(OT) wireless for college campus?

A bit OT for this group, but the subject came up recently, and I found I
really wasn't up to speed on what could be done.

Given a college campus - say a 300m square site, with metal-framed brick
buildings scattered round it - what chance of providing wireless access
to the occupants?

Instinct says no way; I've enough hassle working through one brick wall
at 30 feet range at home.

Any ideas/pointers please?

--
Please use the corrected version of the address below for replies.
Replies to the header address will be junked, as will mail from
various domains listed at www.scottsonline.org.uk
Mike Scott Harlow Essex England.(unet -a-t- scottsonline.org.uk)

On Wed, 24 Aug 2005 14:19:31 GMT, Mike Scott
<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>Given a college campus - say a 300m square site, with metal-framed brick
>buildings scattered round it - what chance of providing wireless access
>to the occupants?

every chance, given the money.

>Instinct says no way; I've enough hassle working through one brick wall
>at 30 feet range at home.

antennae :-)

>Any ideas/pointers please?

http://www.locustworld.com/

Phil
--
Remember - Global Warming is only a weather forecast :-)

Mike Scott wrote:
> A bit OT for this group, but the subject came up recently, and I
> found I really wasn't up to speed on what could be done.
>
> Given a college campus - say a 300m square site, with metal-framed
> brick buildings scattered round it - what chance of providing
> wireless access to the occupants?

Dead easy , but it won't be cheap.
Are you talking inside the buildings only , or did you want coverage outside
(not necessarily a good idea).
Will you want continuous coverage so people can walk around and stay
connected?
You'd need a site survey doing to work out how many access points and where
you want them siting for good coverage and to be able to roam.

> Instinct says no way; I've enough hassle working through one brick
> wall at 30 feet range at home.

"proper" kit like Cisco aironet access points with decent external aerials
will cover great distances.
I've tested one outside our office and could sit in a field 200m away
surfing the net.
Going any further would have meant scaring the sheep in the other field!

> Any ideas/pointers please?

If you email me I can sort out a quote for a survey and/or installation.
This is the sort of thing we do at work
--
Alex

Hermes: "We can't afford that! Especially not Zoidberg!"
Zoidberg: "They took away my credit cards!"

www.drzoidberg.co.uk
www.ebayfaq.co.uk

Dr Zoidberg wrote:
> Mike Scott wrote:
>
>>A bit OT for this group, but the subject came up recently, and I
>>found I really wasn't up to speed on what could be done.
>>
>>Given a college campus - say a 300m square site, with metal-framed
>>brick buildings scattered round it - what chance of providing
>>wireless access to the occupants?
>
>
> Dead easy , but it won't be cheap.
> Are you talking inside the buildings only , or did you want coverage outside
> (not necessarily a good idea).
> Will you want continuous coverage so people can walk around and stay
> connected?
> You'd need a site survey doing to work out how many access points and where
> you want them siting for good coverage and to be able to roam.
>
>
>>Instinct says no way; I've enough hassle working through one brick
>>wall at 30 feet range at home.
>
>
> "proper" kit like Cisco aironet access points with decent external aerials
> will cover great distances.
> I've tested one outside our office and could sit in a field 200m away
> surfing the net.
> Going any further would have meant scaring the sheep in the other field!
>
>
>>Any ideas/pointers please?
>
>
> If you email me I can sort out a quote for a survey and/or installation.
> This is the sort of thing we do at work

Thanks for the reply (and to the other respondent too).

The idea was for static internal use only for students; the subject came
up informally, with a choice between wiring the campus or using
wireless, and I realised there was a huge gap in my knowledge :-(.

Wired would be prohibitively expensive -- and I wasn't at all sure
wireless would work given the nature of the site, as it's not just
distance, but the metal frames of the buildings (plays havoc with vhf
radio reception, for example).

I'll check into the kit you mention, and will bear your offer in mind
should the subject arise again! Thanks.

--
Please use the corrected version of the address below for replies.
Replies to the header address will be junked, as will mail from
various domains listed at www.scottsonline.org.uk
Mike Scott Harlow Essex England.(unet -a-t- scottsonline.org.uk)

Mike Scott wrote:
> The idea was for static internal use only for students; the subject
> came up informally, with a choice between wiring the campus or using
> wireless, and I realised there was a huge gap in my knowledge :-(.
>
> Wired would be prohibitively expensive -- and I wasn't at all sure
> wireless would work given the nature of the site, as it's not just
> distance, but the metal frames of the buildings (plays havoc with vhf
> radio reception, for example).

Hmmm , how many users are you talking about?
Bear in mind that wireless bandwidth is shared between all the clients so if
you have just 50 PCs in a couple of classrooms using an 802.11g access point
you only have 54mb of shared bandwidth between them so approx 1mb per sec
per PC which will be painfully slow when compared to 10 or 100mb wired
access.

Also as you say the more metal framed walls you have the more access points
you will need and that pushes the cost up higher.
Wired networking needn't be all that expensive. If you want some decent
quality switches at fairly civilised prices then the Dell kit is excellent
value for money.

--
Alex

Hermes: "We can't afford that! Especially not Zoidberg!"
Zoidberg: "They took away my credit cards!"

www.drzoidberg.co.uk www.ebayfaq.co.uk

On Thu, 25 Aug 2005 08:03:46 GMT, Mike Scott
<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>Wired would be prohibitively expensive -- and I wasn't at all sure
>wireless would work given the nature of the site, as it's not just
>distance, but the metal frames of the buildings (plays havoc with vhf
>radio reception, for example).

your wireless will be inside the frames though, so I suspect less of
an issue. One access point per floor that type of thing, depending on
size & shape.

I am not aware that Cisco kit is allowed to use any more power or has
better sensitivity than anything else on the market so shop around.

Phil
--
Remember - Global Warming is only a weather forecast :-)

On Thu, 25 Aug 2005 10:17:50 +0100, "Dr Zoidberg"
<AlexNOOOOO!!!!!!@drzoidberg.co.uk> wrote:

> if
>you have just 50 PCs in a couple of classrooms using an 802.11g access point
>you only have 54mb of shared bandwidth between them so approx 1mb per sec
>per PC

less than 0.5 Mbits/s in my experience - real world data throughput of
54G is seldom more than 25 Mbits/s and frequently <20.

Phil
--
Remember - Global Warming is only a weather forecast :-)

Dr Zoidberg wrote:
> Mike Scott wrote:
>
>>The idea was for static internal use only for students; the subject
>>came up informally, with a choice between wiring the campus or using
>>wireless, and I realised there was a huge gap in my knowledge :-(.
>>
>>Wired would be prohibitively expensive -- and I wasn't at all sure
>>wireless would work given the nature of the site, as it's not just
>>distance, but the metal frames of the buildings (plays havoc with vhf
>>radio reception, for example).
>
>
> Hmmm , how many users are you talking about?

Several hundred potentially. Perhaps 'campus' gives the wrong
imnpression - this is a mainly residential site, and the main idea's to
provide students with network access in their rooms. These are scattered
over the site in (iirc) up to 3 storey concrete/brick/metal buildings.

I'm told cabling is out of the question as too expensive. I have a
feeling the person I spoke with though it would be a case of a single
WAP for the site; but I may be doing him an injustice there :-)

> Bear in mind that wireless bandwidth is shared between all the clients so if
> you have just 50 PCs in a couple of classrooms using an 802.11g access point
> you only have 54mb of shared bandwidth between them so approx 1mb per sec
> per PC which will be painfully slow when compared to 10 or 100mb wired
> access.
>
> Also as you say the more metal framed walls you have the more access points
> you will need and that pushes the cost up higher.
> Wired networking needn't be all that expensive. If you want some decent
> quality switches at fairly civilised prices then the Dell kit is excellent
> value for money.

It's not the hardware so much as the potential civil engineering
involved in cabling up the site that would cost too much.

I should find out in the next few weeks if they're at all serious about
this!

--
Please use the corrected version of the address below for replies.
Replies to the header address will be junked, as will mail from
various domains listed at www.scottsonline.org.uk
Mike Scott Harlow Essex England.(unet -a-t- scottsonline.org.uk)

Mike Scott wrote:
> Dr Zoidberg wrote:
>> Mike Scott wrote:
>>
>>> The idea was for static internal use only for students; the subject
>>> came up informally, with a choice between wiring the campus or using
>>> wireless, and I realised there was a huge gap in my knowledge :-(.
>>>
>>> Wired would be prohibitively expensive -- and I wasn't at all sure
>>> wireless would work given the nature of the site, as it's not just
>>> distance, but the metal frames of the buildings (plays havoc with
>>> vhf radio reception, for example).
>>
>>
>> Hmmm , how many users are you talking about?
>
> Several hundred potentially. Perhaps 'campus' gives the wrong
> imnpression - this is a mainly residential site, and the main idea's
> to provide students with network access in their rooms. These are
> scattered over the site in (iirc) up to 3 storey concrete/brick/metal
> buildings.
> I'm told cabling is out of the question as too expensive. I have a
> feeling the person I spoke with though it would be a case of a single
> WAP for the site; but I may be doing him an injustice there :-)

Yep , definately quite a few access points would be needed.

>> Bear in mind that wireless bandwidth is shared between all the
>> clients so if you have just 50 PCs in a couple of classrooms using
>> an 802.11g access point you only have 54mb of shared bandwidth
>> between them so approx 1mb per sec per PC which will be painfully
>> slow when compared to 10 or 100mb wired access.
>>
>> Also as you say the more metal framed walls you have the more access
>> points you will need and that pushes the cost up higher.
>> Wired networking needn't be all that expensive. If you want some
>> decent quality switches at fairly civilised prices then the Dell kit
>> is excellent value for money.
>
> It's not the hardware so much as the potential civil engineering
> involved in cabling up the site that would cost too much.

A reasonably competent DIY-er could run the cables as they are all colour
coordinated but if you have to pay professionals there would be a fair cost
to it.

> I should find out in the next few weeks if they're at all serious
> about this!

No probs.

--
Alex

Hermes: "We can't afford that! Especially not Zoidberg!"
Zoidberg: "They took away my credit cards!"

www.drzoidberg.co.uk www.ebayfaq.co.uk

"Phil Thompson" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> On Thu, 25 Aug 2005 08:03:46 GMT, Mike Scott
> <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
> >Wired would be prohibitively expensive -- and I wasn't at all sure
> >wireless would work given the nature of the site, as it's not just
> >distance, but the metal frames of the buildings (plays havoc with vhf
> >radio reception, for example).

it sounds like they want to avoid pulling cable and duct work (although i
would get hold of the site maintenance people before i wrote this off -
sometimes architects do put access ducts in, even if they arent mainly there
for Cat5).

There are some alternatives - cisco do a bunch of switches and adapters for
"long reach ethernet" (LRE) - this is intended for hotels and similar places
to share the normal phone wiring (if there is any), and can do 15 Mbps per
port over several hundred meters - sort of internal ADSL.....

Or you could look at the ethernet over power cable stuff like homeplug (or
use it to feed the APs).
>
> your wireless will be inside the frames though, so I suspect less of
> an issue. One access point per floor that type of thing, depending on
> size & shape.

i suggest you go for APs with power over ethernet to minimise any power
cabling you need.
>
> I am not aware that Cisco kit is allowed to use any more power or has
> better sensitivity than anything else on the market so shop around.

it isnt. however when you have lots of APs in an area, sometimes things work
better when you turn the power levels down to prevent interference between
APs.

FWIW i had some results from some informal testing about 18 months back
(walking a laptop along a route away from an AP with lots of different
802.11g cards in it).

The cisco laptop card was still working around 50m further away than
anything else tried.....
>
> Phil
> --
> Remember - Global Warming is only a weather forecast :-)
--
Regards

Stephen Hope - return address needs fewer xxs