Searching \ for '[EE] Wireless networking redux' in subject line. ()
Make payments with PayPal - it's fast, free and secure! Help us get a faster server
FAQ page:
Search entire site for: 'Wireless networking redux'.

Exact match. Not showing close matches.
PICList Thread
'[EE] Wireless networking redux'
2006\01\06@145707 by Mike Hord

picon face
Short version:

I'm wondering if anyone has any insight into how
more than one WAP can function on the same
channel in the same space at the same time.

I'm now looking for specific information about
Aironet 1100 series WAPs.  Do any of you
know how these guys deal with having the same
channel in the same room?

Long version:

In particular, we have four Aironet 1100 series
power over ethernet WAPs in one classroom,
two of which are on channel 1.  In addition, we
will shortly have at least four more in a classroom
directly beneath that one, which will almost
certainly bleed through.

I have over and over expressed my concerns
about this, and about the fact that the people
making the decisions surrounding this project
are expecting 150 students to get servicable
network access over wireless network in one
room at one time, but I'm ignored because I'm
not an "expert".  The "experts" are the ones
who set up this four WAPs/three channels
system.  The explanation is that because
these are "enterprise level" WAPs, that's

My feeling is that the 1100's are smart enough
not to interfere with each other (i.e., not talk
at the same time and garble the data), but
there's a big difference between that and
adding another WAP improving matters.  I
expect that the overall throughput of two WAPs
on one channel would be slightly less than the
throughput of one WAP.

Anyone have any input on this particular

Mike H.

PS- First stress test the other day- 120
students downloading a 6 MB file simultaneously.
It was pandemonium.

2006\01\09@151728 by M. Adam Davis

face picon face
I can't speak to the 1100's capabilities.  Newer enterprise APs do
have some features that allow channel sharing, though I'm surprised
they recommend the same channel twice in one small area.  However, the
core of your point is valid - there is only one channel between the
two, and the bandwidth is finite.  There may be other concerns they
are not sharing with you, however, such as the overall plan for the
whole building.

I understand it can be useful to have two APs mounted orthogonally,
but even then it's recommended to go on different channels, but with
the same connection setup so a client can choose the strongest signal
without user intervention.

The key point you need to find out is whether the two APs will share
the channel and still fully use the bandwidth, or whether they will
conflict and provide less bandwidth together than one alone would.
This should be solved with a quick call to cisco, or looking through
the manual.


On 1/6/06, Mike Hord <> wrote:
{Quote hidden}

> -

More... (looser matching)
- Last day of these posts
- In 2006 , 2007 only
- Today
- New search...