dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
5
share rss forum feed

mcbaerentzen

join:2012-11-15
reply to billaustin

Re: Wireless Access Point Recommendation

1. The budget has not even been discussed yet, as of now it's free ball. But I think we are leaning towards it not being horrible if it's over standards, seeing as we would probably pay more, to be sure that it delivers.
2. With the HP solution we had 5 APs, but seeing as this solution didn't work for us, we now utilize 3 Apple AirPorts.
3. Well, theres the APs that's 3. Then around 45 employees, where at least 40 is not wired and uses wireless. Then of course there's an unknown number of devices, such as smart phones, tablets etc.
4. We have around 1100m2 to 1500m2 of space.
5. Yes, we do really need the N support, seeing as G does not meet the standard, as wireless is the primary entry-point for most devices on the network. We would like to have APs with at least 2 radios, in order to seperate the N band from the legacy bands (a, b and g).

Wow, I've now researched a lot on the Ruckus APs, and I've gotta say that I'm warming up to them. Their BeamFlex technology is like nothing I've ever read about before, and it looks quite legit. I would love to see them perform in real-life


tschmidt
Premium,MVM
join:2000-11-12
Milford, NH
kudos:9
Reviews:
·G4 Communications
·Fairpoint Commun..
·Hollis Hosting
said by mcbaerentzen:

Their BeamFlex technology is like nothing I've ever read about before, and it looks quite legit. I would love to see them perform in real-life

Beamforming is not unique to Ruckus but they do it better than other vendors.

Given the small size and large number of connections you are building a "dense network." Normally when folks think about wireless they are concerned range. In your case range is not an issue, assuming the 1500M2 is reasonably rectangular, it is the number of users per AP. Beam forming/interference blocking really shines in that environment.

/tom


billaustin
they call me Mr. Bill
Premium,MVM
join:2001-10-13
North Las Vegas, NV
kudos:5
reply to mcbaerentzen
said by mcbaerentzen:

1. The budget has not even been discussed yet, as of now it's free ball. But I think we are leaning towards it not being horrible if it's over standards, seeing as we would probably pay more, to be sure that it delivers.
2. With the HP solution we had 5 APs, but seeing as this solution didn't work for us, we now utilize 3 Apple AirPorts.
3. Well, theres the APs that's 3. Then around 45 employees, where at least 40 is not wired and uses wireless. Then of course there's an unknown number of devices, such as smart phones, tablets etc.
4. We have around 1100m2 to 1500m2 of space.
5. Yes, we do really need the N support, seeing as G does not meet the standard, as wireless is the primary entry-point for most devices on the network. We would like to have APs with at least 2 radios, in order to seperate the N band from the legacy bands (a, b and g).

Wow, I've now researched a lot on the Ruckus APs, and I've gotta say that I'm warming up to them. Their BeamFlex technology is like nothing I've ever read about before, and it looks quite legit. I would love to see them perform in real-life

There seems to be a bit of confusion. N is not a frequency band, it is a communications standard. 802.11a is the legacy standard for the 5ghz band, and 802.11b/g are the legacy standards for the 2.4ghz band. The 802.11n standard is for both the 2.4ghz and 5ghz bands. 802.11a and 802.11g are more than adequate for devices that just need internet access.

I would recommend an inventory of ALL the wireless devices used in the facility, what frequency bands they support, and their primary use. Any device performing a lot of file transfers should be put on a wired connection. Any device that always stays in the same location, if possible, should be put on a wired connection.

I would also recommend an evaluation of your network infrastructure. It is pointless to setup a wireless N network with 150mb or 300mb connection speeds if your back-end transport is only a 100mb network connection.

If you have 40+ active wireless devices, I would recommend a wireless network that utilizes a controller and at least six access points. Even though each access point can support multiple simultaneous clients, each radio can only service one client at a time. Any device doing file transfers will monopolize the radio and slow down network access for everyone else.

davidhoffman
Premium
join:2009-11-19
Warner Robins, GA
kudos:3
reply to mcbaerentzen
The Tom's Hardware review is one of the best at analyzing real world performance for Ruckus. »www.tomshardware.com/reviews/bea···390.html


mozerd
Light Will Pierce The Darkness
Premium,MVM
join:2004-04-23
Nepean, ON
Beamforming is CHEAP to implement consequently most are now going with beamforming ...... Spatial multiplexing that works with Multipath is far superior but much more expensive to implement. The advantage with spatial multiplexing is that each wireless user gets far more bandwidth especially with Multi-User MIMO. For Business who want to go with wireless only the XIRRUS solution provides far more bandwidth per user than any other so called commercial vendor. Multi-User MIMO changes the paradigm for wireless transmissions but only applies to the N/AC world of wireless.
--
David Mozer
IT-Expert on Call
Information Technology for Home and Business

davidhoffman
Premium
join:2009-11-19
Warner Robins, GA
kudos:3
Xirrus is another solution that seems to work well. They installed some Xirrus equipment for part of the general public and visitor access system where I work. But the entire public and visitor AP system is a mix of Xirrus and other manufacturers, so I cannot comment on what a Xirrus only system would do. People seem happy with network performance so far.