ietf
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: BCP request: WiFi at High-Tech Meetings

2010-12-29 10:56:02
On Dec 29, 2010, at 8:38 AM, Joel Jaeggli <joelja(_at_)bogus(_dot_)com> wrote:

On 12/29/10 8:03 AM, Henning Schulzrinne wrote:
I'm curious what the largest *successful* deployment has been
(measured in number of participants in a single
room/hall/stadium/...) that anybody has seen, within the IETF or
beyond. The NYC article hints at the fact that the limit may be hotel
fiber, rather than wireless, in some cases. We seem to have more
experience with dimensioning those than other organizations.

Our network requirements doc at http://iaoc.ietf.org/network_requirements.html 
is somewhat relevant.

hotel facilities range from acceptable to godawful...

The IETF has the luxury of getting donations of high speed connectivity to many 
of our meetings.

The biggest problem by far is cochannel interference, and the best way
to solve that is more channels. The ability to use 802.11a's 11
non-overlapping bands is the move effective method by far. It's doesn't
work if you have to serve 8000 iphones but in a environment full of
business class laptops, more that half your customers will move over
there by default.

I strongly agree here. Encourage .11a (5ghz) usage, disable .11n for the .11b/g 
2.4ghz spectrum. We also have the luxury of a large number of repeat attendees, 
and many of you have learned the benefits of using .11a and will go out of your 
way to use it. We facilitate that through advertising .11a-only SSID's.

So, yes, some of what we've learned would apply to other events, but some is 
very tailored to the IETF's needs.

Chris.

joel

On Dec 29, 2010, at 10:57 AM, Ole Jacobsen wrote:


Dave,

I think you will find that our NOC people have a great deal of 
experience and perhaps even a list of do's and don'ts for this type
of design. In the end, this technology will not scale without bonds
if we're talking about n-thousand people sitting in a plenary hall,
but there are obviously a lot that can be done with a distribution
of multiple lower-powered (configured as such) units that don't use
overlapping channels, use of various 802.11 flavors (a, n, etc)
and more SSIDs, all in the name of load sharing.

While there may not be a document, and I agree that it would be
useful to have one, there is certainly a collective body of
knowledge on this topic (including a "never again use base stations
from xxxx..").

Ole

Ole J. Jacobsen Editor and Publisher,  The Internet Protocol
Journal Cisco Systems Tel: +1 408-527-8972   Mobile: +1
415-370-4628 E-mail: ole(_at_)cisco(_dot_)com  URL: http://www.cisco.com/ipj



On Wed, 29 Dec 2010, Dave CROCKER wrote:

Time for a BCP?



<http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/29/technology/29wifi.html?_r=1&nl=todaysheadlines&emc=tha25>



The problem is that Wi-Fi was never intended for large halls and
thousands of people, many of them bristling with an arsenal of
laptops,


I don't recall seeing a document on this and the IETF track
record has been quite good.

We should share the joy.

d/ --

Dave Crocker Brandenburg InternetWorking bbiw.net 
_______________________________________________ Ietf mailing
list Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

_______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list 
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf


_______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list 
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf


_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf