Why One Access Point Per Classroom Approach Is Wrong. After much discussion with K 1. WLAN vendors, and other Wireless LAN Professionals, I thought it good to get all this out on the table in a single blog post. I started writing a post to explain my position on the approach some vendors and integrators use when selling Wi Fi solutions to K 1. The title kind of succinctly explains my position. After spending most of the day on the blog post, I realized it was over 2. So instead I turned it into a PDF white paper. Please share your comments and suggestions on this article in the comment section below, or email me directly at keith at WLANPros dot com. This article is to be a starting point to continue the discussions weve been having on Twitter and via Direct Messages. Download PDF article here Why One AP Per Classroom Approach is Wrong. First, let me say if after doing a going through a proper WLAN design process you end up with a series of classrooms, each with a single Access Point more power to you That is not what I am referring to in this article. I am concerned with the trend in our industry of promoting the quick and easy methodology of One Access Point Per Classroom and without any real design processes building out a wireless networks with literally one Access Point in each classroom. Compounding these bad habits is the practice of not even doing a post installation validation survey to find how much co channel interference actually exists, or what other problems might have been created. The System for Award Management SAM is an official website of the U. S. government. There is no cost to use SAM. You can use this site for FREE to. Producing keygens, licenses for different protection systems FlexLM, SentinelLM, ElanLM, CrypKey, etc. Producing emulators or crack for any kind of dongles. Ekahau Site Survey ProfessionalsI know many people with Wireless LAN design experience despise the use of blanket statements as real world methodologies. Other examples of this are things like One Access Point for every 2,0. Access Point every 1. Cell Overlap. That is exactly what I am attempting to agree with. This One Access Point Per Classroom is a blanket statement, and that approach to definingdesigning Wireless LANs is wrong. I am suggesting to always complete proper design processes that include defining requirements, designing to meet those requirements and then validating that the installed solution meets all the requirements. Promoting a One Access Point Per Classroom design is either lazy, ignorant, andor greedy. The 1 for 1 is a marketing campaign meant to sell Access Points, and is not a Wireless LAN design methodology. Many in the Wireless LAN industry have taken advantage of the confusion between the up and coming 1 1 initiative within K 1. Ekahau Site Survey Professional Development' title='Ekahau Site Survey Professional Development' />Ekahau Site Survey ESSPRO8X Ekahau Site Survey Professional. Get expert recommendations for deploying a high density wireless LAN network in this Cisco design guide. Sign up for our WiFi blog Get the latest WiFi design and deployment stories from the creators of the leading WiFi site survey and planning tool. The premise is based on planning for a minimum of one device per pupil. Many schools are moving towards increasing electronic based education methods and their infrastructure needs to support at least 1 device per 1 pupil counts. Additionally, most schools have seen a massive increase in the Bring Your Own Device phenomenon. Even primary schools frequently have the youngest children bringing smartphones or tablets to school. Sidebar At my grandchildrens elementary school in rural middle Georgia the school is moving to a BYOD model where pupils are strongly encouraged to bring their devices to class for use in the education process. In fact, their school officials sent a letter a few months ago to all parents listing what types of devices would be supported, hinting that these would make great Christmas presents. At one school district, I was specifically asked by their school board to design their wireless LAN infrastructure to meet a 5 1 ratio. Rapidshare Pro For. Their expectation was that the Wireless LAN would someday need to support up to five devices per person. Though I think this is a bit of stretch, we have seen in many of our districts a greater than 2 1 device count today. But even these estimates need to take into account how many devices will actively be used at once, not just carried in a backpack or pocket. But it does widen the discussion of proper Wireless LAN design issues. Note There are big differences between a device associated and connected via an Access Point, and a device actively sending data across the RF frequency. One is merely associated, the other sharing a load on the channel along with all other Access Points and client radios on the same channel. So we know the problem there are going to be lots and lots of devices using Wi Fi to access the network in our K 1. They want to prepare for this onslaught, and send out RFPs or contact their VARs, all to get on top of this impending load on their networks. Sometimes even those writing the RFPs dont understand RF or 8. One Access Point Per Classroom requirement, or higher, in their requests. Because other school districts have done it, the buzz language around 1 1 is easy to plop down in the RFP, especially when you have no frame of reference on RF and 8. It is our job as Wireless LAN Professionals to design correctly, even if it includes needing to educate our customers. Enterprise WLAN Design Processes. Normally in most enterprise WLAN installations we follow a proscribed process of Define collect information from the customer and fix on a specific set of requirements to design to. These include number of devices, area to be covered, estimated device count growth over time, density, applications in use as best as can be gleaned, etc. See Andrew Von Nagys presentation from WLPC Wireless LAN Professionals Conference for a great process used in definition stage in the links below. Video Slides. Design using in depth knowledge of RF fundamentals, antenna principles, and how the 8. Access Point on a Stick methods, to arrive at a draft design. But either way, design and measure to make sure the number of Access Points, power settings, antenna choices, and Access Point placement work together to meet all the design requirements from the definition stage. Note There exists weeks of training classes to understand these concepts and to learn how to design wireless LANs properly this is not something to be taken lightly. Never has the term garbage in garbage out been more applicable. Install often the easiest of the WLAN infrastructure steps. Have cabling teams place Category 6 or better cable to each Access Point location in accordance with wiring standards and local codes, certify the new cabling runs, confirm switch port configurations, mount Access Points, and test wired side connectivity. Validate this is the critical phase whereby we prove the design actually did meet the design requirements through a site survey, and followed up with active monitoring of network performance during school hours. Think of it as the operational check any technical system should have before handover to the customer. This is a step many dont do thus just relying on the assumptions made in the design phase and never really knowing how the installed Access Points react with each other and with their surroundings. Remediate if any of the Access Point placements, channel or power settings are sub optimal, or if you need to addremove Access Points, or to turn off radios. This is the phase where we fix whatever was wrong, so the WLAN does meet all the design requirements. Yet, somehow in the world of K 1. One of the more popular techniques is to mistake the 1 1 initiative of one device per pupil, and replace it with One Access Point Per Classroom. This is a very simple design process often used to charge full scope prices for partial quality work. SOLVED Unifi UAP AC LR vs UAP AC PRO What does Pro have to offer Wireless Networking. The new AC LRs are much different than the old UAP LRs, in that they have a funky antenna design that helps connect, rather than cranking up their transmit power. The two main advantages of the AC Pro are 8. POE compliance, only helpful if you already use a 8. Po. E switch. 3 spatial streams in both bands, allowing for higher theoretical thoughput. Note that there are very few 3. SS client devices out there, so this is kind of a moot point. You cant really go wrong with the new UAP AC LRs or the new UAP AC Lites. The new LR will get slightly better receive signal from the clients because of the antenna. Also, dont try to design a wireless LAN in the Uni. Fi controller. It doesnt take into account attenuation from walls or any other sort of obstructions. It also doesnt use the actual antenna pattern, but instead pretends the propagation is a perfect circle. Professional tools such as Ekahau Site Survey, Tamosoft or IBWave do a proper job of this.