skip to main |
skip to sidebar
Time was when you left work at the office. Those days are long gone. Enterprises and institutions with workforces, offices, or colleagues spread across time zones often have time- and location-shifted working conditions.
Users might need to work from home, on the road, or at a remote site. In all cases, a user will be most productive if the network experience - and access to applications and network resources - is the same remotely as it is at his or her desk at work.Can the wireless LAN infrastructure that's used in a campus environment pull double duty and be used by remote users, too? The stock answer from most vendors is "nary the twain shall meet" - use a campus wireless LAN at work and a remote access solution like a virtual private network (VPN) everywhere else.
Since using a VPN is very different than accessing a campus network, this means that users need to be trained how and when to use the appropriate access method. And that means Help Desk calls. The end user is stuck with two parallel, non-intersecting networks to buy, maintain, and learn. Ouch!
The Lessons of Wi-Fi #12: your Wi-Fi network should not be a one-trick pony. One common network infrastructure should support both the campus wireless LAN and off-site users. And it should provide an identical end user experience regardless of how or where the network is accessed.
Enter Aruba's Virtual Branch Networking (VBN) technology. VBN uses low-cost Remote Access Points (RAPs) to securely connect remote users, and their Wi-Fi and wired Ethernet devices, back to a controller in the data center. The same controller that runs the campus Wi-Fi network.
Any standard Aruba indoor access point can be used as a RAP. That means one SKU can serve as both a campus AP or a Wi-Fi enabled remote access device for a home, branch office, or road warrior. 
The $99 list price RAP-2 unit pictured here is small enough to fit in a shirt pocket or valise. It works with any IP-based devices - laptops, iPhone, iTouch, PCs, printers, wired and wireless voice over IP phones, wireless projectors - all of which can simultaneously share a single RAP. As can multiple users.
VBN features one-button installation so that a non-technical person can provision a RAP-2 by him or herself. No IT assistance, no user training required. Once commissioned the user just turns on his or her MacBook, PC, iTouch and they're instantly connected to the network...just as they would be on campus.
Data encryption and an integrated firewall provide comprehensive network security for all RAPs, while centralized management ensures speedy diagnostics and updates right over the network.You don't have to suffer a double budget hit to get best-in-class campus Wi-Fi and secure remote access. So check out VBN and leave it to someone else to relearn the lessons of Wi-Fi.
If you walk around most any IT trade show, a harsh reality sinks in. While a lot of engineering goes in hardware and software design, spending is often miserly when it comes to packaging design.
Consumer companies hire world-class designers - or design firms like IDEO - to create products with rakish, timeless good looks. The resulting products fit well in virtually any decor.
Step into the enterprise market and things change. Evidently many enterprise vendors believe that function trumps form. Make a product function well and no one will care that it was hit with the ugly stick. Even if the products are intended for open display - on ceilings in Board Rooms, classrooms, branch offices.
The Lessons of Wi-Fi #11: aesthetics matter. Businesses and institutions spend fortunes, large and small, with architects and interior designers to ensure that their facilities are attractive. Every component that goes into a building - from fire sprinkler heads to smoke detectors to wiring devices - must pass muster. How could any IT vendor believe that the very same aesthetics standards don't also apply to IT gear. Especially publicly visible devices like Wi-Fi access points.
Visit an IT trade show and you'll see shoe-box sized APs, bristling with dark, leg-like antennas. And squat APs, disk-shaped like the calling card of a digital elephant. And bulbous APs shaped like a knight's helmet.
In the landscape of the ceiling, camouflage is paramount: a diminutive, sleek design with neutral colors and a shape that matches other ceiling fixtures fits in best. At Aruba we use world-class packaging designers to help our indoor access points blend into their surroundings. Our AP-105 Access Point is the smallest enterprise-class 802.11n AP on the market, and neutrally blends into any public environment. While its stellar performance calls attention to the product, its packaging does not.
You don't have to compromise aesthetics to get best-in-class Wi-Fi. So check out the AP-105, and leave it to someone else to relearn the lessons of Wi-Fi.
You need a new Wi-Fi network for your school. The legacy system is a patchwork of consumer Wi-Fi gear and
just can't handle your multi-media, throughput, and security requirements. Moreover the old network is a bear to manage because it doesn't provide any diagnostic information about the cause of increasingly frequent network outages.
One of the vendors you call in gives you a nifty sales pitch about their newfangled access points and even throws in a free network survey. When you ask about network management the sales person says they have a system that automatically discovers, configures, and monitors the whole wireless network, and can scale from single sites to cover the whole school district.
"But what if a problem originates in the wired network or in a mobile device? Or I want to manage the wired switches? How do I handle those scenarios?" you ask. All you draw in return is a blank stare.
The Lessons of Wi-Fi #10: to paraphrase a late13th century French proverb, mauvés hostill ne trovera ja bon network - a bad tool will never find a good network. Network management is really about optimizing operations management, about how to keep a network running 99.9999% of the time. Configuration and monitoring are only small pieces of the work that needs to be done.
Physicians train for hundreds and hundreds of hours to properly handle emergencies. Why? Because patients rarely die waiting for routine check-ups. It's in an emergency - when the stakes are high and time is very short - when they must prove their mettle. The same is true for network management tools.
Wireless networks don't work in isolation. Their operation depends on a wired core, closet switches, cabling, and the mobile devices with which they're associated. A fault could happen anywhere along this chain but "look" like it originated in the Wi-Fi network because that's where the problem first surfaced. A monitoring and diagnostics tool that only looks at the operation of the wireless network will stumble badly in this situation. And the consequence? Classes come to a halt, business stops, patients wait. Pretty bad.
Aruba's AirWave 7 tool is different. It's an operations solution that integrates the management of wireless networks, wired infrastructure, and client devices into a single interface. AirWave 7 provides a single point of visibility and control for the entire network edge, including wired and wireless infrastructure as well as individual client devices. In so doing, AirWave 7 reduces the cost and complexity of network management, while improving service quality for users.
A Mobile Device Management module gives IT managers control over mobile client devices from the same intuitive console they use to manage the network infrastructure. From a single console managers can supervise mobile devices, access points, controllers, and wired edge switches, including vital performance data, port utilization statistics and error data. By integrating monitoring of the wired and wireless infrastructure, the software facilitates faster and more accurate root-cause analysis.
And AirWave 7 is a multi-vendor tool. It works with Cisco and HP switches, among others, and supports wireless LANs made by more than 15 vendors, including Aruba, Cisco, HP, and Motorola. You're only out of luck if you own non-standard products or products from small niche vendors.
If you'd like to get the whole picture on network management you've only to visit the AirWave product site to see what real operations management can do for you. And leave it to someone else to relearn the lessons of Wi-Fi.
A loud-talking ranchman applies to a banker for a loan. The banker asks a neighbor if the rancher is a good credit risk. The neighbor ponders for a moment and then replies “Big hat, no cattle.” False bravado is funny when it’s the stuff of fiction, less so in real life – especially for customers snagged by rhetorical barbs.
And yet it happens again and again. Each year the networking world is introduced to “big hat” products with features and specifications so too-good-to-be-true that we let ourselves be reeled in. Why we don’t see through the shiny veneer and ask for proof of pedigree is a wonder. But it happens all the same.
The Lessons of Wi-Fi #9: use analysts and audited financials to validate vendor claims. Neutral independent industry analysts like Burton Group, Canalys, Gartner, IDC, Infonetics, InfoTech, and Yankee Group can quickly assess vendors' technical claims.
And don't forget to check financials - audited financials - because you want your vendor to be in business should you need assistance or spare parts. If a vendor won't give up the numbers - or the numbers are substandard - then you have grounds for real concern.
A quick example will put the discussion in context. In 2008 a “big hat” four-radio 802.11n access point was announced that claimed to deliver 1.2 gigabits-per-second of aggregate capacity. The data sheet claimed that the four radios worked in tandem, enabling users to dramatically reduce the number of access points and additional security sensors, thereby reaping savings on cabling, connection and installation costs.
Still, the press ate it up. A flurry of articles expounded the virtues of delivering multiple HD streams to an entire building, with perfect coverage, at almost no cost. The world would soon be saturated with multi-adio APs, the unwashed masses blanketed with 802.11n. Wow, where do I sign up?
Fast forward to late 2009. The “big hat” super duper access point was no more. It simply vanished from the vendor’s Web site, its demise a secret. Was it ever built? No. But the company received undeserved publicity and that reeled in some unsuspecting customers.
To paraphrase Orson Wells, companies should herd no cattle before their time. Industry analysts can help you separate claims from reality. If an analyst says that a vendor can't excute well, refuses to divulge shipment numbers, and/or lacks technical vision - well, your due diligence is over.
The next time you see or hear about a product that appears to be too good to be true, separate the hats from the herds - kick the tires, test the features, validate the design. Those impressive features might be chimeras or, as with Aruba's AP-105 802.11 Access Point, the genuine article.
Introduced in July 1979, the Zilog Z80 was an 8-bit microprocessor that operated on 1, 4, 8, or 16-bit data, had a 16-bit address bus, generated its own RAM refresh signals, and would run programs originally designed for Intel’s 8080 CPU. The flexibility of the design made it suitable for a very wide range of consumer, industrial, and military applications spanning from the Tandy TRS-80 computer to programmable logic controllers to naval weapon systems. Prices fell as volumes rose, and the Z80 was one of the most popular 8-bit CPUs for many years following its original introduction.
One of the wonders of semiconductor technology is that a standard part like the Z80 can find its way into so many different applications. The very same CPUs, memories, amplifiers, voltage regulators, and/or transceivers found in consumer products in your home might be found in automobiles, office equipment, factory production lines, airplanes, or ships. What differs is how the part is applied, packaged, and tested. In other words, you don't always need custom parts made of unobtainium to perform specialized tasks in demanding environments.
What happened to the Z80 in the 1970s is happening today with 802.11n chip sets. Chip set vendors are designing a common set of 802.11n parts for use in enterprise, SMB, gateway, and home access point and router products. Doing so drives up the volume of sales, resulting in production economies that boost profit margins for chip vendors even as prices fall for end users.
One of the largest Wi-Fi chip vendors – Atheros – sells its AR9002AP-4XHG chip set for all of the above referenced applications. The chip set features extensive component integration, a small form factor, and low overall cost. The fact that the AR9002AP-4XHG finds its way into such a diverse range of applications speaks volumes about the potential flexibility and robustness of the design. I say potential because whether the objective is realized or not depends on the implementation of the final Wi-Fi device.
Those who forget the lessons of Wi-Fi are doomed to repeat them. Lesson #7: you don't need unobtainium to build great Wi-Fi products.
Just as naval weapon system vendors leveraged a common Z80 design to create very unique and rugged products, so, too, has Aruba leveraged an 802.11n chip set targeted at a broad market in the design of its unique AP-105 802.11n Access Point. The AP-105 was tailored to demanding enterprise applications, and special care was taken in the design of the packaging, antennas, power supply, and security features to make the product both robust and exceptionally fast. A great AP, with a great standard 802.11n chip set, selling for a great price.
The result is an enterprise-class 802.11n access point that has higher throughput and more features than Cisco access points, yet sells for roughly 40% less money. So much less that Cisco felt compelled to pull apart the AP-105 to find out what makes it tick (they did the same when Aruba's high-end kick-ass AP-125 802.11n Access Point was released).
Their conclusion? The AP-105 is unobtainium-free and therefore no better than a consumer product. You know, like that cell phone you rely on for emergency calls 24x7, or that iPod that has delivered faithful service every day at the gym. Comparing the reliability of the AP-105 to that of a consumer product is not an insult. At the end of the day, Cisco still has to explain why the AP-105 is faster, more feature rich, less expensive, and easier to install than its own run-of-the-mill, over-priced, unobtainium-based access points.
So with the wind of good design at our backs, and unobtainium nowhere to be seen, the AP-105 is flying off the shelves, charting a path the Z80 followed.
Would you ever strap a PC to your ceiling and run it there? Probably not. What about inside the plenum space above the ceiling? Nope.
Accessibility aside, the ceiling and plenum are hostile environments for electronics that aren't specifically designed for the vibration, temperature extremes, and blown dust typical of these locations.If you look inside devices designed for this environment - smoke detectors, passive infrared sensors, quality Wi-Fi access points - what you WON'T find are vibration-sensitive connectors (like SIMM sockets), moving parts (like fans), and modular circuit boards that could wiggle loose. These devices are typically designed to have high mean time between failure (MTBF) ratings, something impossible to achieve with commercial SIMMs or fan-based power supplies. It seems so intuitive...and yet.Those who forget the lessons of Wi-Fi are doomed to repeat them. Lesson #6: sleight-of-hand is no substitute for good product design. Wi-Fi access points need to be designed from the ground-up to withstand the rigors of ceiling and outdoor mounting environments.
Consider Wi-Fi arrays, which are effectively PC motherboards with a fleet of sockets, add-on modules, plug-in connectors, and memory SIMMs. They even conjured up a fan-based PC-like power supply - no standard 802.3af Power-over-Ethernet here. And when it fails you've lost 4+ radios at one time. The only workaround is to double-up the number of arrays, a real budget sink. Arrays just aren't designed with long service life, energy efficiency, or network resiliency in mind. That's the reason why no leading vendors in the Wi-Fi market sell arrays.
Aruba Wi-Fi access points have no fans, no SIMM sockets. Our 802.11n access points are designed for the rigors of ceiling and plenum mounting, and run from standard 802.3af PoE. MTBF ratings are excess of 250,000 hours - more than 28 years. And should an access point go down, Aruba's Adaptive Radio Management adjusts the power of near-by access points to self-heal the coverage gap. Automatically.
They'll provide years of reliable service and are backed by a lifetime warranty. And they cost less than an array-based system. A lot less.
So the next time you consider upgrading your wireless LAN, think about the environment in which the equipment will be used. Reliable products don't happen by magic - they happen by design.
Let's consider an alternate ending to Lesson #4. You need wireless access across an entire floor of your building, and a Wi-Fi vendor with shiny white tasseled loafers planted on your desk says he has just the solution: a single16-radio access point that will provide coverage across the whole floor and will save you a bundle in installation costs. How can you go wrong? Think of the cost savings: only one access point to buy, only one access point to wire.
Those who forget the lessons of Wi-Fi are doomed to repeat them. Lesson #5: eggs break - don't put them all in one access point.
What appears alluring at first glance is really false economy. One single failure and there's nothing between you and a totally dead network - you'll have lost the entire floor. A 16-radio access point on a single cable sounds cool but it only gives you coverage – not capacity (you'll need a lot more radios, cables, and switch ports for that. And it offers no redundancy against failures like a dead CPU or memory.How about just throwing in a second 16-radio access point for redundancy? Even if you could align it to deliver the same coverage pattern, your hardware costs would be blown sky high. And if you're using 802.11n, you’ll further drain the bank by needing additional expensive power supplies and even more cables and ports.
With a multi-access point, multi-channel design, any coverage gap created by the loss of a single access point is mitigated by nearby access points. Load balancing handles high density scenarios while airtime fairness handles different mixes of 80211a/b/g/n clients. And using separate access points allows you to cover rooms and labs and lathe walls and metal-foil wall paper that can't be penetrated from outside - even by a single, centrally-located 16-radio array.
The question to ask yourself is what is the cost of a failure? How much will you lose if the entire office wireless network goes down for a day? Or students can’t access the Internet? Or a trade show network stops running? For most users, the cost of putting all of your eggs in one access point is too high.
You've now discovered why no major wireless LAN vendors pack so many radios into a single access point. It's false economy because it puts your business at risk should a failure occur.
And as far as cost differences, they've all but evaporated with Aruba's newest 802.11n access points. You don't need to take my word for it - Gartner's 2009 Wireless LAN Infrastructure Magic Quadrant spells it out in black and white.
If you'd like to get the whole picture on Wi-Fi architecture you've only to download our free white paper, WLAN RF Architecture Primer. And leave it to someone else to relearn the lessons of Wi-Fi.
You've invited Wi-Fi vendors to your facility to discuss a new Wi-Fi project. You need wireless access across an entire floor of your building which includes open plan seating, conference rooms, and executive offices. This will be the primary form of network access and it needs to work. All the time.
It's late afternoon. A Wi-Fi vendor sits across from you in his white suit and black shirt, the very model of semi-neo-avant garde stylin. His shiny white tasseled loafers are firmly planted on the corner of your desk. He looks you straight in the eyes and says that his access point transmits radio signals farther than anyone else's. "It uses special technology. Yes, it's expensive, but by packing sixteen super duper radios in one unit you'll save a bundle because you only need one access point to cover the entire floor." Wow! How can you go wrong?
Those who forget the lessons of Wi-Fi are doomed to repeat them. Lesson #4: we all live by the same laws of physics, and no Wi-Fi vendor has yet bent them to their will.
The maximum output of a radio at any given frequency is dictated by local regulatory agencies. In most countries 100 milliWatts is the upper limit of what an indoor access point is permitted to output. Regardless of vendor and irrespective of Wi-Fi chip vendor - Atheros, Broadcom, Intel, etc. There is a level playing field when it comes to building radios.
What vendors can do is twiddle with antennas, using directional antennas to focus the allowed radio energy into more well defined beams. And, indeed, doing so can project radio signals longer distances.
The issue is that Wi-Fi networks are bidirectional - there's something on the receiving end of those directional antennas. Low power clients like iPhones and netbooks aren't equipped with directional antennas, much less ones that are easily focused on access points. They may be able to hear distant access points but the access points may be unable to hear them - even if directional antennas are used - because they don' use high power radios.
Additionally,as we learned in Lesson #3, bit rate is inversely proportional to range. In a shared medium like 802.11 where only one device transmits at any one time, lower data rates mean less available air-time for data on that entire 802.11 channel. So even if an access point and its clients can communicate, the throughput from the clients to the access point will be relatively low. Not good for voice. Not good for video. Not good for you.
You don't get something for nothing, but you can find yourself with nothing from something. The Wi-Fi standards anticipated the use of multiple access points, and that's how clients are designed to work. Pushing the limits of how far a Wi-Fi signal can be made to propagate has heuristic value, but when it comes to real-world deployments it can jeopardize the functionality and reliability of your network.
It's best just to tell the vendor to take his shoes off your desk and sell his wares elsewhere - you're having none of it.
If you'd like to get the whole picture on Wi-Fi architecture you've only to download our free white paper, WLAN RF Architecture Primer. And leave it to someone else to relearn the lessons of Wi-Fi.
You're excited - the two bids you were expecting for your new Wi-Fi network have just arrived. You rip open the envelopes and then stare in disbelief.
The first bid - the low bid - includes fewer than 100 access points and a note stating that the access points are specially designed to operate at full power at all times so fewer are required. The second bid includes 135 access points and a note about meeting bandwidth capacity requirements and providing resiliency in the event of failure. Both vendors had the same set of plans to review, both did a walk-through of the facility. How could their bids be so different?
Those who forget the lessons of Wi-Fi are doomed to repeat them. Lesson #3: wireless coverage ≠ wireless capacity. Designing for coverage means providing a discernible Wi-Fi signal everywhere without regard for network speed. The access points on these networks are typically run at full output power so the signal coverage is max'd out. They're also spaced with minimal or no overlapping coverage. As a result fewer access points are required.
The downsides of designing for coverage? Many. Consider these two:
- Bit rate: There is an inverse relationship between bit rate and range. The farther away a Wi-Fi device moves from an access point, the lower the bit rate. Wi-Fi devices operating at the fringe of the coverage area will be very slow indeed. Too slow for voice, streaming video, electronic white boarding, and many other applications;
- Failure happens - but this design can't deal with it. If an access point fails, nearby access points can't increase their output power to fill in the coverage gaps.
Designing for coverage is okay if consistent network performance and resiliency are unimportant. Otherwise it should be avoided.
In networks that are designed for capacity, the required bandwidth is available throughout the coverage area. Application performance will therefore be universally uniform.
Planning for capacity requires more access points because the distance to laptops, iPhones and other clients needs to be more limited (remember rate vs. range) for robust, high-speed operation. They're also needed to ensure adequate load balancing, a feature especially important in areas with densely packed clients such as classrooms, lecture halls, and trading floors. The benefits far, far outweigh the cost - you end up with a resilient network on which you can consistently depend for years of service.
Some vendors play on customers' lack of familiarity with the difference between coverage and capacity. When it comes to reviewing bids and proposals, take note of differences in the number of access points and claims about "unique" features affecting coverage. If you fall for the coverage
If you'd like to get the whole picture on Wi-Fi architecture you've only to download our free white paper, WLAN RF Architecture Primer. And leave it to someone else to relearn the lessons of Wi-Fi.
One the reasons for creating technical standards is to ensure interoperability between devices that need to work together. In the Wi-Fi world, the 802.11 standards serve this purpose, and encompass a very extensive set of guidelines that manufacturers of infrastructure and devices must follow to create a cohesive wireless system. Why then do we encounter situations in which Wi-Fi infrastructure is incompatible with Wi-Fi devices?
Those who forget the lessons of Wi-Fi are doomed to repeat them. Lesson #2: not all Wi-Fi networks are standards based. Some use proprietary technology that is not compatible with the way other Wi-Fi device manufacturers have designed their products.
Take, for example, Glenelg Country School and Frances Xavier Warde School, both of which experienced dropped connections with wireless classroom multimedia projectors. At Raytown C-2 School District radio interference affected laptops on rolling computer carts, while at Prairie Cardiovascular Consultants interference was so bad that it affected both office and clinical operations. Others have reported issues with different models of PCs or Apple Macintosh computers and iPhones.
What's interesting about these cases is that the problems were traced to one common source: the wireless LAN infrastructure. Once the infrastructure was upgraded - in these cases to Aruba wireless LANs - the problems went away.
All of these sites had used a non-standard, proprietary single-channel wireless LAN architecture. There are only two companies in the industry that make such systems, and both are small niche players with shrinking market share. So why would anyone buy such non-standard products in the first place?
Simple - product differentiation can be very alluring. It offers the opportunity for the adventurous to tout themselves as early adopters of what they hope will be "the next big thing." Wanting to be the first to use a new Apple iPad, Alienware laptop, or Google Nexus One makes perfect sense. These products embody innovative designs that redefine their markets. But they're also designed to work with existing networking infrastructure like 802.11 Wi-Fi - that they didn't redefine.
Where you run into serious trouble is deploying non-standards based infrastructure. That's akin to
being the first to try a 156 Volt, 76 Hz electrical system in your house. Some devices might work, but you run the very considerable risk that others will crash and burn.
And that's what happened to the single channel wireless LAN customers. The reason single channel architecture hasn't caught on isn't because it's a secret waiting to be discovered. It's because there's a secret to what makes it run, and therefore interoperability is not assured.
When it comes to living on the bleeding edge of technology, consider the importance of interoperability. If a new technology has to be seamlessly integrated with other existing devices - as is the case with Wi-Fi networks and devices - then using a non-standards based product is just asking for trouble.
If you'd like to get the whole picture on Wi-Fi architecture you've only to download our free white paper, WLAN RF Architecture Primer. And leave it to someone else to relearn the lessons of Wi-Fi.
The corded desk phone is becoming a rarity in most households, having long since been replaced by the more convenient wireless phone. Wireless phones offer untethered mobility, allowing us to make and receive calls wherever it's most convenient to do so. And we're not sacrificing features in the pursuit of mobility. Wireless phones today offer far more calling, conferencing, called ID, and answering options than corded phones ever did.
And then there's the office phone. Like a throwback in time, when we enter the typical place of work we enter a world of wired bondage. Why is the corded desk phone still so prominent in offices?
Single mode and dual-mode Wi-Fi enabled phones are available, but the small handheld devices don't offer the same user experience as a desk phone. There's something just right about a desk phone's handset that makes it ideal for hands-free talking when a speakerphone just won't do.
Problem is that the desk phone just hasn't made the same strides as the wireless handset. Sure, we've added IP connectivity, fancy displays for Caller ID, phone books that simplify dialing, and even wireless headsets to bring us a small measure of mobility. But the modern desk phone still requires a wired Ethernet port, and typically a Power over Ethernet power source, too.
This megalith with a direct lineage extending back to the telegraph is the last hurdle to the introduction of a wireless network edge. Replace the wired desk phone with an enterprise-class Wi-Fi desk phone and you can eliminate a big chuck of the wiring and edge switching infrastructure, lowering costs and saving electricity to boot. You also gain the freedom to locate the phone where you want it, and to make adds, moves, and changes at minimal expense.
134 years after the creation of the phone gave us the freedom to speak with the world, it today shackles us in wired bondage. It tethers us to Ethernet ports, to expensive infrastructure, to yesterday's way of working. Let's look forward to the day when Wi-Fi desk phones set us free at last.
With the ratification of 802.11n just around the corner, it’s a good time to reexamine the fundamentals of Wi-Fi design and determine how this blazingly fast new technology will affect you. Who Moved My Packets is about the design considerations associated with 802.11n data, voice, and video applications.
Let’s start with a discussion about designing for coverage or capacity. For some wireless applications simple connectivity is the biggest issue with which users have to contend. Designing a network for coverage ensures that a Wi-Fi signal can be received at any location in which a Wi-Fi device is likely to be used. Connectivity is the primary objective - bit rate, packet throughout, multi-media support, quality of service, and even redundancy of coverage are secondary considerations.
Consider an indoor application in which Wi-Fi is used to communicate with a pool of bar code scanners for inventory management. The users are few in number, the amount of data transmitted is relatively small. Since the bit rate of an in-building Wi-Fi connection typically falls with distance and in the presence of interference sources, what started as a high speed connection near an access point could drop to 1Mpbs or less just a short distance away. However, even at that low throughput, a network designed for coverage should be sufficient for the application.
Any Wi-Fi network can be designed for coverage, and as a rule, designing for coverage requires far fewer access points. Just crank up the access point power to full, space the access points so that their coverage patterns overlap slightly, and the design part is done. Interference compensation, fair airtime availability, security, and network management are another matter entirely, but they’re outside the scope of this discussion.
A handful of Wi-Fi vendors have made an art of promoting their products as requiring fewer access points. Some Wi-Fi array (multiple access points in one box) and single channel vendors go so far as to tout their “unique” ability to deliver what no other Wi-Fi vendors can accomplish.
It’s all smoke and mirrors. Wi-Fi vendors all use Wi-Fi chip sets from a small pool of IC suppliers, and by regulation the power output of the radios is tightly controller by the government. The distance over which they can transmit, using comparable antennas, is the same. If you pull back the curtain, the secret of their claims is simply that they’re designing for coverage. Nothing more.
In fact, it’s really something less. Why? Because many users need a system that is designed for capacity. In a network designed for capacity, coverage is a given but bit rate, packet throughout, multi-media support, quality of service, and often fault-tolerance are primary considerations.
A capacity-based network requires that the vendor pay keen attention to internal architecture, algorithmic processing, and packet handling necessary to service deployments with a high capacity requirement: (1) large number of users; (2) users that are densely congregated; or (3) applications using voice or streaming video or business-critical telemetry data. Coverage alone is not sufficient for these scenarios – they require guaranteed bit rate, high packet throughout, and quality of service.
These scenarios are already the norm in education, healthcare, and government applications, and are fast becoming typical in enterprise, retail, and industrial deployments. With the migration of data, voice, and video applications to 802.11n from wired LANs, the need for capacity-based Wi-Fi will skyrocket. Users will expect wire-like performance with virtually unconstrained capacity on their shiny new 802.11n networks.
So the next time you’re given a pitch for a wireless LAN with one half, one quarter, one eighth the number of access points of an Aruba network, ask the vendor if they’re designing for coverage or capacity. And ask for test data to back it up. Doing so will avoid following Maj. T.J. 'King' Kong on a ride that is a mistake from the outset.
The first quarter of 2009 witnessed the first ever decline in wired switch port sales, accompanied by sales of laptops exceeding those of desktop PCs. These events herald the advent of the always-connected mobile workforce. A workforce that expects network access to be available everywhere works transpires. An untethered workforce.
According to the PEW Internet & American Life Project, it is not unusual for Americans to use the Internet “constantly” at work. To do so effectively, Americans either need to be equipped with Ethernet extension cords or cut the cord entirely. Why? Because where once we worked at desks all day long, today roughly half of us spend at least 20 percent of our work time away from our primary workplace. That from Yankee Group's Anywhere Enterprise—Large: 2009 U.S. Transforming Infrastructure and Transforming Applications Survey.
We are transitioning into an increasingly mobile workforce. And to stay connected we are turning our backs on traditional wired Ethernet networks and looking to Wi-Fi. According to another Yankee Group report, Make Wireless the Burger of Enterprise LAN Access, Not the Fries, in 2006 about 43 percent of enterprises did not even offer Wi-Fi access. In 2009 that number dropped to just 11 percent. More telling, 45 percent of enterprises expect that by 2012 more than 50% of their work forces will be connected to an office Wi-Fi network.
The transition from wired to Wi-Fi did not come quickly or easily. Many generations of wireless pretenders have attempted to steal the edge access throne from Ethernet – starting with proprietary frequency hoppers and moving through three versions of 802.11 standards-based wireless.
In ascendance now is the real king – 802.11n. The first standards-based wireless to offer performance, security, and value that rivals or bests Ethernet. In difficult economic times, it’s value that sells, and for network access 802.11n wins hands down over wired networks except for a very limited number of power users.
The good news is that selecting an access method is not a binary choice. Users can mix Ethernet and 802.11n access, using the former only where necessary and the latter everywhere else. Indeed, Wave 1 of the Yankee Group survey revealed that forty percent of enterprises have no plans to deploy gigabit Ethernet to the desktop, preferring instead to move to 802.11n Wi-Fi. Following such a “rightsizing” process promises to deliver the greatest value and the lowest access cost per user, while offering a level of mobility a wired network can simply never match.
Just as the Roman Empire succumbed to invasions due to the loss of its greatness, so too is Ethernet edge access fading in the face of a more virtuous technology. So if you’re considering an office network refresh, or have a green field deployment, follow the tide. As Gibbons wrote, “the wind and the waves are always on the side of the ablest navigators.”
The long-awaited ratification of the high-speed 802.11n standard is slated to happen in mid-September. And the ramifications are both large and small.
Large in the sense that many enterprises have held back from deploying 802.11n until the standard is formally ratified. The reason? Fear of incompatibility between products compliant with the Draft 2.0 pre-standard and those built to meet the final standard.
Small because Draft 2.0 802.11n was already the de facto standard. In order to ameliorate concerns about potential incompatibilities, the Wi-Fi Alliance last year stated that interoperability was a given between products adhering to the draft and final versions of the standard. The September 2009 ratification will simply render that pronouncement prescient, with the draft morphing into the de jure standard with no significant changes to mandatory specifications.
When implemented "correctly," 802.11n is the first wireless technology that not only gives Ethernet a run for its money, it wins the skirmish, battle, and war. I say correctly because there are wide variations among vendors in how 802.11n channels and bands are managed, the impact of legacy 802.11a/b/g clients, the performance of densely deployed clients, and how secure 802.11n networks can be made against attack.
Wire-like reliability, harmonious client interoperability, exceptional throughput, and military-grade security are all possible – but none is assured. Not without additional engineering built on top of the 802.11n standard.
So to paraphrase Churchill, with the ratification of the 802.11n standard we’ve at last reached the end of the beginning. With the standard in place the impetus will now be on end users to validate vendors’ claims about reliability, interoperability, performance, and security. Conduct bake-offs, put equipment through its paces, ensure the veracity of claimed features and benefits. The results will open your eyes to the realization that the ratification of a standard is just the beginning of the real work.
If you’re interested in learning more about how Aruba is making 802.1n realize its full potential, please see the white paper ARM Yourself to Increase Enterprise WLAN Data Capacity (http://bit.ly/wFj9n) and the technical brief 802.11n Client Throughput Performance (http://bit.ly/bMvT).
A funny thing happened while Aruba was on the way to market with its innovative Virtual Branch Network (VBN) solution and "network rightsizing" initiative - Cisco got hot and bothered. Just after the VBN solution received the 2009 Best of Interop Las Vegas Award in the Wireless & Mobility category (http://bit.ly/aUocV), Joel Conover, senior manager, network systems at Cisco called the new 600 Series Branch Office Controller "a travesty" (http://bit.ly/KOmNv). He then claimed that Cisco offered the same capabilities with a new product...but only when used behind an expensive Cisco 800 Series ISR Router. Why does Cisco need an expensive WAN router when Aruba VBN does not, even for the entry level $99 list RAP-2?Aruba's rightsizing initiative promotes the use of Wi-Fi everywhere it can be used, wired networks only where they must be used. Rightsizing is a three step process whereby users assess current wired LAN utilization using a tool like StatSeeker (on average 30-40% of wired ports aren't used at all), consolidate switches and scale service plans/cooling/power consumption to match, and then invest the savings in upgrading the Wi-Fi network to 802.11n. Simple and logical, right? If you can save money you should. If your network is already rightsizied then the most you've invested is some time verifying that's the case.Customer reaction to rightsizing has been nothing short of amazing. The California State University System identified $30M of savings by shifting from wired networks to Wi-Fi (http://bit.ly/uvjbu). Cisco, however, had a different reaction.When John Cox published an article in Network World titled "Is it time to cut the Ethernet access cable?" (http://bit.ly/3cG4t) in which he noted that pervasive WLANs leave costly wired ports idle, Cisco flipped. Chris Kozup, ironically titled senior manager for mobility solutions at Cisco, maintained that an Ethernet cable is exactly what everyone needs. Aruba's right-sizing is a "shortsighted message from a wireless-only provider. It's penny-wise and pound-foolish." Using Wi-Fi as the primary form of network access is inflexible and the benefits exaggerated, he said. And yet....Cisco itself released a report stating that its own employees average 90 minutes per day of additional productive time using Wi-Fi (http://bit.ly/UNHQd). So why is Cisco so aggressively pushing wired LANs on customers? The answer to both questions can be found in Cisco's business model, which depends on profits generated from selling overpriced wired routers and wired ports. The big R&D bucks go to the wired side of the house, which is perhaps one reason why Cisco's lackluster wireless LANs are missing innovative features like application awareness and adaptive response to changes in local RF conditions. Cisco's focus on wired LANs and lack of wireless innovation has resulted in two consistent forms of behavior: attempts to replicate features found in Aruba's innovative products (Cisco's new band steering feature and the changes in their newest network management console appear to be almost exact replicas of Aruba features); and whining, as exemplified in the articles above.If you want real innovation, look to companies that identify problems and deliver creative solutions. Replicators and whiners need not apply.
Earlier postings on this blog highlighted the environmental downsides of wired LANs, and the benefits of using a Wi-Fi network as the primary means of accessing an enterprise network. For many readers, however, money is where the rubber meets the road. Is it possible to champion Green IT by shifting to Wi-Fi AND save money? As a staunch advocate of both Green IT and wireless, Aruba felt it should validate what it preaches by rightsizing its own enterprise network - eliminating as much of the wired LAN as possible, replacing it with a wireless network, and then assessing the savings, if any. Under the leadership of our Senior IT Director, Murali Mahalingam, we did just that - we rightsized Aruba’s IT infrastructure. In the process we not only dramatically lowered expenses but also increased employee productivity and reduced the company’s resource footprint.The first step was to review the performance of both our wired and wireless LANs to determine which best satisfied the majority of our application requirements while offering the lowest cost method of network access. The wireless LAN (WLAN) was determined superior on both counts. As a result we deployed high-speed 802.11n WLANs for >90% of our 500+ employees, and used a traditional wired LAN only for those employees who needed Gigabit Ethernet speeds in excess of the capability of the WLAN.A single WLAN was configured for data and voice applications for use by all Aruba employees located at our corporate headquarters, remote, branch offices, and home offices. We averaged roughly 15 users per wireless access point. We also provided this solution to the road warriors in our sales force, all of whom connect to the network while traveling. We also enable true mobility for users by providing wireless connections for voice clients (such as Wi-Fi connected desk phones from snom) and dual-mode Wi-Fi/cellular handsets for all employees at our corporate headquarters, remote, branch offices.Finally, we replaced virtual private network (VPN) clients and secure tokens with Aruba’s Remote Access Point (RAP) technology for all road warriors and employees who work remotely from home offices. RAP is a low-cost solution that combines a wireless access point with VPN security and policy enforcement firewall. The beauty of RAP is that it does not require any software to be installed on the laptop, PDA, smart phone or other devices with which it is used. RAP is also plug-and play: following initial provisioning by the IT department, no further management or configuration of the RAP is needed. Instead, the employee simply plugs the RAP into a local network (or plugs in a 3G cellular modem) and RAP automatically establishes a secure tunnel with our primary or back-up data center, establishes the corporate SSID, and initiates a secure session for both data and voice (including corporate phone extension calling). These steps enabled us to simplify our wiring closets by converting a large portion of wired ports to wireless. As a result we needed many fewer data switches. This reduced data room power consumption, increased operating time from our back-up battery uninterruptible power supply (UPS), and reduced cooling loading on our air conditioning system. The net result has been a lower utility bill and a reduction in the tons of CO2 emissions per year associated with equipment cooling.We were also able to lower cabling and IT support costs associated with office adds, moves, and changes. These might seem incidental, but for many enterprises the costs and wasted cabling quickly add up. For example, we recently merged a nearby engineering center for our AirWave division into our corporate headquarters facility. By leveraging our wireless network instead of installing 2-4 new cable drops per relocated employee, we used 10km less Category 5 copper cable. From a sustainability perspective, cable insulation, cable management/trunking systems, and wiring device accessories like plugs and boots, are make of PVC, polyethylene, polypropylene, synthetic rubber, MIC, nylon, and phenol formaldehyde. Each of the constituent chemicals has an impact on the environment when the part is made, when it’s used, should it catch fire, and when it is discarded. For example PVC is a commonly used insulation material, and contains lead and other toxic chemicals. Not only does it require special handling at the disposal site – something it rarely receives – but it produces highly toxic chemicals when burned. Polyethylene, polypropylene, synthetic rubber, and nylon are only slightly less toxic. See The Green Building Handbook for more details about the environmental impact of wiring according to energy consumption, resource consumption, global warming, acid rain, ozone depletion, toxicity, photochemical smog, occupational health, recycling impact, and hormone disruption In terms of expense reduction (read monetary savings), we were able to reduce corporate telecom expenses by using voice-over-Wi-Fi at our headquarters, remote offices and home office locations. When a user goes home and turns on his/her laptop, they are automatically logged into the corporate LAN via RAP. Their Wi-Fi enabled mobile phone will auto-register and support corporate VOIP calls instantly with no additional set up. A user with a Wi-Fi enabled mobile phone can dial a 4-digit extension number to call colleagues in a branch office anywhere in the world at no cost. Additionally, the user can make external calls leveraging the corporate IP PBX. Both of these benefits decrease billable cell phone usage, lowering our telecommunication expenses.Off-site meetings at shows and partner events are also less expensive since a single RAP provides all attendees with access to the corporate network. Some RAP models include 3G cellular connections, allowing low-cost cellular to be used in lieu of expensive convention/hotel Ethernet for WAN connectivity. No client software or IT overhead is required to handle such meetings.Additional savings were achieved with respect to our work with business partners. For example, Aruba’s offshore SAP Managed Services Team, based in India, was set up in less than one day for about 20 shared-service resources. Only a one-time set up of all user accounts was required on the wireless controller. RAP devices were shipped to the SAP consultant in India, who had only to plug them into a local WAN to obtain secure access to our SAP implementation and voice over Wi-Fi calling. We’re current expanding this model to other Aruba business partners and hundreds of remote and mobile workers.As a result of this project, Aruba reduced the utilization of costly wired ports by overlaying wireless LAN access for the majority of our work force. We reduced the number of closet switches and lowered power and cooling requirements up to 20%. Employee office moves no longer require IT support as the users can now sign-on to a single corporate SSID from anywhere in the world using wireless access. Deploying a wireless office saved on upfront, non-refundable costs such as a cubicle wiring - this has reduced IT network administration costs by 10-15%. Mobile employees can now connect their laptops to the corporate LAN without local IT assistance, regardless of the county in which they’re operating. This eliminates the need for local IT network administrators in branch offices. Nor is IT assistance required to install VPN clients, issue secure tokens, or deal with VPN misconfiguration and client problems. By deploying RAP devices with build in VPN capabilities, we actually gained more control and insight into remote clients for trouble-shooting purposes.Assumptions Total # of network users: 500 Size of existing facilities (in square feet): 60,000 Average number moves/add/changes per year, per employee: 0.50 Estimated Cost of the legacy wired networkNumber of switch ports required to support current users: 1,200 Number of access layer switches required for current usage: 26 Annual Capital Expense to support the 'Wired Edge': $182,888 Annual Operating Expense to support the 'Wired Edge': $83,417 Total annual cost of the 'Wired Edge': $266,305 The New 'Rightsized Network' Number of switch ports decommissioned after Rightsizing: 675 Number of switches decommissioned after Rightsizing: 14 Annual reduction in costs through Rightsizing: $149,796 3-Year Cost Assessment Reduction in 'Rightsized Network' Costs (3 years): $449,389 Total 3-year cost savings through Rightsizing: $398,546Savings Summary (Projected savings over next 3 years)Savings from “Network Rightsizing”: $398,546Savings from reduced IT support costs: $200,000Savings from increased use of Vo-FI calling: $600,000Savings from power, cabling and cooling costs: $ 50,000Total projected savings over 3 years: $ 1,248,546 Is it possible to champion Green IT by shifting to Wi-Fi AND save money? You bet. Aruba’s IT infrastructure is living proof that Green IT can both save money and help the planet.
The all-wireless workplace is wreaking havoc among cable and wiring device manufacturers, accustomed as they were to years of fast growth due to Ethernet overbuilding. The salad days are over and the stark new world is one with fewer wired ports and more wireless users. Like other businesses, cable and wiring device companies need to grow to survive. To do so they have to find new, expanding market opportunities. Were you such a manufacturer, how would you cope? Hold that thought.The economic turmoil roiling the economy is also impacting the networking market, putting immense pressure on smaller niche players. Within the wireless world a Darwinian cleansing is in full swing. Aruba and Cisco, the two leading enterprise wireless LAN vendors, have pulled away from the pack, leaving the remaining vendors to fight for business, recognition, funding.
Where only a year ago an IPO looked like a viable exit path for many of those vendors, that door is now firmly closed. Bridge loans, where available, are anathema to existing investors who are rightfully fearful about losing alpha position to new creditors should the venture go belly up. Even venture capital partners are taking a very hard line with portfolio companies, refusing to invest new funds and telling companies to spend every dollar/yen/euro/yuan as if it were their last – because it might well be. Were you a niche wireless LAN vendor, how would you cope? The confluence of interests between the cable and wiring device vendors – in search of a growing market but at risk of misstepping in a new field in which they are not expert – and weak wireless LAN vendors panicked for an exit strategy - makes for strange bedfellows. And poor strategy. The reason the weak wireless LAN vendors are in such poor shape is because their products / architecture / messaging / support was/were not up to snuff; something a new owner can't change that overnight or without significant investments. Instead of sliding down the drain and out of the gene pool, struggling wireless LAN vendors are being scooped up in nets trolled by cable and wiring device manufacturers that believe they’ve caught a bargain. Sadly for them, and their shareholders, the results prove otherwise.On 16 July 2008, upon completing the acquisition of Trapeze Networks, John Stroup, Belden’s President and Chief Executive Officer, was quoted in a press release as saying: “Belden’s strategy is to provide our customers with the world’s most reliable signal transmission solutions for mission-critical applications, encompassing wireless systems as well as optical fiber, copper cable, and related connectivity products. Mobility is a requirement among our enterprise customers, and today’s wireless technology provides the performance and security that make wireless an indispensable component of the enterprise network. The acquisition of Trapeze Networks uniquely positions Belden to address the enterprise market with a full complement of signal transmission solutions. We are eager to introduce Trapeze Networks’ technology to Belden’s enterprise customers.” Fast forward to yesterday when Belden announced its 4th quarter and full year 2008 results, including the Trapeze wireless division they acquired on a trolling expedition. Customers just aren't buying into the wired+wireless synergy story, this despite Belden being a first class cable manufacturer. Belden's operating loss in 2008 was $342.2 million, and the net loss was $361.0 million, $8.08 per diluted share. The earnings report stated that Trapeze revenues for the 12 month period were only $13.7M, resulting in an operating loss of $54M. The fact is that not all wireless LANs are created equal – the 30 January 2009 posting in this blog highlights that point. Acquiring companies and customers alike that compare competing solutions side-by-side, mano-a-mano, and check performance across a wide range of clients and with a range of interference sources will see the differences. Marketing literature is not a sound basis for comparison. Or acquisition.As for wired+wireless double-play strategies, consider this. Most enterprises use Cisco wired networks at the core, but the largest enterprises use Aruba wireless LANs as an overlay. Why do they do this when Cisco offers a wired+wireless solution? Gartner analysts Mark Fabbi and Alan Mac Neela summarized it best in Exploiting the Enterprise Networking Commoditization Curve when they noted that networks are not homogeneous systems but rather building blocks. They recommend that users select the best building blocks for each element of the network – core, edge switching, wireless LAN, etc. – and resist pressure to buy a single-vendor solution. Why? Because no one single vendor excels across the range of building blocks. Aruba excels at building wireless LANs. Niche wireless LAN vendors don't, a sad lesson that Belden is learning the hard way.
So set aside the false promise of wired+wireless synergies and look instead for best-in-class building blocks. That way you'll catch the genuine article.
We are today witnessing the coalescence of multiple technology breakthroughs into products that herald a fundamental shift in where and how we work:* High-speed 802.11n wireless LANs and portable computing platforms make it feasible to deploy an all-wireless workplace free from the constraints of wired Ethernet access ports;* Multi-core processors and hardware-based encryption accelerators make possible high-throughout wireless LAN access points and controllers capable of handling the volumes of encrypted traffic, and the wide range of applications, expected in an all-wireless workplace;* Energy efficient semiconductors and power supplies make possible products that perform more functions but consume less energy than previous alternatives;* Infrastructure-based controls and Quality of Service can deliver the reliability and determinism required by a broad range of applications, from computer connectivity to telephony and streaming video;* Identity-based security with central encryption, strong authentication, and access control policies enable roaming users to be correctly identified, regardless of where or how they access the network, thereby enhancing mobility in ways not possible using legacy security mechanisms. What lies before us is a workplace in which users have greater mobility to choose where they work, copper cabling takes a backseat to Wi-Fi as the primary access method, and information technology (IT) infrastructure does more but uses less power. “All-wireless” as used in this context is a metaphor for a workplace that affords secure mobility to its users. That workplace could be in a traditional office or campus, at home, or on the road. Our newfound mobility will have profound environmental, economic, human, and social effects. Sustainability (in terms of energy and resource consumption), user efficiency and productivity, space/architectural/urban planning, and the total cost of network/facility ownership will all be impacted. Additionally, unfettered mobility will result in a wide range of new applications and jobs - perhaps even whole new categories of employment - not previously anticipated or conceivable.The objective of The Green Island News is to discuss the technology and companies behind this sea change, and to explore the micro- through macro-level impact of the all-wireless workplace. The scope is very broad, the topics very wide. The perspective will be one of an industry insider looking outwards, and hopefully will cast a different light on the subject than one finds in the popular press.If you're interested in research on Green Island-related topics, please consider participation in The Green Island Project. For details please see www.arubanetworks.com/company/green_island.php.
Time was when you left work at the office. Those days are long gone. Enterprises and institutions with workforces, offices, or colleagues spread across time zones often have time- and location-shifted working conditions.
Posts
