ProSoundWeb Community

Sound Reinforcement - Forums for Live Sound Professionals - Your Displayed Name Must Be Your Real Full Name To Post In The Live Sound Forums => Console Connectivity Solutions => Topic started by: Tim Hite on April 22, 2019, 01:47:58 pm

Title: Cisco Aironet
Post by: Tim Hite on April 22, 2019, 01:47:58 pm
Looking for a nice WAP for console control. Is anyone using the Cisco Aironet line?
Title: Re: Cisco Aironet
Post by: Erik Jerde on April 22, 2019, 02:11:11 pm
Looking for a nice WAP for console control. Is anyone using the Cisco Aironet line?

Are they remotely affordable now?  I used them in IT work years ago but the price was so high Iíve never considered them for production work.  Iím personally using ubiquity stuff now.  No reason a properly deployed aironet shouldnít work fine.
Title: Re: Cisco Aironet
Post by: Scott Holtzman on April 22, 2019, 08:37:39 pm
Are they remotely affordable now?  I used them in IT work years ago but the price was so high Iíve never considered them for production work.  Iím personally using ubiquity stuff now.  No reason a properly deployed aironet shouldnít work fine.

Older Cisco is affordable, and you can run the standalone image.  They work well but newer stuff blows it away.

Ubiquity and Ruckus are my go to.
Title: Re: Cisco Aironet
Post by: Erik Jerde on April 22, 2019, 11:33:43 pm
Older Cisco is affordable, and you can run the standalone image.  They work well but newer stuff blows it away.

Ubiquity and Ruckus are my go to.

One of my client sites is all Ruckus and a couple of my production networks are exposed on the WiFi and it's all worked great.  There were a couple of coverage issues in the new building but I identified those and they added APs and now it's all good.
Title: Re: Cisco Aironet
Post by: Scott Holtzman on April 24, 2019, 02:18:41 pm
One of my client sites is all Ruckus and a couple of my production networks are exposed on the WiFi and it's all worked great.  There were a couple of coverage issues in the new building but I identified those and they added APs and now it's all good.

Yes, the Ubiquity stuff is my value line and the Ruckus can hold its own to Cisco and Aruba (the heavy hitter super high dollar products).  The problem with the enterprise stuff and Cisco's Meraki product. the ecosystem is so expensive to live in.  If you fall out (don't keep your contract up to date) the value of the devices is essentially zero for anything but hobby customers. 
Title: Re: Cisco Aironet
Post by: Ryan C. Davis on April 24, 2019, 03:08:17 pm
I agree with scott on meraki. Expensive to buy and even more expensive to use. Ruckus is awesome- personally been moving away from ubiquiti unless my hands are tied on doing something at a higher price point. Ok for many things but Iíve run into major throughput issues with some of their gear that has majorly turned me off.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Cisco Aironet
Post by: Nathan Riddle on April 24, 2019, 03:17:43 pm
Console control is inherently low bandwidth...

Why not a cheap Ubiquiti AC mesh or AC mesh pro?
Title: Re: Cisco Aironet
Post by: Scott Holtzman on April 24, 2019, 03:23:43 pm
I agree with scott on meraki. Expensive to buy and even more expensive to use. Ruckus is awesome- personally been moving away from ubiquiti unless my hands are tied on doing something at a higher price point. Ok for many things but Iíve run into major throughput issues with some of their gear that has majorly turned me off.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I am "all in" on the cloud in my other vocation however NAAS (Network as a Service) I just can't get my arms around.  Before Cisco bought Meraki it was an interesting price point and idea.  Now we have hybrid systems that us the cloud as a management layer and all out hosted designs that hand off deep packet inspection to the mothership via an API.  I can't get into that.  The SLA's are also written really weird so you have no accountability if the response time slows.  I am going to have to relent as it looks like we will be getting into Cisco Hyperflex alongside our Open Stack infrastructure to enable flexible capacity using public/private cloud.  It's a brave new world.  Kinda cool to have gone from 1200 baud point to point circuits when I started to 40G Internet drains and hypervisors with terabytes of RAM. 

Anyway back to Ruckus,  my only concern with using for the production is access to Internet.  I have not had any real "tours" but have looked at doing a few and I always said I would have a router with a 4G radio in it so we had reliable Internet to run IP Phones for the work desk and other functions.  If I do this I will document the experience.
 
Title: Re: Cisco Aironet
Post by: Ryan C. Davis on April 24, 2019, 05:00:40 pm
I am "all in" on the cloud in my other vocation however NAAS (Network as a Service) I just can't get my arms around.  Before Cisco bought Meraki it was an interesting price point and idea.  Now we have hybrid systems that us the cloud as a management layer and all out hosted designs that hand off deep packet inspection to the mothership via an API.  I can't get into that.  The SLA's are also written really weird so you have no accountability if the response time slows.  I am going to have to relent as it looks like we will be getting into Cisco Hyperflex alongside our Open Stack infrastructure to enable flexible capacity using public/private cloud.  It's a brave new world.  Kinda cool to have gone from 1200 baud point to point circuits when I started to 40G Internet drains and hypervisors with terabytes of RAM. 

Anyway back to Ruckus,  my only concern with using for the production is access to Internet.  I have not had any real "tours" but have looked at doing a few and I always said I would have a router with a 4G radio in it so we had reliable Internet to run IP Phones for the work desk and other functions.  If I do this I will document the experience.

Brave new world indeed.

The 4G is a peice of cake, just build your infrastructure like you normally would for your network and use a Cradlepoint for your WAN connection. You can get 40-50 Mbps on those no problem. Comcast is starting to use those as business failover units on our commercial accounts.
Title: Re: Cisco Aironet
Post by: Scott Holtzman on April 24, 2019, 07:45:48 pm
Brave new world indeed.

The 4G is a peice of cake, just build your infrastructure like you normally would for your network and use a Cradlepoint for your WAN connection. You can get 40-50 Mbps on those no problem. Comcast is starting to use those as business failover units on our commercial accounts.

Yes, that's exactly what I have in mind.  For instance at hotels even if I get a courtesy production network it's dicey and VPN doesn't work great behind double NAT.  For instance at a corporate gig our production desk will be ready to roll.  No field engineering and an IP phone will work like a champ.  It would be cool to put an ATA adapter for the intercoms and radios too, just dial an extension and go!  Great for the non tech folks that may just be checking in speakers or talent.
Title: Re: Cisco Aironet
Post by: John Schalk on April 25, 2019, 10:07:30 am
Why not a cheap Ubiquiti AC mesh or AC mesh pro?

Is the Ubiquiti UniFi UAP-AC-M 802.11ac Mesh a good option?  It looks like a good candidate for pole/mic stand mounting, whereas the Ubiquiti "flying saucer" WAPs look like they would be harder to deploy for portable use.
Title: Re: Cisco Aironet
Post by: Nathan Riddle on April 25, 2019, 10:56:51 am
Is the Ubiquiti UniFi UAP-AC-M 802.11ac Mesh a good option?  It looks like a good candidate for pole/mic stand mounting, whereas the Ubiquiti "flying saucer" WAPs look like they would be harder to deploy for portable use.

Depending on the expected area of coverage, I'd say yes. Ticks all the marks: cheap, good range/coverage, looks nice, etc.
Title: Re: Cisco Aironet
Post by: Tim Hite on April 25, 2019, 11:56:33 pm
I have that exact model sitting here and it will not run instant alone mode, as far as I can tell. It requires one of the flying saucer WAPs to mesh with.

I was not impressed.


Is the Ubiquiti UniFi UAP-AC-M 802.11ac Mesh a good option?  It looks like a good candidate for pole/mic stand mounting, whereas the Ubiquiti "flying saucer" WAPs look like they would be harder to deploy for portable use.
Title: Re: Cisco Aironet
Post by: Russell Ault on April 26, 2019, 11:01:38 am
I have that exact model sitting here and it will not run instant alone mode, as far as I can tell. It requires one of the flying saucer WAPs to mesh with.

I was not impressed.

That's odd; I just deployed one as the only WAP on an audio network and it's been flawless. Setup using the UniFi software was exactly the same as the flying saucers from what I recall.

-Russ
Title: Re: Cisco Aironet
Post by: Nathan Riddle on April 26, 2019, 12:47:07 pm
I have that exact model sitting here and it will not run instant alone mode, as far as I can tell. It requires one of the flying saucer WAPs to mesh with.

I was not impressed.

Yeah, that's really strange.

You actually have to force it to run in mesh mode. It defaults to standard AP mode.
Title: Re: Cisco Aironet
Post by: Tim Hite on April 26, 2019, 01:41:11 pm
I'll try again but I could not figure out how to get it out of mesh mode and into AP mode. It's been a while but I want to say bunt wouldn't support me on this.

That's odd; I just deployed one as the only WAP on an audio network and it's been flawless. Setup using the UniFi software was exactly the same as the flying saucers from what I recall.

-Russ

Nathan, I think the opposite is true and I can't figure out how to make the AC mesh run in AP mode.

Yeah, that's really strange.

You actually have to force it to run in mesh mode. It defaults to standard AP mode.
Title: Re: Cisco Aironet
Post by: Nathan Riddle on April 26, 2019, 01:45:17 pm
I'll try again but I could not figure out how to get it out of mesh mode and into AP mode. It's been a while but I want to say bunt wouldn't support me on this.

Nathan, I think the opposite is true and I can't figure out how to make the AC mesh run in AP mode.

Should help a bit. ~14:50 mark

https://youtu.be/-_LRCnQXa8M?t=811


Now the AirMax stuff isn't designed for AP's only for bridging networks. I have a nanostation that confused me for a while. Old firmware allows for AP usage,  but the unifi stuff should work just fine.
Title: Re: Cisco Aironet
Post by: Tim Hite on April 26, 2019, 02:50:22 pm
Thanks.

Is it wrong that driven to distraction by the audio in that video?

Should help a bit. ~14:50 mark

https://youtu.be/-_LRCnQXa8M?t=811


Now the AirMax stuff isn't designed for AP's only for bridging networks. I have a nanostation that confused me for a while. Old firmware allows for AP usage,  but the unifi stuff should work just fine.
Title: Re: Cisco Aironet
Post by: Nathan Riddle on April 26, 2019, 03:01:16 pm
Thanks.

Is it wrong that driven to distraction by the audio in that video?

 ;D no?

Though I'm not noticing anything, maybe due to the tiny speakers on my laptop?
Title: Re: Cisco Aironet
Post by: Rob Spence on April 26, 2019, 03:54:16 pm
I have one also in AP mode up 12í on a tripod.

I had to turn off a parameter something like uplink monitor to make it work. I read that here somewhere. It fixed my problem.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro