Cisco 802.11ac AP

[ZenicaPA]

Hi Everyone,

I'm new here so I'll first start by saying ...Hello.

For the past hour I've been looking through the Cisco site and reading many data sheets but I'm just not clear on the language or terminology being employed to know if a product is going to meet my needs or not.

I have a 5000sq foot house on three levels (the basement is a walk out and fully finished so I'm counting it as a level for this scenario) and want to install wireless networking. I am looking at the Cisco lineup because I've always heard and read they are rock solid and when I'm in a hospital or other public setting that has access points placed throughout, I noticce that Cisco seems the preferred manufacturer.

I would like the 802.11ac standard with exposed antennae but I don't want it to be controller based. In that respect, I'd like something like what you'd find on the shelf of Best Buy. A wireless router that is all-in-one out of the box. Plug in the power supply, CAT6 cable from the modem and that's it. I'm simplifying this of course, the AP needs the network SSID, password and security level set but as far as hardware, no separate controller for the AP.

I've been reading up on the Cisco Aironet 3700 Series but so far, I believe this requires a controller. Does a version of it not require the controller?

If I can't escape the controller, how much complexity does it add? how much cost? The controller is essentially a LAN controller right? It would control the AP like how it would control devices connected to its gigabit ports? A more capable switch?

Any help...and I do mean any...is appreciated.

David

 

[sdifox]

Look at ubiquiti. Cisco makes zero sense for home.

And can you run cat 6 to all three levels?

 

[boomhower]

Look at ubiquiti. Cisco makes zero sense for home.

And can you run cat 6 to all three levels?

If you use Ubiquiti you need a controller. However it does not need to be running all the time as long as you are not wanting to use a guest network. Just run the controller app on a computer hooked to the system to set-up the AP's then you can shut it down. The controller does not need to be running for the system to operate. I have one of the new Uniquiti AC AP's in my home and am loving it so far.

An off the shelf router is not going to cope with a 5,000q/ft home, just doesn't have the coverage. I'd get three of the new Ubiquiti AC LR models. One for each floor. They also make outdoor units if you need coverage outside. You do need to run an ethernet cord to each AP. It takes some labor getting wires ran but the end result is worth it. You will likely not have to change cords for many years. As wifi tech changes you can just swap the AP's for newer ones as your needs change.

 

[ZenicaPA]

Thank you for replying...

Look at ubiquiti. Cisco makes zero sense for home.

And can you run cat 6 to all three levels?

Yes, CAT6 is being wired to 14 rooms.

I trust Cisco products. It might be overkill but I think its worth it.

If you use Ubiquiti you need a controller. However it does not need to be running all the time as long as you are not wanting to use a guest network. Just run the controller app on a computer hooked to the system to set-up the AP's then you can shut it down. The controller does not need to be running for the system to operate. I have one of the new Uniquiti AC AP's in my home and am loving it so far.

An off the shelf router is not going to cope with a 5,000q/ft home, just doesn't have the coverage. I'd get three of the new Ubiquiti AC LR models. One for each floor. They also make outdoor units if you need coverage outside. You do need to run an ethernet cord to each AP. It takes some labor getting wires ran but the end result is worth it. You will likely not have to change cords for many years. As wifi tech changes you can just swap the AP's for newer ones as your needs change.

The family room is two story and the dual staircases have open views to the first floor so I'm hoping one can cover those levels. The basement might need a repeater, I'll wait and see how the signal is.

Does Cisco have an autonomous 802.11ac router/AP? I am having trouble with the terminology used in the marketing materials as they don't state a controller is needed when it is.

 

[sdifox]

You can change the wap to standalone mode, but I think you lose mesh at that point.
http://www.networkworld.com/article...-access-points-top-out-at-nearly-400mbps.html

 

[386DX]

Seriously you're in way over your head OP. If you're asking these questions about Cisco AP you don't need it nor will you be able to set one up regardless if you are using it in controller mode or autonomous mode. We use Cisco switches, routers, wireless AP, controllers at work and listen to what others are saying it's not for home use. Yes you can trust them and they are reliable in the hospital, etc you've seen them in but it's because there's knowledgeable people setting them up.

A couple of things to consider with Cisco AP. The web interface is garbage and most configuration needs to be done view command line. If you're not comfortable with Cisco's CLI you'll run into problems. Secondly Cisco AP are just that Access Points, they don't provide any routing, firewall, DNS, DHCP, etc services like you expect with consumer targeted devices. So unless you have servers or other devices to handle those functions, Cisco AP is out if the question for you. Lastly regarding your question about how much a Cisco wireless controller costs it depends on the model and features you want, at work our Cisco Wireless AP costs around $1000 each but our wireless controller was closer to $30,000.

Listen to what others are saying get some consumer device for your house. Some have recommend Ubiquiti gear but IMO they were the gear to get during the wireless N days as they were able to provide seamless roaming (zero handoff) with there gear, something usually only provided by enterprise gear. However with there wireless AC gear that are not able to provide this functionality so IMO it makes them no better then the higher end Asus, Netgear equipment and arguably worst in features and performance.

 

[ZenicaPA]

Seriously you're in way over your head OP. If you're asking these questions about Cisco AP you don't need it nor will you be able to set one up regardless if you are using it in controller mode or autonomous mode. We use Cisco switches, routers, wireless AP, controllers at work and listen to what others are saying it's not for home use. Yes you can trust them and they are reliable in the hospital, etc you've seen them in but it's because there's knowledgeable people setting them up.

A couple of things to consider with Cisco AP. The web interface is garbage and most configuration needs to be done view command line. If you're not comfortable with Cisco's CLI you'll run into problems. Secondly Cisco AP are just that Access Points, they don't provide any routing, firewall, DNS, DHCP, etc services like you expect with consumer targeted devices. So unless you have servers or other devices to handle those functions, Cisco AP is out if the question for you. Lastly regarding your question about how much a Cisco wireless controller costs it depends on the model and features you want, at work our Cisco Wireless AP costs around $1000 each but our wireless controller was closer to $30,000.

Listen to what others are saying get some consumer device for your house. Some have recommend Ubiquiti gear but IMO they were the gear to get during the wireless N days as they were able to provide seamless roaming (zero handoff) with there gear, something usually only provided by enterprise gear. However with there wireless AC gear that are not able to provide this functionality so IMO it makes them no better then the higher end Asus, Netgear equipment and arguably worst in features and performance.

Thank you---

You've put some things into perspective for me. While I will have a shop install the CAT6 and hardware, I am not sure of they also perform ongoing maintenance. I was also not aware Cisco equipment lacked a firewall or DNS functionality. I've read that the UI wasn't exactly intuitive but it isn't like I'd be accessing it on a daily basis so that was a low concern for me.

The installer was suggesting either a [FONT=&quot]Ruckus R700 or an Araknis Networks AN-KIT-300-AP-INJ in place of the Cisco. I had never heard of either [/FONT][FONT=&quot]so I said I'd rather have a Cisco solution.


Are his suggestions any good?[/FONT]

 

[boomhower]

Thank you---

You've put some things into perspective for me. While I will have a shop install the CAT6 and hardware, I am not sure of they also perform ongoing maintenance. I was also not aware Cisco equipment lacked a firewall or DNS functionality. I've read that the UI wasn't exactly intuitive but it isn't like I'd be accessing it on a daily basis so that was a low concern for me.

The installer was suggesting either a [FONT=&quot]Ruckus R700 or an Araknis Networks AN-KIT-300-AP-INJ in place of the Cisco. I had never heard of either [/FONT][FONT=&quot]so I said I'd rather have a Cisco solution.


Are his suggestions any good?[/FONT]

If your paying a competent vendor to install and perform the set-up then Cisco would be fine but your going to pay through the nose for the name and not really benefit from it. Plus you are going to likely need on site support down the road since you don't know how to handle it.

The latter options are more of the same, business class hardware at business class prices. Ubiquiti is a solid option, cheap but still good stuff. Their first run AC hardware had some serious issues but their newly released hardware is looking to be solid stuff. Do your research and know what your getting.

You could also stick with plain consumer level hardware. A Netgear Nighthawk router and Nighthawk extender would be good enough for most households web surfing and media consumption needs. (but at a similar if not higher cost than Ubiquiti)

 

[sdifox]

If your paying a competent vendor to install and perform the set-up then Cisco would be fine but your going to pay through the nose for the name and not really benefit from it. Plus you are going to likely need on site support down the road since you don't know how to handle it.

The latter options are more of the same, business class hardware at business class prices. Ubiquiti is a solid option, cheap but still good stuff. Their first run AC hardware had some serious issues but their newly released hardware is looking to be solid stuff. Do your research and know what your getting.

You could also stick with plain consumer level hardware. A Netgear Nighthawk router and Nighthawk extender would be good enough for most households web surfing and media consumption needs. (but at a similar if not higher cost than Ubiquiti)

I am rocking an Aerohive HiveAP 340 :awe:

 

[ZenicaPA]

So far, this networking shop has my confidence in being able to install and set up the network as I've asked. That is running the CAT6 cable and building the networking station in an unused closet. I have not asked about ongoing support but I suspect they can handle it.

I have an Asus setup in our existing home, because we're keeping this house for my parents I was just going to leave this equipment here for them but thus far I have had no complaints with Asus. This house is half the size of the new one and the new Sony TVs are all smartTVs and all are 4K. Something the Asus has not had to handle and a concern for me if it could have, hence the thought to use Cisco. 3 TVs all needing to stream 4K can be very taxing on a router!

This was the concern I presented to the installer which is why he was leaning towards commercial/enterprise grade equipment even if a different brand than Cisco.

I like the NETGEAR Nighthawk X8 - AC5300 Tri-Band. It seems like it could be a very potent router and with dual 5GHz bands, would mean not every TV set would be on one band.

I will run this model by the installer.

Thanks for the suggestion and advice.

 

[sdifox]

So far, this networking shop has my confidence in being able to install and set up the network as I've asked. That is running the CAT6 cable and building the networking station in an unused closet. I have not asked about ongoing support but I suspect they can handle it.

I have an Asus setup in our existing home, because we're keeping this house for my parents I was just going to leave this equipment here for them but thus far I have had no complaints with Asus. This house is half the size of the new one and the new Sony TVs are all smartTVs and all are 4K. Something the Asus has not had to handle and a concern for me if it could have, hence the thought to use Cisco. 3 TVs all needing to stream 4K can be very taxing on a router!

This was the concern I presented to the installer which is why he was leaning towards commercial/enterprise grade equipment even if a different brand than Cisco.

I like the NETGEAR Nighthawk X8 - AC5300 Tri-Band. It seems like it could be a very potent router and with dual 5GHz bands, would mean not every TV set would be on one band.

I will run this model by the installer.

Thanks for the suggestion and advice.

Do the sony tvs have ethernet or are they wifi only? Hardwire is always better than wifi.

 

[boomhower]

So far, this networking shop has my confidence in being able to install and set up the network as I've asked. That is running the CAT6 cable and building the networking station in an unused closet. I have not asked about ongoing support but I suspect they can handle it.

I have an Asus setup in our existing home, because we're keeping this house for my parents I was just going to leave this equipment here for them but thus far I have had no complaints with Asus. This house is half the size of the new one and the new Sony TVs are all smartTVs and all are 4K. Something the Asus has not had to handle and a concern for me if it could have, hence the thought to use Cisco. 3 TVs all needing to stream 4K can be very taxing on a router!

This was the concern I presented to the installer which is why he was leaning towards commercial/enterprise grade equipment even if a different brand than Cisco.

I like the NETGEAR Nighthawk X8 - AC5300 Tri-Band. It seems like it could be a very potent router and with dual 5GHz bands, would mean not every TV set would be on one band.

I will run this model by the installer.

Thanks for the suggestion and advice.

You need to hardwire more. Streaming 4K over wireless is just asking for trouble. As a general rule if it doesn't move it need to be hardwired. Yes, I know it's not easy but will save you a lot of grief down the line.

You will get tired fast of having to call someone and paying for an onsite visit overtime a problem arrises.

 

[ZenicaPA]

You need to hardwire more. Streaming 4K over wireless is just asking for trouble. As a general rule if it doesn't move it need to be hardwired. Yes, I know it's not easy but will save you a lot of grief down the line.

You will get tired fast of having to call someone and paying for an onsite visit overtime a problem arrises.

Good point. I had completely overlooked that as an option. I wonder if the installer just assumed I asked for CAT6 in those locations exclusively for the TV sets. Would it make more sense to have a single CAT6 in each room and then a local switch or multiple outlets in each room, all going back to the main router/switch in the closet?

I'll talk to the installer to clarify this but your opinion could serve to corroborate his.

 

[sdifox]

Good point. I had completely overlooked that as an option. I wonder if the installer just assumed I asked for CAT6 in those locations exclusively for the TV sets. Would it make more sense to have a single CAT6 in each room and then a local switch or multiple outlets in each room, all going back to the main router/switch in the closet?

I'll talk to the installer to clarify this but your opinion could serve to corroborate his.

1 cat.6 drop should be good enough for home use. Add a five port gigabit swtich if necesafy at the room.

 

[boomhower]

Good point. I had completely overlooked that as an option. I wonder if the installer just assumed I asked for CAT6 in those locations exclusively for the TV sets. Would it make more sense to have a single CAT6 in each room and then a local switch or multiple outlets in each room, all going back to the main router/switch in the closet?

I'll talk to the installer to clarify this but your opinion could serve to corroborate his.

Pretty much what I am doing. 16 port switch in the living room where the internet comes in. (don't have the luxury of a networking closet.) From there a 5e drop to the three bedrooms that will have five port switches for TV, games consoles, media boxes, etc. and the AP mounted in the center of the house. Everything that can be hardwired should be.

 

[ZenicaPA]

Pretty much what I am doing. 16 port switch in the living room where the internet comes in. (don't have the luxury of a networking closet.) From there a 5e drop to the three bedrooms that will have five port switches for TV, games consoles, media boxes, etc. and the AP mounted in the center of the house. Everything that can be hardwired should be.

Sounds like a similar setup to what I am after. I'll probably add a repeater for the basement and backyard deck. I have a Drobo that will be connected to the network via a laptop. It is an ad-hock NAS for me because I have never really had positive experiences with NAS boxes.

Would you have a recommendation for one?


EDIT

I checked Drobo....it seems they make a few NAS options. I ordered the B810n.

 

[sdifox]

Sounds like a similar setup to what I am after. I'll probably add a repeater for the basement and backyard deck. I have a Drobo that will be connected to the network via a laptop. It is an ad-hock NAS for me because I have never really had positive experiences with NAS boxes.

Would you have a recommendation for one?


EDIT

I checked Drobo....it seems they make a few NAS options. I ordered the B810n.

You want access points for basement and backyard with Ethernet backhaul to switch.

 

[boomhower]

You want access points for basement and backyard with Ethernet backhaul to switch.

Yup, hardwired AP's are the way to go. Unless a building is constructed in suck a manner running ethernet is just impossible you should use wired ethernet. A hardwired AP will give greatly improved performance over a wifi extender.

For a NAS I strongly sugget Synology. They are dead nuts reliable and have a huge user base for customization and add ons that can add a lot of functionality. Have mine set up with couch potato and sickbeard. Wonderful unit.

 

[ZenicaPA]

Thanks, checking out Synology now.

The installer is suggesting an AP as well.

Thanks everyone for all of your input and suggestions.