[177649] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Recommended wireless AP for 400 users office
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Mike Hammett)
Thu Jan 29 14:57:22 2015
X-Original-To: nanog@nanog.org
Date: Thu, 29 Jan 2015 13:57:08 -0600 (CST)
From: Mike Hammett <nanog@ics-il.net>
To: nanog@nanog.org
In-Reply-To: <CAKrtbvnaVd0+h-qJK-g-4b-Q6FXRfQoJNrXqXnBsnuOz3AavLQ@mail.gmail.com>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces@nanog.org
They should have never made the LR models. Louder radios don't work with to=
day's mobile clients. It's antenna or nothing.=20
The pricing is old as well. It hasn't changed since it debuted.=20
A platform that manages handoffs would mitigate that issue. Mobile devices =
really suck in that regard.=20
-----=20
Mike Hammett=20
Intelligent Computing Solutions=20
http://www.ics-il.com=20
----- Original Message -----
From: "Sean Harlow" <sean@seanharlow.info>=20
To: "Mike Hammett" <nanog@ics-il.net>=20
Cc: nanog@nanog.org=20
Sent: Thursday, January 29, 2015 1:50:20 PM=20
Subject: Re: Recommended wireless AP for 400 users office=20
I have had this same behavior at my UniFi pilot site. What I discovered in =
my case was a combination of bad behaviors in both the UniFi unit and Andro=
id.=20
Long story short Android really wants to hang on to a WiFi signal as long a=
s it can and does not seemingly scan for other signals when connected. If i=
t sees even the slightest bit of a signal from the access point it's connec=
ted to it doesn't give it up. I can replicate this behavior on every Androi=
d device I have where I can walk across a building and pass through 2-3 oth=
er "cells", even others on the same channel, and still see my device connec=
ted to the AP I started on in the UniFi control panel until it completely l=
oses signal.=20
This behavior then interacts poorly with UniFi in that it seems to be very =
willing to keep trying to get the data through to the distant client and qu=
eues up everything else until it either succeeds or possibly times out.=20
Presumably if ZHR worked this would effectively work around the issue, but =
as already noted it has its own issues that reduce its utility in a crowded=
environment. Our solution has been to stop using the "Long Range" units an=
d install more small cells to minimize the impacted area if this does occur=
, plus ensure that any Android devices are set to sleep their WiFi when the=
display is off (this is often set by default). The customer we were testin=
g with had a few tablets that needed to be on most of the time, but they sw=
itched to Windows devices for unrelated reasons and basically eliminated th=
e problem.=20
There is apparently some way to have the APs drop clients that are below a =
certain signal threshold now, but I haven't looked in to it in a while as i=
t hasn't really been an issue.=20
---=20
Overall my experience with UniFi is positive, if you have relatively simple=
needs they'll usually get the job done. You'll probably need a few more ac=
cess points than you would with another solution, but they're generally a f=
raction of the price so it still often works out. If you need your wireless=
to get fancy or handle a high number of clients on a single AP look elsewh=
ere. Needing to work on 5GHz also changes the value equation as those units=
are significantly more expensive than the plain 2.4GHz 802.11n units.=20
On Thu, Jan 29, 2015 at 10:53 AM, Mike Hammett < nanog@ics-il.net > wrote:=
=20
Did you figure out why it was dropping out? All of it dropping out? Just so=
me APs dropping? Just some users dropping?=20
-----=20
Mike Hammett=20
Intelligent Computing Solutions=20
http://www.ics-il.com=20
----- Original Message -----=20
From: "Paul Stewart" < paul@paulstewart.org >=20
To: "Mike Hammett" < nanog@ics-il.net >, nanog@nanog.org=20
Sent: Thursday, January 29, 2015 8:34:46 AM=20
Subject: RE: Recommended wireless AP for 400 users office=20
I had a bad experience with it one time at a tradeshow environment. 6 acces=
s 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 i=
ntervals as soon as about 300 users were online. It wasn't my idea to use U=
BNT but it definitely turned me off of their product after digging into the=
ir 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
-----Original Message-----=20
From: NANOG [mailto: nanog-bounces@nanog.org ] On Behalf Of Mike Hammett=20
Sent: Thursday, January 29, 2015 8:23 AM=20
To: nanog@nanog.org=20
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
Mike Hammett=20
Intelligent Computing Solutions=20
http://www.ics-il.com=20
----- Original Message -----=20
From: "Manuel Mar=C3=ADn" < mmg@transtelco.net >=20
To: nanog@nanog.org=20
Sent: Wednesday, January 28, 2015 11:06:39 PM=20
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 Ru=
ckus 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
