[177635] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Recommended wireless AP for 400 users office
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Paul Nash)
Thu Jan 29 11:26:17 2015
X-Original-To: nanog@nanog.org
From: Paul Nash <paul@nashnetworks.ca>
In-Reply-To: <CAOxD=zV0ww4P1pMEvV+Jp9fugXGOGFBrBV_bLAD0dSu_XH2eFw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 29 Jan 2015 11:22:50 -0500
To: Tyler Mills <tylermills@gmail.com>
Cc: Untitled 3 <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces@nanog.org
You can also VLAN allocation through RADIUS. Our setup has a single =
SSID, 250-odd user accounts. User connects to the SSID & authenticates =
with their userid/password and is assigned to their VLAN, which connects =
them to the appropriate DHCP server, gateway, etc.
Makes management and segregation fairly trivial (for non-trivial values =
of trivial :-)).
paul
> On Jan 29, 2015, at 11:18 AM, Tyler Mills <tylermills@gmail.com> =
wrote:
>=20
> Most of the issues are related to firmware. Most of my UBNT =
experience was
> with the UAP-Pro and the UAP-AC, and it wasn't a good experience.
> Production firmwares seem to be of beta quality.
>=20
> For features, they can't compete with Ruckus. One thing I can think =
of off
> the top of my head is support for tagging management on its own VLAN =
and
> tagging wired traffic onto another. If you were to implement this on =
the
> UBNT products you would have to SSH into every single one and =
implement the
> features as you would on a linux box, and it might work. Ruckus, you
> configure the VLAN's how you would want through the Zonedirector or =
the
> AP's GUI and it will just work.
>=20
> They cost more, but you get what you pay for.
>=20
> On Thu Jan 29 2015 at 10:54:44 AM Mike Hammett <nanog@ics-il.net> =
wrote:
>=20
>> Did you figure out why it was dropping out? All of it dropping out? =
Just
>> some APs dropping? Just some users dropping?
>>=20
>>=20
>>=20
>>=20
>> -----
>> Mike Hammett
>> Intelligent Computing Solutions
>> http://www.ics-il.com
>>=20
>>=20
>>=20
>> ----- Original Message -----
>>=20
>> From: "Paul Stewart" <paul@paulstewart.org>
>> To: "Mike Hammett" <nanog@ics-il.net>, nanog@nanog.org
>> Sent: Thursday, January 29, 2015 8:34:46 AM
>> Subject: RE: Recommended wireless AP for 400 users office
>>=20
>> I had a bad experience with it one time at a tradeshow environment. 6
>> access points setup for public wifi. The radio levels were quite good =
in
>> various areas of the tradeshow however traffic would keep dropping =
out at
>> random intervals as soon as about 300 users were online. It wasn't my =
idea
>> to use UBNT but it definitely turned me off of their product after =
digging
>> into their gear...
>>=20
>> Again as someone pointed out, for residential and perhaps SOHO
>> applications it can probably work well - and in my opinion it's =
priced for
>> that market.
>>=20
>> Paul
>>=20
>>=20
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-bounces@nanog.org] On Behalf Of Mike =
Hammett
>> Sent: Thursday, January 29, 2015 8:23 AM
>> To: nanog@nanog.org
>> Subject: Re: Recommended wireless AP for 400 users office
>>=20
>> What problems have you had with UBNT?
>>=20
>> It's zero hand-off doesn't work on unsecured networks, but that's =
about
>> the extent of the issues I've heard of other than stadium density
>> environments.
>>=20
>>=20
>>=20
>>=20
>> -----
>> Mike Hammett
>> Intelligent Computing Solutions
>> http://www.ics-il.com
>>=20
>>=20
>>=20
>> ----- Original Message -----
>>=20
>> From: "Manuel Mar=C3=ADn" <mmg@transtelco.net>
>> To: nanog@nanog.org
>> Sent: Wednesday, January 28, 2015 11:06:39 PM
>> Subject: Recommended wireless AP for 400 users office
>>=20
>> Dear nanog community
>>=20
>> I was wondering if you can recommend or share your experience with =
APs
>> that you can use in locations that have 300-500 users. I friend =
recommended
>> me Ruckus Wireless, it would be great if you can share your =
experience with
>> Ruckus or with a similar vendor. My experience with ubiquity for this =
type
>> of requirement was not that good.
>>=20
>> Thank you and have a great day
>>=20
>>=20
>>=20
>>=20
