H-REAP and Client Load-Balancing

pmccubbin · ‎09-07-2007

I'm told by Cisco that H-REAP does not support client load-balancing.

We have a situation where we want to deploy LWAPPs using H-REAP into a conference room where training would take place.

Any suggestions on how to overcome the inevitable slowness these people are going to experience from being unevenly associated with the APs?

We can't re-write the application so we are looking for a wireless solution.

Anyone hear about how other organizations have dealt with this type of situation?

I'll be glad to supply more details if I am not being clear in my description of the problem.

Thanks in advance. All responses will be rated.

Paul

engineerangelo · ‎09-14-2007

Hi Paul,

I don't think Cisco APs can do client load balancing. The only way you can make sure that users would not be overcrowded in one AP is to set the maximum number of clients on the APs so that wireless clients would be forced to connect to another AP if one AP has reached its maximum number.

Regards

pmccubbin · ‎09-14-2007

Angelo,

Thanks. I'll give it a try and report my findings to this forum.

Paul

pmccubbin · ‎09-14-2007

This is the functionality which is missing in H-REAP: Client and Network Load Balancing

"Radio Resource Management (RRM) load-balances new clients across grouped lightweight access points reporting to each controller. This function is particularly important when many clients converge in one spot (such as a conference room or auditorium) because RRM can automatically force some subscribers to associate with nearby access points, allowing higher throughput for all clients. The controller provides a centralized view of client loads on all access points. This information can be used to influence where new clients attach to the network or to direct existing clients to new access points to improve wireless LAN performance. The result is an even distribution of capacity across an entire wireless network.

Note: Client load balancing works only for a single controller. It is not operate in a multi-controller environment."

I suppose if we limit the number of users that can associate with a particular AP then we will achieve some client load-balancing. Though a hard limit on the number of end-users will also lead to situations where some end users will not be allowed any access.

Rob Huffman · ‎09-14-2007

Hi Paul,

Thanks for posting back with your results! 5 points for your continued good work here :) Just curious if you looked into REAP vs H-REAP? I'm not sure of your other restrictions but there is some funtionality in REAP that is not in H-REAP. Anyways.......

Thanks again,

Rob

pmccubbin · ‎09-14-2007

Hi Rob,

Thanks for all your posts! I could not do my job without the Cisco Professionals Forums.

We looked at REAP but there is currently no support for the 1131 APs we are deploying.

Also, we need the Local Switching option in the case of a WAN failure and support for more than one WLAN.

In sum, REAP has two shortcomings:

1. No 802.1q support;

2. "During a WAN failure, a REAP AP ceases service offered on all WLANs, except the first one specified in the controller."

Thanks again,

Paul