cpu needed to NAT 45mbs

Joel Jaeggli joelja at bogus.com
Mon Nov 12 20:54:21 UTC 2007

Frank Bulk wrote:
> I would have disagree with your point on centralized AP controllers --
> almost all the vendors have some form of high availability, and Trapeze's
> offering, new (and may not yet be G.A) purports to be almost entirely
> seamless in its load sharing and failover support.

I have a few scars to show from deploying centralized ap controllers,
from several vendors including the one that you mention above. Hence my
observation that they must be deployed in a HA setup in that sort of

We you lose a fat-ap, unless cascading failure ensues you just lost one
ap... When your ap-controller with 80 radio's attached goes boom, you
are dead. So, as I said if you're going to use a central ap controller
for an environment like this you need to avail yourself of it's HA features.

> Now that dual-band radios in laptops are becoming more prevalent, it's
> possible to get 30 to 50% of your user population using 802.11a.
> Frank
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-nanog at merit.edu [mailto:owner-nanog at merit.edu] On Behalf Of Joel
> Jaeggli
> Sent: Saturday, November 10, 2007 11:51 PM
> To: Adrian Chadd
> Cc: Suresh Ramasubramanian; nanog at merit.edu
> Subject: Re: cpu needed to NAT 45mbs
> Adrian Chadd wrote:
>> On Sat, Nov 10, 2007, Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote:
>>> Speaking of all that, does someone have a "conference wireless'  bcp
>>> handy?  The sort that starts off with "dont deploy $50 unbranded
>>> taiwanese / linksys etc routers that fall over and die at more than 5
>>> associations, place them so you dont get RF interference all over the
>>> place etc" before going on to more faqs like what to do so worms dont
>>> run riot?
>>> Comes in handy for that, as well as for public wifi access points.
>> Everyone I speak to says something along the lines of
>> "Why would I put that sort of stuff up? I want people to pay me for
>> that kind of clue."
> I did a presentation a couple of years ago at nanog on high-density
> conference style wireless deployments. It's in the proceedings from
> Scottsdale. Fundamentally the game hasn't changed that much since then:
> Newer hardware is a bit more robust.
> Centralized AP controllers are beguiling but have to be deployed with
> high availability in mind because putting all your eggs in a smaller
> number of baskets carriers some risk...
> If you can, deploy A to draw off some users from 2.4ghz.
> Design to keep the number of users per radio at 50 or less in the worst
> case.
> Instrument everything...
>> There are slides covering basic stuff and observations out there.
>> (I'm going through a wireless deployment at an ISP conference next week;
>> I'll draft up some notes on the nanog cluepon site.)
>> Adrian

More information about the NANOG mailing list