• July 17, 2019, 03:17:14 AM
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register. Registration is free.
Did you miss your activation email?

Author Topic: WLAN 8100  (Read 18723 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline alexbat

  • Rookie
  • **
  • Posts: 12
Re: WLAN 8100
« Reply #15 on: August 26, 2011, 05:23:05 AM »
Quote
2x3, but reportedly, with the chipset that is being used by Avaya in the 8100, the throughput is virtually identical to 3x3.

From datasheets:
8120 has 3 RF with internal antennas and own's dsp.
8120E has 2x8120 and two external 3x3 MIMO antennas or one 6x6 MIMO antenna.
I am wrong?


Offline Jon Hurtt

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 142
Re: WLAN 8100
« Reply #16 on: January 04, 2012, 02:59:53 PM »
What is the difference in who will be responsible for "split plane"?
It is obvious that:
- decreases the traffic of the data core switches;
- WLAN capacity increases in direct proportion to the number of access points.

Sorry I neglected to respond

When it comes to apply policies to WLAN Traffic, we are now asking the Access Point to apply policies, limit users and other security measures. In a centralized WLAN infrastructure these were done by the Wireless Controller. These types of task can be done on a regular basis at a higher speed by L2/L3 Switches. I would think a L2/L3 switch would be better equipped to handle this extra load.

Another factor is Roaming of mobile devices, in a Centralized WLAN infrastructure that was not much of a problem, but when Access Points now have to handle what the Controller used to handle, and now we want the AP to handle Roaming tunnels to ensure minimal wireless disruption. If you are running VoWLAN this becomes important.

When you start to increase the requirements inside the Access Points that could drive price of the device up as well.

Just one question which is better prepared to handle more task? The AP or L2/L3 Switch?

Offline mratner

  • Rookie
  • **
  • Posts: 5
Re: WLAN 8100
« Reply #17 on: January 19, 2012, 11:57:40 PM »
Hi. Was recently completed project. If something is interesting, there is a real opportunity to test.

Offline mratner

  • Rookie
  • **
  • Posts: 5
Re: WLAN 8100
« Reply #18 on: January 20, 2012, 01:05:57 AM »
APs

Offline 3l3m3n7

  • Rookie
  • **
  • Posts: 19
Re: WLAN 8100
« Reply #19 on: February 28, 2012, 12:27:44 AM »
I have the 8100 wireless controller an Aps installed, but with the actual release the controller is rebooted by himself. Avaya give me a "temporary" release to solved this issue. The controller is not rebooting anymore, but i have disconnections issues.
There is anyone here who knows if split plane is already working? o will be present in the new release?

Offline mratner

  • Rookie
  • **
  • Posts: 5
Re: WLAN 8100
« Reply #20 on: February 29, 2012, 12:13:27 AM »
I'll periodically watch the problem - one of the controllers periodically disconnected from the mobile domain and loses some of the settings. Simple reboot return conf and return it to domain... TT

Offline mdieter1

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 27
Re: WLAN 8100
« Reply #21 on: March 02, 2012, 11:38:34 AM »
I attended the Avaya Tech Forum in Orlando in February and they gave a product roadmap for the next 18-24+ months.  It was NDA, but I would strongly encourage you to contact your SE and ask for a similar presentation.  I am not fully versed in the intricacies of WLAN, but I found their roadmap very impressive.  Personally think that tunneling all traffic back to controllers is an idea that has outlived its usefulness and from my perspective if you have a significant investment in Avaya wired switches (and intend to continue with them) then it would be foolish not to consider adopting their WLAN products.  The administrative and operational advantages of consolidating wired and WLAN are simply too compelling---which is an idea that at least Aruba shares since they are extremely aggressively promoting their entry into the wired switch market.

Offline mratner

  • Rookie
  • **
  • Posts: 5
Re: WLAN 8100
« Reply #22 on: May 22, 2012, 06:10:30 AM »
WLAN 8100 version 1.2 released.


Offline Triniman

  • Rookie
  • **
  • Posts: 2
Re: WLAN 8100
« Reply #23 on: May 30, 2012, 10:04:17 AM »
FYI...

Does anyone know who makes the AP's for Avaya?

The Juniper AX series AP's are made by the same vendor...

Physically Avaya blocks the console port and has no external power supply jack...

The Juniper doesn't have the 5 Ghz antennas...


Offline Jon Hurtt

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 142
Re: WLAN 8100
« Reply #24 on: May 30, 2012, 10:11:20 AM »
FYI...

Does anyone know who makes the AP's for Avaya?

The Juniper AX series AP's are made by the same vendor...

Physically Avaya blocks the console port and has no external power supply jack...

The Juniper doesn't have the 5 Ghz antennas...

The APs are developed in house by Avaya... If they have similar components that is normal as many Manufactures use the same chipsets. Avaya only blocks the console port with the Access Point Cover... if you remove the cover you can access the console (used for debugging and troubleshooting)

The Juniper AX are the pre-Trapeze/Beldon Acquisition... and you are correct they are only 2.4Ghz capable. (Note the Avaya 8180 AP are dual band)

Offline zulcap

  • Rookie
  • **
  • Posts: 3
Re: WLAN 8100
« Reply #25 on: June 07, 2012, 03:12:15 AM »
Hi All,

Do you guys have any idea what is the maximum local DB client account can be stored in WC8180? currently I have upgraded my WC8180 software image to 1.2.0.075 version with diagnostic image 1.0.2.0 version. Much appreciated if you guys can assist me on this.

Thanks!!! ;)

Offline PinkElephant

  • Rookie
  • **
  • Posts: 3
Re: WLAN 8100
« Reply #26 on: July 17, 2012, 02:02:38 PM »
Hi All,

Do you guys have any idea what is the maximum local DB client account can be stored in WC8180? currently I have upgraded my WC8180 software image to 1.2.0.075 version with diagnostic image 1.0.2.0 version. Much appreciated if you guys can assist me on this.

Thanks!!! ;)

It should be around 4k, but if you are planning on going that high you might as well use a radius server.