These sound like good suggestions. Here's something else to
consider--could you simplify this whole thing by using a single WAP,
adding a 1-watt bidirectional amp to it, and choosing a directive
antenna array located out in the courtyard? There are sectoral arrays
that are configured to deliver a broad horizontal pattern while having
essentially no radiation to the rear. I realize that an amp costs
about as much as 3 WAPs, but it might be a simple solution.
On Thu, 03 Jul 2003 22:48:12 -0400, Yhetti <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>Hi Jim,
>
>There could be a couple things happening here, both of which I've
>experienced in real life situations and are the things to look at.
>
>The first possible scenario is that the access points you're using don't
>have a lot of intelligence to them. Lets say there are 3 access points,
>A, B, and C, spread through a building, all running on the same channel.
>Lets further say that all 3 are poorly designed in the firmware, so that
>they don't implement any sort of sanity checking. If they're functioning
>as ethernet bridges, what can happen is that access point A will get a
>packet on the LAN and broadcast it. B & C will pick it up over the air
>and put it back onto the LAN, where A may then pick it up again. It
>doesn't take a lot of traffic, then, to destroy everything.
>
>Scenario two, that I have also seen, involved ARP packets. What would
>happen is that a machine connected on the same segment as A will do an ARP
>request, some of the same magic as above will happen, and the network will
>get flooded with ARP requests/replies before the first useful packet is
>ever sent.
>
>Both of problems require that all of the APs be connected to the same
>physical LAN. In switches, the same thing can occur, which is the point
>behind Spanning Tree Protocol. If you can play with it and figure out
>that one of these (most likely scen. 1) is the culprit, you can switch the
>APs to use different channels. In infrastructure mode, the WICs should
>choose the strongest signal and just use that channel.
>
>If my assumptions are incorrect, please let me know and I'll think a bit
>harder on it : )
>
>Wes
>
>
>
>On Thu, 03 Jul 2003 09:58:39 -0500, Jim Behymer wrote:
>
>
>> If anyone can offer me any suggestions for a problem I'm having with a
>> wireless network, I'd sure appreciate it.
>>
>....
>>
>> Thanks in advance,
>>
>> Jim Behymer
>> Service Manager
>> Computer Works
|