[181350] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Whats' a good product for a high-density Wireless network setup?
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Jared Mauch)
Sun Jun 21 07:42:32 2015
X-Original-To: nanog@nanog.org
From: Jared Mauch <jared@puck.nether.net>
In-Reply-To: <m2zj3teik7.wl%randy@psg.com>
Date: Sun, 21 Jun 2015 07:40:29 -0400
To: Randy Bush <randy@psg.com>
Cc: North American Network Operators' Group <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
> On Jun 21, 2015, at 1:28 AM, Randy Bush <randy@psg.com> wrote:
>=20
>> My understanding is that the most recent NANOG had issues with =
clients
>> picking channels sequentially vs by signal strength. There may have
>> been other issues but when all devices use 149 because that's the
>> first they can and they get link that's not good.
>=20
> we're lucky those mean vicious bad clients don't also come to ietf,
> wwdc, crisco live, ... oh wait =E2=80=A6
I=E2=80=99ll say the difference about IETF is a lot more planning goes =
into it.
The people are on-site much earlier than for a NANOG and there are
few last minute rushes.
While there are larger plenary meetings at IETF, most are in smaller
rooms but are packed with chairs and laptops/devices.
> you are blaming the customer as if you worked for a telco. oh wait =
...
> :)
Duh. Always blame the customer, step 1 success.
step2 (vendor/cisco tac): have you tried turning it on and off again?
step3 maybe it=E2=80=99s fixed in the latest code
>> If people know of tricks to solve this when there are 600-1000 =
devices
>> per room i am certain the NANOG eng team would love to know about it.
>=20
> clue: with 600-1000 geeks there are gonna be 2k-4k devices.
Yup. This is a given.
- Jared=
