client association to ap

[bluesea2010]

Hi,

I have 10 access points deployed on one floor, but most clients keep connecting to a single AP in one area. This causes connectivity problems and slow browsing, especially for new clients trying to join. How can I resolve this issue and ensure proper client distribution across all APs?

Thanks

[pieterh]

that depends
are these A's individual AP's or controller based ?

if individual, then you have very little options to manage connections,
you can disconnect/turn off the wifi adapter on the client , wait some time, then (re)connect and hope for the best

if controller based (or mesh) you have some options of steering the clients
- max clients per AP
- load balancing over AP's during association (number of clients)
- distribute clients based on actual load

by the way it is the client that selects the AP to associate with, so it also depends on client-OS and wifi driver

-> tell us more about your environment

[Mark Elsen]

    - @bluesea2010            Client roaming decisions (or not) are always autonomous; preferred AP(s) may depend on load
                                          and capacity advertised , make sure the wi-fi driver(s) of the clients are up to date

  M.

[bluesea2010]

We observed another similar issue: even when the client is stationary, it roams from the nearest AP to a farther one. When you mention load or capacity, do you mean EHT/HE/VHT capability? Also, regarding 'capacity advertised', how can I identify this in Wireshark to confirm whether the roaming occurred due to AP load or capacity advertisement?

[lindawa]

---

@bluesea2010 wrote:

how can I identify this in Wireshark to confirm whether the roaming occurred due to AP load or capacity advertisement?

---

APs can inform clients about their current load using the BSS Load Element. This element is found in beacon and probe response frames as a part of the 802.11k/r/v standard.

• In Wireshark, look for:

• Tagged Parameter: BSS Load

• This shows:

• Station Count

• Channel Utilization

• Available Admission Capacity

[pieterh]

if your AP's are controller based, then look at this document
https://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/td/docs/wireless/controller/9800/technical-reference/c9800-best-practices.html#s80211v
and enable assisted roaming in your controller

The 802.11k standard allows clients to request neighbor reports containing information about known neighbor APs that are candidates for roaming. The use of the 802.11k neighbor list can limit the need for active and passive scanning. A common problem that 802.11k helps solve is “sticky” clients, which usually associate with a specific AP and then hold on to that AP strongly, even when significantly better options are available from nearer APs.

The 802.11k feature can be configured directly on the WLAN under the Advanced settings:

[Rasika Nayanajith]

This is a common issue when there are too many APs in an open office environment. When a Wi-Fi device enters a building or floor, it initially associates with the AP that has the strongest RSSI. Afterward, it does not continuously seek the strongest AP; instead, it waits until the signal drops below its roaming threshold. For example:

-Apple iOS devices: typically wait until signal drops to around -70 dBm
-MacBooks: around -75 dBm
-Samsung devices: typically around -75 dBm, etc.

In your case, I would check how strong the AP coverage is in the given area.
One option is to reduce the transmit power of your radios, 8–14 dBm for 5 GHz is generally a good range. Make sure 2.4GHz radio power much lower than 5GHz (at least 8dB lower), so client will not prefer 2.4GHz over 5GHz.

HTH
Rasika
*** Pls rate all useful responses ***

[Leo Laohoo]

---

@bluesea2010 wrote:
but most clients keep connecting to a single AP in one area. This causes connectivity problems and slow browsing

---

That conclusion is totally wrong.  

10 wireless clients connecting to a single AP will not cause "connectivity problems or slow browsing" if the wireless client are (very) close to the AP.  

However, X wireless clients connecting to a single AP will not cause "connectivity problems or slow browsing" if the wireless client are not roaming correctly and have "sticky" stuck to a far away AP.  And this behaviour is very common if-and-when the wireless NIC drivers have never been updated before.  

[lindawa]

Cisco recommends leveraging the Radio Resource Management (RRM) features of the Catalyst 9800 Wireless LAN Controllers to address uneven client distribution and AP overloading. Here's what you should do:

Key Actions to Take

1. Enable RRM Load-Balancing

• Make sure all APs are in the same RF group and are configured with similar power and channel settings.

• RRM load-balancing dynamically shifts clients to less congested APs to avoid overloading a single AP.

• Significant RRM-based load-balancing improvements were introduced starting with IOS XE 17.12.x (recommended: 17.12.6a or later).

2. Software Recommendation

• Verify you are running at least IOS XE 17.12.6a on your Catalyst 9800 WLC, as this release brings critical improvements to client load-balancing algorithms. always check what's the current recommended release here: https://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/support/docs/wireless/catalyst-9800-series-wireless-controllers/214749-tac-recommended-ios-xe-builds-for-wirele.html

• If you are on an older version, upgrade to benefit from these features.

Additional Notes

• Ensure all APs have proper physical positioning and coverage overlap via site survey, which is also crucial for good load distribution.

[Rasika Nayanajith]

Hi Linda,

Thank you for taking time to check these queries and respond.. appreciate it

Rasika

[pieterh]

@bluesea2010 
I  did not find a respons to my question if this is a controller based environment at all?

please tell more about environment, AP models, controller type software versions etc.

[bluesea2010]

MR 55 ,meraki controller based 

[pieterh]

now we are getting somewhere.

are they individually managed?
or do they form a cluster with shared wlan configuration (using templates) ?

also:  are one or more AP's configured as MESH accespoints or has each AP an individual cloud connection?

[bluesea2010]

has each AP an individual cloud connection?

yes 

do they form a cluster with shared wlan configuration (using templates)

templates , but as i understand meraki doesnot form a cluster

Thanks

[pieterh]

first:  have you ever looked in the Meraki dashboard  for troubleshooting ?
information can be found about troublesome clients.

second: the Meraki MR55 is End-of-sale for some time now (end-of-sale: 2022 ; end-of support 2027)
why report  this  problem three years after EOS ? 
 -> this could be due to new model clients being used on your site
      or due to a malfunctioning access point
      -> use a measurement tool to check if all accesspoints transmit the desired SSID
      a dedicated wireless analyer like Netally Aircheck is a good choice when you need frequent measurements
     free tools like Ekahau and Aruba Utilities will be good for a quick check
      

third: look at this documents: 
https://documentation.meraki.com/Wireless/Design_and_Configure/Architecture_and_Best_Practices/Seamless_Roaming_with_MR_Access_Points 
https://documentation.meraki.com/Wireless/Design_and_Configure/Architecture_and_Best_Practices/802.11k_and_802.11r_Overview 
Fast Transition (FT) 802.11r roaming is not supported between Meraki MR55/MR45 and any other MR Access Point (AP) running version 25.x or lower. If you have a mixed deployment with MR55/MR45 and any other model of Meraki APs and 802.11r is either set as enabled or adaptive on any of the SSIDs configuration ensure all your APs are running version 26.4 or higher.

check (all access points in this region) if all AP's are same model and if this option is enabled 
if not check if software version is up-to-date

also in the Additional Resources section you may find document that can help your investigation

last:  there is a separate Meraki community where members can help.
https://community.meraki.com/t5/Wireless/Terrible-Roaming-issues/m-p/216706#:~:text=Do%20your%20corporate%20devices%20have,Just%20wanted%20to%20share.&text=Good%20Morning.,Just%20my%20useless%20two%20cents.&text=These%20things%20can%20help%20but,if%2...