Yes, we vary the power by AP, but that’s more to optimize the network than 
it is to push devices to 5 GHz.  That’s why I didn’t mention it.  AP layout 
in dense environments has to be driven by the number of users and RF 
parameters adjusted accordingly.  We also adjust Rx sensitivity.  We do so 
in 3 dB increments to avoid having 15 different RF settings for 20 APs.  We 
may compromise a bit more if it avoids having an insane number of AP groups 
in a building.  So far our most complex building has 106 APs in 4 AP groups.



Regarding powering up to fill in coverage gaps from a failed AP, that really 
only works if you use extra APs, and therefore have very low power settings 
when operating normally.  If in the event of a failure APs go from high 
power to really high power, client devices in the affected area are still 
likely to have problems.



At the risk of inviting criticism, I’ve attached our AP layout and site 
survey strategy.  That said, questions and constructive criticism are 
welcome.  I’ve removed the Aruba AP specific stuff.  You need to develop 
your own minimum coverage standard and figure out home many clients can be 
supported on your AP(s) of choice.  I will say this this design approach has 
resulted in good performance (as measured by positive user feedback) while 
using less hardware than most recommendations I’ve read (up 100 occupants in 
the coverage area of a premium, wave-1 11ac AP.)  I apologize for any 
difficulty understanding the part about choosing the power settings.  It’s 
surprisingly easy to understand if you’re actually doing it, but my staff 
had difficulty following the text in abstract.  Once they understood it they 
didn’t need to refer back to it.  It’s pretty intuitive.



Chuck Enfield

Manager, Wireless Systems & Engineering

Telecommunications & Networking Services

The Pennsylvania State University

110H, USB2, UP, PA 16802

ph: 814.863.8715

fx: 814.865.3988



From: Jason Cook [mailto:jason.c...@adelaide.edu.au]
Sent: Thursday, August 13, 2015 1:38 AM
To: Chuck Enfield <chu...@psu.edu>; WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU
Subject: RE: Exclusive 2.4 Ghz and 5 Ghz SSIDs



Top info Chuck



A few additional things to play with from that list.



Do you have varying power in your set power or is it designed to be all one 
so very even spacing between AP’s?

By varying I guess do you set to X, survey then adjust some.

Or rely more on your testing and design to get it right and have them all 
the same. And double check with a survey

I’m trying to think of any downsides, but really it would only be the lack 
of ability to surrounding devices to up power and cover and AP that’s 
failed. However design and 2.4ghz still might cover this. And we find AP 
failures aren’t common.





--

Jason Cook

The University of Adelaide, AUSTRALIA 5005

Ph    : +61 8 8313 4800



From: The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv 
[mailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU] On Behalf Of Chuck Enfield
Sent: Thursday, 13 August 2015 1:14 PM
To: WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU 
<mailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU>
Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] Exclusive 2.4 Ghz and 5 Ghz SSIDs



Yes, we use band-steering and I recommend it over the different SSID 
approach. If a device chooses the 2.4 GHz SSID on its own, most people won't 
notice for quite some time.  How often have you found your device on an SSID 
other than the one you intended?  My Netgear router at home won't let me use 
the same SSID on both bands. (I'll resist the temptation to comment on that 
"feature".)  Every now and then I notice that my phone is connecting on the 
2.4 GHz SSID instead of 5 GHz.  It's hard to say how long my phone was 
connecting to the wrong SSID before I noticed.  At work, my phone sometimes 
connects to the wrong SSID, but it ALWAYS connects at 5 GHz



There are design techniques that will result in a significant majority of 
clients connecting to 5 GHz radios.  If you make dual-band devices want to 
connect to 5 GHz I believe you'll end up with a higher percentage of device 
connected in that band than you'll get through the two SSID method.  It's 
possible to get a majority of dual-band devices onto 5 GHz even without 
band-steering.  Band-steering helps for those oddball devices that just 
won't go there by themselves, but that's less than 10%.  At PSU we attempt 
to optimize 5 GHz coverage, then adjust 2.4 GHz to do the best it can within 
that AP layout.  This allows us some flexibility with 2.4 GHz parameters. 
Even with the compromised settings, 2.4 GHz isn't usually too bad.  With 75% 
of the devices on 5 GHz, 2.4 GHz is usually acceptable for the clients that 
remain on it.  In summary, our approach for getting clients onto 5 GHz is:



1. Have good 5 GHz coverage everywhere. >25dB SNR.  Not only will this make 
5 GHz attractive, but most devices won't probe for a better AP once 
connected, which keeps the air cleaner.

2, Turn down power on 2.4 GHz so it is at least 3 dB weaker than 5 GHz 
throughout the coverage area.  This is what makes the devices prefer 5 GHz. 
(It may go without saying given this recommendation, but we configure the AP 
with a fixed Tx power.  RF management only chooses the channel.  The 
benefits of optimizing the power settings of the two radios on an AP easily 
outweigh the benefits of the crappy power adjustment algorithms used by the 
AP manufacturers.)

3. Turn off 2.4 GHz radios only when necessary to avoid egregious CCI.  It's 
usually only needed in locations with a really high AP density, like 
auditoriums or lots of adjacent classrooms, although it's also sometimes 
needed if walls are close together and construction materials have a much 
higher loss at 5 GHz than at 2.4 GHz, as is common in dorms.  Turning off 
2.4 GHz radios results in uneven coverage, which makes it hard to keep the 
signal weaker than 5 GHz everywhere without having gaps in the 2.4 GHz 
coverage.

4. Enable band steering.

5. Make sure no other settings are undermining band-steering.  (Aruba's 
default settings for "Client Match" undermine band steering when there's a 
strong 2.4 GHz signal.  Shout-out to Jason Mueller at Iowa for bringing that 
one to my attention.)

6. Adjust load balancing parameters such that clients are only pushed to 2.4 
GHz if 2.4 GHz utilization is VERY low.



If you do these things almost everybody with a 5 GHz radio will connect at 5 
GHz.  If your AP of choice doesn't support band-steering, adjustment of load 
balancing parameters, or a wide enough range of power settings, maybe two 
SSIDs is the way to go.  But then I'd start shopping for a new AP, because 
it's not the right product for higher ed.



Chuck



  _____

From: "Jeremy Gibbs" <jlgi...@utica.edu <mailto:jlgi...@utica.edu> >
To: "EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv" 
<WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU 
<mailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU> >
Sent: Wednesday, August 12, 2015 7:39:29 PM
Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] Exclusive 2.4 Ghz and 5 Ghz SSIDs



Does anyone employ band-steering?  When we enabled it, we saw a massive jump 
of users connecting at 5ghz. Obviously if the client doesn't support 5ghz or 
it just prefers 2.4 because of various factors it can stay on 2.4. I have 
only seen it improve throughput for everyone. Any opinions on this?  We are 
an extreme network shop, but our wireless is the enterasys (chantry) 
solution with new 3825i 3x3.

On Wednesday, August 12, 2015, Jeffrey D. Sessler <j...@scrippscollege.edu 
<mailto:j...@scrippscollege.edu> > wrote:

Single SSID – anything else just adds confusion for the end-user. Then 
again, I was recently visited a spot where they had a different SSID for 
every building. :)



Thinking more about this…



If residence halls (academic buildings too) are well designed around 5 GHz 
and use in-room AP placement, the issues with 2.4 tend to melt away (or you 
can ignore them), with clients only falling back to 2.4 when they transition 
outside of a building.



If you’re a Cisco shop (I assume Aruba has something similar), their 
automatic RRM (radio resource management) and TPC (Transmit Power Control) 
tend to result in very tiny cells where there is a lot of 2.4 radios talking 
(which is a good thing - tiny cells).  Of course, this can be really 
problematic if the AP layout design is not-optimal such as in a typically 
budget-driven “down the center of the hallway” methods of deployment where 
adjacent AP’s tend to have clear line-of-sight of each other. In cases such 
as these, the reduction in radio output to reduce AP channel overlap can 
result in client connection troubles i.e. The clients are probably behind 
fire–proof metal clad doors, brick walls, etc. Coupled with coverage hole 
detection (where AP power is increased for client connectivity), you now 
have an environment that’s in constant chaos, where someone has to do a lot 
of manual adjusting of AP radios or disable the auto-adjusting.



On the other hand, if AP layout is optimal where you’re deploying AP’s 
in-room, lower on the wall, avoiding line-of-sight, etc. then you get the 
benefit of the room’s construction (doors, floors, walls, what inside the 
walls, bed, desks, etc.). All of which help promote small cell isolation and 
reduce the number of adjacent neighbor AP’s you’ll see, resulting in less 
2.4 GHz channel overlap.



Now then, the same issues can crop up in 5 GHz, but it doesn’t propagate as 
far, so if you're using the in-room deployment method, it’s likely not as 
big of an issue even in dense deployments. That said, if you do have dense 5 
GHz deployments, Cisco’s 8.1 code introduces 5 GHz dynamic channel-width 
allocation, somewhat eliminating the issue by dynamically moving between 20, 
40, and 80 MHz channels.



In my opinion, 2.4 GHz is slowly marching to its demise, and I’m focusing 
all of my attention on 5 GHz. We have the luxury of of a robust Mac 
population (~80% of the students), and Apple laptops and desktops have long 
since had access to 5GHz, so I’m not sure how much effort should be put into 
maintaining 2.4 if it’s ultimately only being used by old phones, devices 
that move little data, or have alternative data paths such as cellular, why 
expend a lot of effort on it?



Jeff







From: "wireless-lan@listserv.educause.edu" on behalf of Stephen Oglesby
Reply-To: "wireless-lan@listserv.educause.edu"
Date: Wednesday, August 12, 2015 at 9:41 AM
To: "wireless-lan@listserv.educause.edu"
Subject: Re: [WIRELESS-LAN] Exclusive 2.4 Ghz and 5 Ghz SSIDs



Paul,



We're an Aruba shop and, as Bruce of Liberty mentioned, for dense 
deployments we turn 2.4 ghz radios off on every other AP (typically edge of 
building APs). Our main performance issues were due to interference and 
channel utilization on the 2.4 ghz spectrum. We attempted reducing 2.4 ghz 
(20 mhz channel)  transmit power but still had issues.



I also agree with keeping to the simplicity of a single SSID if at all 
possible.  I can't imagine the number of issues that would be reported to me 
simply because the user exited the ideal range for 5ghz spectrum. Our 
student and staff networks support a wide range of client wireless cards, 
antenna configurations, and spectrum compatibility (many are including 
2.4ghz only). Having users manually switch networks as needed may cause 
HelpDesk to become very popular.



Good Luck,




Stephen Oglesby

Network and Telecommunications Architect

Aims Community College

5401 W. 20th Street

Greeley, CO 80634

970.339.6350 (Office)

stephen.ogle...@aims.edu



IT staff will never ask you for your username and password.
Always decline to provide the information and report such
attempts to the help desk (x6380).



On Wed, Aug 12, 2015 at 8:24 AM, Philippe Hanset <phan...@anyroam.net> 
wrote:

Paul,



Dorm design is an animal of itself and each school has its own set of 
challenges based on

locations and policies. As much as I agree that 2.4 GHz and 5 GHz shouldn’t 
be on separate SSIDs for main campus,

I have really changed my mind for dormitories. Those buildings are really 
micro houses stacked on top of each other

with people bringing anything and everything they want which is quite 
different than academic buildings. We all spend our summers designing

the best coverage that we can for those residential areas, and as soon as 
students move in, the interference in 2.4 GHz makes our entire effort look

pointless in the eyes of the complaining student who is actually partly 
responsible for the problem.

So, in dormitories only, I would have the regular set of SSIDs that the 
campus provides plus and extra 5 GHz only called something like 
"residential-preferred".

But I wouldn’t use “fast” or “5GHz” in the SSID name.



Best,



Philippe





Philippe Hanset

www.eduroam.us <http://www.eduroam.us>







On Aug 11, 2015, at 4:22 PM, Paul Sedy <rps...@masters.edu> wrote:



Hello everyone,



We are a Cisco shop and have, up until now, employed a single SSID for 
students, supporting both 2.4 Ghz and 5Ghz connections.  During this summer, 
we have been working to develop sufficient AP density to ensure good 5Ghz 
cells throughout our dorms.  In the past, we have seen numerous instances of 
poorer performance on the 2.4 Ghz spectrum, but up to this point, have 
relied on the client to make the decision between these two options.



We are thinking of deploying two separate SSIDs, a 5Ghz network and a 2.4 
Ghz network, that are exclusive in order to promote a better experience for 
the students with devices capable of 5Ghz connectivity.  We would probably 
use the original SSID name with an appended (5 Ghz) or (2.4 Ghz).



Are any of you currently employing this type of configuration and how well 
has it worked for you?



We would appreciate any insights that anyone might have.



Paul Sedy

The Master’s College

Director of IT Operations

21726 Placerita Canyon Rd, Santa Clarita, CA 91321

661.362.2340 <tel:661.362.2340>  | rps...@masters.edu

********** 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/.



********** Participation and subscription information for this EDUCAUSE 
Constituent Group discussion list can be found at 
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/.



-- 

--

Jeremy L. Gibbs

Sr. Network Engineer
Utica College IITS

T: (315) 223-2383

F: (315) 792-3814

E:  <mailto:jlgi...@utica.edu> jlgi...@utica.edu

 <http://www.utica.edu/> http://www.utica.edu


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



-- 

Chuck Enfield

Manager, Wireless Systems & Engineering

Telecommunications & Networking Services

The Pennsylvania State University

110H, USB2, UP, PA 16802

ph: 814.863.8715

fx: 814.865.3988

********** Participation and subscription information for this EDUCAUSE 
Constituent Group discussion list can be found at 
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/.

Attachment: AP Placement and RF Survey.docx
Description: MS-Word 2007 document

Reply via email to