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 <mike.lyon@gmail.com> wrote:

Check out Xirrus On Jan 28, 2015 9:08 PM, "Manuel Marín" <mmg@transtelco.net> 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

Mikrotik's also a rather good choice for the Wireless AP side... On Thu, Jan 29, 2015 at 11:46 AM, Eduardo Schoedler <listas@esds.com.br> wrote:

+1 Ruckus+ZoneDirector

-- Eduardo

Em quinta-feira, 29 de janeiro de 2015, Tyler Mills <tylermills@gmail.com> 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 <mike.lyon@gmail.com <javascript:;>> wrote:

...

Check out Xirrus On Jan 28, 2015 9:08 PM, "Manuel Marín" <mmg@transtelco.net <javascript:;>> 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

-----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 <listas@esds.com.br> wrote:

+1 Ruckus+ZoneDirector

-- Eduardo

Em quinta-feira, 29 de janeiro de 2015, Tyler Mills <tylermills@gmail.com> 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 <mike.lyon@gmail.com <javascript:;>> wrote:

...

Check out Xirrus On Jan 28, 2015 9:08 PM, "Manuel Marín" <mmg@transtelco.net <javascript:;>> 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 iQIcBAEBCAAGBQJUygo/AAoJEMR7HC7H8wTJJwIQAJLj0fo7zSItMGmlj+v5oo8S VS/ePSV6YG31SLvADHy9Ge7yaazLzrh9tUdGKqBz5KCHMghUqJLnMf1DDiDvYzuW cmv3Y4P/Knu3q3eYeBlcYMhoh+qSRJ+/lTwaPCyHE3BlSr1E/VQjGygHGREQkjDk ubjcXnAbPTJRj6EwKq/MTdqO/nAQROtCxB/69c7i3m3kSvS5XY0jrZiBlhJNgJuH JghSx5wihsbmuMKVkgTta+BhJ0k4+8+Eyp4wnLi1bPNxaRuygF0lkOfnAagZC/ab OkfBabUc4O8p575XRmm+RJStoB1QlbaLaKJfqu1VKbWO6fOpsntU5nyK12lPceKs 7Nq8jbVUzRlkNIQS0kAfwMPOMV9oEWP9zBt4ZAi2gsuHP52YbwKcqn5vzadiJQog 1CC95cfWiYpfT26ThzOzCu6PcLYZzokM4izYi57uPPLRgz4fOmVu89rMSNI/QC00 habLpZV1FVMFRBjEs3HDhKTgedE55WJYelAg5Gw9o5X5qazN0d5UaGSDGb/TKaf+ SwngXboBlfM1a07dM3rK3RTjXPFp6/mrrrPTsoXp0LRdXqJhYQzDtsD/l8r/QQpr hjapvY79HVF8Km8FaZwynSzrY0qS0jESH60LLJzm+IHgEoXNY5bDzDV79x4e+4Xy CjPDZ7IYJ3FvroTsPtoY =yNtF -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

+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-bounces@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" <mmg@transtelco.net> 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

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" <bohn@adelphi.edu> To: "Eric C. Miller" <eric@ericheather.com> Cc: "NANOG" <nanog@nanog.org> 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 bohn@adelphi.edu 5168773327 On Fri, Jan 30, 2015 at 6:28 PM, Eric C. Miller <eric@ericheather.com> 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-bounces@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" <mmg@transtelco.net> 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

"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 Mlewis@Techcompute.Net <mailto:MLewis@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-bounces@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" <bohn@adelphi.edu> To: "Eric C. Miller" <eric@ericheather.com> Cc: "NANOG" <nanog@nanog.org> 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 bohn@adelphi.edu 5168773327

On Fri, Jan 30, 2015 at 6:28 PM, Eric C. Miller <eric@ericheather.com> 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-bounces@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" <mmg@transtelco.net> 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

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 <tim@pelican.org> 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.

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 <paul@nashnetworks.ca> 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

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 <bohn@adelphi.edu> 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 bohn@adelphi.edu 5168773327

On Fri, Jan 30, 2015 at 6:28 PM, Eric C. Miller <eric@ericheather.com> 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-bounces@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" <mmg@transtelco.net> 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

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.slade@saic.com  | 703.676.5234 -----Original Message----- From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-bounces@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" <mmg@transtelco.net> 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

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 <nanog@ics-il.net> 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" <mmg@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

-- 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

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" <paul@paulstewart.org> To: "Mike Hammett" <nanog@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" <mmg@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

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" <tylermills@gmail.com> To: "Mike Hammett" <nanog@ics-il.net>, 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 < nanog@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" < paul@paulstewart.org > To: "Mike Hammett" < nanog@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" < mmg@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

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 <paul@nashnetworks.ca> 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 <tylermills@gmail.com> 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 <nanog@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" <paul@paulstewart.org> To: "Mike Hammett" <nanog@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" <mmg@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

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" <clay@bloomcounty.org> To: "NANOG" <nanog@nanog.org> 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 <mianosm@gmail.com> 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 <paul@nashnetworks.ca> 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 <tylermills@gmail.com> 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 <nanog@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" <paul@paulstewart.org> To: "Mike Hammett" <nanog@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" <mmg@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

Op 29 jan. 2015, om 17:18 heeft Tyler Mills <tylermills@gmail.com> 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

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-bounces@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-bounces@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" <paul@paulstewart.org> To: "Mike Hammett" <nanog@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" <mmg@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

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 <JEdwards@sonifi.com> 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-bounces@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-bounces@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" <paul@paulstewart.org> To: "Mike Hammett" <nanog@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" <mmg@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

Just curious, were you using WPA2 or were the networks open? Thanks, Mike On Jan 29, 2015 8:56 AM, "Paul Stewart" <paul@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-bounces@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" <paul@paulstewart.org> To: "Mike Hammett" <nanog@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" <mmg@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

Open – it was just for a trade show setting .. few years ago …. Thanks, Paul From: Mike Lyon [mailto:mike.lyon@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" <paul@paulstewart.org <mailto:paul@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-bounces@nanog.org <mailto:nanog-bounces@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" <paul@paulstewart.org <mailto:paul@paulstewart.org> > To: "Mike Hammett" <nanog@ics-il.net <mailto:nanog@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-bounces@nanog.org <mailto:nanog-bounces@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" <mmg@transtelco.net <mailto:mmg@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

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" <sean@seanharlow.info> To: "Mike Hammett" <nanog@ics-il.net> 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 < nanog@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" < paul@paulstewart.org > To: "Mike Hammett" < nanog@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" < mmg@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

+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 / carlos@race.com / http://www.race.com On 1/30/15, 8:19 AM, "William Herrin" <bill@herrin.us> wrote:

On Thu, Jan 29, 2015 at 12:06 AM, Manuel Marín <mmg@transtelco.net> 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 ................ herrin@dirtside.com bill@herrin.us Owner, Dirtside Systems ......... Web: <http://www.dirtside.com/>