I was going to comment that in 2007 or 2008 when we were choosing between Cisco 
& Aruba, Cisaco told us that Aruba's band steering was not possible. Now 
everybody is doing it.

 
Bruce Osborne
Wireless Engineer
IT Infrastructure & Media Solutions
 
(434) 592-4229
 
LIBERTY UNIVERSITY
Training Champions for Christ since 1971

-----Original Message-----
From: Chuck Enfield [mailto:[email protected]] 
Sent: Thursday, August 13, 2015 5:25 PM
Subject: Re: Exclusive 2.4 Ghz and 5 Ghz SSIDs

Thanks.  That could be what I was missing.  The Cisco systems I get asked to 
assist with are usually neglected.  It's quite likely I wasn't dealing with all 
the latest features.  It's important to know the product in this business, so 
I'm at a major disadvantage on Cisco.  (I humbly request that those of you who 
know me resist the temptation to comment on just how disadvantaged I am.)

-----Original Message-----
From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv 
[mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Jeffrey D. Sessler
Sent: Thursday, August 13, 2015 5:07 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] Exclusive 2.4 Ghz and 5 Ghz SSIDs

On the Cisco, you also have a choice between TPCv1 coverage optimal mode or
TPCv2 Interference Optimal. For dense deployments, you really want to be using 
TPCv2.

Jeff




On 8/13/15, 1:05 PM, "The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv 
on behalf of James Michael Keller" 
<[email protected] on behalf of [email protected]>
wrote:

>On 08/13/2015 03:40 PM, Chuck Enfield wrote:
>> Just to be clear, we don’t have to do these things to make wireless 
>> work.  It makes it work better.  But it is sometimes necessary to 
>> make wireless work acceptably in the most challenging environments.  
>> That said, left to defaults Aruba’s ARM also adjusts 2.4 GHz Tx power 
>> way down.  So far down, in fact, that coverage gaps show up.  It also 
>> tends to keep power higher on busy APs and lower on less busy ones.  
>> In some cases the power on the 2.4 radio will be the same as the 
>> power on the 5 GHz radio.  These characteristics forces us to 
>> configure a range of acceptable power levels for ARM to choose from.  
>> Once you’re doing that, why not select the optimum power levels?
>>
>> While I’m no expert on Cisco wireless, I have assisted some 
>> departments with problems on their Cisco infrastructure.  Based on 
>> that limited experience, I have far less confidence in RRM than you seem to.
>>
>
>The main issue is the defaults for Aruba are for coverage networks, not
>high density (30-40 ft) or very high density (30 Ft or less).   You need
>to adjust the coverage index min/ideal for high density deployments so 
>ARM will power down to Min TX powers without shutting down the 2.4 GHz 
>radios due to CCI (even with edge detection for the APs the default will
>still end up with only a few 2.4 GHz APs).   If you set Tx Min/Max to a
>6dBm range the APs can power to around double the cell size for 
>coverage gaps if a radio is down.
>
>I also like to set the 5 GHz Tx Min/Max range at least 3dBm higher then
>2.4 GHz because of the unattenuated propagation distance and better 
>attenuated penetration.  Which also helps duel band devices make better 
>selections.  However most devices have a fairly generous threshold on 
>AP signal drop before they even try and probe for candidate APs to 
>associate to.  That's really where the controller based client stearing 
>solutions come in to play with selective acks or the probes to get the 
>client on the best AP regardless of what the client wants based on just 
>Rx signal.
>
>--
>
>-James
>
>**********
>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/.

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

Reply via email to