Complexe environment, IAP or Controller ?

[G.lorre]

Hi,

I have to deploy 54 access point in a difficult environment.

This environment is composed like this :

- High density : classroom, amphitheater.

- Workshop : machine tool, ventilation system...

- Wall made of wood and/or metal.

- A wooden architecture.

My question is this one : with this difficult environment, which solution is the best :

- IAP : maybe it's a bit light for this particular environment and the complexity.

- Controller : maybe it's safer and offer better management of 54 APs in a complex environment.

What would be the best solution for you?

[cclemmer]

---

@G.lorre wrote:

Hi,

I have to deploy 54 access point in a difficult environment.

This environment is composed like this :

- High density : classroom, amphitheater.

- Workshop : machine tool, ventilation system...

- Wall made of wood and/or metal.

- A wooden architecture.

My question is this one : with this difficult environment, which solution is the best :

- IAP : maybe it's a bit light for this particular environment and the complexity.

- Controller : maybe it's safer and offer better management of 54 APs in a complex environment.

What would be the best solution for you?

---

From what you've described so far, either architecture should do fine. Is there something you feel you need to do for this setup that you can do on a hardware controller, but can't do with Instant?

[G.lorre]

Hi cclemmer,

Thanks for the answer.

My fear is about the ability for IAPs to finely manage terminals and RF in this particular environment. A controller might be more responsive on these aspects in particular. It may be best to have dedicated equipment to manage APs in a complex environment. This is my question.
But if for you the use of IAP is enough, it suits me too.

[mharing · Accepted solution]

In my opinion, I think you're better going with a controller-based solution here. My thinking is that it gives you more granular control over the environment and allows you to design the RF settings around the spaces, and not a blanket setting. It also gives you the flexibility to only broadcast SSIDs necessary in any given group, to minimize management frames and overhead. 

This also gives more expansion ability, as the network may grow, its much easier to already have a controller, as opposed to converting afterward.

[cclemmer]

I've done some pretty complex designs with IAP, so I wouldn't say its not possible to use that architecture if it makes sense. At 54 APs, it could be a fit for IAP. Ultimately it comes down to requirements and knowing the limitations/benefits of the systems.