Ian, I appreciate your response. I’ll start looking at 8.2.121.11 to see if it makes sense for our environment. I’ll take the information you’ve provided and include it into my PoC justification summary. If absolutely required, I will separate these devices onto our unused secondary hot/standby cluster, but my preference is a single (stable) code version throughout our environment. We may recommend that they purchase a third hot/standby cluster for their environment since their license counts are going to triple in most buildings. Since they do not manage any of their infrastructure, they’re not aware of these types of issues and just expect things to work and be cost effective.
Again, thank you for the useful information. Best, -- Devyn Moore Network Enterprise Systems Team Leader Campus Wireless Network Engineer Information Technology Services http://directory.uark.edu/people/devyn From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv <WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU<mailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU>> on behalf of Ian Lyons <ily...@rollins.edu<mailto:ily...@rollins.edu>> Reply-To: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv <WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU<mailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU>> Date: Tuesday, October 25, 2016 at 10:08 AM To: "WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU<mailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU>" <WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU<mailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU>> Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] Question about Cisco 1810w APs in residential buildings 8.2.120.11 is the minimum version I would recommend. 1810 (in my opinion) came out of the factory not completely baked. We bought the first batch of 1810’s off the assembly line and they did not have a means to talk to the controller (DNS would not work nor DNS options). We had to manually point them at our controller. However, *if* you bought a recent batch (after Sept) I have been told they have reimaged all the AP’s at the assembly line and that issue has been resolved. Other issues we have seen (and in 8.2.130.0 most have been resolved) are AP’s rebooting frequently. More recent code upgrades have fixed that issue, however we are still having an issue with the 1810’s and the wired ports. As to redundant WLC’s I would go to 8.2.121.11 at a minimum, there is a WLC issue with SSO as well as the 1810 issue that I found (the hard way) to be the minimum version to start at. Things are improving. However, 500 1810’s deployed = challenging times. The good news is, is that the students memories are short and I expect once these issues get ironed out, smooth sailing. From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv [mailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU] On Behalf Of Devyn Moore Sent: Tuesday, October 25, 2016 10:49 AM To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU<mailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU> Subject: [WIRELESS-LAN] Question about Cisco 1810w APs in residential buildings All, Our housing department wants us to look at these for wide-scale deployment in 11 residence halls within the next 2-3 years due to cost reduction in cable installation with our previous designs. This will be a one AP per room deployment utilizing current wiring infrastructure, where Aps were previously in the hallways (2600, 3500). We’re planning to configure the cells to a lower transmit power as well as assigning channels based on zero occupancy with 20MHz channels. Our ability to get into these buildings in order to resolve rogue issues is severely limited already because we are required to have a Residential Technician (from the housing department) with us when visiting student rooms. That’s only going to get worse when we lose visibility that we currently have with our current deployments in the halls. We’re also not planning to enable the ethernet ports because those aren’t in scope for the Proof of Concept due to crashed timelines provided by the department. We’re currently running 8.0.133.0 and have been incredibly stable (no AVC, no IPv6, 802.1x for primary SSID, web auth guest). We don’t use ISE, but use FreeRADIUS for wireless auth. We’re running two pairs of Hot/Standby 8510s with a mixture of 2600, 2700, 3500, 3600 and 3700 series APs, but would like to start integrating 2800 and 3800 series APs – separate from the housing request. I am targeting 8.2.121.7 for our upgrade in order to get around some bugs that I’ve seen mentioned here as we also start testing 2800/3800 in our environment. Has anyone had any issues with 1810w in dense cell deployments like residential hall buildings? Issues with damaged devices due to installation locations on wall approximately 1.5ft (45cm) from the floor? Have there been any issues with SSO HA with 8.2.121.7? Anything else you’d like to share about the 1810ws? Thanks in advance for the feedback. -- Devyn Moore Network Enterprise Systems Team Leader Campus Wireless Network Engineer Information Technology Services http://directory.uark.edu/people/devyn ********** Participation and subscription information for this EDUCAUSE Constituent Group discussion list can be found at http://www.educause.edu/groups/<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.educause.edu_groups_&d=DQMFAg&c=7ypwAowFJ8v-mw8AB-SdSueVQgSDL4HiiSaLK01W8HA&r=i_CB6wek27rS3NX5hYslNA&m=Jxxd4_cjLtVOXlq3yaQyWLstXPnr-nmrcJEH0STZ5N8&s=6uVNmNOsr5p0r3D3ZrZsYbFgtzg3KWjiVMIkYM4_iIc&e=>. ********** Participation and subscription information for this EDUCAUSE Constituent Group discussion list can be found at http://www.educause.edu/groups/<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.educause.edu_groups_&d=DQMFAg&c=7ypwAowFJ8v-mw8AB-SdSueVQgSDL4HiiSaLK01W8HA&r=i_CB6wek27rS3NX5hYslNA&m=Jxxd4_cjLtVOXlq3yaQyWLstXPnr-nmrcJEH0STZ5N8&s=6uVNmNOsr5p0r3D3ZrZsYbFgtzg3KWjiVMIkYM4_iIc&e=>. ********** Participation and subscription information for this EDUCAUSE Constituent Group discussion list can be found at http://www.educause.edu/groups/.
