I'm having quite a bit of fun imagining *power* over fiber to the AP ;-)
On November 7, 2014 6:02:08 AM PST, Lee H Badman <[email protected]> wrote: >I don't disagree that even at the lofty data rates promised by the >beefier allowed specs in 11ac, you'd still be hard-pressed to saturate >a single Gig uplink in the real world of wireless- even where dual-band >APs are used. > >But the WLAN industry created a messaging problem for themselves. With >the high-octane hype that fuels Wi-Fi systems marketing, you can't get >people all worked up about 11ac being "6.7 Gbps Wi-Fi, the Ethernet >killer! Woo woo!" and then follow it up with "oh, BTW, you still only >need the same uplink required for 11n... please don't ask us to >explain." > >I like the the innovation of multi-Gig on a single UTP, and I'm all for >anything that legitimately cuts down on cable counts, port counts, and >link aggregation when you have thousands of APs deployed. If you buy >into needing/wanting more than 1 Gig to your 11ac APs, multi-Gig to me >is the most reasonable option. > >Can you imagine the hell of fiber to the AP? > >-Lee > >Lee H. Badman >Network Architect/Wireless TME >ITS, Syracuse University >315.443.3003 > >________________________________________ >From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv ><[email protected]> on behalf of James Andrewartha ><[email protected]> >Sent: Thursday, November 6, 2014 9:11 PM >To: [email protected] >Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] Potentially big news for the 11ac minded >concerned with cabling > >On 07/11/14 02:00, Frank Sweetser wrote: >> I would strongly encourage everyone to bug all of their vendors about >where >> this is on their roadmap. I've been asking ours, and they haven't >made any >> commitments yet but they're all well aware of it. > >Our AM at Extreme hinted that 2.5Gbps will be coming in their new >stackables which are due next year. 2.5GBps ethernet has been a thing >for 10 years, but only on PCBs as a single lane of XAUI. > >I'd still argue YAGNI in a real-world environment that is limited to >40MHz channels, given that 80MHz and 160MHz don't allow for a lot of >channel re-use. So then 40MHz with 8 spatial streams peaks at 1.6Gbps >theoretical with all clients within 20ft of the AP. Add in overheads, >256QAM being unusable at with MU-MIMO [1] and a bit of clients sending >(which I believe can't be MU-MIMO) and you're well under 1Gbps again. > >Even if we assume a single 3SS client, 256 QAM and 80MHz channels >you're >looking at 1.3GBps theoretical, which again is going to be under 1GBps. >IMHO, if you really want to give good performance to everyone, install >dense single-5GHz-radio APs with 1Gbps links rather than trying to push >theoretical boundaries for just a few users. > >[1] >http://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/products/collateral/wireless/aironet-3600-series/white_paper_c11-713103.html > >-- >James Andrewartha >Network & Projects Engineer >Christ Church Grammar School >Claremont, Western Australia >Ph. (08) 9442 1757 >Mob. 0424 160 877 > >********** >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/. -- Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity. ********** Participation and subscription information for this EDUCAUSE Constituent Group discussion list can be found at http://www.educause.edu/groups/.
