If you put the 3 APs close to each other, the cell coverage will be roughly the same. And if you configure each one to use a different non-overlapping channel, there will be no interference between them. So, you'll get a combined rate in the cell of 33 Mbps (3 x 11 Mbps) to share between the clients of the 3 APs. Each client will communicate at no more than 11 Mbps, but you will be able to put 3 times the number of clients.
Think of it as using 3 hubs to serve the clients in an Ethernet wired environment. The total bandwidth could be seen as 30 Mbps. Just a little tricky ;-).
As I see it, the problem could arise with the association between the clients and the APs. You can configure one third of the clients to prefer AP#1, another third to prefer AP#2 and so on. It doesn't seem to be a good solution. Or, you can rely on the inherent load balancing mechanisms that makes a client, according to Cisco, select the best AP to associate with.
Has anyone deployed a scenario like this? Do the clients distribute evenly with respect to the APs? Or do they begin to disassociate and reassociate frequently?
Javier
