School Wi-Fi Upgrade – Seeking Advice on UniFi Deployment

[leewakelam]

Hi all,

 

We’re currently exploring an upgrade to our school Wi-Fi network and would really value some advice from those with relevant experience.

 

At present, we’re running a ZoneDirector 1200 with 32 Ruckus access points (R500 & R710). Due to budget considerations, we’re looking at moving over to UniFi, specifically the U7 Pro XG models.

Has anyone made a similar transition from Ruckus to UniFi? If so, how have you found the performance and overall reliability?

 

I’ve also come across suggestions that UniFi deployments may require around 20–30% more access points to achieve comparable coverage. Has this been your experience in practice?

 

Any insights or recommendations would be greatly appreciated.

 

Thanks in advance,
Lee

[TheHyperTechie]

Can't commend on moving exclusively from Ruckus > UniFi - but I imagine there wouldn't be much of a difference...

 

As for the need of more access points, upload a floor plan here: https://design.ui.com/ - It will give you a good idea of coverage, I have done this for deployments in our schools.

[Davit2005]

Yep I think it is important to add in the differences of different APs not jus place newer and/or more powerful APs in the same location and expect better performance overall without some thought of overlapping channels etc. Good example been where our plans for APs were ignored by builders and as a result we ended up turning off a 3rd of the APs and had less issues because the APs were overlapping as were not to plan and too close. Literally 3 APs placed within 5 meters in an open plan area, lol.

Edited March 27 by Davit2005

[AlphamaleZed]

How many devices you got? I found the U7 Lites work for our scenario and have quite a few rather than U7 Pros which i do have some.

 

Youll need to check the spec of the current stuff and range and compare to unifi to make judgement im sure its on par.

[mitchell1981]

We moved from Meru to U7 Pros and some U7 Pro Maxes.
We dropped from about 150 APs, to 90.

 

Horrendous problems from September 2024 - December 2024, we were about to give up and replace the whole lot, but it turned out to be bad firmware. UniFi released an update and it's been completely stable since December 2024, and very few WiFi problems. 
 

I would just say to be cautious of brand new products, and read the comments on the forums about specific models before purchase, but in general we are now very happy with our UniFi stuff.

 

 

[DrCheese]

I wouldn't use U7-lites - They don't have the 6ghz radio that is a big feature of Wi-Fi 7.

 

Agree on Unifi's firmware, the early 7 firmware as a whole was a total poopshow. Also the early U7-Pros had fans in them, but no way to monitor if one failed & not user replacable. Yuck.

 

The modern XG and XGS's are fine tho - I like the XGSs (It's what we'll end up replacing our NanoHD's with) as they have a spectral radio which helps for balancing out channels.

[AlphamaleZed]

20 minutes ago, DrCheese said:

I wouldn't use U7-lites - They don't have the 6ghz radio that is a big feature of Wi-Fi 7.

 

Agree on Unifi's firmware, the early 7 firmware as a whole was a total poopshow. Also the early U7-Pros had fans in them, but no way to monitor if one failed & not user replacable. Yuck.

 

The modern XG and XGS's are fine tho - I like the XGSs (It's what we'll end up replacing our NanoHD's with) as they have a spectral radio which helps for balancing out channels.

Bare in mind 6ghz isnt widely adopted and only works in the room not across walls very well so didnt bother. 6Ghz has caused issues with wpa3 enterprise so switched off.

[forkies]

On 27/03/2026 at 11:30, AlphamaleZed said:

Bare in mind 6ghz isnt widely adopted and only works in the room not across walls very well so didnt bother. 6Ghz has caused issues with wpa3 enterprise so switched off.

You must not forget you must be Meeting digital and technology standards in schools and colleges - Wireless network: core standard - Guidance - GOV.UK by year 2030, which includes "You should ask your supplier or IT support to provide a wireless solution that uses, at a minimum, the Wi-Fi 6E standard." and to meet that standard you must have Wi-Fi 6 (802.11ax) 6GHz compatible wireless access points. Even if your current end user devices don't support it now, doesn't mean you shouldn't be future proofing. If you are spending money, why put in something that doesn't support the minimum standards you will need in 4 years time, when you will end up having to replace it all before then to meet standards.

We rolled out U7 Pro and U7 Pro Max APs in the summer, and we are very pleased with them, no issues at all with only 5GHz and 6GHz.

DfE have said if you are not meeting the standards by 2030, DfE could arrange a targeted visit to the school to determine why it was not met and provide management guidance on meeting the standards as part of the new addition to the annual returns. This is part of the estates management update they are implementing. Then it could be taken out of your hands.

[synaesthesia]

4 minutes ago, forkies said:

DfE have said if you are not meeting the standards by 2030, DfE could arrange a targeted visit to the school to determine why it was not met and provide management guidance on meeting the standards as part of the new addition to the annual returns. This is part of the estates management update they are implementing. Then it could be taken out of your hands.

As usual with the DfE there's a lot of "could" there. The reality is, next to no chance of this actually happening. And also I will endeavour to point out that unless it's changed, none of the information says "you must", it's "you should".

If it gets taken out of the school's hands, they (DfE) would then be liable to help cover the costs. That isn't going to happen any time soon. 

 

You could look at it like the CyberAlarm thing too - you could have the kit capable but doesn't mean it needs to be switched on...

[andy_b]

6 minutes ago, synaesthesia said:

As usual with the DfE there's a lot of "could" there. The reality is, next to no chance of this actually happening. And also I will endeavour to point out that unless it's changed, none of the information says "you must", it's "you should".

If it gets taken out of the school's hands, they (DfE) would then be liable to help cover the costs. That isn't going to happen any time soon. 

 

You could look at it like the CyberAlarm thing too - you could have the kit capable but doesn't mean it needs to be switched on...

 

I would love the DfE to come in and say we have to sack staff to ensure we have WiFi 6.

 

I see the document as aspirational - I would like to tick all the boxes, but realistically it is never going to happen. There is no subtlety in the document a 2,000 place mainstream secondary school is a very different beast to a 55 place SEMH school, and they both have different needs and budgetary constraints.

 

 

[BKGarry]

I moved 9 or 10 years ago from Meru N access points to Unifi AC, and then 2 years ago to 6.

 

It has been miles better than the Meru stuff towards the end, but I also think some of that was left overs of configurations from the MSP (we are a post BSF school), including one machine startup batch file that was basically DDOS'ing everything.

 

Unifi has been solid for us, I have their switches, cameras and APs and everything works fine.

[msi_school]

10 minutes ago, andy_b said:

 

I would love the DfE to come in and say we have to sack staff to ensure we have WiFi 6.

 

I see the document as aspirational - I would like to tick all the boxes, but realistically it is never going to happen. There is no subtlety in the document a 2,000 place mainstream secondary school is a very different beast to a 55 place SEMH school, and they both have different needs and budgetary constraints.

 

 

Who knows what an inspector will say I worked at a school that replaced all its emergency exit lights becasue the ISI inspector objected to the charging LEDs being red instead of green.

Edited April 2 by msi_school
spelling

[forkies]

7 minutes ago, synaesthesia said:

As usual with the DfE there's a lot of "could" there. The reality is, next to no chance of this actually happening. And also I will endeavour to point out that unless it's changed, none of the information says "you must", it's "you should".

If it gets taken out of the school's hands, they (DfE) would then be liable to help cover the costs. That isn't going to happen any time soon. 

 

You could look at it like the CyberAlarm thing too - you could have the kit capable but doesn't mean it needs to be switched on...

I guess it depends how the budget is managed by your leadership team, we are all but one criteria away from meeting the standards but have always been able to manage the budget allocation to ensure a rolling replacement cycle for all of our assets. We wouldn't like to be the only school in the area that gets a management visit from DfE for not meeting the standards, not great PR and brings into question if the IT team have managed their assets and budget effectively, and provided correct guidance to the school leadership.

As always, the Government is providing schools with the money, it is how the school spends it, schools should be able to meet all standards in their eyes. I think DfE are realising a lot of schools haven't managed their estates very well (buildings) and putting more ownership on schools to look after them. IT is a major part of any business, and not having updated, modern and secure systems is also costing them money. Leadership teams and Board of Trustees need to balance between fancy purchases that don't last long, have minimal impact or that get replaced when someone leaves and someone else starts with a different system/product because they "used it in their last school", and instead ensuring the school has modern assets that are fit for purpose.

[AlphamaleZed]

36 minutes ago, forkies said:

You must not forget you must be Meeting digital and technology standards in schools and colleges - Wireless network: core standard - Guidance - GOV.UK by year 2030, which includes "You should ask your supplier or IT support to provide a wireless solution that uses, at a minimum, the Wi-Fi 6E standard." and to meet that standard you must have Wi-Fi 6 (802.11ax) 6GHz compatible wireless access points. Even if your current end user devices don't support it now, doesn't mean you shouldn't be future proofing. If you are spending money, why put in something that doesn't support the minimum standards you will need in 4 years time, when you will end up having to replace it all before then to meet standards.

We rolled out U7 Pro and U7 Pro Max APs in the summer, and we are very pleased with them, no issues at all with only 5GHz and 6GHz.

DfE have said if you are not meeting the standards by 2030, DfE could arrange a targeted visit to the school to determine why it was not met and provide management guidance on meeting the standards as part of the new addition to the annual returns. This is part of the estates management update they are implementing. Then it could be taken out of your hands.

Where has DFE said that if you could provide a source be great.

 

Interesting as the U5s are still supported by unifi and by then there will probably be WiFi 8. as long as in date and sufficient be suitable. I feel like they just slapped a generic set of rules whilst cutting public sector funding...

[synaesthesia]

Ah, theres a lot of assumptions there though. Yes the government provide the funds, to a point. If they are adequate is obviously under question, because if they were, we wouldn't have ongoing issues with unions, staffing, conditions etc etc. Locations have massive effects, roll numbers (ours are low enough this year that there is significant job losses involved) roll types, provision statuses. Lots more to this bugger picture than what you've just painted I'm afraid and certainly isn't just down to poor management. 

A 5 year rolling replacement is pie in the sky for us and many many more besides!

[forkies]

4 minutes ago, AlphamaleZed said:

Where has DFE said that if you could provide a source be great.

 

Interesting as the U5s are still supported by unifi and by then there will probably be WiFi 8. as long as in date and sufficient be suitable. I feel like they just slapped a generic set of rules whilst cutting public sector funding...

https://www.gov.uk/guidance/meeting-digital-and-technology-standards-in-schools-and-colleges/wireless-network-core-standard

[AlphamaleZed]

8 minutes ago, forkies said:

https://www.gov.uk/guidance/meeting-digital-and-technology-standards-in-schools-and-colleges/wireless-network-core-standard

Can’t find that section your explicitly referring too. 
 

However I did note that there is no specific mention of 6ghz just WiFi 6e or WiFi 7. So based on wording I think the U7 Lites should be fine. 

[FN-GM]

On 27/03/2026 at 22:00, AlphamaleZed said:

Bare in mind 6ghz isnt widely adopted and only works in the room not across walls very well so didnt bother. 6Ghz has caused issues with wpa3 enterprise so switched off.

 

No idea where you're getting this from as it's not true.

[AlphamaleZed]

5 minutes ago, FN-GM said:

 

No idea where you're getting this from as it's not true.

You’re right let me rephrase.

 

6GHz signals drop significantly through walls you can lose quite a lot depending on wall type and if there’s metal in the walls the signal degrades a lot more. 
it was designed to close range high throughput initially. 
 

imagine a classroom of 30 students (humans affect signal too) that’s a lot more interference before it gets to the other room. 

 

It’s more suitable for same room or line of sight connections. 

[synaesthesia]

3 hours ago, AlphamaleZed said:

You’re right let me rephrase.

 

6GHz signals drop significantly through walls you can lose quite a lot depending on wall type and if there’s metal in the walls the signal degrades a lot more. 
it was designed to close range high throughput initially. 
 

imagine a classroom of 30 students (humans affect signal too) that’s a lot more interference before it gets to the other room. 

 

It’s more suitable for same room or line of sight connections. 

That's the problem - wifi solutions these days across the board are designed pretty much for a 1 AP per room approach. Long gone are the days when you'd have an AP per block, or even just your router sat on a shelf at home hence why there's so many "mesh" solutions for consumer use now. 

I mean it wasn't a 1:1 school but one of the original UniFi AP's used to run about a dozen classrooms in old buildings with walls that would stop point blank artillery barrages. You'd be hard pushed to see any wifi survey now come back with anything but a 1 per room with exceptions of mobile classrooms or stud walls - but put an IWB on that wall and the picture can quickly change.

 

Our unifi UAP 6 deployment at the moment is 45 APs across 80 rooms (class & offices) and fairly sure that when/if our CtC comes through later this year we'd be looking to push that to 80 APs.

(We had CtC wifi surveys done a few years ago which fell through - one of which quoted for 114 Aruba APs! I suspect the surveyor used might have been a PAT tester previously)

[MrEprise]

1 hour ago, synaesthesia said:

That's the problem - wifi solutions these days across the board are designed pretty much for a 1 AP per room approach. Long gone are the days when you'd have an AP per block, or even just your router sat on a shelf at home hence why there's so many "mesh" solutions for consumer use now. 

I mean it wasn't a 1:1 school but one of the original UniFi AP's used to run about a dozen classrooms in old buildings with walls that would stop point blank artillery barrages. You'd be hard pushed to see any wifi survey now come back with anything but a 1 per room with exceptions of mobile classrooms or stud walls - but put an IWB on that wall and the picture can quickly change.

 

I remember how good the original UAP's were, that in my last school we'd deployed a single one to serve a whole 1970's RoSLA building without any significant drop in signal degradation. That's how good they were. Admittedly we didn't have classes of 32 kids logging onto laptops in that building but it served the needs of those who did use it just fine.

[forkies]

On 02/04/2026 at 15:47, AlphamaleZed said:

Can’t find that section your explicitly referring too. 
 

However I did note that there is no specific mention of 6ghz just WiFi 6e or WiFi 7. So based on wording I think the U7 Lites should be fine. 

WiFi 6e is 6GHz.

 

Below is the extract from the page, under the Use the latest wireless network standards section.

Quote

 

How to meet the standard
Work with your IT support to ensure that your wireless network allows you to achieve the outcomes and device usage you need across the site. They should support concurrent logon and use of all devices.

You should ask your supplier or IT support to provide a wireless solution that uses, at a minimum, the Wi-Fi 6E standard.

 

Yes it is "should" not "must", at this time anyway.

[psydii]

I am concerned that getting reliable 6Ghz coverage moves us back to 1 AP per classroom as a "rule of thumb", and unreliable 6Ghz might be worse than "only" 5Ghz.

 

Back in the 11a/b/g/n days you could end up with lower (perceived) performance/reliability for some users who were at the edge of viable 5Ghz, but the laptop next to them was fine on 2.4.

 

Does anyone have experience of a network that has good 5Ghz converge (e.g. -63dB everywhere with SNR of >25dB), but only patchy 6Ghz coverage? How well/seamlessly do devices transition between them?

 

Also, does anyone have any data or "anecdata" on whether 7 has any actually performance benefit over 6 (or 5!) in real-world use cases (e.g. classroom full of laptops throwing photos/videos up and down, syncing to the cloud).

 

Here's my anecdata: 11ac (Wifi 5) single laptop (2x2 80Mhz) doing the work, after school (so few users on the LAN/WLAN and ISP) - up to 900MBit/s but usually much less because cloud sync has its own overheads/throttling; but with 30 laptops all doing the same during the day on the same (single) AP (4x4), the aggregate throughput tends to max out at about 250MBit/sec; Impact on users from it being 'slow' during the day? None. Nobody notices or complains, and the feedback was the experience is better than the 100Mb/sec lan, 10Gb backhaul to 10Gb servers with fibre channel it relaced. (secret: working on files cached on the local ssd is faster than any affordable lan/server set up, and in fact performance has very little to do with the wireless)

 

I'm beginning to think that wifi 5 (done right) was fast enough, and for anything much beyond that, the price performance doesn't really stack up. (see also: how expensive/fussy classroom screens are with cabling now 20Gbit/sec+ transfer rates are the standard on new kit).   Of course wifi 5 kit is old now, and needs to be replaced, but adequate 6Ghz coverage might be a huge expense to do right, and ultimately of insufficient benefit in the lifetime of any kit bought in 2026 to be worth the expense.

Edited April 14 by psydii

[AlphamaleZed]

3 hours ago, forkies said:

WiFi 6e is 6GHz.

 

Below is the extract from the page, under the Use the latest wireless network standards section.

Yes it is "should" not "must", at this time anyway.

Its wifi 6, 6e, 7 in order of release so guidelines are not really clear, i dont think 6ghz is a must personally.

[nicholab]

From the doc

Can you deliver more than 1Gbit to your AP's i.e. 2.5Gbps, 5Gbps or 10Gbps.

We are running 6U+ and can get 1Gbit Wi-Fi from some clients.