Increasing Wireless Bandwidth

Unanswered Question
Jul 15th, 2008

Hi,

I'm looking to combine three 54Mbps Wireless radios to increase wireless bandwidth, load balancing and redundancy. My intention was to create an etherchannel using the connected Cisco 2960 switch ports but I have read this is not a recommended solution. Could anyone provide details of a recommended solution and the required devices? Thanks in advance for your help.

I have this problem too.
0 votes
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Overall Rating: 3 (1 ratings)
Loading.
Richard Atkin Tue, 07/15/2008 - 03:42

If you're in a L2 scenario with lots of VLANs, then you can setup your three bridges and push different VLANs over different bridges - it's crude but it works. Obviously you'll need to run spanning tree!

If you want to do this properly though, you should be using 2.4GHz & 5GHz, not just one or the other.

Failing that, you could use other more dedicated equipment like Laser Links, or go to a manufacturer that specialises in high-capacity / high-reliability bridge links, as this kind of thing isn't really on Cisco's current portfolio.

aoyawale Tue, 07/15/2008 - 04:07

RikJonAtk,

Thanks for your response and suggestion. I'm using 2 2.4Ghz radio. The requirement is to provide abt 80Mbps link for synchronisation traffic between 2 servers in the same vlan but in 2 different locations. I was thinking of bundling the 3 bridges into an etherchannel on the switch but another option is to use layer3 switch e.g 3750 and configure EIGRP for equal load balancing across the 3 wireless links. I've not tried this before so I'm seeking opinions on the forum.

Richard Atkin Tue, 07/15/2008 - 04:19

The L3 option is best, as you know the EtherChannel method isn't actually supported, whereas using them as parallel routed links certainly is.

Your next problem is that even if your APs run at "54Mbps" then you'll only see about 20Mbps throughput (half-duplex) for each radio, so if your requirement is 80Mbps, you'll realistically need four or five radios by the time you account for unreliability of wireless, additional over heads, etc..

aoyawale Tue, 07/15/2008 - 04:31

The problem I have with the L3 option is that both servers (in different locations) are in the same subnet so routing is not possible except I move them to different subnets/vlan. Pls why do I have to run the radios in half-duplex and not full-duplex node?

aoyawale Tue, 07/15/2008 - 05:41

Oops...my bad!!!! The specs of the radio says its capable of "Super G" transmission rate of up to 108MBps so 3 radios should give the required 80Mbps at the minimum.

Scott Fella Tue, 07/15/2008 - 09:50

With etherchannel, you are still dedicated to one link, depending on how you configure the load-balancing on the etherchannel. Your best bet is to get an outdoor bridge that can give you the bandwidth you need in one link.

ROBERTO TACCON Fri, 07/18/2008 - 05:51

Please can you tell me why "the EtherChannel method isn't actually supported" ?

Regards

Roberto Taccon

Actions

This Discussion

 

 

Trending Topics: Other Wireless Mobility

client could not be authenticated
Network Analysis Module (NAM) Products
Cisco 6500 nam
reason 440 driver failure
Cisco password cracker
Cisco Wireless mode