This challenge is a little bit more conversation-based. I encourage you to make
sure you have some answers in mind before we talk through these situations
together.
So we understand ultimately that this design clearly is going to have some
issues when it comes to high-density deployments.
We're talking about 50 wireless stations all at the same time. That number is
getting pretty high as far as the number of stations we should have on a single
radio within a single space.
We're going to have a lot of contention. We might even see interference because
of the head node problem. I mean, there's going to be issues with these larger WEBVTT X-TIMESTAMP-MAP=LOCAL:00:00:00.000,MPEGTS:900000
of the head node problem. I mean, there's going to be issues with these larger
cells.
So when we look at the scenarios, we see that employees are reporting the
wireless gets slow. What changes could we make?
Well, there's a lot of changes we could make, but a lot of it's going to come
down to the fact that we need to shrink the number of stations per cell.
We have a lot of different techniques that we can use at this point. We could
deploy multiple channels all in the same space.
We should probably consider reducing the channel size because 80 megahertz
channels are great for throughput, but maybe not so much for the high-density WEBVTT X-TIMESTAMP-MAP=LOCAL:00:00:00.000,MPEGTS:900000
channels are great for throughput, but maybe not so much for the high-density
deployments.
We might consider going down to a 40 megahertz channel or two 40 megahertz
channels and maybe even go 20 megahertz if we get a lot more devices.
Which is the second bullet point there. We're talking about doubling the
capacity of our wireless network because we're going to distribute iPads to
every employee.
That's a wonderful thing when you love management to just come around handing
out iPads.
And so again, we probably want to look at shrinking the cell size. One of the WEBVTT X-TIMESTAMP-MAP=LOCAL:00:00:00.000,MPEGTS:900000
And so again, we probably want to look at shrinking the cell size. One of the
ways we could do that is by lowering the transmit power of our access points.
Our cell sizes are going to get much smaller, which means we're going to need
more APs.
Yes, it's going to require some money. Management might not like that, but at
least we're doing right by deploying a robust wireless network.
Now we want to implement tracking services, well, only MOLY. At that point, we
've got to consider the RTLS requirements of putting access points at the WEBVTT X-TIMESTAMP-MAP=LOCAL:00:00:00.000,MPEGTS:900000
've got to consider the RTLS requirements of putting access points at the
perimeter.
So not only are we shrinking our access points, we're going to deploy more
access points because we need to surround the space rather than have access
points just in the middle, which is how our design would have been if RTLS wasn
't involved.
So again, a little bit more of a conversation. There's not a specific right-of-
wrong answer to how we want to do this. For example, if you said, let's do 40 M
Hz channels versus 20 MHz.
Neither one is necessarily right or wrong. It just depends on the situation and WEBVTT X-TIMESTAMP-MAP=LOCAL:00:00:00.000,MPEGTS:900000
Neither one is necessarily right or wrong. It just depends on the situation and
whether it'll work based on the client density.
But the main point here is if we're going to talk about higher density deploy
ments, we usually want to talk about shrinking ourselves, shrinking the number
of stations on a per radio per cell basis.
We've got lots of techniques for doing that. And if we do talk about location
services, we need to make sure our access points are getting deployed to the
perimeter of our space.
I hope this has been informative for you and I'd like to thank you for viewing.