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
315 443-3003
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 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/.
________________________________
No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com<http://www.avg.com>
Version: 10.0.1392 / Virus Database: 1520/3839 - 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/.
________________________________
No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com<http://www.avg.com>
Version: 10.0.1392 / Virus Database: 1520/3840 - Release Date: 08/17/11
********** 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/.
The information in this e-mail is intended only for the person to whom it is
addressed. If you believe this e-mail was sent to you in error and the e-mail
contains patient information, please contact the Partners Compliance HelpLine at
http://www.partners.org/complianceline . If the e-mail was sent to you in error
but does not contain patient information, please contact the sender and properly
dispose of the e-mail.
**********
Participation and subscription information for this EDUCAUSE Constituent Group
discussion list can be found at http://www.educause.edu/groups/.
**********
Participation and subscription information for this EDUCAUSE Constituent Group
discussion list can be found at http://www.educause.edu/groups/.
