R600,SZ100 is taking overload latency with 30 clients

  • 1
  • Question
  • Updated 6 months ago
R600 aps are working fine(answers about 1-5ms to gateway LAN), until 30+ clients connect to the SSID on same AP(300-600ms to gateway LAN).

Controller version: 3.5.1.0.862
Control Plane Software Version: 3.5.1.0.820
Data Plane Software Version: 3.5.1.0.807
AP Firmware Version: 3.5.1.0.1010
Photo of harvi yesid calle cardenas

harvi yesid calle cardenas

  • 5 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes

Posted 7 months ago

  • 1
Photo of Michael Murphy

Michael Murphy

  • 7 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
Experiencing issues with 3.4 and 3.5.  Similar high latency and high utilization.  Issue roves.  Lots of problems.
Photo of harvi yesid calle cardenas

harvi yesid calle cardenas

  • 5 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
what's your configuration?

I have 2 SSID on all Access Points, if you like better write to +573162267697 Whatsapp number, maybe we can talk about issues and try solve faster.

Best regards.
Photo of Jamie Walmsley

Jamie Walmsley

  • 23 Posts
  • 3 Reply Likes
Im using the same firmware version on an SZ300 and have 3 R700 AP's that I'm seeing the same behaviour with. High unexplained latency on 5Ghz see image below. Havent done a great deal of investigation yet.

Photo of Jamie Walmsley

Jamie Walmsley

  • 23 Posts
  • 3 Reply Likes
Just re-read your comment and see your referring to latency on the AP's wired interface. for me that appears to be fine, its just wireless clients that are seeing latency.
Photo of Michael Murphy

Michael Murphy

  • 7 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
My latency is wireless clients, not the ap's themselves.   I can have 15 (of 125) overload with high latency up to 600 ms or use up to 95% of airtime.



The could be interference from other ap's (power / channel) but I see these come and go.  Which would imply channels changing often.  They are telling me even though you set AUTO for power they stay on full.  That they can't manage power on the ap from the controller, which is disappointing.
Photo of harvi yesid calle cardenas

harvi yesid calle cardenas

  • 5 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
Hi Michael.

Mi problem, is your problem, hahahaha, when 30+ clients are concurrents to the same AP, answer times to the gateway(from clients), raise to 130-200ms.

About manage power on the AP from controller, i manage it on AP from controller selecting the AP and clicking on configuration at top of the page where you take screenshot.

Regards.
Photo of Michael Murphy

Michael Murphy

  • 7 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
To me, if you have an AUTO setting for power, that implies that you can manage the power.  Which an enterprise controller should be able to do and that is what Ruckus says they are.  The fact that you have to manually change power means that your AP's really aren't self healing as described. 

If AP's were running at 50% power and one drops out, the controller should realize this, and then step up power on the adjacent APs to help cover the hole created by the failed unit.  Setting power manually prevents this from happening.  Also if you add another AP in the environment you would now need to manually change power levels on everything else.  That change would cause a cascade of changes throughout the building.  It's not good to manage these manually.  I have 4 building and 125 aps.  That's going to be a lot of management.  That's not enterprise stuff to me which Ruckus claims to be.   

What I don't understand is why this is an issue for me now.  I've had my system 2.5 years.  The first 2 years were all good.  Not much change in the environment.  Now things have gone to heck.  The latency and high utilization issues will roam the ap's on my network, changing locale all the time.  I suspect controller software is to blame.  I was fine at 3.2.  Somewhere in the 3.4 software my sz100's became real unhappy.  Moving to 3.5 didn't resolve the issue.  Makes using the wireless network difficult or frustrating.  You never know when things are going to fall apart or reassemble for you.

I hope to find resolutions with them soon.  Ruckus was good for 2 years for me.  Better than my previous Cisco stuff.  Now I almost long for my Cisco equipment again.
Photo of harvi yesid calle cardenas

harvi yesid calle cardenas

  • 5 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
Michael.

I think so we are not so different on issues and topology.

I'm validating update to 3.6 version or to a patch and test again January, when students come back and let you know how is going.

Thanks for your help.

Merry Christmas.
Photo of Michael Murphy

Michael Murphy

  • 7 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
I'm probably going to play around with the channel mappings and power settings in one of my buildings and manually set them how I think it would be best.  We'll see if that improves things or makes it worse. 

This is just a nightmare though.  I don't know why I am doing the job my controller should be doing.

You have a good Christmas too!
Photo of harvi yesid calle cardenas

harvi yesid calle cardenas

  • 5 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
The problem is not channel mapping or power settings, i have already do and problem persist, the issue is about high density on Access Points, however, at least in theory, should not happen because AP support 500 clients.

I think better if you write to my whatsapp and start thinking what to do, i think so, any way, +573162267697.

Regards.
(Edited)
Photo of Michael Murphy

Michael Murphy

  • 7 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
I also had a number of these; ap rebooted by the system.  I could have 1 to 5 a day.  Lately it's down to 1 every other day (check your events - look for "rebooted").
  


They had run a script to turn some things off on the aps for non essential services to reduce traffic.  Seems to have help reduce these reboots. We also tried Channelfly but went back to background scanning as it worked better.
Photo of Michael Murphy

Michael Murphy

  • 7 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
I don't know about 500 users.  If you have 500 users I don't know if 120 ms latency is high.  I think it really depends on how much traffic is traversing the AP and the number of clients actively communicating.  More clients is probably more latency ( I think ).

For me 90% of my AP's never exceed 55 users.  High water mark on any given ap would be 75 at most.  Average is probably more like 30.  I can see latency becoming higher with more clients and traffic.  My issue when I see high latency with a low number of users (like in the picture from earlier today - 1 user and 220 ms latency).  Or 25 users and 600 ms latency.

The interesting part is 75% of my buildings are the same setup as last year but now perform badly compared to the past.  One building did have an increase in devices but I added more AP in that building.  My issues are in all building though.  So I say what changed.  Controller software.

Hope 3.6 helps you.  Let me know.
Photo of Jamie Walmsley

Jamie Walmsley

  • 23 Posts
  • 3 Reply Likes
Personally I wouldnt use auto power. Might be fine in a small environment with a handful of AP's but if you have a decent size deployment then allowing the AP's to set their own power levels means your cell sizes are dynamically changing, completely nullifying any WLAN design done before hand.

The AP has no idea about what its coverage cell area is supposed to be, its just reacting to what its seeing other AP's signal strengths at, so you are likely to end up either with area's with coverage holes or if the AP's power too high, increased co channel interference.

Best to manually configure power settings based on a design done in the likes of Ekahau or Airmagnet.
(Edited)
Photo of Michael Murphy

Michael Murphy

  • 7 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
I know in some literature they talked of Ruckus being self-healing.  You can't be if you manually are setting power.  Manual power setting is fine for any initial design but if you get an unknown interference or want to introduce a new AP, or one drops off you have to manually set power on all the neighbors.  The controller should be able to see neighbor signal strengths and then should be able to determine if an AP should be set to lower or higher power based on these measurements.

 An enterprise controller, (small to medium sized) which this is billed as should be able to do this.  Without this I've negated half of the reasons for having a controller.  I agee a site survey and manual plan could help short term.  What I don't understand is why the system worked well for 2 years on auto power, then goes belly up.  3 of the 4 building are basically identical to their old config.  That implies change.  Theirs or mine.   I've done a bunch to try and eliminate me, which leaves the controller doing something different in the updates.  Manual config would be stop gap, until I could replace this system.   I wasn't planning to replace it after 3 years but if it can't perform the duties expected of it, <yoda> then replacement with a real enterprise grade solution, it may need. </yoda>