Search the Community

Hi On behalf of a school we need to dispose of 78 Aerohive AP121. The sale is by the school and monies would be due to them. We are looking for £60 each inc vat. They will come with a certificate of sale so they can be moved. Thanks

Hi We are currently trialling Aerohive AP230 and Meraki MR32 wireless access points with a view to replacing our existing system and at the same time expanding our coverage. After a considerable amount of testing we do not have a clear winner and we are looking for feedback from anyone who is currently running one of these brands of WAP. In particular we are looking to know of any issues or problem you have encountered. Regards Philip

Hi all, we have Aerohive, we have an old DC which we want to retire, I have been shutting it down to see if any services are affected. We find that WPA AAA authentication is affected. I checked the AD integration and pointed it to our new DC. However still have the same issues. Anyone able to help me find referances to the old DC? Thanks.

When the school wanted me to install a wireless network I checked out 4 or 5 companies and eventually settled on Aerohive having seen it working in a local school. To be fair it was a close call between it and Ruckus after testing. That was 3 years ago and it has been such a nightmare (For us anyway) and our installers, AIT, do not seem to be able to make it work reliably. I have asked them if our network set up is any different to other schools because I cannot think that they would also put up with such shenannigans. We have two SSIDs Guest and School Portal, the Guest is accessed using a PSK which is renewed weekly and bypasses our filters so people visiting the school can use the wi-fi. All AD users connect through the School Portal and we have two groups, Staff and Students, on two different WLANs that use different DHCP scopes. We have problems with roaming connections not being passed on and users being disconnected at any time even though the DHCP licence expiry time is set quite high (8 hours). Users are also being issued licences from the wrong DHCP scope or pickling one up from one scope and being re-allocated another when they log on to the wireless (Which means the previous licence is held until its expiry. I admit I was sceptical about wireless but thought I had made the correct decision given my reservations, but the wireless is a bit of a running joke in the school and we cannot expand our BYOD plans till it is reliable. So if anyone would be willing to discuss this with me or chat about their school set up post here and I will respond.

We have just started looking after a school that has an Aerohive WLAN. The school, the previous support company and the original installers have no details of the login details to manage these APs. Does anyone have any experience with taking over management in this situation? Aerohive says there is nothing they can do as the school is an end user. (I must say, it doesn't say much for Aerohive end-user support!)

Hi, I'm currently looking at our BYOD WiFi config as we currently use a captive portal (from firewall) to get students to enter AD credentials and then gain access(filtered) to the internet. I want to move away from the captive portal, as we are getting quite a few issues with it not popping up, or getting SSL errors as although i have a public certificate on the page, it is not google.com's one, the other problem is that i don't have the visibility of the user in my wifi system, so if i see a device that is behaving in an unwanted manner, or not experiencing a good connection, i have to go look up the user elsewhere. So i want to move to some form of radius authentication where the student/staff member put's their username/password in as part of the connection instead. My AD is 2012, WiFi is Aerohive and Firewalls are Fortinet (I also have Smoothwall Proxy's) Where do i do the radius/authentication? The AP has to be involved somewhere to secure the connection... but i also need the firewall to know who the user is. AD Exists... i also have 2 NPS server's doing the authentication for Domain Computers Very confused.

Hi Guys I have just been informed that we will be rolling out a IPad Pilot to 40 students i have up to date been able to hold of this deployment as we have no wifi infrastructure and are getting a new 60 class room building which we hope will be ready in 2016 ( not holding my breath as it should have been built by september this year but no groundworks have been completed yet) and because of this new building i have been told they don't want to invest in any new ICT infrastructure (as we will be getting all new stuff in the new building) I have now been able to get them to make a compromise that we would fit out 2 to 3 classrooms with wifi for these 40 students Im hoping to use this Ipad pilot as a opportunity to test out a system for full on deployment in the new place what im looking for now is a suggestion on what type of system i should go for we currently have 1 Meraki AP in the staff room which works reasonably well but would love some feedback on others such as ruckus, muru, aerohive Thanks in advance Timothy

Divergent Dynamics have released a new stress test report putting Ruckus, Aruba, Aerohive, Meraki and Cisco against each other. Using mid-range 802.11ac access points (APs), the testing measured each AP’s ability to simultaneously deliver video and data to 60 client devices. I thought it could be of interest to some of you. A lot of the time these reports are co-sponsored/supported by a vendor, but on quick inspection, i can't see any obvious signs of this being the case. You can view the report here: http://divdyn.com/docs/WiFi-vendor-video-stress-test.pdf Ruckus intro piece: Using mid-range 802.11ac access points (APs), the testing measured each AP’s ability to simultaneously deliver video and data to 60 client devices. The results showed that the Ruckus R610 AP was the only tested AP able to maintain stall-free video delivery to each client when data traffic loading was simultaneously applied to the network. “The tests were conducted in a real-world, high client-density environment and carried out using industry best practices and each manufacturer’s recommendations,” said Devin Akin, founder and CEO of Divergent Dynamics. “In this environment, Ruckus APs delivered consistent stall-free video, outperforming five APs from four manufacturers, including two APs with higher performance specifications. The R610 was the only AP to meet real-world relevant test objectives and was nothing short of impressive.” Test Results In the test with 30 video clients, the Ruckus R610 was the only AP that maintained stall-free video delivery to all 30 clients while under heavy network loading from data-only clients. In the test with 60 video clients, the Ruckus R610 was the only AP that maintained stall-free video delivery to all 60 video clients both with and without network loading. Business Implications IT departments are increasingly tasked with delivering a higher quality of service over a wireless local area network (WLAN) without over-spending on infrastructure. In some segments, such as education, the consistent delivery of stall-free video is imperative to the proper functioning of the organization. IT organizations that can provide their users with a better video experience save time by reducing the number of helpdesk tickets they receive. IT organizations that can use the equivalent of one AP for every two rooms rather than one AP for each room reduce the cost of access point infrastructure as well as associated licenses, cable runs and power consumption. “Ruckus is committed to ensuring the highest quality of experience for each user, regardless of traffic type,” said Greg Beach, vice president of wireless products, Ruckus. “Video is becoming more prevalent in every WLAN environment and, in contrast to most types of data traffic, poor video delivery is immediately apparent to the end user. The Divergent Dynamics report is further testament to Ruckus’ unique ability to ensure a great end-user Wi-Fi experience—without over-procuring—even under the most challenging of circumstances.”