Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] 5GHz Channel Width

2016-12-01 Thread Jeffrey D. Sessler
eply-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 d

RE: [WIRELESS-LAN] 5GHz Channel Width

2016-12-01 Thread Mike Atkins
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

RE: [WIRELESS-LAN] 5GHz Channel Width

2016-12-01 Thread Jeffrey D. Sessler
] 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

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

RE: [WIRELESS-LAN] 5GHz Channel Width

2016-11-30 Thread Jason Cook
@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

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

RE: [WIRELESS-LAN] 5GHz Channel Width

2016-11-30 Thread Lee H Badman
UCAUSE 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?

RE: [WIRELESS-LAN] 5GHz Channel Width

2016-11-30 Thread Donald Ambrose
@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

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

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

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

RE: [WIRELESS-LAN] 5GHz Channel Width

2016-11-29 Thread Heller, Josh
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

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

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