I agree with Chuck about the need for better information about WLAN
scalability. It's an issue I've struggled with for many years but I'm not
optimistic about a resolution. I've discussed this issue extensively with
Phil Belanger, the author of the Novarum report, and I just can't see any
way to get all the vendors to agree to a single test plan and commit the
resources necessary for such ambitious tests. 

Although it's clear that Meru designed these tests to best reflect their
competitive advantage, I also believe Phil played the role of objective
analyst, which is not always the case with "pay for test" projects. Phil
pressured Meru to include test runs that were not part of their original
plan and he was very transparent in disclosing his role in these tests.
Still, it's highly likely that the results would have been different if
Cisco and Aruba had been directly involved. Personally, I still think Meru
would have performed better, but I don't think the differences would have
been as great. 

Although the issue of co-channel interference is an important one, I think
it may be reasonable to assert that its importance will be reduced with the
adoption of 5 GHz 802.11n. With over 20 non-overlapping channels, I believe
it will be possible to design high-density, micro-cellular WLANs that do not
suffer from performance degradation as a resulting of co-channel
interference. Over time, I believe 2.4 GHz will be thought of as a
best-effort legacy technology for most enterprises. I'd be curious how
others are viewing this.

dm

-----Original Message-----
From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Charles Spurgeon
Sent: Monday, March 31, 2008 4:31 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] Aruba's SCA vs. MCA whitepaper [was: Open
Wireless in Higher Ed]

On Wed, Mar 26, 2008 at 10:31:50PM -0500, Frank Bulk - iNAME wrote:
> I wish it was easier to evaluate the performance (not only aggregrate
> throughput, but also QoS) of the MCA and SCA products in various scenarios
> and density and usage, but unfortunately examining the impact of
co-channel
> interference on a large scale in variety of building types and
architectures
> with lots of APs and clients with realistic traffic patterns (in terms of
> type and longitudinally over time) is not currently possible with the
tools
> available.  I think we would learn that there certain scenarios where one
> performs generally better over another.  

I, for one, would like to see more vendors step up and do the kind of
testing of co-channel interference issues that was described in the
recent Novarum whitepaper:
http://www.novarum.com/documents/WLANScaleTesting.pdf

As a user of typical multi-channel equipment, I'm not focussed on the
SCA versus MCA debate. Instead, I would very much like to see more
real-world test results on how the typical multiple APs on multiple
channels (MCA) approach works at scale and under traffic loads.

I think it's very interesting that the author of the Novarum
whitepaper is also one of the developers of the 802.11 MAC, and that
he states that he was "surprised at how easily we could drive these
systems to unstable behavior." 

I've heard complaints from the vendors whose gear was used in the
Novarum test. But I haven't seen any third-party tests commissioned by
those vendors to replicate the tests and show where the problems were
in the Novarum tests. 

I would be much more impressed by actual third-party test results
based on a significant scale layout like the one used in the Novarum
tests, rather than hearing complaints about the how the test was
unfair since it was done under the auspices of Meru.

The problems of co-channel interference and wireless channel meltdown
under load are too important to be left to the marketing departments
of the wireless vendors. On our campus the community has been adopting
wireless networking at extremely high rates, and this technology has
become much too important to allow it to be supported this poorly.

Isn't it long past time for more real-world scale testing like the
Novarum tests to be done to investigate the issues with CCI and
channel meltdown under load in 802.11b/g systems and to develop some
approaches for identifying and dealing with those issues?

-Charles

Charles E. Spurgeon / UTnet
UT Austin ITS / Networking
[EMAIL PROTECTED] / 512.475.9265

**********
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/.

Reply via email to