<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:taxo="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/taxonomy/" version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>topic Re: Wireless N deployment scenario in Wireless</title>
    <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/wireless/wireless-n-deployment-scenario/m-p/1214287#M85694</link>
    <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;I was told by Cisco engineers to run 40 MHZ channel bonded N on the 5 Ghz side allowing speeds of up to 300 Mbps and regular N (20 mhz channel width) on the 2.4 side (allows up to 144 Mbps).&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I have deployed this scenario in a threes tory building with 12 1140 AP's and it seems to work well.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I run 4404 controllers with 5.2 code.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Most of my clients seem to associate on the 2.4 side. I see a few A clients and rarely anyone running 5 Ghz N. Most of the laptops we use do not have N NIC cards though. &lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I don't advertise N rate speeds as I deployed N for the ability to deal with mulitpath issues and improve conditions for legacy A/B/G clients. So long as the users get a good connection with a halfway decent data rate...it meets the requirements (and most users will not notice any slownes)&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Also, 5 Ghz just does not have the coverage that 2.4 ghz does (I just don't have the budget to deploy all the access points that I would like to...so they are spread out a bit more than I would like). &lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Curious what others have to say about this....&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Thu, 04 Jun 2009 22:47:05 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>phillip.vansickle</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2009-06-04T22:47:05Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>Wireless N deployment scenario</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/wireless/wireless-n-deployment-scenario/m-p/1214286#M85693</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;When designing a Wireless N network to support both B/G and N clients I've come up with the following:&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;1.) Dedicate the 5.0GHz radio for N giving you 9 non-overlapping channels to work with and allowing clients to connect at 300Mbps (when 40MHz channels).&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;2.) Use the 2.4GHz frequency as legacy B/G access for all other clients.  If we wanted 300Mbps speeds on the 2.4GHz radio we would only have 1 non-overlapping channel to work with (when using 40MHz channels).&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Are my assumptions correct or does anyone else have a better design?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Thanks!&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Sun, 04 Jul 2021 00:40:59 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/wireless/wireless-n-deployment-scenario/m-p/1214286#M85693</guid>
      <dc:creator>klein425</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2021-07-04T00:40:59Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Wireless N deployment scenario</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/wireless/wireless-n-deployment-scenario/m-p/1214287#M85694</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;I was told by Cisco engineers to run 40 MHZ channel bonded N on the 5 Ghz side allowing speeds of up to 300 Mbps and regular N (20 mhz channel width) on the 2.4 side (allows up to 144 Mbps).&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I have deployed this scenario in a threes tory building with 12 1140 AP's and it seems to work well.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I run 4404 controllers with 5.2 code.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Most of my clients seem to associate on the 2.4 side. I see a few A clients and rarely anyone running 5 Ghz N. Most of the laptops we use do not have N NIC cards though. &lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I don't advertise N rate speeds as I deployed N for the ability to deal with mulitpath issues and improve conditions for legacy A/B/G clients. So long as the users get a good connection with a halfway decent data rate...it meets the requirements (and most users will not notice any slownes)&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Also, 5 Ghz just does not have the coverage that 2.4 ghz does (I just don't have the budget to deploy all the access points that I would like to...so they are spread out a bit more than I would like). &lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Curious what others have to say about this....&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 04 Jun 2009 22:47:05 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/wireless/wireless-n-deployment-scenario/m-p/1214287#M85694</guid>
      <dc:creator>phillip.vansickle</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2009-06-04T22:47:05Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Wireless N deployment scenario</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/wireless/wireless-n-deployment-scenario/m-p/1214288#M85695</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;802.11n Design and Deployment Guidelines&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;A class="jive-link-custom" href="http://www.cisco.com/en/US/solutions/collateral/ns340/ns394/ns348/ns767/white_paper_80211n_design_and_deployment_guidelines.html" target="_blank"&gt;http://www.cisco.com/en/US/solutions/collateral/ns340/ns394/ns348/ns767/white_paper_80211n_design_and_deployment_guidelines.html&lt;/A&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 04 Jun 2009 23:30:50 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/wireless/wireless-n-deployment-scenario/m-p/1214288#M85695</guid>
      <dc:creator>Leo Laohoo</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2009-06-04T23:30:50Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

