Controllerless Networks

 View Only
last person joined: yesterday 

Instant Mode - the controllerless Wi-Fi solution that's easy to set up, is loaded with security and smarts, and won't break your budget
Expand all | Collapse all

(SCA) Single channels Architecture

This thread has been viewed 22 times
  • 1.  (SCA) Single channels Architecture

    Posted Feb 21, 2024 04:25 AM


    I am working on a solution that requires us to bring up to 3 APs to a customer site and integrate these into an existing RF environment.
    To avoid this i wanted to use an SCA or "Single channel Architecture" so that we would ask the customer to reserve a channel for our solution.
    1. What is this standard called in Aruba, and is this supported?

    2. Do I need a centralized controller or can I use ARUBA AP535 (RW)?

    3. Is there a better way forward, feeling  a little lost with the practical parts.

    Appreciate you thaughts and comments in this subject.

    //Niclas Johansson TMHLS

  • 2.  RE: (SCA) Single channels Architecture

    Posted Feb 21, 2024 05:01 AM

    Single Channel Architecture is something that I know one specific vendor in the past had as 'unique feature' but in practice was most times disabled/not used as it didn't work well in many environments. Don't think it is still used.

    What you ask is more to put all APs on the same channel, which is is easy to do by putting the AP to a fixed channel, or configure the Adaptive Radio Management to only select specific channels. Both features are available on Controller, Instant or AOS10 with Central.

    Note that setting fixed channels does not allow the AP to move to another channel in case of interference, also on 5GHz if you have a DFS channel, the AP has no other option than to shut the radio down if there is a radar detection. In general, letting the AP do it's work and select the optimal channel is the recommended mode of operation, but if you know it's better you can set fixed channels (and optionally fixed power as well).

    Herman Robers
    If you have urgent issues, always contact your Aruba partner, distributor, or Aruba TAC Support. Check for how to contact Aruba TAC. Any opinions expressed here are solely my own and not necessarily that of Hewlett Packard Enterprise or Aruba Networks.

    In case your problem is solved, please invest the time to post a follow-up with the information on how you solved it. Others can benefit from that.

  • 3.  RE: (SCA) Single channels Architecture

    Posted Feb 21, 2024 06:04 AM
    Hi and thank you so much for your answer, even if it didn't answer my question.
    The patent was held for a period by Fortinet, then later implemented in the WIFI6 standard.
    The Controller distributes one Virtual MAC BSSID to all AP's and mitigates Channel interference and the WLC controls handover between AP.
    The client sees one AP and does not need to roam.

    Not everyone has implemented this standard, but i believe Aruba has done that.


    Information classification: Internal

  • 4.  RE: (SCA) Single channels Architecture

    Posted Feb 21, 2024 03:36 PM

    We very specifically recommend against attempting SCA.  None of our APs are designed specifically to support SCA.

    Carson Hulcher, ACEX#110

  • 5.  RE: (SCA) Single channels Architecture

    Posted Feb 23, 2024 12:17 PM

    Hi Niclas

    As said, SCA is a "false good idea" : if you stick on a single channel, how can you really mitigate channel interference ?

    Aruba has a good Radio Management algorithm (ARM), to optimize channel selection.

    Roaming is part of a standard wireless architecture. It's really not a problem to roam nowadays.

    The roaming delay in modern systems (like ARUBA) is very short, unnoticeable.

    Please remember that it's the client that decides to roam, not de APs.

    Most roaming problems I see are linked to :

    • an incorrect roaming aggressiveness on clients (swapping from one AP to another too frequently, or sticking excessively) 
    • inappropriate tx powers in AP (mostly, too high) -> too many APs available, the client cannot clearly choose the good one.
    • excessive channel aggregation (no need to bond 4 channels to 80MHz for standard office usages)

    As advised by other contributors, for 3 APs, I shall prefer the Instant architecture.

    (kudos welcome)