WAP321 - Loosing connection to DHCP Server

ISMepearson · ‎01-02-2013

Hello,

I have two WAP321s in my office. The network they are on is a single VLAN (172.16.10.x). Both WAPs are setup with the same SSID, and I have setup Single Point Setup.

I am having a problem that was happening before I setup Single Point Setup, and it is still happening. Basically wireless will be up and running fine for part of the day. Then people throughout the office will begin to lose their connections to the DHCP server. They still retain the connection to the WAP, but can no longer access the network.

The only way I have been able to fix this issue is to reboot the WAP. As soon as it reboots the connections come back. At first I thought it was due to the number of connections (which is why we now have 2 WAPs), however we only have about 20-25 conncurrent connections.

I put in the second WAP to try to balance out the load but this does not seem to be working. Is there a setting I need to change on the WAPs to balance out the load?

Has anyone seen this issue before? Did I miss something in my setup?

Thanks.

Frank Peter · ‎01-03-2013

Hi Eric,

I only had such issues with single Point Setup activated and it disappeared when I deactivated the feature. However, did you also tried an older firmware? I've got the feeling that (since CISCO added the Single Point Setup feature) the WAP became quiet unstable (DHCP Server not reachable, Webinterface down,...).

By the way, I don't think there is a feature for real load balancing between different WAPs.

Regards,

Frank

ISMepearson · ‎01-03-2013

Thanks for the Reply.

Actually I had the same issues before I upgraded the Firmware and before I turned on Single Point Server.

In fact the issue started when I only had one WAP321. I thought the issues were due to too many users on that one WAP, which is why I got the second one.

However the problem has not gone away.

If there is no way to load balance, then should I be looking at a different WAP? We are a small office, about 30 employees, so I don't need anything too big. But of course just about everyone has laptops and phones so there are a lot of wireless connections.

Any other suggestions would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks,

Eric

Frank Peter · ‎01-03-2013

What you could try is to set up two differnet SSIDs (one on each access point) using the same VLAN. Then you could configure half of the devices to use the first WAP (SSID1) and the other half of the devices to use the second WAP (SSID2).

Yes, this is NOT a load balancing and it is a little work to configure. But for testing...? They will still use the same DHCP Server and VLAN. So maybe you could find out wether this is really a matter of the number of sessions...

Frank Peter · ‎01-03-2013

Another way may be to use this setting in the radio settings:

Maximum Associated Clients—The maximum number of stations allowed

to access this WAP device at any one time. You can enter an integer between

0 and 200. The default is 200 stations.

If you set the value to 15 or 20, I guess it will force the rest of the clients to connect to the other WAP. But remember, if you configure 15 on each WAP, you can only have 30 devices connect at the same time.

Another disadvantage of this setting is that a client tries to connect to the stongest signal. So maybe some of the clients will try it over and over again (if the max is already reached) and won't try to connect to the second one.

ISMepearson · ‎01-03-2013

Thanks. I will try that.

ISMepearson · ‎01-03-2013

That seems to have helped.

Do you know if there is any way to kick people off if they are idle for a certain amount of time?

Thanks,

Eric

Frank Peter · ‎01-08-2013

Sorry, I don't know such a feature in the WAP321. Maybe anybody else?

Eric Moyers · ‎01-08-2013

Hi, My name is Eric Moyers. I am a Network Support Engineer in the Cisco Small Business Support Center. Thank you for using the Cisco Community Post Forums.

The maximum active WLAN client allowed on the WAP321 is 32.

To get a better understanding about your wireless environment, are the WAP's hardwired into the network?

What are you using as the DHCP Server?

Since you have the WAP321 you could setup the captive portal. 1) this would allow you to control who and what is connecting to the access point by giving them a specific sign in. Also you can set up an idle time that would disconnect them as well.

Thanks

Eric Moyers .:|:.:|:.

Cisco Small Business US STAC Advanced Support Engineer

CCNA, CCNA-Wireless

866-606-1866 ext 601027

Mon - Fri 09:00 - 18:00 (UTC - 05:00)

*Please rate the Post so other will know when an answer has been found.

ISMepearson · ‎01-15-2013

Yes they are hardwired to my network.

We currently have a "flat" network, so only one subnet, and my DHCP server is a Windows Server 2003 system.

Thinking the issue was caused by too many users I added a third WAP321. Now, I average about 15 users on each.

I am still having problems.

The issues seem to be more prevelent on Phones and iPads than on PCs.

Basically what I am seeing is that things will be fine then I will get a call from a user who says their device is not connecting. When I check the device, it is seeing the WAP321 fine it is just not getting a DHCP address. I have checked my DHCP server and there are avaialable IPs. The only solution to this issue is to reboot the WAP321. After the reboot the devices seem to connect fine. This will happen randomly throughout the day, and happens to me everyday when I turn on my iPad at lunch time.

How does Captive Portal work? Would that mean that each day when the user comes in they would have to sign in? Or is it a one time sign in, and then the device is remembered?

How do I set the Idle Time? I couldn't find that setting.

Thanks,

Eric

Eric Moyers · ‎01-15-2013

Captive Portal is designed to have the user authenticate each time they enter the area covered by that portal. They will not have to authenticate again until they sign out, leave the area and loose connection or the device disassociates them after a specified period. That is designated by two options in the Instance configuration section.

Away Timeout--The amount of time a user can remain idle before automatically being logged out. If the value is set to 0, the timeout is not enforced. The range is from 0 to 1440 minutes. The default value is 60 minutes.

Session Timeout--The amount of time to wait before terminating a session. A user is logged out after the session timeout is reached. If the value is set to 0, the timeout is not enforced. The range is from 0 to 1440 minutes. The default value is 0.

Are the phones that are having issues Apples? There is some issue with WPA2 security and Apple IPads and IPhones. You might want to see about adjusting your security settings some and test.

Thanks

Eric Moyers .:|:.:|:.

Cisco Small Business US STAC Advanced Support Engineer

CCNA, CCNA-Wireless

866-606-1866 ext 601027

Mon - Fri 09:00 - 18:00 (UTC - 05:00)

*Please rate the Post so other will know when an answer has been found.

ISMepearson · ‎01-15-2013

Yes, actually most of the problems are on Apple products (iphone, ipad, MACs).

Our current security settings are WPA Personal, with WPA2 and CCMP(AES) checked.

What would you suggest I change it to? Would just going to WPA instead of WPA2 work? Or should I be looking to change the security to WPA Enterprise? I believe those are my only choices on this WAP without turning off security.

Thanks,

Eric

mpyhala · ‎01-15-2013

Eric,

Try giving your iPad a static LAN IP address before connecting. If you are able to connect and stay connected there might be a DHCP issue between the WAP and DHCP server.

You might want to extend the DHCP lease time to 24 hours to stop devices from having to renew multiple times daily.

Please keep us updated.

- Marty

Mustaffahamadi_2 · ‎02-27-2013

Hi,

I've experienced a similar issue with the wap321.

Devices would connect/disconnect/reconnect frequently, show connected but no traffic would pass. The windows devices would just show up limited connectivity but then sort themselves out then go back to limited.. painfull experience, unhappy users.

I changed the radios to wifiG and the connection reliability has improved.

Not ideal but this will do until I either replace them or work out what is going on..

groupetechno · ‎12-05-2014

Do you find a stable solution ?