• Think About the surveillance case application that would go hand in hand with any deployment.

    Think about the upstream traffic for this kind of an application?????

  • WirelesswizardCWSP Escribi?3:

    Hi All,

    I have been watching this topic for a long time and i feel that there are a few things that are either unoticed or biased .

    It good to do a lot of talking but one will we able to evaluate things unbiased once we are no way associated to the product .

    Here we go .....

    1) How abt upstream throughput of a 802.11n Beamforming radio??

    Not sure what you mean here. There isn't currently an 11n beamforming station.

    WirelesswizardCWSP Escribi?3:

    2) How does it Behave when you have one legacy client associated to the 11n AP which already has a handfull of 11n clients??

    I'll test it, but I'll take a shot at it and assume that it uses protection modes just like the 11n standard requires.

    WirelesswizardCWSP Escribi?3:

    3) Does it provide Throughput to clients connected equally or it does Provide excellent throughput to the closest and DOS of to others???

    I'm a bit lost on this one. How would it perform a DoS to other STA's?

    WirelesswizardCWSP Escribi?3:

    4) test the clients in Diffrent directions and different rates.

    I agree that more testing should be done, but I have personally seen one Ruckus AP Tx streaming HD to 3 STA's, two of which were mobile laptops. Walking with the laptop in all directions of the AP. I do agree that I need to test it with more than 3 STA's.

    WirelesswizardCWSP Escribi?3:

    I wish everyone in the forum to take a vendor nuetral standpoint .I know what i am questioning about.

    Since I'm the only one so far that has mentioned a vendor, I'll take that to mean that you wish I would take a vendor neutral approach.

    To be honest, it isn't possible to be vendor neutral when many companies such as Xirrus, Ruckus, Aerohive and Meru innovate beyond the traditional methods of Wi-Fi. Each vendor has to be taken for what they do well and what they don't do well.

    Search my other threads. I give much props to many other vendors for what they are doing. This thread is talking about beam forming and hands-down Ruckus does that better than anyone. Are there issues that need to be considered with beam forming? Absolutely. Just like there are issues with all Wi-Fi technology.

    WirelesswizardCWSP Escribi?3:

    If anyone wants to know the pitfalls of beamforming test what i mentioned above and get back .Always run the test with multiple clients in different directions.

    Roma has said as much as well and it deserves it's own test. I have Ruckus gear in the lab but I won't be home until Dec 20th or so. I plan a comprehensive test at that time.

    WirelesswizardCWSP Escribi?3:

    If you have clients in one direction or one client coennected to the Ap, your test would yield good results. (But this is what biased testing is all about) Have legacy clients,Have one client at gud connection speed and other at different rates.Test both upstream and downstream throughput.(This is how testing needs to be done. Simulate the actual network scenario)

    Simulate what actual network scenario? Give me any vendor and I can throw a legitimate network scenario at it that will make it yield good results. I totally agree that vendors test their gear in environments where they will excel.

    WirelesswizardCWSP Escribi?3:

    Please donot go by the reports present in the net .They are totally biased :(

    Not all tests are biased. If so, then we shouldn't read any of them, including mine.

    I get the hint from some people that somehow I'm biased towards Ruckus. In ways, I am because of what they do well. I don't get paid by Ruckus and I wasn't chosen to speak at the road show for being a proponent of Ruckus tech.

    I would do a road show for many companies and for each vendor I could point out what they do well, and what they don't do well.

    During my presentation at the Ruckus road shows I specifically point out hidden node (hidden STA) problem and upstream throughput.

    I get questions about Meru, Cisco and Xirrus during the presentations. I tell them objectively what they do right and what they could improve on. I've said things during the road show that Ruckus doesn't want to hear because no technology is perfect. Of all vendors, Ruckus is the best at knowing that they aren't the solution for every Wi-Fi situation.

    WirelesswizardCWSP Escribi?3:


    - GT

  • Hi GT (My guru)

    1) When i talk abt upstream throughput .
    Its is the througput from the Mu's to the
    AP .AP is the beamforming radio..
    Again while running the test have the client in
    all directions ,

    2)By Default if protection is disabled ??

    3) When i say DOS. It means that one station eats up the Airtime completely. You will get clarity if you run this test.

    Gene im not saying that My guru is biased .Im saying valid points were unnoticed .

    But im not getting on the backfoot(Reports on the net are biased)


Page 4 of 4