Wetting the feet with wireless

[CriscoSystems]

Hi-ho nice NetPro folks.

I've been asked to give a detailed presentation on an idea that I stupidly proferred in a team meeting months ago, about how we might speed up our WAN connections by piggybacking, wirelessly, off of a much faster LAN in a neighboring building (it's OUR offices in that building, so this is not piracy).

The wiring in our building (bldg #525) is what's blamed for our slowness in accessing an out-of-state server. Three doors down at bldg #333 they get lightning-speed access to the same server. Building management at 525 says the wiring in 525 is staying as it is, no exceptions.

So I thought, what about if we link our LAN here on the 21st floor of 525, wireless-like, to the zippy LAN at 333? We don't have a clear optical line to 333, and I don't know of any WiFi that operates faster than 54 Mbps (we're currently on 100Mbps FE), and that, plus encryption & firewall delays, will probably zotz whatever speed gains we'd make from the 333 LAN.

However, my team doesn't want to hear this. They want me to present something.

So - is there a way (even if only in theory) to wirelessly link our 21st floor LAN to the 333 LAN two blocks away, at a speed rivalling FE, and with decent security?

Thanks oodles.

[Wilson Samuel]

Hi,

After going through your post, I guess the issue is with the wiring closet (or patch panel) issue at the 525. Hence no amt of good Uplink connectivity to Bldg # 333 would do any good.

So now there is an option which is quite good and that is to make the Bldg 525 a WiFi zone with uplink to Bldg 333.

These days with the help of 802.1X, I guess security can be well taken care of.

The Cisco 1230AG Wireless AP with a suitable Wireless Lan Controller along with 802.1x technology can make your lives easier, however the costs may significantly increase depending upon the number of users in the building number 525

http://cisco.com/en/US/products/ps6108/products_data_sheet0900aecd801b9068.html

http://cisco.com/en/US/products/hw/wireless/index.html

Hope that helps,

Please rate, if it helps,

Kind Regards,

Wilson Samuel

PS: You may find the Enterprise Mobility SRND good for the presentation purposes.

[CriscoSystems]

I'm confused, you said that because the patch panel at 525 is no good, "no amt of good uplink connectivity to Bldg 333 would do any good," and the very next thing you said was that the good option "is to make Bldg 525 a WiFi zone to with uplink to Bldg 333."

How would that be different from "piggybacking, wireless-like, off of the 333 network," which is all I was proposing in my post?

[mheusing]

Hi,

I guess there are two different options you both are talking about:

1) Do not use the slow LAN, replace it by plastering the office with fast APs (and install wireless interfaces in any office equipment) and use the existing uplink to Bldg333.

2) Keep the lan and replace the uplink by a wireless bridge.

Depending on the situation either may make sense. Or none. Can you check the quality of the interbldg link by doing some download tests?

Speed- and distancewise you might want to check out Wireless 802.11n standard available f.e. in Linksys products. Check for further details:

http://newsroom.cisco.com/dlls/2006/prod_042406.html

http://www.linksys.com/servlet/Satellite?c=L_Product_C1&childpagename=US%2FLayout&cid=1115416936001&pagename=Linksys%2FCommon%2FVisitorWrapper&lid=3600139789L03

In any case, with wireless before actually throwing too much money at the problem, I would do some performance tests in the LAN. Second you have to do a wlan site survey to check the reachability across two blocks, in case you spotted the bldg link to be responsible.

Hope this helps!

Regards, Martin

[Wilson Samuel]

Hi,

I'm sorry that I was not able to express the point clearly.

Let me put this way:-

1. Lets not worry about the Uplink issue, you may continue using that

2. All you require is to avoid the Access-Layer wiring at the 525, is to make the 525 floor a WiFi zone and thats it.

I hope I'm clear this time.

Please get back to us with the queries you may have.

Kind Regards,

Wilson Samuel