A Q&A with Randy Regimbal on how Mayo Clinic sees efficiency as a major mobility benefit can be read here.
And the press release is available here.
]]>Here is the setup: since a WLAN is available, I can roam around the office and campus while maintaining a connection to check email and access unified communication-type applications like messaging. Grand. I can make phone calls with a voice over Wi-Fi phone. Grand. If I did not have an actual handset available, then I could use my IP softphone client installed on my laptop to make phone calls. Grand. (I’m sure many users are over it, but my IP softphone client has a high usability and practicality factor, especially when I work from home or away from my desk.) And, if I were to work in a retail store, I could use a mobile computer to check inventory levels or collaborate with team members to better serve customers. Grand. Not to digress…
But, how about some of the not so often discussed mobility services? I’m talking about services that happen in the background, behind the scenes, yet have an impact to operations. I wanted to learn about some mobility services that do not get too much play, but deserve equal billing because I think they fall into the cool (literally) mobility application category.
In this episode, I interview Isabelle Guis, senior manager of mobility solutions, and asked her what mobility-related area she has been focused on. (Mobility has been a long-standing hot topic, but Isabelle always adds that certain je ne sais quoi…) So I will not say more; but, watch and listen about how adding context awareness to a wireless network can benefit the carpeted enterprise and enterprises in the every vertical market, including healthcare and manufacturing. Also, Isabelle talks about what IT should look for when planning to deploy context awareness services within their organization.
]]>It is clear that more mobile devices are entering the enterprise, and this trend does not show any signs of slowing with industry analysts predicting an additional 1.1 billion new mobile devices coming to the market in the next couple years.
Security is a maintained concern with IT, especially with wireless and mobility; and with the expected wave of devices entering the enterprise, I interviewed Chris Kozup for his insight on the trends he is seeing that are related to securing a broader mobility network with a growing number of connecting end points and mobile users traversing multiple networks.
Although businesses can not deny the benefits of mobility, they should be cognizant of emerging security threats, as well as adjust their strategy when evolving their mobility network.
]]>In the pilot episode, “Mobility and the Converging Networks,” I interview Ben Gibson, and ask what Cisco is seeing as IT’s challenge for providing mobility to employees and mobile users as they are connecting to more disparate networks (both wired and wireless). Ben provides insight on what and how IT should consider when planning, managing and growing a mobility system. And finally, hear how Cisco sees mobility evolving.
Thanks for watching, and stay tuned for a new episode next week!
• Managing the growth in wireless devices – Managing the growth and diversity of devices connecting to the network requires a continued focus on device compatibility and testing. Through its Cisco Compatible Extensions program, Cisco works with leading Wi-Fi silicon manufacturers to ensure simple, secure connections for a broad range of mobile devices. Another key need is ongoing interoperability testing and validation. While not widely known, Cisco has a very robust program in place, called Assurewave, to achieve just this.
]]> • RF management is critical – IT should not underestimate the importance of pushing the envelope in radio development and optimization. In the wireless industry, providers either integrate off-the-shelf radio technology, or internally develop radios. Only by internally developing its own radios and antennas can a provider truly deliver a high performance access point. A robust solution combines radio expertise with software excellence so IT can benefit from dynamic radio resource management capabilities. This removes the complexity of management while ensuring an adaptive network capable of responding to environmental changes including changes in user and device location and density.• Spectrum Intelligence – It is difficult to place heavy reliability requirements on wireless networks without clear visibility into the RF spectrum. Comprehensive spectrum intelligence solutions are critical to provide the intelligence to classify, locate and mitigate RF interference, including from non Wi-Fi sources such as microwave ovens, cordless phones and Bluetooth.
• System Unification – For performance and simplicity, the wireless network must be unified with the wired network. In this way, IT can leverage common services and provide the processing horsepower needed to support the breadth of mobility applications being demanded by users, while achieving efficiencies in power and resource consumption.
• Intuitive Management – By deploying a comprehensive management solution, IT can obtain the requisite diagnostics and reports on system health before issues become service impacting. The wireless management solution must have proactive tools that help IT optimize the wireless deployment and on going operations.
Only by deploying a wireless infrastructure designed to meet the reliability needs of the most stringent environments can IT enable the business to take advantage of emerging mobility solutions.
Cisco has led the industry in the development of industry specific solutions like mobile care solutions for healthcare and in-store mobility solutions for retail. These are delivered over next generation, high performance wireless networks like 802.11n. With a significant part of its R&D invested in developing highly available wireless networks, Cisco continues to turn the immobile into the mobile, and keep them there.
The methodology behind the CRN performance tests is questionable. The Cisco access point was tested without a WLAN controller – differing from its intended configuration. No attention was paid to using the latest software drivers or product software. CRN provides no transparency to product sourcing and configuration methodology and refused to offer Cisco the opportunity to troubleshoot for fear of revealing the source of the product and its configurations.
For an unbiased and transparent review of Cisco’s product performance, readers should shift their attention to the Network Computing performance review. The performance review is summarized in the article, “First Look: Cisco's 1250 802.11n AP” and can be read here: http://www.networkcomputing.com/channels/wireless/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=206901320. This review shows the performance of the Aironet 1250 as reaching 154.9 Mbps. The 300 Mbps as referenced by CRN is the link speed. It is well understood that the TCP/UDP throughput reported in performance tests is approximately half that of the link speed (due to overhead associated with the 802.11 standard). Cisco has achieved phenomenal success with the Aironet 1250 with over 30,000 units shipped - the fastest selling access point in Cisco history. Leading customers like Duke University have shown real-world performance results just shy of 130 Mbps.
CRN fell short on delivering a complete and transparent test due to flawed testing methodology. Only by testing products with the latest drivers and software code can CRN expect to receive results commensurate with the true performance of the product.
]]>Cisco customers are putting this new technology to work today. A large apparel retailer is improving the quality of its warehouse voice-over-wireless implementation by deploying 802.11n. MIMO has improved the call quality of the company’s Cisco wireless IP phones by increasing network reliability and coverage predictability. A large U.S. hospital is deploying 802.11n to ensure consistent connectivity for synchronous patient care applications deployed to mobile computer carts. Without 802.11n, mobile carts were losing connectivity due to coverage holes caused by interference and multipath. Finally, Duke and Western Michigan universities are…deploying 802.11n across campus to support a growing diversity of client devices.
Technology shifts are gradual events that generally take years. With the Wi-Fi Alliance assuring longevity, the adoption timeframes should be determined purely on business need. Assured of investment protection and the performance required for the truly mobile experience, businesses can adopt 802.11n with confidence today.
]]>Here are the facts:
The 802.3af standard provides up to 12.95 watts at the remote end of the Ethernet cable to power a variety of devices.
To perform at full capacity, dual radio 802.11n access points require greater than 12.95 watts.
Thus, our conclusion:
Currently, 802.3af is not adequate to fully power dual radio 802.11n access points. That is, without some trade offs.
Despite these facts, a number of industry players are claiming to power their dual radio 802.11n access points with standard 802.3af power. While at face value the statement is true, the devil is in the details. The truth is simple. Powering dual radio 802.11n access points with standard 802.3af power will result in a reduction in performance. Here are some different ways in which performance will be impacted:
1. Up to 60% reduction in coverage area (requiring additional access points to cover the same facility)
2. Reduction in throughput (disable transmitters, reduce CPU clock rate, etc.)
3. A loss of services (e.g. security)
4. Limiting to a single radio
What does this mean for the business deploying 802.11n? To realize the full value of their investment, the business must invest in power options that deliver full power to the access point. Options that promise support for standard 802.3af PoE for dual radio 802.11n access points don't come without significant performance implications. IT must assess whether investment in these suboptimal solutions is worth it.
Cisco offers four alternatives that each deliver complete power:
1. Enhanced Power over Ethernet - Cisco has innovated beyond the 802.3af standard to deliver up to 20 watts of power from a single Ethernet port across select members of the Catalyst switch family. This option offers the greatest performance with the lowest operational impact.
2. Power Injector - The Aironet 1250 Series supports power injectors that can deliver adequate power to support full operation.
3. Local AC Power - Access points within proximity of a power outlet can deliver full performance with AC power.
4. Standard 802.3af - The Aironet 1250 Series can fully power a single 802.11n radio with standard 802.3af power. This is ideal for businesses that chose to only deploy on a single frequency (2.4GHz or 5GHz).
Other options such as the nascent 802.3at PoE standard will emerge over the next several quarters.
The next several months promise to be exciting as businesses start to experience the true power of 802.11n. The inadequate power alternatives offered by other providers will leave IT questioning the true performance of 802.11n. Only by treating next generation wireless as an integrated wired and wireless decision can businesses truly unleash the power of business mobility.
]]>The Claim: Aruba's CEO, Dominic Orr, claimed on their earnings call last week that his company was rapidly gaining market share in the Enterprise WLAN market.
Some perspective: The Dell'Oro Group, a widely respected industry analyst firm, just released new market share numbers last week. The results: The Dell’Oro Group reported that Cisco extended its market share lead to 63 percent in the Enterprise WLAN market, which includes WLAN controllers and access points. This performance came at the expense of the No. 2 (Aruba) and No. 3 (Motorola) vendors in the market, who both hold market share positions of under 10 percent and showed sequential declines in revenue from Q2 2007 to Q3 2007.
Some more perspective: In the critical WLAN controller market, Dell’Oro reported that Cisco sequentially gained 4 points of share in Q3, while the distant No. 2 player Aruba Networks lost more than 3 points of share due to declining controller shipments. In the past two years since the introduction of Cisco’s Unified Wireless Network, Cisco has gone from 31% share to today's 54%. Aruba has gone from 9% to 13% over the same time period.
And from another source: Synergy Research, another respected, indepedent authority, reported Enterprise WLAN market share for Cisco of 64 percent. Synergy also reports that Cisco’s share has grown from 46 percent in Q1 2005, the quarter when Cisco acquired Airespace, to the most recent quarter share at 64 percent. These 18 points of market share gain over the past three years significantly outpace all competitors, which according to Synergy all individually fall below 10 percent of share.
Everything listed above is based on independent, non-commissioned analyst data, with permission given by each firm for me to cite here.
www.delloro.com
www.srgresearch.com
My point? That Cisco continues to strongly lead this market, and grow its share over time? Well .. yes. But also to provide a counter to claims that big companies can't be agile and compete in fast-growing markets. Both topics were addressed by Aruba's CEO in what I felt was in misleading fashion, particularly in light of the data just released above. So I post this not with chest-thumping, but to offer up a more facts-based response to some public statements. Plus, it's fun when the numbers are on your side :)
]]>Our erstwhile competitor Aruba boasts the "only 802.11n AP that operates with standard PoE." Yet when you really take a closer look, what they mean here is that their AP can operate, but at reduced performance and capacity. Their story gets stranger when you read recent, completely inconsistent press comments from Aruba, essentially warning against 802.11n deployments altogether. http://news.zdnet.co.uk/communications/0,1000000085,39290082,00.htm The best part -- there's no sign that the company is shipping product any time soon.
My other favorite competitive claim by the same folks is their new "80 Gbps controller". Sounds great, until you realize that if you actually want to encrypt your traffic over an Aruba WLAN -- and what customer wouldn't -- that same Aruba controller, which handles all encryption centrally, slows down to 16 Gbps. Kind of like looking at a speedometer -- sure, 210 mph looks cool, but it doesn't mean a thing.
]]>Originally I was just passing notes to her, but then the instructor caught me and separated us (what's up with our marriage instructor separating us)? So after we were separated I started making paper airplanes especially when the payload of one of my paper airplane 'notes' was destined for her.
She giggled.
The instructor didn't.
She took the paper away from me and I was left with no way to entertain Deborah (my fiance)... except for my cell phone in my pocket. I whipped it out and started texting her. Here's what I wrote: "Aren't I a loser for passing notes in marriage class." I hit the send button and waited for her to react to the incoming message (She knew I was sending her a message)."
To my surprise it took a few seconds - it was much slower than physically passing a note (packet) - it was even slower then throwing the paper airplane.
It was then that I realized how 'network like' my stupidity was. When the physical layer link was interrupted, I chose another way of sending data. Each took a bit more time and they were progressively more costly (NOTE: as part of my personal GREEN initiative I only pass notes on recycled paper).
What does this all mean? Well I'd like a solution that solves this problem transparently for a network connection. I'm tired of having to change network connections, having it change all the time, and then having to reconfigure them. I want a solution that is as reslient as I am.
]]>Finding a candidate access point typically requires a client to scan all of the available channels, and on a dual mode (2.4Ghz and 5Ghz device), this is quite a number of channels. This process can be sped up through some innovation on the client side, but is best when it is assisted by the infrastructure. Cisco supports the neighbor discovery extension, which allows an access point to transmit its neighboring APs, along with their channels. This information can be used by clients to minimize the number of channels to scan.
Once the client has found a new access point, it needs to request access, which includes the authentication process. The issue with re-authentication is the fact that it requires that the backend RADIUS server be involved, which increases latency, and the overall cost of the handoff. Eliminating the authentication process altogether, and only relying on a series of transactions between the client and the access point, is ideal. To do this, Cisco uses CCKM to allow a device to simply re-key, using information that was distributed during the original authentication phase. CCKM is supported on both the autonomous and unified wireless architectures, and the latter can support roaming times of sub-20ms.
Cisco is working with the IEEE 802.11 to create an industry standards. Neighbor discovery will be available in 802.11k, while 802.11r will include CCKM- like features. This standard involves many of the consumer and enterprise class access point vendors, all of which are working diligently to provide these technologies to their customers quickly. Given that we've already proven that handoffs times can support the needs of real-time applications, I can only assume that the argument being made by these vendors is against access point technologies as they existed five years ago.
Next time, we will focus on RF related issues brought up by these vendors.
]]>So for instance, if an AP wanted to send a packet, it could split the packet up into three "chunks", and transmit each "chunk" across each of its three antennas simultaneously. This would effectively reduce the transmit time - and therefore increase the overall capacity of the network.
]]>So how’s this different then enterprise? He’s not even thinking about niceties such as guest access, VoWLAN, location or asset tracking. His mobility application is EMR, plain and simple. He readily ticks off the benefits from improved staff productivity, more accurate records, and therefore better patient care.
BTW – his most trusted technical advisor is his son. He has one outsourced, part time IT guy. And he still needs to figure out what it means to be HIPAA compliant in a wireless world.
“Small and medium enterprises or SMEs are companies whose headcount or turnover (revenue) falls below certain limits. The EU categorizes companies with fewer than 50 employees as "small", and those with fewer than 250 as "medium". In the US, SMB often refers to companies with less than 100 employees, while medium-sized business often refers to those with less than 500 employees.”
Cisco defines SMB pretty much along the lines of the EU definition. These definitions are fairly meaningless because they imply that SMBs are just small enterprises. But thinking in terms of mobility, small and medium size companies are different than enterprises in 3 key ways:
2) They speak a different language then enterprise. SMB owners and business managers rely on a range of “experts” for IT decisions because they typically have little or no IT staff. IT staff that exists are generalists, not networking or wireless experts. Trusted advisors may include business peers, vendors (think Dell), on-line retailers such as CDW, accountants, consultants, and brothers-in-law.
3) SMBs don’t really know how Cisco can help their business. To most SMBs and their VARs, Cisco is too big, too complex, and too expensive. Try navigating Cisco.com and compare the experience to hp.com. This is our opportunity and this is what we need address.
I have to admit that all of this is pretty much a U.S. centric point of view and needs more thinking for different markets. In many countries, a 250 or even 100 person company is a big business. And even though we like to segment the market by company size, how many SMBs actually view themselves as one? They would most likely describe their business as (for example) a manufacturer, retailer, medical clinic, hotel, legal office - and we should too.
]]>