Wireless Access

Reply
MVP Expert

Re: Improve this terrible network design

Thanks Victor great feedback. I will see tomorrow how it goes. We are doing this during regular business hours (network will go up and down) as the hotel must remain in business of course.

I'll check the antenna plots for the 93s as we do not use 93H's.

I would love to put the AP's in the rooms permanently if that proves to be successful but will be a challenge to convince the hotel of that.

Will let you all know tomorrow or wednesday how it goes.

Thanks
Highlighted
MVP Expert

Re: Improve this terrible network design

Not looking good.

 

Found out APs in ceiling were facing upwards (93 logo facing ceiling). Moving APs out of ceiling and facing floor did not see to improve RSSI or SNR values on the 1st floor.

 

Next step is to attempt to move 2 or 3 of them in a room staggered and test with it on the ceiling and wallmounted so we can test floor 1 and 2.

 

What I am noticing is definitely roaming is not working properly (Probably because all RAPs), some sticky client issues. Even though APs are configured with min/max EIRP at 127 (some are not actually at MAX). 

(c1) #show ap active  | include CN253
CN253_AP6               group_YARCI                    1.1.1.122     0            AP:HT:11/16/20       0                                 93       R2da   4h:19m:40s        
CN253_AP7               group_YARCI                    1.1.1.123     0            AP:HT:11/16/20       0                                 93       R2da   4h:19m:20s       
CN253_AP9               group_YARCI                    1.1.1.125     1            AP:HT:1/17/20        0                                 93       R2da   4h:16m:38s      
CN253_AP2               group_YARCI                    1.1.1.126     0            AP:HT:1/17/20        0                                 93       R2da   4h:16m:14s       
CN253_AP3               group_YARCI                    1.1.1.127     2            AP:HT:1/17/20        0                                 93       R2da   4h:15m:27s       
CN253_AP4               group_YARCI                    1.1.1.128     1            AP:HT:1/17/20        0                                 93       R2da   4h:15m:15s       
CN253_AP1               group_YARCI                    172.31.0.34   1            AP:HT:11/16/20       0                                 93       R2da   2h:12m:40s        
CN253_AP8               group_YARCI                    172.31.0.40   3            AP:HT:1/17/20        0                                 93       R2da   2h:2m:47s      
CN253_AP10              group_YARCI                    172.31.0.158  0            AP:HT:6/18/20        0                                 93       R2da   1h:15m:15s      
CN253_AP5               group_YARCI                    1.1.1.121     2            AP:HT:6/20/20        0                                 93       R2da   4h:20m:0s         

 AP 8 and AP10 were fighting for clients, made an AP specific profile for AP10 and reduced its power setting so that it users in the lobby would stop connecting to AP10. This did not seem to affect the rooms close to AP10.

 

APs are definitely fighting for clients.

I'll see once we can test in the rooms how it works out.

 

EDIT: Moving an AP into the room definitely increased the SNR and RSSI within that room and the room next to it was not much better. Moving across the hall didn't seem to help and dropped the SNR by half.

Placing the AP vertically along the wall and going upstairs to rooms 230/232 proved to me that placing the APs vertically in this building would not make a difference. The values we were seeing were similar to what we saw across the hall, SNR ~20 and RSSI -80s+

 

Looks like I can conclude the following.

1. Add more APs to the 2nd floor

2. Even though the hotel may not want, add APs to the rooms.

3. Because of #2, add way more APs.

4. Possibly switch 93s for 105/115/135, an AP with a higher gain antenna.

 

 

 

Search Airheads
cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: