Lee,

All you need is a Smart-Phone with a HotSpot feature and a very large Data 
Quota.
(I assume that’s what schools thinking about switching to LTE have in mind!)
You can then do WPA2-PSK between your phone and your TV, your Game Console, ...

Mongolians don’t have wireless in the plains, but they do have goats ...

Philippe

Philippe Hanset
www.anyroam.net



> On May 13, 2015, at 10:59 AM, Lee H Badman <lhbad...@syr.edu> wrote:
> 
> Does the carrier guarantee capacity at this scale? And does it matter that no 
> game systems, TVs, etc can play any more? And… students have to use two 
> distinct technologies depending on where they are on campus, and probably 
> have to VPN in for certain operations from the dorm to campus?
>  
> This sounds like an absolute goat rope (I believe Mongolians have another 
> term for it).
>  
> Lee Badman
> Wireless/Network Architect
> ITS, Syracuse University
> 315.443.3003
> (Blog: http://wirednot.wordpress.com <http://wirednot.wordpress.com/>) 
>  
> From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv 
> [mailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU 
> <mailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU>]On Behalf Of Brian Helman
> Sent: Wednesday, May 13, 2015 9:25 AM
> To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU 
> <mailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU>
> Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] AW: [WIRELESS-LAN] To provide (wireless) service, 
> or not to provide (wireless) service...
>  
> I have a little more information to provide now.  I absolutely appreciate 
> that it will be extremely tempting to respond with biased opinions.  I don’t 
> think there is anything that can be said that I haven’t already expressed to 
> my team.  However, that will not help me write up my recommendation.  So that 
> being said, feel free to chime in with tangible reasons to do this or not…
>  
> Apparently, our president heard that some schools are investigating 
> purchasing bulk data contracts with mobile (“cellular”) carriers for data.  
> The idea is, we would stop providing 802.11g/n/ac wireless in the residence 
> halls and instead provide students with the abilities to register their 
> devices with the mobile carrier to use 4G/LTE data.  The University will pay 
> for this.
>  
> Pros:
> No wireless (802.11) to purchase, support
> Reduced POE requirements on switches
> No wireless driver/configuration mismatches problems to support
>  
> Cons:
> Is mobile wireless signal available everywhere inside the buildings?  Costs 
> to improve signal.
> What speeds are available (what range of speeds)?  Is it by user or aggregate?
> How is congestion handled?
> What devices – mobile phones only?  Hotspots to provide access to 
> non-cellular devices (e.g wifi-only tablets; laptops)
> More Ethernet ports needed for devices that previously depended on wireless
> What provider(s)?
> Support shifted from “device to institutional wifi” to “device to myfi” or 
> “devide to 3rd party”
> Cost per user, per GB?  
>  
> What else?
>  
> If you know of any institutions who have attempted this (I have heard MIT is 
> looking at it, but we aren’t MIT), please let me know.
>  
> By the way, the background here is .. we installed our 802.11n network ~5 
> years ago and haven’t had any commitment to fund it since.  So now we are 
> trying to deal with capacity (BYOD) issues that didn’t exist 5 years ago 
> while upgrading to 11ac.  Of course, it’s not a 1:1 swap of equipment since 
> we’d be migrating from 2.4GHz to 2.4+5GHz.  That puts the costs for forklift 
> upgrades pretty high (did I mention I’ve been unsuccessfully asking for 
> funding for 3 years?).
>  
> I believe this can all best be summarized with a simple .. Oy.
>  
> -Brian
>  
>  
>  
>  
>  
> From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv 
> [mailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU 
> <mailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU>]On Behalf Of Jerkan, Kristijan
> Sent: Sunday, May 03, 2015 12:34 PM
> To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU 
> <mailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU>
> Subject: [WIRELESS-LAN] AW: [WIRELESS-LAN] To provide (wireless) service, or 
> not to provide (wireless) service...
>  
> As a public institution in the EDU sector we always had a byod policy in our 
> dorm network, specifically including „anything You want to connect to the 
> port in Your room“.
>  
> Parameters: 
> -5k+ dorm rooms (1.8k the largest segment, 20 the smallest)
> -120km radius
> -at least one (mostly two) RJ45 port per room (cat5-7 to the switch, fiber 
> afterwards)
> -10/100MBit ports (deliberatly did not go for 1GBit at the edge)
> -no additional accounting, just dhcp with opt82
> -public ips behind reflexive acl (no shaping, etc.)
> -uplink via the federal research network
> -service neutral (whoever wants to can use a DSL provider also/instead and 
> may use the inhouse cable from their basement to their room for it)
> -one service number (fixed number, forwarded to five cellphones – whoever 
> picks up first wins)
> -managed by ~10 students (pro bono, but with a couple of incentives)
>  
> That beeing said, here are a few points why this works for us and is not 
> generally applicable:
> -people have to work together to archive common goals (state, local, 
> university and dorm administration – technical and administrative staff)
> -it does not take much to put a service neutral CAT cable into every room 
> while they are beeing built/renovated instead of a cheaper telephone cable, 
> but it does take a joint effort and common goals
> -to every dorm room there is a rent/contract, so we know who is „behind“ it 
> and can make one specific person liable (opt82)
> -there are only single-bed rooms (this is a cultural thing and different than 
> in the US, I guess noone around here would even rent a shared room)
> -almost no dorms are adjacent to the classrooms/labs (seamless wireless 
> coverage/services wouldn’t be possible anyway)
> -in order to find enough students (5 for the core team) who will do the 
> occasionally needed actual work without payment, a balance between demands 
> and incentives is important
>  
> Effect:
> -very low capex and extremly low opex for the dorm network [numbers only off 
> list]
> -very limited support calls (maybe 2/week; maybe 10-20 during the 
> move-in-phase, mostly students from the states asking about the non-existant 
> login/pw)
> -no need to worry about deprication charges or every new feature (regarding 
> wireless: ABG to N to AC; MIMO, fequency analysis chipsets; 2.4ghz to 5ghz, 
> wave2)
> -the least administrative overhead possible
> -none of the students in our networking team had problems finding jobs after 
> they left (no trouble finding volunteers, very long participation period)
> -scalabe system; got us from ~1.2k rooms (back in ’99) within a 1km radius to 
> 5k+ (today) in a 120km radius
> -effective support answers („Yes, You can also attach every AP You want to 
> You port… No, don’t worry, if You are able to understand Your class reading, 
> You will also understand vendor X’s manual…)
> -no secondary discussions (health, etc.)
> -plug&play experience for students
> -ability to consolidate our attention to more interesting projects; we still 
> provide wireless (eduroam), but only in common areas  away from the rooms 
> (ALU/Aruba 6000, now 7210, anything between 124s and 270s except the cloud 
> based APs)
> -over the years we had some (small and larger) dorms outsourced to different 
> (small and large) companies who provided full wireless-only coverage, 
> standard management as well as forbidden private wireless, but as our own 
> model proved technically resiliant and cost-effective time and again, our 
> external partners solutions didn‘t
>  
> Basically our setup could be exactly what Your administrative staff/board is 
> aiming for.
> My personal message to them would be to first and foremost take an honest 
> look at how and why things are the way they are.
> If they just argue out of a mix of intuition and auserity, their good 
> intentions will cause a fail (probably utterly and completely, like many 
> others before).
> It is possible to run a cost effective plug&play network, with a high 
> satisfaction rate amoung students (EDU did that long before the BYOD 
> marketing hype). But that requires a high level of cooperation (belivers, 
> ideally who themselves lived in dorms and remember how student life can be), 
> common goals, success in overcoming obstacles and also constant vigilance and 
> re-evaluation.
> From an administrative and oversight point of view this is a lot more and 
> complex work than finding, distributing and approving funds. For various 
> reasons it is also not always something that can be implemented everywhere or 
> sustained for a meaningful period of time. Therefore it is often better to 
> honestly deal with the geographic/personal/political reality and to solve the 
> technical problem with money.
> Even if Your board would want to, a change towards a system like ours takes 
> time. Your institution should definetly not run on an obsolete wireless 
> infrastructure during that periode (and wear out its staff and cause stir 
> among students in the process).
> Hope this helps to balance the biased view. ;-)
>  
>  
> Regards,
> Kris
>  
>  
>  
>  
> Von: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv 
> [mailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU 
> <mailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU>] Im Auftrag von Brian Helman
> Gesendet: Freitag, 1. Mai 2015 17:23
> An: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU 
> <mailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU>
> Betreff: [WIRELESS-LAN] To provide (wireless) service, or not to provide 
> (wireless) service...
>  
> A few weeks ago we made a pitch for funding to upgrade our res halls to 
> 802.11ac.  This request for funding has had an unforeseen effect.  I’m not 
> being asked to investigate NOT providing wireless networking in our res 
> halls.  Here are the options, as it has been described to me:
>  
> -No institutional wireless.  Let the students bring in their own AP’s
> -Some kind of managed service (wireless as a service) with 802.11
> -Some kind of institutionally owned/leased mobile wireless (e.g we provide 
> our own 4G)
> -Hybrid
> -Continue with 802.11n 2.4GHz and fill in holes as they pop up
>  
> I’m not going to put my thoughts up here just yet.  These are the 
> options/thoughts as presented by the levels above me.
>  
> Let the discussion begin….
>  
>  
>  
>  
> ____________________________________
> Brian Helman, M.Ed |  Director, ITS/Networking Services | (: 978.542.7272
> Salem State University, 352 Lafayette St., Salem Massachusetts 01970
> GPS: 42.502129, -70.894779
>  
> ********** Participation and subscription information for this EDUCAUSE 
> Constituent Group discussion list can be found at 
> http://www.educause.edu/groups/ <http://www.educause.edu/groups/>. 


**********
Participation and subscription information for this EDUCAUSE Constituent Group 
discussion list can be found at http://www.educause.edu/groups/.

Reply via email to