Re: Recommended wireless AP for 400 users office

[Paul Nash]

It’s the “remote capture” that scares me.

I was testing some Meraki kit, called their NOC to try to debug some Radius 
issues, tech tells me “oh yes, I can see your traffic going hither and yon 
between the test client and test server that are both in your office, and 
looking at the packet contents I can see ….”

With Ruckus (or almost any other) gear, I have to either open up a hole through 
my firewall or grab the packet traces and send them to the tech folk.  They 
don’t have uncontrolled access to my internal traffic out of the box.

paul


> On Feb 4, 2015, at 8:31 AM, Ray Soucy  wrote:
> 
> Honestly, in a lot of cases you don't even need a device to support
> packet capture as a feature to add it as a feature once its
> compromised.  This is just FUD IMHO.
> 
> On Wed, Feb 4, 2015 at 7:24 AM, Paul Nash  wrote:
>>> I love the built-in remote packet captures,
>> 
>> You, the NSA, and lots and lots of hackers, ALL love the remote packet 
>> capture.  If Meraki support can turn it on, so can someone who penetrates 
>> their systems (by getting a job there or by hacking), and then they get to 
>> see everything happening INSIDE your network.  Not just your WAN traffic, 
>> which would be bad enough.
>> 
>>paul
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Ray Patrick Soucy
> Network Engineer
> University of Maine System
> 
> T: 207-561-3526
> F: 207-561-3531
> 
> MaineREN, Maine's Research and Education Network
> www.maineren.net

Re: Recommended wireless AP for 400 users office

[Ray Soucy]

Honestly, in a lot of cases you don't even need a device to support
packet capture as a feature to add it as a feature once its
compromised.  This is just FUD IMHO.

On Wed, Feb 4, 2015 at 7:24 AM, Paul Nash  wrote:
>> I love the built-in remote packet captures,
>
> You, the NSA, and lots and lots of hackers, ALL love the remote packet 
> capture.  If Meraki support can turn it on, so can someone who penetrates 
> their systems (by getting a job there or by hacking), and then they get to 
> see everything happening INSIDE your network.  Not just your WAN traffic, 
> which would be bad enough.
>
> paul



-- 
Ray Patrick Soucy
Network Engineer
University of Maine System

T: 207-561-3526
F: 207-561-3531

MaineREN, Maine's Research and Education Network
www.maineren.net

Re: Recommended wireless AP for 400 users office

[Paul Nash]

> I love the built-in remote packet captures, 

You, the NSA, and lots and lots of hackers, ALL love the remote packet capture. 
 If Meraki support can turn it on, so can someone who penetrates their systems 
(by getting a job there or by hacking), and then they get to see everything 
happening INSIDE your network.  Not just your WAN traffic, which would be bad 
enough.

paul

Re: Recommended wireless AP for 400 users office

[Sean Hunter]

I happen to administer a deployment of almost exclusively Meraki gear; ~140
switches (mix of MS42 and MS22) and ~400 AP's (almost all MR16's).

I would *not* recommend them for this situation. If you've got a low-usage
scenario, they might be fine. The tech support quality has noticeably
declined over the last 2 years we've been running their gear, and the
really amazing fact about that is that I'm working with the same people
(read: Cisco is making them script-following support monkeys rather than
techs) who generally know me by name. That is another "interesting" point
with Meraki. I've helped them identify several bugs, some of which were
very serious. We regularly have to ship back switches after an update.
We've encountered a RADIUS auth issue where users were being randomly
diverted into the wrong VLAN in the middle of a wireless session (they
weren't even roaming or anything). The RADIUS issue was actually really
interesting; it dumped users into our management VLAN which very quickly
depleted the DHCP pool. About 20% of our 4000 wireless devices were in the
wrong VLAN and unable to get on the internet (yikes!) and suddenly our AP's
started bouncing because they lost their DHCP leases, couldn't get new
ones, lost contact with the Meraki cloud controller, and started rebooting
every few minutes (the MR16's don't boot quickly, either). It was
terrifying and horrible, especially because that was the 2nd time it
occurred for us. We're *still* running a custom Meraki firmware that's a
year old because they have, twice now, reported that the fixed the RADIUS
issue, only to have us experience this when we updated them all at once.
We've had similarly critical firmware regressions on the wired side of
things, aside from the normal slew of issues ("What do you mean your
firmware upgrade disabled the uplink port?").

If provided a do-over, I'd select Ubiquiti today, or another of the more
professional vendors. Meraki's gear is cool, the Dashboard is a *dream* to
work with, I love the built-in remote packet captures, and they're probably
fine for most small deployments, but Meraki isn't ready for prime time yet.
I feel like a beta-tester rather than a customer, and the support is
getting worse when, if they're going to act like a startup (read: move fast
and break things), they really need for it to get better.

RE: Aforementioned criticisms from this thread:

1) Meraki makes you buy hardware, licenses, and more hardware when the
first dies.

Response: Almost 100% wrong. I read each warranty and suggest you do the
same for any gear you buy. The stuff we use (MR16's, MR22's, and MR42's)
has cost-free replacement warranty coverage as long as you hold a valid
license. The one exception are the outdoor AP's, which only have a 1 year
warranty, which is rather crappy on Meraki's part, because the license fees
are the same no matter your model of AP (indoor, outdoor, big and
expensive, or small and cheap).

2) Meraki switching/AP functionality is/is not tied to cloud controller
functionality.

Response: It is and it isn't. First, you must have a valid license or 30
days later your network ceases to function. All of it. Completely ceases.
They haven't been flexible on this and we even got within 2 days of it
expiring when we first installed ours. Our sales rep was sympathetic but
unhelpful, even after taking our money for the license. :/ Second, we've
had our cloud controller go down and life went on. However, we've also had
our AP's be unable to get a DHCP lease and start rebooting every few
minutes. You tell me what that's worth.

I think that might be $0.05 worth. ;)

On Mon, Feb 2, 2015 at 4:24 AM, Tim Franklin  wrote:

> > That's it. Step 1, buy the equipment at full price. Step 2, pay for the
> cloud
> > management license, yearly. Step 3, no extended warranty option, so pay
> full
> > price if equipment from step one fails.
>
> As long as you're doing step 2 (which you *have* to, otherwise it's a
> brick), isn't step 3 "report device as failed, new device shipped to site,
> plug in cable, sucks down config of old device from the cloud, up and
> running again"?
>
> I only so far have the demo gear from one of their (rather good) training
> courses, which has a couple of years left to run, rather than any live
> deployments, but that's my understanding of the support model from the
> meetings I've had with them to date.
>
> Regards,
> Tim.
>

Re: Recommended wireless AP for 400 users office

[Tim Franklin]

> That's it. Step 1, buy the equipment at full price. Step 2, pay for the cloud
> management license, yearly. Step 3, no extended warranty option, so pay full
> price if equipment from step one fails.

As long as you're doing step 2 (which you *have* to, otherwise it's a brick), 
isn't step 3 "report device as failed, new device shipped to site, plug in 
cable, sucks down config of old device from the cloud, up and running again"?

I only so far have the demo gear from one of their (rather good) training 
courses, which has a couple of years left to run, rather than any live 
deployments, but that's my understanding of the support model from the meetings 
I've had with them to date.

Regards,
Tim.

Re: Recommended wireless AP for 400 users office

[Lewis, Mitchell T.]

"If you choose not to renew, your Meraki systems will cease to provide network 
access on February 28, 2015."


I find that interesting as it is my understanding (confirmed by Meraki
documents the last I knew) the Meraki Cloud's functionality is carried
out on the control domain & does not have any involvement in packet
forwarding(my limited testing with Meraki equipment confirmed this). I
knew that access to change configuration might disappear but, I was not
aware that the data plane could be interrupted as well. That is a
excellent item for me to investigate further as I have investigated
Meraki as a solution in the past.

On a side note, those of you in this situation described below-you may
want to take a peek at this:
https://meraki.cisco.com/support/#policies:gpl . Does not provide an
"enterprise" solution but never the less may get you out of a jam if
needed until replacement equipment can be purchased etc.




Mitchell T. Lewis

mle...@techcompute.net <mailto:mle...@itgeekdom.net>

LinkedIn Profile:www.linkedin.com/in/mlewisitg
<http://www.linkedin.com/in/mlewisitg>
Mobile: (203)816-0371

A computer will do what you tell it to do, but that may be much
different from what you had in mind. ~Joseph Weizenbaum

On 02/01/2015 08:51 PM, Eric C. Miller wrote:
> That's it. Step 1, buy the equipment at full price. Step 2, pay for the cloud 
> management license, yearly. Step 3, no extended warranty option, so pay full 
> price if equipment from step one fails. 
>
> We just dumped our meraki deployment because of it:
>
> 
>
>> Dear Helpdesk, 
>> Thank you for being a valued Meraki customer. Our records show that your 
>> Meraki Cloud license has expired.
>>
>> If you wish to continue using your Meraki networks, you must renew your 
>> license immediately. If you choose not to renew, your Meraki systems will 
>> cease to provide network access on February 28, 2015. If you have recently 
>> made a Meraki purchase, please add your >license key to your Dashboard 
>> account.
> 
>
>
>
>
> Eric Miller, CCNP
> Network Engineering Consultant
> (407) 257-5115
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-
> From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-boun...@nanog.org] On Behalf Of Mike Hammett
> Sent: Sunday, February 01, 2015 9:55 AM
> To: NANOG
> Subject: Re: Recommended wireless AP for 400 users office
>
> I try to avoid anything that Cisco has touched. 
>
> Also not a fan of their stop paying our recurring fee and the device becomes 
> a brick policy. 
>
>
>
>
> -
> Mike Hammett
> Intelligent Computing Solutions
> http://www.ics-il.com 
>
>
>
> - Original Message -
>
> From: "Dennis Bohn" 
> To: "Eric C. Miller" 
> Cc: "NANOG" 
> Sent: Sunday, February 1, 2015 8:41:52 AM
> Subject: Re: Recommended wireless AP for 400 users office 
>
> We are substantially larger and use Aruba, but I am wondering why no one has 
> mentioned Meraki (now cisco-meraki). We tried one of their give-away aps and 
> it seemed fine, with the 'cloud management.' I am not advocating Meraki, just 
> curious. 
> best, 
>
>
> Dennis Bohn
> Manager of Network and Systems
> Adelphi University
> b...@adelphi.edu
> 5168773327 
>
> On Fri, Jan 30, 2015 at 6:28 PM, Eric C. Miller 
> wrote: 
>
>> +1 Xirrus, especially for the multi radio arrays. Crowded common areas
>> benefit from sector antennas attached to individual radios. Also, 
>> there XMS server is really useful for managing a large cluster. 
>> Ubiquiti UniFi is good for smaller installations, but I wouldn't trust 
>> them for enterprise level reliability.
>>
>>
>>
>> Eric Miller, CCNP
>> Network Engineering Consultant
>> (407) 257-5115
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> -Original Message- 
>> From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-boun...@nanog.org] On Behalf Of Mike Lyon 
>> Sent: Thursday, January 29, 2015 12:17 AM 
>> To: Manuel Marín 
>> Cc: NANOG 
>> Subject: Re: Recommended wireless AP for 400 users office 
>>
>> Check out Xirrus 
>> On Jan 28, 2015 9:08 PM, "Manuel Marín"  wrote: 
>>
>>> Dear nanog community 
>>>
>>> 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. 
>>>
>>> Thank you and have a great day 
>>>

RE: Recommended wireless AP for 400 users office

[Eric C. Miller]

That's it. Step 1, buy the equipment at full price. Step 2, pay for the cloud 
management license, yearly. Step 3, no extended warranty option, so pay full 
price if equipment from step one fails. 

We just dumped our meraki deployment because of it:



>Dear Helpdesk, 
>Thank you for being a valued Meraki customer. Our records show that your 
>Meraki Cloud license has expired.
>
>If you wish to continue using your Meraki networks, you must renew your 
>license immediately. If you choose not to renew, your Meraki systems will 
>cease to provide network access on February 28, 2015. If you have recently 
>made a Meraki purchase, please add your >license key to your Dashboard account.






Eric Miller, CCNP
Network Engineering Consultant
(407) 257-5115



-Original Message-
From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-boun...@nanog.org] On Behalf Of Mike Hammett
Sent: Sunday, February 01, 2015 9:55 AM
To: NANOG
Subject: Re: Recommended wireless AP for 400 users office

I try to avoid anything that Cisco has touched. 

Also not a fan of their stop paying our recurring fee and the device becomes a 
brick policy. 




-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
http://www.ics-il.com 



- Original Message -

From: "Dennis Bohn" 
To: "Eric C. Miller" 
Cc: "NANOG" 
Sent: Sunday, February 1, 2015 8:41:52 AM
Subject: Re: Recommended wireless AP for 400 users office 

We are substantially larger and use Aruba, but I am wondering why no one has 
mentioned Meraki (now cisco-meraki). We tried one of their give-away aps and it 
seemed fine, with the 'cloud management.' I am not advocating Meraki, just 
curious. 
best, 


Dennis Bohn
Manager of Network and Systems
Adelphi University
b...@adelphi.edu
5168773327 

On Fri, Jan 30, 2015 at 6:28 PM, Eric C. Miller 
wrote: 

> +1 Xirrus, especially for the multi radio arrays. Crowded common areas
> benefit from sector antennas attached to individual radios. Also, 
> there XMS server is really useful for managing a large cluster. 
> Ubiquiti UniFi is good for smaller installations, but I wouldn't trust 
> them for enterprise level reliability.
> 
> 
> 
> Eric Miller, CCNP
> Network Engineering Consultant
> (407) 257-5115
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -Original Message- 
> From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-boun...@nanog.org] On Behalf Of Mike Lyon 
> Sent: Thursday, January 29, 2015 12:17 AM 
> To: Manuel Marín 
> Cc: NANOG 
> Subject: Re: Recommended wireless AP for 400 users office 
> 
> Check out Xirrus 
> On Jan 28, 2015 9:08 PM, "Manuel Marín"  wrote: 
> 
> > Dear nanog community 
> > 
> > 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. 
> > 
> > Thank you and have a great day 
> > 
> 

Re: Recommended wireless AP for 400 users office

[Paul Nash]

I have tried Meraki for a large deployment, and was significantly underwhelmed.

PF performance was poor compared to Ruckus, meshing was erratic, Radius auth 
only worked with one Radius server (a cloud-based service).  The final straw 
was when we were trying to debug the Radius auth problem with a Meraki tech, 
who started sniffing our network traffic from California or wherever, without 
us needing to do anything.

Can you say “security hole”?  Like “great gaping security chasm”?

As soon as they did that, I disconnected everything and shipped it back to 
them.  Never considered them for anything ever again.

paul

> On Feb 1, 2015, at 9:41 AM, Dennis Bohn  wrote:
> 
> We are substantially larger and use Aruba, but I am wondering why no one
> has mentioned Meraki (now cisco-meraki).  We tried one of their give-away
> aps and it seemed fine, with the 'cloud management.'   I am not advocating
> Meraki, just curious.
> best,
> 
> 
> Dennis Bohn
> Manager of Network and Systems
> Adelphi University
> b...@adelphi.edu
> 5168773327
> 
> On Fri, Jan 30, 2015 at 6:28 PM, Eric C. Miller 
> wrote:
> 
>> +1 Xirrus, especially for the multi radio arrays. Crowded common areas
>> benefit from sector antennas attached to individual radios. Also, there XMS
>> server is really useful for managing a large cluster. Ubiquiti UniFi is
>> good for smaller installations, but I wouldn't trust them for enterprise
>> level reliability.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Eric Miller, CCNP
>> Network Engineering Consultant
>> (407) 257-5115
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> -Original Message-----
>> From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-boun...@nanog.org] On Behalf Of Mike Lyon
>> Sent: Thursday, January 29, 2015 12:17 AM
>> To: Manuel Marín
>> Cc: NANOG
>> Subject: Re: Recommended wireless AP for 400 users office
>> 
>> Check out Xirrus
>> On Jan 28, 2015 9:08 PM, "Manuel Marín"  wrote:
>> 
>>> Dear nanog community
>>> 
>>> 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.
>>> 
>>> Thank you and have a great day
>>> 
>> 

Re: Recommended wireless AP for 400 users office

[Mike Hammett]

I try to avoid anything that Cisco has touched. 

Also not a fan of their stop paying our recurring fee and the device becomes a 
brick policy. 




- 
Mike Hammett 
Intelligent Computing Solutions 
http://www.ics-il.com 



- Original Message -

From: "Dennis Bohn"  
To: "Eric C. Miller"  
Cc: "NANOG"  
Sent: Sunday, February 1, 2015 8:41:52 AM 
Subject: Re: Recommended wireless AP for 400 users office 

We are substantially larger and use Aruba, but I am wondering why no one 
has mentioned Meraki (now cisco-meraki). We tried one of their give-away 
aps and it seemed fine, with the 'cloud management.' I am not advocating 
Meraki, just curious. 
best, 


Dennis Bohn 
Manager of Network and Systems 
Adelphi University 
b...@adelphi.edu 
5168773327 

On Fri, Jan 30, 2015 at 6:28 PM, Eric C. Miller  
wrote: 

> +1 Xirrus, especially for the multi radio arrays. Crowded common areas 
> benefit from sector antennas attached to individual radios. Also, there XMS 
> server is really useful for managing a large cluster. Ubiquiti UniFi is 
> good for smaller installations, but I wouldn't trust them for enterprise 
> level reliability. 
> 
> 
> 
> Eric Miller, CCNP 
> Network Engineering Consultant 
> (407) 257-5115 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -Original Message- 
> From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-boun...@nanog.org] On Behalf Of Mike Lyon 
> Sent: Thursday, January 29, 2015 12:17 AM 
> To: Manuel Marín 
> Cc: NANOG 
> Subject: Re: Recommended wireless AP for 400 users office 
> 
> Check out Xirrus 
> On Jan 28, 2015 9:08 PM, "Manuel Marín"  wrote: 
> 
> > Dear nanog community 
> > 
> > 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. 
> > 
> > Thank you and have a great day 
> > 
> 

Re: Recommended wireless AP for 400 users office

[Dennis Bohn]

We are substantially larger and use Aruba, but I am wondering why no one
has mentioned Meraki (now cisco-meraki).  We tried one of their give-away
aps and it seemed fine, with the 'cloud management.'   I am not advocating
Meraki, just curious.
best,


Dennis Bohn
Manager of Network and Systems
Adelphi University
b...@adelphi.edu
5168773327

On Fri, Jan 30, 2015 at 6:28 PM, Eric C. Miller 
wrote:

> +1 Xirrus, especially for the multi radio arrays. Crowded common areas
> benefit from sector antennas attached to individual radios. Also, there XMS
> server is really useful for managing a large cluster. Ubiquiti UniFi is
> good for smaller installations, but I wouldn't trust them for enterprise
> level reliability.
>
>
>
> Eric Miller, CCNP
> Network Engineering Consultant
> (407) 257-5115
>
>
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-boun...@nanog.org] On Behalf Of Mike Lyon
> Sent: Thursday, January 29, 2015 12:17 AM
> To: Manuel Marín
> Cc: NANOG
> Subject: Re: Recommended wireless AP for 400 users office
>
> Check out Xirrus
> On Jan 28, 2015 9:08 PM, "Manuel Marín"  wrote:
>
> > Dear nanog community
> >
> > 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.
> >
> > Thank you and have a great day
> >
>

RE: Recommended wireless AP for 400 users office

[Eric C. Miller]

+1 Xirrus, especially for the multi radio arrays. Crowded common areas benefit 
from sector antennas attached to individual radios. Also, there XMS server is 
really useful for managing a large cluster. Ubiquiti UniFi is good for smaller 
installations, but I wouldn't trust them for enterprise level reliability.



Eric Miller, CCNP
Network Engineering Consultant
(407) 257-5115




-Original Message-
From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-boun...@nanog.org] On Behalf Of Mike Lyon
Sent: Thursday, January 29, 2015 12:17 AM
To: Manuel Marín
Cc: NANOG
Subject: Re: Recommended wireless AP for 400 users office

Check out Xirrus
On Jan 28, 2015 9:08 PM, "Manuel Marín"  wrote:

> Dear nanog community
>
> 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.
>
> Thank you and have a great day
>

Re: Recommended wireless AP for 400 users office

[Rob Seastrom]

Paul Nash  writes:

> Ruckus is also *way* easier to configure than Cisco.  Some of the
> Cisco folk that I know think that that is a point in favour of
> Cisco, as it adds to job security :-)

That matches my experience with Cisco 802.11 kit.  Way too many knobs
exposed, and guidance on how to set them is thin on the ground.
Sensible defaults and quick to configure on the Ruckus kit.

-r

Re: Recommended wireless AP for 400 users office

[Carlos Alcantar]

+1 on Xirrus or Ruckus if you care to sleep at night. Just my 2cents


Carlos Alcantar
Race Communications / Race Team Member
1325 Howard Ave. #604, Burlingame, CA. 94010
Phone: +1 415 376 3314 / car...@race.com / http://www.race.com





On 1/30/15, 8:19 AM, "William Herrin"  wrote:

>On Thu, Jan 29, 2015 at 12:06 AM, Manuel Marín  wrote:
>> 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.
>
>Hi Manuel,
>
>At 300-500 users you may still be in dd-wrt territory with the lack of
>smart roaming and self-healing features mitigated by a price that
>makes it practical to simply deploy more access points. Dumb roaming
>can be good enough when the user count per AP is low.
>
>Aruba it is not, but I had a 150 user deployment on 5 dd-wrt APs that
>was largely trouble-free.
>
>Regards,
>Bill Herrin
>
>-- 
>William Herrin  her...@dirtside.com  b...@herrin.us
>Owner, Dirtside Systems . Web: 
>

Re: Recommended wireless AP for 400 users office

[William Herrin]

On Thu, Jan 29, 2015 at 12:06 AM, Manuel Marín  wrote:
> 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.

Hi Manuel,

At 300-500 users you may still be in dd-wrt territory with the lack of
smart roaming and self-healing features mitigated by a price that
makes it practical to simply deploy more access points. Dumb roaming
can be good enough when the user count per AP is low.

Aruba it is not, but I had a 150 user deployment on 5 dd-wrt APs that
was largely trouble-free.

Regards,
Bill Herrin

-- 
William Herrin  her...@dirtside.com  b...@herrin.us
Owner, Dirtside Systems . Web: 

Re: Recommended wireless AP for 400 users office

[Paul Nash]

My personal experience is that the Ruckus kit outperforms the Cisco Air-O-Net 
stuff.  This was looking at penetration through concrete walls, co-existence 
with other devices, throughput.  

YMMV, I’m not a Cisco expert but *did* have a local 
certified-up-to-his-eyeballs Cisco dude check what I had done, and he could not 
squeeze any better performance out of the Cisco gear either.  Maybe they just 
want to sell more APs and controllers?  Oh, and for this application, the 
Ruckus kit came in an order of magnitude cheaper than Cisco would have.

Ruckus is also *way* easier to configure than Cisco.  Some of the Cisco folk 
that I know think that that is a point in favour of Cisco, as it adds to job 
security :-)

paul


> On Jan 29, 2015, at 12:02 PM, Edwards, Jermaine  wrote:
> 
> Ruckus should work fine for you.  You need to have a controller and need a 
> good RF plan but as far as capacity, throughput, roaming etc they are really 
> solid.  Of course the best is Cisco but if you can't afford them Ruckus is 
> the way to go.  I use them in small and very large convention centers and 
> hotels with no reservation.
> 
> jle
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-boun...@nanog.org] On Behalf Of Paul Stewart
> Sent: Thursday, January 29, 2015 11:55
> To: 'Mike Hammett'; nanog@nanog.org
> Subject: RE: Recommended wireless AP for 400 users office
> 
> It was all users getting randomly disconnected ... the AP's stayed online but 
> the traffic would completely halt for 15-30 seconds at a time.  Their 
> association with the AP would stay in tact 
> 
> Paul
> 
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-boun...@nanog.org] On Behalf Of Mike Hammett
> Sent: Thursday, January 29, 2015 10:53 AM
> To: nanog@nanog.org
> Subject: Re: Recommended wireless AP for 400 users office
> 
> Did you figure out why it was dropping out? All of it dropping out? Just some 
> APs dropping? Just some users dropping? 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> - 
> Mike Hammett 
> Intelligent Computing Solutions 
> http://www.ics-il.com 
> 
> 
> 
> - Original Message -
> 
> From: "Paul Stewart"  
> To: "Mike Hammett" , nanog@nanog.org 
> Sent: Thursday, January 29, 2015 8:34:46 AM 
> Subject: RE: Recommended wireless AP for 400 users office 
> 
> 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... 
> 
> 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. 
> 
> Paul 
> 
> 
> -Original Message- 
> From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-boun...@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 
> 
> What problems have you had with UBNT? 
> 
> 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. 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> - 
> Mike Hammett 
> Intelligent Computing Solutions 
> http://www.ics-il.com 
> 
> 
> 
> - Original Message - 
> 
> From: "Manuel Marín"  
> To: nanog@nanog.org 
> Sent: Wednesday, January 28, 2015 11:06:39 PM 
> Subject: Recommended wireless AP for 400 users office 
> 
> Dear nanog community 
> 
> 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. 
> 
> Thank you and have a great day 
> 
> 
> 
> 

RE: Recommended wireless AP for 400 users office

[Edwards, Jermaine]

Ruckus should work fine for you.  You need to have a controller and need a good 
RF plan but as far as capacity, throughput, roaming etc they are really solid.  
Of course the best is Cisco but if you can't afford them Ruckus is the way to 
go.  I use them in small and very large convention centers and hotels with no 
reservation.

jle

-Original Message-
From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-boun...@nanog.org] On Behalf Of Paul Stewart
Sent: Thursday, January 29, 2015 11:55
To: 'Mike Hammett'; nanog@nanog.org
Subject: RE: Recommended wireless AP for 400 users office

It was all users getting randomly disconnected ... the AP's stayed online but 
the traffic would completely halt for 15-30 seconds at a time.  Their 
association with the AP would stay in tact 

Paul


-Original Message-
From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-boun...@nanog.org] On Behalf Of Mike Hammett
Sent: Thursday, January 29, 2015 10:53 AM
To: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Re: Recommended wireless AP for 400 users office

Did you figure out why it was dropping out? All of it dropping out? Just some 
APs dropping? Just some users dropping? 




- 
Mike Hammett 
Intelligent Computing Solutions 
http://www.ics-il.com 



- Original Message -

From: "Paul Stewart"  
To: "Mike Hammett" , nanog@nanog.org 
Sent: Thursday, January 29, 2015 8:34:46 AM 
Subject: RE: Recommended wireless AP for 400 users office 

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... 

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. 

Paul 


-Original Message- 
From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-boun...@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 

What problems have you had with UBNT? 

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. 




- 
Mike Hammett 
Intelligent Computing Solutions 
http://www.ics-il.com 



- Original Message - 

From: "Manuel Marín"  
To: nanog@nanog.org 
Sent: Wednesday, January 28, 2015 11:06:39 PM 
Subject: Recommended wireless AP for 400 users office 

Dear nanog community 

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. 

Thank you and have a great day 

Re: Recommended wireless AP for 400 users office

[Rob Seastrom]

Manuel Marín  writes:

> 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.

I have had a pair of Ruckus R700s at the house for a short while now
(hey, they haven't been out that long).

They work fine without a controller, at least in WPA2-PSK mode with a
few VLANs.  Haven't seen if Enterprise works without the controller or
not, so if you care you might want to check.  For an annual fee,
Ruckus offers a "cloud controller" too as opposed to their physical
box controllers; this is worthy of consideration depending upon your
situation.

Software upgrades were pretty straightforward.

The R700 has a CLI, but I haven't tried doing anything particular with
it so I can't offer any thoughts there.  Those running with a
controller (the "expected" mode of operation) will never touch the
individual APs anyway, so I'd expect the CLI might be a little
disappointing.  The web UI is thoughtfully laid out and was easy to
use.

Management VLAN can be separate from the customer traffic VLANs and
they work fine with my slightly demented mix of tagged/untagged
traffic.  The caveat here is that if you were thinking of just tossing
everything in one VLAN without any separation whatsoever, there
doesn't seem to be a good way to filter access to the management
interface.  Then again, it's https/ssh (http and telnet are available
but off by default, hooray!) so you may not care.  The sshd and web
server are dropbear and GoAhead-Webs respectively.

Overall I've found the R700s very stable and been pleased with them.
They're a bit spendy, but you absolutely get what you pay for.  At the
other end of the spectrum is the Ubiquiti and Mikrotik kit, which I
also love, but for a completely different use case and budget.

I would recommend Ruckus without hesitation.

My $0.02.

-r

Re: Recommended wireless AP for 400 users office

[Jared Mauch]

You can manually adjust the UAP radios to reject clients, but things like the 
LR are really only useful in an outdoor setting, or environments that have 
sparse clients.

https://community.ubnt.com/t5/UniFi-Configuration-Examples/UniFi-Set-minimum-RSSI-for-clients/ta-p/522637

It’s really an ugly hack and I wish they would allow it to be set under the 
site or AP.

For my home environment, my iPhone thinks it can see the AP up to 1/4 of a mile 
away with a normal UAP-PRO, which is not really the case as the client doesn’t 
notice the signal fade as quickly as one would expect.

- Jared

> On Jan 29, 2015, at 2:57 PM, Mike Hammett  wrote:
> 
> They should have never made the LR models. Louder radios don't work with 
> today's mobile clients. It's antenna or nothing. 
> 
> The pricing is old as well. It hasn't changed since it debuted. 
> 
> A platform that manages handoffs would mitigate that issue. Mobile devices 
> really suck in that regard. 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> - 
> Mike Hammett 
> Intelligent Computing Solutions 
> http://www.ics-il.com 
> 
> 
> 
> - Original Message -
> 
> From: "Sean Harlow"  
> To: "Mike Hammett"  
> Cc: nanog@nanog.org 
> Sent: Thursday, January 29, 2015 1:50:20 PM 
> Subject: Re: Recommended wireless AP for 400 users office 
> 
> 
> 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 Android. 
> 
> 
> 
> Long story short Android really wants to hang on to a WiFi signal as long as 
> it can and does not seemingly scan for other signals when connected. If it 
> sees even the slightest bit of a signal from the access point it's connected 
> to it doesn't give it up. I can replicate this behavior on every Android 
> device I have where I can walk across a building and pass through 2-3 other 
> "cells", even others on the same channel, and still see my device connected 
> to the AP I started on in the UniFi control panel until it completely loses 
> signal. 
> 
> 
> 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 
> queues up everything else until it either succeeds or possibly times out. 
> 
> 
> 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 and 
> 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 testing 
> with had a few tablets that needed to be on most of the time, but they 
> switched to Windows devices for unrelated reasons and basically eliminated 
> the problem. 
> 
> 
> 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 it 
> hasn't really been an issue. 
> 
> 
> --- 
> 
> 
> 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 
> access points than you would with another solution, but they're generally a 
> fraction 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 
> elsewhere. 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. 
> 
> 
> On Thu, Jan 29, 2015 at 10:53 AM, Mike Hammett < na...@ics-il.net > wrote: 
> 
> 
> Did you figure out why it was dropping out? All of it dropping out? Just some 
> APs dropping? Just some users dropping? 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> - 
> Mike Hammett 
> Intelligent Computing Solutions 
> http://www.ics-il.com 
> 
> 
> 
> - Original Message - 
> 
> From: "Paul Stewart" < p...@paulstewart.org > 
> To: "Mike Hammett" < na...@ics-il.net >, nanog@nanog.org 
> Sent: Thursday, January 29, 2015 8:34:46 AM 
> Subject: RE: Recommended wireless AP for 400 users office 
> 
> 
> 
> 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 u

Re: Recommended wireless AP for 400 users office

[Mike Hammett]

They should have never made the LR models. Louder radios don't work with 
today's mobile clients. It's antenna or nothing. 

The pricing is old as well. It hasn't changed since it debuted. 

A platform that manages handoffs would mitigate that issue. Mobile devices 
really suck in that regard. 




- 
Mike Hammett 
Intelligent Computing Solutions 
http://www.ics-il.com 



- Original Message -

From: "Sean Harlow"  
To: "Mike Hammett"  
Cc: nanog@nanog.org 
Sent: Thursday, January 29, 2015 1:50:20 PM 
Subject: Re: Recommended wireless AP for 400 users office 


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 Android. 



Long story short Android really wants to hang on to a WiFi signal as long as it 
can and does not seemingly scan for other signals when connected. If it sees 
even the slightest bit of a signal from the access point it's connected to it 
doesn't give it up. I can replicate this behavior on every Android device I 
have where I can walk across a building and pass through 2-3 other "cells", 
even others on the same channel, and still see my device connected to the AP I 
started on in the UniFi control panel until it completely loses signal. 


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 queues 
up everything else until it either succeeds or possibly times out. 


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 and 
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 testing with had a few 
tablets that needed to be on most of the time, but they switched to Windows 
devices for unrelated reasons and basically eliminated the problem. 


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 it 
hasn't really been an issue. 


--- 


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 access 
points than you would with another solution, but they're generally a fraction 
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 elsewhere. 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. 


On Thu, Jan 29, 2015 at 10:53 AM, Mike Hammett < na...@ics-il.net > wrote: 


Did you figure out why it was dropping out? All of it dropping out? Just some 
APs dropping? Just some users dropping? 




- 
Mike Hammett 
Intelligent Computing Solutions 
http://www.ics-il.com 



- Original Message - 

From: "Paul Stewart" < p...@paulstewart.org > 
To: "Mike Hammett" < na...@ics-il.net >, nanog@nanog.org 
Sent: Thursday, January 29, 2015 8:34:46 AM 
Subject: RE: Recommended wireless AP for 400 users office 



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... 

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. 

Paul 


-Original Message- 
From: NANOG [mailto: nanog-boun...@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 

What problems have you had with UBNT? 

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. 




- 
Mike Hammett 
Intelligent Computing Solutions 
http://www.ics-il.com 



- Original Message - 

From: "Manuel Marín" < m...@transtelco.net > 
To: nanog@nanog.org 
Sent: Wednesday, January 28, 2015 11:06:39 PM 
Subject: Recommended wireless AP for 400 users office 

Dear nanog community 

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 Ruck

Re: Recommended wireless AP for 400 users office

[Sean Harlow]

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
Android.

Long story short Android really wants to hang on to a WiFi signal as long
as it can and does not seemingly scan for other signals when connected.  If
it sees even the slightest bit of a signal from the access point it's
connected to it doesn't give it up.  I can replicate this behavior on every
Android device I have where I can walk across a building and pass through
2-3 other "cells", even others on the same channel, and still see my device
connected to the AP I started on in the UniFi control panel until it
completely loses signal.

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
queues up everything else until it either succeeds or possibly times out.

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
and 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 testing with had a few tablets that needed to be on most of the time,
but they switched to Windows devices for unrelated reasons and basically
eliminated the problem.

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
it hasn't really been an issue.

---

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
access points than you would with another solution, but they're generally a
fraction 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 elsewhere.  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.

On Thu, Jan 29, 2015 at 10:53 AM, Mike Hammett  wrote:

> Did you figure out why it was dropping out? All of it dropping out? Just
> some APs dropping? Just some users dropping?
>
>
>
>
> -
> Mike Hammett
> Intelligent Computing Solutions
> http://www.ics-il.com
>
>
>
> - Original Message -
>
> From: "Paul Stewart" 
> To: "Mike Hammett" , nanog@nanog.org
> Sent: Thursday, January 29, 2015 8:34:46 AM
> Subject: RE: Recommended wireless AP for 400 users office
>
> 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...
>
> 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.
>
> Paul
>
>
> -----Original Message-
> From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-boun...@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
>
> What problems have you had with UBNT?
>
> 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.
>
>
>
>
> -
> Mike Hammett
> Intelligent Computing Solutions
> http://www.ics-il.com
>
>
>
> - Original Message -
>
> From: "Manuel Marín" 
> To: nanog@nanog.org
> Sent: Wednesday, January 28, 2015 11:06:39 PM
> Subject: Recommended wireless AP for 400 users office
>
> Dear nanog community
>
> 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.
>
> Thank you and have a great day
>
>
>
>

Re: Recommended wireless AP for 400 users office

[Mike Lyon]

If all goes well, my Mimosa gear should be arriving this week :)

-Mike


On Thu, Jan 29, 2015 at 10:12 AM, Clay Fiske  wrote:

> Anyone played with/deployed any Mimosa gear? I’m not a “real” wireless guy
> so I’ll spare folks any armchair speculation. Just looks interesting to me.
>
> -c
>
>
> On Jan 29, 2015, at 8:34 AM, Steven Miano  wrote:
>
> > Another hat that I haven't seen thrown in the ring yet is Aerohive.
> >
> > They're great to work with - and the product is decent in terms of
> > scalability across geographically locations with management being hosted
> by
> > them, or you - as/when needed.
> >
> > Huge list of features and capabilities (from having silly fun with the
> LEDs
> > on the units, to 802.1x and WIPS/etc).
> >
> > On Thu, Jan 29, 2015 at 11:22 AM, Paul Nash 
> wrote:
> >
> >> 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 
> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> 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.
> >>>
> >>> 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.
> >>>
> >>> They cost more, but you get what you pay for.
> >>>
> >>> On Thu Jan 29 2015 at 10:54:44 AM Mike Hammett 
> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> Did you figure out why it was dropping out? All of it dropping out?
> Just
> >>>> some APs dropping? Just some users dropping?
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> -
> >>>> Mike Hammett
> >>>> Intelligent Computing Solutions
> >>>> http://www.ics-il.com
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> - Original Message -
> >>>>
> >>>> From: "Paul Stewart" 
> >>>> To: "Mike Hammett" , nanog@nanog.org
> >>>> Sent: Thursday, January 29, 2015 8:34:46 AM
> >>>> Subject: RE: Recommended wireless AP for 400 users office
> >>>>
> >>>> 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...
> >>>>
> >>>> 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.
> >>>>
> >>>> Paul
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> -Original Message-
> >>>> From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-boun...@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
> >>>>
> >>>> What problems have you had with UBNT?
> >>>>
> >>>> 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.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> -
> >>>> Mike Hammett
> >>>> Intelligent Computing Solutions
> >>>> http://www.ics-il.com
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> - Original Message -
> >>>>
> >>>> From: "Manuel Marín" 
> >>>> To: nanog@nanog.org
> >>>> Sent: Wednesday, January 28, 2015 11:06:39 PM
> >>>> Subject: Recommended wireless AP for 400 users office
> >>>>
> >>>> Dear nanog community
> >>>>
> >>>> 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.
> >>>>
> >>>> Thank you and have a great day
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
>
>


-- 
Mike Lyon
408-621-4826
mike.l...@gmail.com

http://www.linkedin.com/in/mlyon

Re: Recommended wireless AP for 400 users office

[Mike Hammett]

Thus far only available for backhaul, but they're looking pretty good from the 
reports I've read. 

There will be a webinar in about an hour. http://mimosa.co/webinar 




- 
Mike Hammett 
Intelligent Computing Solutions 
http://www.ics-il.com 



- Original Message -

From: "Clay Fiske"  
To: "NANOG"  
Sent: Thursday, January 29, 2015 12:12:23 PM 
Subject: Re: Recommended wireless AP for 400 users office 

Anyone played with/deployed any Mimosa gear? I’m not a “real” wireless guy so 
I’ll spare folks any armchair speculation. Just looks interesting to me. 

-c 


On Jan 29, 2015, at 8:34 AM, Steven Miano  wrote: 

> Another hat that I haven't seen thrown in the ring yet is Aerohive. 
> 
> They're great to work with - and the product is decent in terms of 
> scalability across geographically locations with management being hosted by 
> them, or you - as/when needed. 
> 
> Huge list of features and capabilities (from having silly fun with the LEDs 
> on the units, to 802.1x and WIPS/etc). 
> 
> On Thu, Jan 29, 2015 at 11:22 AM, Paul Nash  wrote: 
> 
>> 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  wrote: 
>>> 
>>> 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. 
>>> 
>>> 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. 
>>> 
>>> They cost more, but you get what you pay for. 
>>> 
>>> On Thu Jan 29 2015 at 10:54:44 AM Mike Hammett  wrote: 
>>> 
>>>> Did you figure out why it was dropping out? All of it dropping out? Just 
>>>> some APs dropping? Just some users dropping? 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> - 
>>>> Mike Hammett 
>>>> Intelligent Computing Solutions 
>>>> http://www.ics-il.com 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> - Original Message - 
>>>> 
>>>> From: "Paul Stewart"  
>>>> To: "Mike Hammett" , nanog@nanog.org 
>>>> Sent: Thursday, January 29, 2015 8:34:46 AM 
>>>> Subject: RE: Recommended wireless AP for 400 users office 
>>>> 
>>>> 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... 
>>>> 
>>>> 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. 
>>>> 
>>>> Paul 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> -Original Message- 
>>>> From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-boun...@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 
>>>> 
>>>> What problems have you had with UBNT? 
>>>> 
>>>> 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. 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> - 
>>>> Mike Hammett 
>>>> Intelligent Computing Solutions 
>>>> http://www.ics-il.com 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> - Original Message - 
>>>> 
>>>> From: "Manuel Marín"  
>>>> To: nanog@nanog.org 
>>>> Sent: Wednesday, January 28, 2015 11:06:39 PM 
>>>> Subject: Recommended wireless AP for 400 users office 
>>>> 
>>>> Dear nanog community 
>>>> 
>>>> 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. 
>>>> 
>>>> Thank you and have a great day 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>> 
>> 
> 
> 

Re: Recommended wireless AP for 400 users office

[Clay Fiske]

Anyone played with/deployed any Mimosa gear? I’m not a “real” wireless guy so 
I’ll spare folks any armchair speculation. Just looks interesting to me.

-c


On Jan 29, 2015, at 8:34 AM, Steven Miano  wrote:

> Another hat that I haven't seen thrown in the ring yet is Aerohive.
> 
> They're great to work with - and the product is decent in terms of
> scalability across geographically locations with management being hosted by
> them, or you - as/when needed.
> 
> Huge list of features and capabilities (from having silly fun with the LEDs
> on the units, to 802.1x and WIPS/etc).
> 
> On Thu, Jan 29, 2015 at 11:22 AM, Paul Nash  wrote:
> 
>> 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  wrote:
>>> 
>>> 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.
>>> 
>>> 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.
>>> 
>>> They cost more, but you get what you pay for.
>>> 
>>> On Thu Jan 29 2015 at 10:54:44 AM Mike Hammett  wrote:
>>> 
>>>> Did you figure out why it was dropping out? All of it dropping out? Just
>>>> some APs dropping? Just some users dropping?
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> -
>>>> Mike Hammett
>>>> Intelligent Computing Solutions
>>>> http://www.ics-il.com
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> - Original Message -
>>>> 
>>>> From: "Paul Stewart" 
>>>> To: "Mike Hammett" , nanog@nanog.org
>>>> Sent: Thursday, January 29, 2015 8:34:46 AM
>>>> Subject: RE: Recommended wireless AP for 400 users office
>>>> 
>>>> 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...
>>>> 
>>>> 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.
>>>> 
>>>> Paul
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> -Original Message-
>>>> From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-boun...@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
>>>> 
>>>> What problems have you had with UBNT?
>>>> 
>>>> 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.
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> -
>>>> Mike Hammett
>>>> Intelligent Computing Solutions
>>>> http://www.ics-il.com
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> - Original Message -
>>>> 
>>>> From: "Manuel Marín" 
>>>> To: nanog@nanog.org
>>>> Sent: Wednesday, January 28, 2015 11:06:39 PM
>>>> Subject: Recommended wireless AP for 400 users office
>>>> 
>>>> Dear nanog community
>>>> 
>>>> 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.
>>>> 
>>>> Thank you and have a great day
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>> 
>> 
> 
> 

Re: Recommended wireless AP for 400 users office

[Seth Mos]

Op 29 jan. 2015, om 17:18 heeft Tyler Mills  het volgende 
geschreven:

> 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.

It’s meh, but it’s good enough. Getting wifi „right” is really hard considering 
the sheer amount of different hardware, network stacks etc.

> 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.

That’s not true in my experience.

Fyi, I just setup a new site here using the Unifi Pro AP’s and I’ve been doing 
the reverse. Management is untagged, and tag all the traffic VLANs. That works 
just fine, have been doing that since 2013.

The networks are all plain WPA2, but most devices on our wifi seem fine roaming 
throughout the building without dropping much traffic. The management tool is 
quite allright, more so when considering the prices and the lack of a 
subscription model.

Really, the subscription models offered for some of the other gear is off the 
wall.

The Unifi gear is by no means bad, but it’s still way better then manually 
configuring wireless APs without any management. It’s still far better then the 
3Com/H3C gear I had before that was 3 times as expensive and still lacks proper 
english for the management.

We have a site with 26 APs, and a new one with 8. You can now manage multiple 
sites from the same server too.

> 
> They cost more, but you get what you pay for.

Yup!

Cheers,

Seth

RE: Recommended wireless AP for 400 users office

[Paul Stewart]

Open – it was just for a trade show setting .. few years ago ….

 

Thanks,

Paul

 

 

From: Mike Lyon [mailto:mike.l...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Thursday, January 29, 2015 12:07 PM
To: Paul Stewart
Cc: Mike Hammett; NANOG
Subject: RE: Recommended wireless AP for 400 users office

 

Just curious, were you using WPA2 or were the networks open?

Thanks,
Mike

On Jan 29, 2015 8:56 AM, "Paul Stewart" mailto:p...@paulstewart.org> > wrote:

It was all users getting randomly disconnected ... the AP's stayed online but 
the traffic would completely halt for 15-30 seconds at a time.  Their 
association with the AP would stay in tact 

Paul


-Original Message-
From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-boun...@nanog.org <mailto:nanog-boun...@nanog.org> ] 
On Behalf Of Mike Hammett
Sent: Thursday, January 29, 2015 10:53 AM
To: nanog@nanog.org <mailto:nanog@nanog.org> 
Subject: Re: Recommended wireless AP for 400 users office

Did you figure out why it was dropping out? All of it dropping out? Just some 
APs dropping? Just some users dropping?




-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
http://www.ics-il.com



- Original Message -

From: "Paul Stewart" mailto:p...@paulstewart.org> >
To: "Mike Hammett" mailto:na...@ics-il.net> >, 
nanog@nanog.org <mailto:nanog@nanog.org> 
Sent: Thursday, January 29, 2015 8:34:46 AM
Subject: RE: Recommended wireless AP for 400 users office

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...

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.

Paul


-Original Message-
From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-boun...@nanog.org <mailto:nanog-boun...@nanog.org> ] 
On Behalf Of Mike Hammett
Sent: Thursday, January 29, 2015 8:23 AM
To: nanog@nanog.org <mailto:nanog@nanog.org> 
Subject: Re: Recommended wireless AP for 400 users office

What problems have you had with UBNT?

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.




-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
http://www.ics-il.com



- Original Message -

From: "Manuel Marín" mailto:m...@transtelco.net> >
To: nanog@nanog.org <mailto:nanog@nanog.org> 
Sent: Wednesday, January 28, 2015 11:06:39 PM
Subject: Recommended wireless AP for 400 users office

Dear nanog community

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.

Thank you and have a great day

Re: Recommended wireless AP for 400 users office

[Jared Mauch]

UBNT just fixed some of this in their latest firmware:

http://community.ubnt.com/t5/UniFi-Beta-Blog/UniFi-3-2-10-GA-is-Released-for-Soaking/ba-p/1157252

I’m not saying the UniFi stuff doesn’t leave something to be desired, but in a 
small deployments i’ve had good luck with them.

- Jared

> On Jan 29, 2015, at 12:07 PM, Mike Lyon  wrote:
> 
> Just curious, were you using WPA2 or were the networks open?
> 
> Thanks,
> Mike
> On Jan 29, 2015 8:56 AM, "Paul Stewart"  wrote:
> 
>> It was all users getting randomly disconnected ... the AP's stayed online
>> but the traffic would completely halt for 15-30 seconds at a time.  Their
>> association with the AP would stay in tact 
>> 
>> Paul
>> 
>> 
>> -Original Message-
>> From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-boun...@nanog.org] On Behalf Of Mike Hammett
>> Sent: Thursday, January 29, 2015 10:53 AM
>> To: nanog@nanog.org
>> Subject: Re: Recommended wireless AP for 400 users office
>> 
>> Did you figure out why it was dropping out? All of it dropping out? Just
>> some APs dropping? Just some users dropping?
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> -
>> Mike Hammett
>> Intelligent Computing Solutions
>> http://www.ics-il.com
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> - Original Message -
>> 
>> From: "Paul Stewart" 
>> To: "Mike Hammett" , nanog@nanog.org
>> Sent: Thursday, January 29, 2015 8:34:46 AM
>> Subject: RE: Recommended wireless AP for 400 users office
>> 
>> 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...
>> 
>> 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.
>> 
>> Paul
>> 
>> 
>> -Original Message-
>> From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-boun...@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
>> 
>> What problems have you had with UBNT?
>> 
>> 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.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> -
>> Mike Hammett
>> Intelligent Computing Solutions
>> http://www.ics-il.com
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> - Original Message -
>> 
>> From: "Manuel Marín" 
>> To: nanog@nanog.org
>> Sent: Wednesday, January 28, 2015 11:06:39 PM
>> Subject: Recommended wireless AP for 400 users office
>> 
>> Dear nanog community
>> 
>> 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.
>> 
>> Thank you and have a great day
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 

RE: Recommended wireless AP for 400 users office

[Mike Lyon]

Just curious, were you using WPA2 or were the networks open?

Thanks,
Mike
On Jan 29, 2015 8:56 AM, "Paul Stewart"  wrote:

> It was all users getting randomly disconnected ... the AP's stayed online
> but the traffic would completely halt for 15-30 seconds at a time.  Their
> association with the AP would stay in tact 
>
> Paul
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-boun...@nanog.org] On Behalf Of Mike Hammett
> Sent: Thursday, January 29, 2015 10:53 AM
> To: nanog@nanog.org
> Subject: Re: Recommended wireless AP for 400 users office
>
> Did you figure out why it was dropping out? All of it dropping out? Just
> some APs dropping? Just some users dropping?
>
>
>
>
> -
> Mike Hammett
> Intelligent Computing Solutions
> http://www.ics-il.com
>
>
>
> - Original Message -
>
> From: "Paul Stewart" 
> To: "Mike Hammett" , nanog@nanog.org
> Sent: Thursday, January 29, 2015 8:34:46 AM
> Subject: RE: Recommended wireless AP for 400 users office
>
> 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...
>
> 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.
>
> Paul
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-boun...@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
>
> What problems have you had with UBNT?
>
> 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.
>
>
>
>
> -
> Mike Hammett
> Intelligent Computing Solutions
> http://www.ics-il.com
>
>
>
> - Original Message -
>
> From: "Manuel Marín" 
> To: nanog@nanog.org
> Sent: Wednesday, January 28, 2015 11:06:39 PM
> Subject: Recommended wireless AP for 400 users office
>
> Dear nanog community
>
> 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.
>
> Thank you and have a great day
>
>
>
>
>

Re: Recommended wireless AP for 400 users office

[Mike Hammett]

UniFi, Xirrus, Ruckus. Only WiFi I would deploy anywhere (well, aside from 
residential). 




- 
Mike Hammett 
Intelligent Computing Solutions 
http://www.ics-il.com 



- Original Message -

From: "Jermaine Edwards"  
To: "Paul Stewart" , "Mike Hammett" , 
nanog@nanog.org 
Sent: Thursday, January 29, 2015 11:02:20 AM 
Subject: RE: Recommended wireless AP for 400 users office 

Ruckus should work fine for you. You need to have a controller and need a good 
RF plan but as far as capacity, throughput, roaming etc they are really solid. 
Of course the best is Cisco but if you can't afford them Ruckus is the way to 
go. I use them in small and very large convention centers and hotels with no 
reservation. 

jle 

-Original Message- 
From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-boun...@nanog.org] On Behalf Of Paul Stewart 
Sent: Thursday, January 29, 2015 11:55 
To: 'Mike Hammett'; nanog@nanog.org 
Subject: RE: Recommended wireless AP for 400 users office 

It was all users getting randomly disconnected ... the AP's stayed online but 
the traffic would completely halt for 15-30 seconds at a time. Their 
association with the AP would stay in tact  

Paul 


-Original Message- 
From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-boun...@nanog.org] On Behalf Of Mike Hammett 
Sent: Thursday, January 29, 2015 10:53 AM 
To: nanog@nanog.org 
Subject: Re: Recommended wireless AP for 400 users office 

Did you figure out why it was dropping out? All of it dropping out? Just some 
APs dropping? Just some users dropping? 




- 
Mike Hammett 
Intelligent Computing Solutions 
http://www.ics-il.com 



- Original Message - 

From: "Paul Stewart"  
To: "Mike Hammett" , nanog@nanog.org 
Sent: Thursday, January 29, 2015 8:34:46 AM 
Subject: RE: Recommended wireless AP for 400 users office 

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... 

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. 

Paul 


-Original Message- 
From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-boun...@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 

What problems have you had with UBNT? 

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. 




- 
Mike Hammett 
Intelligent Computing Solutions 
http://www.ics-il.com 



- Original Message - 

From: "Manuel Marín"  
To: nanog@nanog.org 
Sent: Wednesday, January 28, 2015 11:06:39 PM 
Subject: Recommended wireless AP for 400 users office 

Dear nanog community 

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. 

Thank you and have a great day 

RE: Recommended wireless AP for 400 users office

[Paul Stewart]

It was all users getting randomly disconnected ... the AP's stayed online but 
the traffic would completely halt for 15-30 seconds at a time.  Their 
association with the AP would stay in tact 

Paul


-Original Message-
From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-boun...@nanog.org] On Behalf Of Mike Hammett
Sent: Thursday, January 29, 2015 10:53 AM
To: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Re: Recommended wireless AP for 400 users office

Did you figure out why it was dropping out? All of it dropping out? Just some 
APs dropping? Just some users dropping? 




- 
Mike Hammett 
Intelligent Computing Solutions 
http://www.ics-il.com 



- Original Message -

From: "Paul Stewart"  
To: "Mike Hammett" , nanog@nanog.org 
Sent: Thursday, January 29, 2015 8:34:46 AM 
Subject: RE: Recommended wireless AP for 400 users office 

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... 

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. 

Paul 


-Original Message- 
From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-boun...@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 

What problems have you had with UBNT? 

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. 




- 
Mike Hammett 
Intelligent Computing Solutions 
http://www.ics-il.com 



- Original Message - 

From: "Manuel Marín"  
To: nanog@nanog.org 
Sent: Wednesday, January 28, 2015 11:06:39 PM 
Subject: Recommended wireless AP for 400 users office 

Dear nanog community 

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. 

Thank you and have a great day 

Re: Recommended wireless AP for 400 users office

[Steven Miano]

Another hat that I haven't seen thrown in the ring yet is Aerohive.

They're great to work with - and the product is decent in terms of
scalability across geographically locations with management being hosted by
them, or you - as/when needed.

Huge list of features and capabilities (from having silly fun with the LEDs
on the units, to 802.1x and WIPS/etc).

On Thu, Jan 29, 2015 at 11:22 AM, Paul Nash  wrote:

> 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  wrote:
> >
> > 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.
> >
> > 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.
> >
> > They cost more, but you get what you pay for.
> >
> > On Thu Jan 29 2015 at 10:54:44 AM Mike Hammett  wrote:
> >
> >> Did you figure out why it was dropping out? All of it dropping out? Just
> >> some APs dropping? Just some users dropping?
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> -
> >> Mike Hammett
> >> Intelligent Computing Solutions
> >> http://www.ics-il.com
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> - Original Message -
> >>
> >> From: "Paul Stewart" 
> >> To: "Mike Hammett" , nanog@nanog.org
> >> Sent: Thursday, January 29, 2015 8:34:46 AM
> >> Subject: RE: Recommended wireless AP for 400 users office
> >>
> >> 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...
> >>
> >> 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.
> >>
> >> Paul
> >>
> >>
> >> -Original Message-
> >> From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-boun...@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
> >>
> >> What problems have you had with UBNT?
> >>
> >> 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.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> -
> >> Mike Hammett
> >> Intelligent Computing Solutions
> >> http://www.ics-il.com
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> - Original Message -
> >>
> >> From: "Manuel Marín" 
> >> To: nanog@nanog.org
> >> Sent: Wednesday, January 28, 2015 11:06:39 PM
> >> Subject: Recommended wireless AP for 400 users office
> >>
> >> Dear nanog community
> >>
> >> 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.
> >>
> >> Thank you and have a great day
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
>
>

Re: Recommended wireless AP for 400 users office

[Paul Nash]

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  wrote:
> 
> 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.
> 
> 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.
> 
> They cost more, but you get what you pay for.
> 
> On Thu Jan 29 2015 at 10:54:44 AM Mike Hammett  wrote:
> 
>> Did you figure out why it was dropping out? All of it dropping out? Just
>> some APs dropping? Just some users dropping?
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> -
>> Mike Hammett
>> Intelligent Computing Solutions
>> http://www.ics-il.com
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> - Original Message -----
>> 
>> From: "Paul Stewart" 
>> To: "Mike Hammett" , nanog@nanog.org
>> Sent: Thursday, January 29, 2015 8:34:46 AM
>> Subject: RE: Recommended wireless AP for 400 users office
>> 
>> 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...
>> 
>> 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.
>> 
>> Paul
>> 
>> 
>> -Original Message-
>> From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-boun...@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
>> 
>> What problems have you had with UBNT?
>> 
>> 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.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> -
>> Mike Hammett
>> Intelligent Computing Solutions
>> http://www.ics-il.com
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> - Original Message -
>> 
>> From: "Manuel Marín" 
>> To: nanog@nanog.org
>> Sent: Wednesday, January 28, 2015 11:06:39 PM
>> Subject: Recommended wireless AP for 400 users office
>> 
>> Dear nanog community
>> 
>> 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.
>> 
>> Thank you and have a great day
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 

Re: Recommended wireless AP for 400 users office

[Mike Hammett]

That would be a nice feature to have and I have been on them about that. 




- 
Mike Hammett 
Intelligent Computing Solutions 
http://www.ics-il.com 



- Original Message -

From: "Tyler Mills"  
To: "Mike Hammett" , nanog@nanog.org 
Sent: Thursday, January 29, 2015 10:18:31 AM 
Subject: Re: Recommended wireless AP for 400 users office 

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. 


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. 


They cost more, but you get what you pay for. 


On Thu Jan 29 2015 at 10:54:44 AM Mike Hammett < na...@ics-il.net > wrote: 


Did you figure out why it was dropping out? All of it dropping out? Just some 
APs dropping? Just some users dropping? 




- 
Mike Hammett 
Intelligent Computing Solutions 
http://www.ics-il.com 



- Original Message - 

From: "Paul Stewart" < p...@paulstewart.org > 
To: "Mike Hammett" < na...@ics-il.net >, nanog@nanog.org 
Sent: Thursday, January 29, 2015 8:34:46 AM 
Subject: RE: Recommended wireless AP for 400 users office 

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... 

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. 

Paul 


-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 

What problems have you had with UBNT? 

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. 




- 
Mike Hammett 
Intelligent Computing Solutions 
http://www.ics-il.com 



- Original Message - 

From: "Manuel Marín" < m...@transtelco.net > 
To: nanog@nanog.org 
Sent: Wednesday, January 28, 2015 11:06:39 PM 
Subject: Recommended wireless AP for 400 users office 

Dear nanog community 

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. 

Thank you and have a great day 

Re: Recommended wireless AP for 400 users office

[Tyler Mills]

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.

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.

They cost more, but you get what you pay for.

On Thu Jan 29 2015 at 10:54:44 AM Mike Hammett  wrote:

> Did you figure out why it was dropping out? All of it dropping out? Just
> some APs dropping? Just some users dropping?
>
>
>
>
> -
> Mike Hammett
> Intelligent Computing Solutions
> http://www.ics-il.com
>
>
>
> - Original Message -
>
> From: "Paul Stewart" 
> To: "Mike Hammett" , nanog@nanog.org
> Sent: Thursday, January 29, 2015 8:34:46 AM
> Subject: RE: Recommended wireless AP for 400 users office
>
> 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...
>
> 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.
>
> Paul
>
>
> -Original Message-----
> From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-boun...@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
>
> What problems have you had with UBNT?
>
> 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.
>
>
>
>
> -
> Mike Hammett
> Intelligent Computing Solutions
> http://www.ics-il.com
>
>
>
> - Original Message -
>
> From: "Manuel Marín" 
> To: nanog@nanog.org
> Sent: Wednesday, January 28, 2015 11:06:39 PM
> Subject: Recommended wireless AP for 400 users office
>
> Dear nanog community
>
> 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.
>
> Thank you and have a great day
>
>
>
>

Re: Recommended wireless AP for 400 users office

[Tiago Felipe]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256

+1 Xirrus

On 01/29/2015 08:17 AM, Paul Nash wrote:
> Make that +2.  I am halfway through an install for about 800 users
> spread through a multi-story building with around 100 R700 access
> points and ZD 3000.  Once you understand the basics, it is trivial
> to set up, easy to manage, performance is superb.
> 
> Using RADIUS auth you can assign different groups of users to
> different VLANs (all on a single SSID), just different
> username/password to connect.
> 
> Signal penetration is the best that I have ever seen, and makes the
> Cisco Aironet enterprise stuff look really really silly.
> 
> paul
> 
>> On Jan 29, 2015, at 4:46 AM, Eduardo Schoedler
>>  wrote:
>> 
>> +1 Ruckus+ZoneDirector
>> 
>> -- Eduardo
>> 
>> Em quinta-feira, 29 de janeiro de 2015, Tyler Mills
>>  escreveu:
>> 
>>> Have had a lot of experience with Ruckus(and Unifi
>>> unfortunately).  The Ruckus platform is one of the best. If you
>>> will be responsible for supporting the deployment, it will save
>>> you a lot of frustration when compared with UBNT.
>>> 
>>> On Thu Jan 29 2015 at 12:18:54 AM Mike Lyon
>>> > wrote:
>>> 
 Check out Xirrus On Jan 28, 2015 9:08 PM, "Manuel Marín"
 >> > wrote:
 
> Dear nanog community
> 
> 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.
> 
> Thank you and have a great day
> 
 
>>> 
>> 
>> 
>> -- Eduardo Schoedler
> 

-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v2
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=yNtF
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

Re: Recommended wireless AP for 400 users office

[Mike Hammett]

Did you figure out why it was dropping out? All of it dropping out? Just some 
APs dropping? Just some users dropping? 




- 
Mike Hammett 
Intelligent Computing Solutions 
http://www.ics-il.com 



- Original Message -

From: "Paul Stewart"  
To: "Mike Hammett" , nanog@nanog.org 
Sent: Thursday, January 29, 2015 8:34:46 AM 
Subject: RE: Recommended wireless AP for 400 users office 

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... 

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. 

Paul 


-Original Message- 
From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-boun...@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 

What problems have you had with UBNT? 

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. 




- 
Mike Hammett 
Intelligent Computing Solutions 
http://www.ics-il.com 



- Original Message - 

From: "Manuel Marín"  
To: nanog@nanog.org 
Sent: Wednesday, January 28, 2015 11:06:39 PM 
Subject: Recommended wireless AP for 400 users office 

Dear nanog community 

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. 

Thank you and have a great day 

RE: Recommended wireless AP for 400 users office

[Slade, Ian]

I've setup at several hotel conference event/trade-shows and office networks 
with Aruba Networks and it has worked well with multiple access-points getting 
great coverage and having their adaptive strength features.



Ian Slade 
Sr. Network Engineer | SAIC ITO - Network & Security Solutions
ian.sl...@saic.com  | 703.676.5234

-Original Message-
From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-boun...@nanog.org] On Behalf Of Aaron Smith
Sent: Thursday, January 29, 2015 7:13 AM
To: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Re: Recommended wireless AP for 400 users office

Aruba Networks is also good for wireless.  I support ~2000 users spread out 
over 50+ buildings on a small college campus.  Lots of add on options like 
Clearpass for NAC and guest provisioning and Airwave for historical data and RF 
planning.

Good Luck!
Aaron Smith

- Original Message -
From: "Manuel Marín" 
To: nanog@nanog.org
Sent: Thursday, January 29, 2015 12:06:39 AM
Subject: Recommended wireless AP for 400 users office

Dear nanog community

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.

Thank you and have a great day

RE: Recommended wireless AP for 400 users office

[Paul Stewart]

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...

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.

Paul


-Original Message-
From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-boun...@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

What problems have you had with UBNT? 

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. 




-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
http://www.ics-il.com 



- Original Message -

From: "Manuel Marín" 
To: nanog@nanog.org
Sent: Wednesday, January 28, 2015 11:06:39 PM
Subject: Recommended wireless AP for 400 users office 

Dear nanog community 

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. 

Thank you and have a great day 

Re: Recommended wireless AP for 400 users office

[Ray Soucy]

Yeah, most people ignore ZH.  UBNT marketing hyped it up quite a bit,
and for a residential deployment it can work OK, but if you have any
kind of background in wireless you'll understand that it goes out the
window for a non-trivial deployment due to the requirement of all APs
sharing a channel.

It's too bad they don't support 802.11r (fast roaming) and 802.11k
(radio resource management).


On Thu, Jan 29, 2015 at 8:22 AM, Mike Hammett  wrote:
> What problems have you had with UBNT?
>
> 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.
>
>
>
>
> -
> Mike Hammett
> Intelligent Computing Solutions
> http://www.ics-il.com
>
>
>
> - Original Message -
>
> From: "Manuel Marín" 
> To: nanog@nanog.org
> Sent: Wednesday, January 28, 2015 11:06:39 PM
> Subject: Recommended wireless AP for 400 users office
>
> Dear nanog community
>
> 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.
>
> Thank you and have a great day
>



-- 
Ray Patrick Soucy
Network Engineer
University of Maine System

T: 207-561-3526
F: 207-561-3531

MaineREN, Maine's Research and Education Network
www.maineren.net

Re: Recommended wireless AP for 400 users office

[Mike Hammett]

What problems have you had with UBNT? 

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. 




- 
Mike Hammett 
Intelligent Computing Solutions 
http://www.ics-il.com 



- Original Message -

From: "Manuel Marín"  
To: nanog@nanog.org 
Sent: Wednesday, January 28, 2015 11:06:39 PM 
Subject: Recommended wireless AP for 400 users office 

Dear nanog community 

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. 

Thank you and have a great day 

Re: Recommended wireless AP for 400 users office

[Ray Soucy]

Just curious.  What kind of problems have you seen with the Ubiquiti solution?

I've had a few units in for testing a potential managed wireless for
rural libraries and so far they've been pretty rock solid for the
price.  My biggest critique is that they don't support many features
and are fairly static, so you really need to map out your deployment
and handle power level and channel selection manually.  That said the
test deployments I have going are very, very small.

On Thu, Jan 29, 2015 at 1:19 AM, Tyler Mills  wrote:
> Have had a lot of experience with Ruckus(and Unifi unfortunately).  The
> Ruckus platform is one of the best. If you will be responsible for
> supporting the deployment, it will save you a lot of frustration when
> compared with UBNT.
>
> On Thu Jan 29 2015 at 12:18:54 AM Mike Lyon  wrote:
>
>> Check out Xirrus
>> On Jan 28, 2015 9:08 PM, "Manuel Marín"  wrote:
>>
>> > Dear nanog community
>> >
>> > 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.
>> >
>> > Thank you and have a great day
>> >
>>



-- 
Ray Patrick Soucy
Network Engineer
University of Maine System

T: 207-561-3526
F: 207-561-3531

MaineREN, Maine's Research and Education Network
www.maineren.net

Re: Recommended wireless AP for 400 users office

[Aaron Smith]

Aruba Networks is also good for wireless.  I support ~2000 users spread out 
over 50+ buildings on a small college campus.  Lots of add on options like 
Clearpass for NAC and guest provisioning and Airwave for historical data and RF 
planning.

Good Luck!
Aaron Smith

- Original Message -
From: "Manuel Marín" 
To: nanog@nanog.org
Sent: Thursday, January 29, 2015 12:06:39 AM
Subject: Recommended wireless AP for 400 users office

Dear nanog community

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.

Thank you and have a great day

Re: Recommended wireless AP for 400 users office

[Paul Nash]

Make that +2.  I am halfway through an install for about 800 users spread 
through a multi-story building with around 100 R700 access points and ZD 3000.  
Once you understand the basics, it is trivial to set up, easy to manage, 
performance is superb.

Using RADIUS auth you can assign different groups of users to different VLANs 
(all on a single SSID), just different username/password to connect.

Signal penetration is the best that I have ever seen, and makes the Cisco 
Aironet enterprise stuff look really really silly.

paul

> On Jan 29, 2015, at 4:46 AM, Eduardo Schoedler  wrote:
> 
> +1 Ruckus+ZoneDirector
> 
> --
> Eduardo
> 
> Em quinta-feira, 29 de janeiro de 2015, Tyler Mills 
> escreveu:
> 
>> Have had a lot of experience with Ruckus(and Unifi unfortunately).  The
>> Ruckus platform is one of the best. If you will be responsible for
>> supporting the deployment, it will save you a lot of frustration when
>> compared with UBNT.
>> 
>> On Thu Jan 29 2015 at 12:18:54 AM Mike Lyon > > wrote:
>> 
>>> Check out Xirrus
>>> On Jan 28, 2015 9:08 PM, "Manuel Marín" > > wrote:
>>> 
 Dear nanog community
 
 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.
 
 Thank you and have a great day
 
>>> 
>> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Eduardo Schoedler

Re: Recommended wireless AP for 400 users office

[Chris Knipe]

Mikrotik's also a rather good choice for the Wireless AP side...



On Thu, Jan 29, 2015 at 11:46 AM, Eduardo Schoedler 
wrote:

> +1 Ruckus+ZoneDirector
>
> --
> Eduardo
>
> Em quinta-feira, 29 de janeiro de 2015, Tyler Mills 
> escreveu:
>
> > Have had a lot of experience with Ruckus(and Unifi unfortunately).  The
> > Ruckus platform is one of the best. If you will be responsible for
> > supporting the deployment, it will save you a lot of frustration when
> > compared with UBNT.
> >
> > On Thu Jan 29 2015 at 12:18:54 AM Mike Lyon  > > wrote:
> >
> > > Check out Xirrus
> > > On Jan 28, 2015 9:08 PM, "Manuel Marín"  > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Dear nanog community
> > > >
> > > > 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.
> > > >
> > > > Thank you and have a great day
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
>
> --
> Eduardo Schoedler
>



-- 

Regards,
Chris Knipe

Re: Recommended wireless AP for 400 users office

[Eduardo Schoedler]

+1 Ruckus+ZoneDirector

--
Eduardo

Em quinta-feira, 29 de janeiro de 2015, Tyler Mills 
escreveu:

> Have had a lot of experience with Ruckus(and Unifi unfortunately).  The
> Ruckus platform is one of the best. If you will be responsible for
> supporting the deployment, it will save you a lot of frustration when
> compared with UBNT.
>
> On Thu Jan 29 2015 at 12:18:54 AM Mike Lyon  > wrote:
>
> > Check out Xirrus
> > On Jan 28, 2015 9:08 PM, "Manuel Marín"  > wrote:
> >
> > > Dear nanog community
> > >
> > > 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.
> > >
> > > Thank you and have a great day
> > >
> >
>


-- 
Eduardo Schoedler

Re: Recommended wireless AP for 400 users office

[Tyler Mills]

Have had a lot of experience with Ruckus(and Unifi unfortunately).  The
Ruckus platform is one of the best. If you will be responsible for
supporting the deployment, it will save you a lot of frustration when
compared with UBNT.

On Thu Jan 29 2015 at 12:18:54 AM Mike Lyon  wrote:

> Check out Xirrus
> On Jan 28, 2015 9:08 PM, "Manuel Marín"  wrote:
>
> > Dear nanog community
> >
> > 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.
> >
> > Thank you and have a great day
> >
>

Re: Recommended wireless AP for 400 users office

[Mike Lyon]

Check out Xirrus
On Jan 28, 2015 9:08 PM, "Manuel Marín"  wrote:

> Dear nanog community
>
> 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.
>
> Thank you and have a great day
>