North American Network Operators Group

Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical

Re: cpu needed to NAT 45mbs

  • From: Carl Karsten
  • Date: Mon Nov 12 23:57:33 2007

Thank you for all the advice - it was nice to see 20 replies that all basically agreed (and with me too.) If only the 6 people involved in this project were such.

On Wifi for 1000:

I have tried to make sure everyone involved in this PyCon Wifi project has read - too bad some have read it and don't get it. I think it will be OK, because someone else wrote up the plan, which is basically to use

If anyone would like to see it in action, I am sure something can be arranged. (you are welcome to come look at it, but I would think would want to actually peek under the hood and see some stuff in real time, etc. ) March 13-16 in Chicago.

Carl K

Joel Jaeggli wrote:
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 environment...

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.


-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Joel
Sent: Saturday, November 10, 2007 11:51 PM
To: Adrian Chadd
Cc: Suresh Ramasubramanian; [email protected]
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

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.)