07-27-2009 05:42 AM
in our projects we are quite often facing the problem that there is bulk-traffic that stay's local, i.e. live-data in a laboratory or high-resolution scans that are downloaded from a scanner device standing next to the Client/AP but far away to the controller.
Those situations often create bottlenecks in the infrastructure, because this traffic has to go all the way up to the controller and back down to the AP. And most client's only have 1 or 2 GBit links to the distributed switches, that already are quite busy.
So we are more and more facing the situation that we need to create a VAP that would decouple the traffic locally on the AP, without passing it trough the controller.
Using local controllers is often not a solution, because it's too expensive to use an own controller for 3 or 4 AP's. The other point is a 'Cheap' A200 can't handle the traffic generated by 3 or 4 "heavy duty" 802.11n clients very well...
I know this feature exists for RAP's. But i've heard that Roming on RAP's won't work. Is this true or would be configuring those Campus-AP's as RAP a solution for this issue?
Or what other idea's / solution are available to handle such situations?
It's even a competitive issue. Lot's of competitor's are pointing out this missing feature and it's hard to argue against it. This is also the main cause why we loose most projects on university's or higher schools, because they usually have a very decentralized IT-Infrastructure - at least here in germany...
What are your hints / thoughts to this? Are your competitor's also bugging you with this item, and how can you argue it? It's very simple if you have a centralized IT, but how can you argue it in a university or hospital where the infrastructure is very decentralized and applications often are used only locally?
Thanks for your input!
10-08-2009 01:01 AM
My understanding is also that on campus APs (not RAPs), only tunnel mode is supported; so no bridging or split-tunneling. Is this correct? Any ideas to argue against the bandwidth topic?
10-13-2009 11:08 PM
When you use RAP and also bridge-mode VAP, all wpa/wpa2 encryption/decryption processes ara handled on RAP itself. So, if you choose a AP12x series device, it'll work very well because it has own encryption/decryption processor on it..
In addition, roaming works as "normal" if you use RAPs. Basically, there will be a number of RAPs, they will choose the best channels according to the each other and your client will see a number of APs running in different channels and it will select the best one according to the signal it receives. The features you will have to loose are "spectrum load balancing" and "rf sensitivity tuning based channel reuse" but I think that will not a big issue for your environment I think...