Recommended wireless AP for 400 users office

[nanog at ics-il.net (Mike Hammett)]

I try to avoid anything that Cisco has touched. 

Also not a fan of their stop paying our recurring fee and the device becomes a brick policy. 




----- 
Mike Hammett 
Intelligent Computing Solutions 
http://www.ics-il.com 



----- Original Message -----

From: "Dennis Bohn" <bohn at adelphi.edu> 
To: "Eric C. Miller" <eric at ericheather.com> 
Cc: "NANOG" <nanog at nanog.org> 
Sent: Sunday, February 1, 2015 8:41:52 AM 
Subject: Re: Recommended wireless AP for 400 users office 

We are substantially larger and use Aruba, but I am wondering why no one 
has mentioned Meraki (now cisco-meraki). We tried one of their give-away 
aps and it seemed fine, with the 'cloud management.' I am not advocating 
Meraki, just curious. 
best, 


Dennis Bohn 
Manager of Network and Systems 
Adelphi University 
bohn at adelphi.edu 
5168773327 

On Fri, Jan 30, 2015 at 6:28 PM, Eric C. Miller <eric at ericheather.com> 
wrote: 

> +1 Xirrus, especially for the multi radio arrays. Crowded common areas 
> benefit from sector antennas attached to individual radios. Also, there XMS 
> server is really useful for managing a large cluster. Ubiquiti UniFi is 
> good for smaller installations, but I wouldn't trust them for enterprise 
> level reliability. 
> 
> 
> 
> Eric Miller, CCNP 
> Network Engineering Consultant 
> (407) 257-5115 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -----Original Message----- 
> From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-bounces at nanog.org] On Behalf Of Mike Lyon 
> Sent: Thursday, January 29, 2015 12:17 AM 
> To: Manuel Marín 
> Cc: NANOG 
> Subject: Re: Recommended wireless AP for 400 users office 
> 
> Check out Xirrus 
> On Jan 28, 2015 9:08 PM, "Manuel Marín" <mmg at transtelco.net> wrote: 
> 
> > Dear nanog community 
> > 
> > I was wondering if you can recommend or share your experience with APs 
> > that you can use in locations that have 300-500 users. I friend 
> > recommended me Ruckus Wireless, it would be great if you can share 
> > your experience with Ruckus or with a similar vendor. My experience 
> > with ubiquity for this type of requirement was not that good. 
> > 
> > Thank you and have a great day 
> > 
>