Friday, May 17, 2013

With 11ac, The WLAN Industry Owes Customers A New Kind Of Network Switch

I realize I'm beating the 11ac thing up pretty good lately, but I think I finally hit on what bugs me about the way the new hot technology is being brought to market. What I'm about to describe is more of a BAN issue (BAN=BigAss Network, where APs are counted in the hundreds or thousands) and not so much of concern for smaller environments.

802.11ac is being delivered in rather bizarre (for the customer) "waves".

  • Wave 1: Data rates to 1.3 Gbps. You'll do fine (for most new first wave APs) with a single Gig uplink, and many new APs will work on 802.3af POE, not yet requiring .3at. Fine, good. No real squawks.

  • Wave 2: You get the joy and cost of recabling your environment to add a second Gig uplink, doubling the number of switchports in use for the WLAN and configuring Etherchannels, and depending on what vintage switches you have- upgrading them for latest POE standard, all to help get to data rates likely to realistically be between 2 and 2.5 Gbps best case.


And this is where I say "time out". I'd like the WLAN makers to bear some of that Wave 2 logistical pain. And I want them to get creative to take the onus off of the customer. Here's what I want:

  • In simplest terms- I don't want to use two cable runs. And I don't want the complexity and risk of 4000 more Etherchannels for my APs. But I still want the benefits of 11ac Wave 2.

  • I would like the WLAN vendors to put their brilliant minds (and that I do mean sincerely- these guys and gals accomplish amazing, amazing stuff) to work to come up with a new switch or mid-span injector. Here's the requirements:

    • No feature bloat. May not even need to be VLAN aware.

    • Provides lots of PoE

    • Somehow puts 2 Gbps of uplink to an AP on a single UTP run without requiring me to configure a port channel

    • Cost effective (by customer standards), no licensing BS, and ultra-reliable




Spare me the lecture that there is no such thing as 2 Gig Ethernet, and that what I'm asking for would be based in no existing standard. The WLAN industry has long since turned it's back on standards and interoperability, which is why vendor lock prevails. Other than PoE and what comes out of the antenna (and even that can be a dubious discussion), the mention of standards is a joke in the WLAN industry as each vendor authors their own technical magic. So be it- I just want new magic and don't care that it's not exactly Ethernet in the middle.

I'm OK feeding this new component a 10 GB uplink that it then divvies up into auto-configured 2 Gbps AP uplinks of some proprietary protocol. Or feeding it 2 single-gig ports on my wireless management VLAN that it then magically muxes into a 2 Gbps, big powered uplink that connects via a single wiring run (of excellent quality, of course) to each AP. At that point, all of MY work was done in the closet, and I didn't run a slew of new wires for my wireless network.

If we don't get something disruptively creative on the wired side to go along with 11ac, pretty much any TCO discussion on new 11ac ownership presented by WLAN vendors will be incomplete at best, and poppycock at worst. I've seen both announced and unannounced 11ac products- and the prices are pretty steep (well, except for Ubiquity). But we're supposed to believe that 11ac lets us draw down the wired network considerably, and so be willing to buy into a higher premium for wireless. But... adding lots of new switchports and cabling runs (not trivial in many environments,  can add hundreds of dollars in cost to real TCO for each AP) has to be considered.

As a customer, I feel OK asking- because the customer is always right (well, except when they're wrong). So... when will my new non-standards-based 2 Gbps mega-PoE switches arrive?

5 comments:

  1. At least one baby step in the right direction would be demanding proper LACP support. This means both supporting LACP from the initial boot firmware up in the AP, and equally important, ensuring that the edge switches hosting the APs are able to scale up LACP to that degree. I've seen too many switches that support LACP, but have such weak CPUs that they run out of LACP processing time long before they run out of physical ports. For wireless deployment, I'd ideally like to see those switches capable of running LACP actively on every physical port simultaneously.

    That obviously wouldn't help with the physical cabling problem, but for those lucky enough to have extra runs to their AP locations, it would at least take a little of the sting out of the configuration part.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Great post and thank you for your other 802.11ac posts as well.

    Another thought crosses my mind....

    If I have a 24x port switch (all 24 = PoE) and I have 12 phase 2 802.11ac APs... but each AP only requires 1 Drop for power....but 2 (1gb) drops for traffic..... I guess I just wind up using/wasting 1 PoE drop per AP. This may not be an issue to a lot of folks but not everyone has VoIP throughout their network, not everyone has PoE switches deployed throughout their network. I cringe at the thought of purchasing a 24port PoE switch and patching 12 Non-PoE drops into it or a 48port and patching 24 non-PoE drops into it.

    or can I expect some sort of LACP/Etherchannel magic to work across 2 different switches... IE my AP Eth0 is patched into the PoE SW1 for 1gb link and PoE and the APs Eth1 is patched into non-PoE SW2 for the additional 1gb link but not PoE (thus not wasting a second PoE port on PoE SW1).

    ReplyDelete
  3. Thanks, John and Frank. The complications of wiring for 11ac kind of remind me of the early days of VoIP. You'd be presented with incredible TCO estimates from vendors that showed staggering savings over legacy telephony- as long as you didn't include power concerns. Add in PoE and backup UPS to come anywhere close to the power-out uptime of traditional Telcos, and the optimistic estimates quickly deflated. That didn't mean VoIP wasn't a good move, but it did mean that vendors were not being complete with the "and this is what it will REALLY cost you" projections. And as I mention here, small environments certainly won't get hit as hard as larger ones, who will definitely feel the effects of wiring and licensed feature "taxes" because of their size.

    ReplyDelete
  4. I believe this whole multi-gig thing is a bit over-hyped.

    Achieving those speeds (not rates, real speeds) is not easy. Consider that the max RATE with 80MHz channels and 4SS is abot 1700Mbps. I do not see enterprises casually using 160MHz channels, and we have yet to live and see 8SS APs and chpsets. Ok, let's add another 300 Mbps for the 2.4Ghz .11n radio with 4SS@20Mhz for a total of 2000Mbps RATE, recall the "rate to real throughput" ration, and move on...

    Even with 100% ratio, I doubt that APs will be able to transfer 2Gbps+ worth of real traffic with in-line encryption, firewalling and all other fancy stuff embedded in modern distributed WLAN architectures. With pure bridging back to controller - maybe. But then you need terabit controllers :-) Do note the price wars in the enterprise AP segment, as the scale of deployments grows. We still have to wait and see cheap überAPs :-)

    And finally, who in the world will consume such bandwidth (and will depend on it so critically, to justify all the wired/wireless upgrade costs)? Even with 8 spatial streams you will be able to transmit to 8 clients at a time. Given that modern wireless networks gravitate towards ultra-portable laptops, tablets and smartphones, I doubt they will be able to consume (not to say, generate) any decent amount of data to fill up the entire 1G uplink. We're talking access layer, not backbone or entire datacenters going wireless, right? Look at the whole "Gigabit to desktop" thing - who's using the whole gig?

    So, IMHO, even a single 1G wire for your typical AP (not a bridge or any other special case) will last long beyond the Wave 2 induction date, or even further. Unless some new traffic-crazy application is invented. :-) The whole point of 802.11ac in the Enterprise in much more about cell capacity, than sheer performance..

    ReplyDelete
  5. Well said, and quite my sentiments as will be reflected in my NWC column very soon. I wish the WLAN industry would tone it down on the multi gig message, but it wouldn't market well...

    ReplyDelete