Hello Ryan,
With your comment in mind...
My point of view is somewhat unique, in that my buisness is a vendor-agnostic professional services setup. I.e. we do everything (wired and wireless) on all "tier 1" (and most tier 2-3) vendors in the IT channel (indirect service delivery). As a result, our views tend to be more blended in some respects.
So (and sorry if this is a bit long, you might wish you hadn't asked)...
- What was your motivation for pursuing 100%?
Most customers I've worked with pursue this to achieve Wi-Fi VOIP/IPT or RFID outcomes. Hospitals and IPT heavy enterprises fit into this slot most often. Others that target 100%, often do so as a result of lack of governance or assurdity from within the buisness regarding "who will be doing what, where and when". Those without Wi-Fi use cases mandating 100% specifically, tend to target key coverage areas (and this represents most of academia). I trust this makes sense?
- What methodologies did you use to estimate APs required for the project for budgetary purposes? (e.g., square footage, client-to-AP density, ...?)
The short answer from me, is this is a cost vs risk decision. We deliver multiple "packaged" services into the IT channel that deliver against this requirement, and there's no single answer. We seek to work with the reseller/distributor/customer in order to understand where the project lifecycle is, and what the world looks like from a cost-accuracy vs. budget-for-planning point of view. What we deliver, is what the requester asks for, and we ensure they know what they are getting from us including associated risks from any service. Whilst in the technical world we seek to de-risk, the commercial world doesn't always support that of course! For all services in this space, we have a PQQ (pre-qualifying questionaire) to be filled in by the customer which includes questions around predicted use cases for the Wi-Fi, anticipated client count etc (all in "simple" non-techy language). Examples of "how" we go to work are as follows...
a. If the view is nobody has any money for planning, we have a spreadsheet that calculates an amount of APs based on square footage (adjustable based on Wi-Fi use cases and user count IF known (which it usually isn't)). This is normally requested by "lower skill, higer risk" partners who are simply speculating against opportunities with customers. We of course advise the partner we are not responsible for any degree of accuracy, and this is simply a well intended guess provided "as is". Accuracy tends to be around 85%. On occasion we've extended this to "pen-on-paper" in special circumstances.
b. Offsite planning. This is what it sounds like. RF modelled in Visual RF, Airmagnet planner or Ekahau. We tend to use the tool that most closely aligns to the partners vendor strategy (e.g. Visual RF for Aruba). This is a chargable exercise (as we tend to spend time modelling it properly with walls etc). Again we ensure that partner knows we're not accountable for the accuracy gap. Why? Because I can't protect the business against onsite "unknowns". I can't demonstrate my assurance of accuracy with FACTS. This service is usually used for partners who want colateral that is more compelling as part of bid/proposal/budget, that also sends a nice message to the customer (pretty pictures). Accuracy tends to be around 90-95% (as all my engineers who do this, have to have a number of "real" surveys under their belt). If you look at example from those that haven't, it obvious to those that have, right?
c. Onsite planning. This is proper surveying. AP on stick with Airmagnet. The only gap of course being "if the site conditions change after we leave, results will vary..." which we cover off. We do underwrite our work with this service, so the customer is de-risked. This service is used by risk-averse partners who want to establish full cost accuracy. Broadly speaking, it's commonly used by partners who are Cisco (about 70% of our survey work), and to a lesser extent Aruba/HP/Motorola based. Partners who sell (let's call it) "cheap stuff" just don't get it, and can't rationalise the cost for the work.
- What are some of the hurdles you have encountered with this project?
If I focus this answer against 100% scenarios, it's usually AP fitting in challenging areas. RF maximisation vs. practicallity sort of thing. Again, the simple answer I'm afraid is it's a cost decision. No matter how great the desire for 100%, no sensible business will spend x10 cost to install an AP on a newly erected mast in a field (with power). Architects can be a bit precious. They don't like APs on shiney new ceilings. I usually leave this battle between the prime building contractor/architect and head of IT (I have seen them go to CEO level), and the outcome is 50/50 between "APs above ceiling" (RF impact) and "APs below ceiling, or special antennas". Usually, biggest personality wins (rarely comes down to contract Ts&Cs). I see asbestos has already been mentioned. We see that quite a bit in the UK. Stairwells can be an interesting one too. Frequently cablers struggle more in those areas due to wall thickness and firebreaks. So costs go up, and get challenged. And lastly of course, APs getting stolen in open areas with low ceilings is something to consider.
- As you deployed, were any changes to design/approach necessary?
I think this has been covered nicely by the previous comments (Kevin). Note that as an interesting blended metric, we see CAD diagrams to be inaccurate 80% of the time. However, the inaccuracy only tends to impact planning about 10% of the time. As long as outer walls and heavy inner walls are there, you're fine. You more or less always get correct plans for new buildings. Where the plans are inaccurate, we just ensure the customer understands why an AP is shown on the plans in "strange places".
- Similarly, how accurate was your initial estimate of how many APs would be required?
With approach "a" above, we hit about 85%. For approach "b" it's about 95%. For "c", it's 100% obviously. But of course I use RF skilled guys to do this. If it's done by people who've never touched Airmagnet in the wild, your accuracy goes right down. You can't teach it in a classroom.
- Have you completed 100% deployment?
Broadly speaking, those that go for it tend to fall in early budget stages, or they do get to the goal yes (40-60 split). Having said that, I have seen metric evidence on occasion that suggests ROI in certain places is quite low after completion. I.e. APs in certain places never get an association.
- Was outdoor included? If so, how did you approach estimating/budgeting for outdoor spaces?
Up to about 2 years ago, virtually nobody wanted this. Now, the shift is towards including it. Over the last year, 75% plan to include it. About half of that actually executes against outdoor (again, cost based).
- What percentage (hunches/guesses acceptable) of client devices were incapable of moving to wireless? Why?
This is rarer these days, but you still see it. Track back 3-4 years, it was around 15%. Now, it's less than 5%. Wi-Fi is a good catalyst for ditching legacy kit. Mostly, this comes down to third-party bespoke build devices that are unsupportable (but still in use). Interestingly, 3 times in the last year, I've used Wi-Fi considerations/requirements as catalysts to help the justify removal of XP (and excelerate associated projects). Rationale varies from security requirements, GPO practicality, NIC age etc. Customers like this once they come around to the idea.
Hope this helps.