings we’ve 
achieved better results with 20Mhz layouts.  You’re probably only forced 
into 20MHz layouts if you can’t use DFS channels or you have an extremely 
high AP density, but when in doubt I recommend 20MHz channels.



Chuck Enfield

Manager, Wireless Engineering

Telecommunications & Networking Services

The Pennsylvania State University

110H, USB2, UP, PA 16802

ph: 814.863.8715

fx: 814.865.3988



From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv 
[mailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU] On Behalf Of Trinklein, Jason R
Sent: Tuesday, November 29, 2016 4:35 PM
To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
Subject: [WIRELESS-LAN] 5GHz Channel Width



Hi All,



I was just reading a blog article that heavily recommends not to use 40Mhz 
channel width in multi-floor environments, particularly where many 5GHz 
radios are used (particularly in our case with Xirrus multi-radio APs). Our 
campus presently uses 20MHz channel width in all buildings. We are testing 
and considering 40MHz width because of the bandwidth benefits for clients. 
What do you use on your campus? Have you found that setting a 40MHz channel 
width on your 5GHz radios has caused too much interference?



Here is the article:

http://divdyn.com/dual-5ghz-radio-aps/



Your thoughts are appreciated.

-- 

Jason Trinklein

Wireless Engineering Manager

College of Charleston

81 St. Philip Street | Office 311D | Charleston, SC 29403

  trinkle...@cofc.edu | (843) 300–8009

** 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/.