Network Computing is part of the Informa Tech Division of Informa PLC

This site is operated by a business or businesses owned by Informa PLC and all copyright resides with them. Informa PLC's registered office is 5 Howick Place, London SW1P 1WG. Registered in England and Wales. Number 8860726.

Air Time: Understanding 802.11 Interference: Page 2 of 3

Meanwhile, back at the lab, a review of Aruba Networks' latest offerings provided us with the opportunity to add another vendor to our good-neighbor test bed. When we tested with Aruba and Cisco APs installed on the same channel, the results were similar to what we encountered with Meru. Although Cisco is still investigating our results, a product manager suggested that Aruba's unique use of the 802.11 PCF timing algorithm might be the cause. Aruba denies using PCF timing and claims its implementation is simply more efficient than Cisco's.

The story doesn't end there. In our initial testing, we used notebooks with Atheros-based NICs. This time, we ran additional tests using NICs based on Broadcom and Intel chipsets. The results were astonishing. Not only did we find significant variation in the each AP's performance, we also found significant differences in performance using various client chipsets. While Meru performed quite well with Atheros and Broadcom clients, for instance, it performed poorly with Intel clients.

The implications of these tests are alarming. Under conditions of heavy network utilization and co-channel interference, today's wireless LAN products behave unpredictably. Given the relatively low utilization and user density of enterprise Wi-Fi networks, it's not surprising that these problems don't keep network administrators up at night. But over time, as wireless LANs assume a more central role and their density increases, these problems will become more critical.

Our test results cast a shadow over Cisco's leadership position in the enterprise WLAN market. For now, we'll give Cisco the benefit of the doubt as we work with company reps to understand why its equipment performs so poorly when running side by side with competitors' gear. But it's clear that organizations like the Wi-Fi Alliance must bolster their testing to include more than base-level interoperability. If all these products are Wi-Fi certified, you have to wonder what that really means.

Dave Molta is a Network Computing senior technology editor. He is also assistant dean for technology at the School of Information Studies and director of the Center for Emerging Network Technologies at Syracuse University. Write to him at [email protected]