wireless

Choosing the right

WLAN architecture
Lightweight and autonomous systems each provide benefits and merit consideration.
Autonomous architecture model
Core layer Backbone devices Backbone devices

ireless local area networks (WLANs) are often implemented as an overlay to the wired LAN. The two distinct WLAN architectures in use are lightweight and autonomous, each having varied impact on the wired network infrastructure. Selection of the right WLAN architecture can be dicult. Regardless of which architecture your choose, consideration should include building a futureproof, integrated wired and wireless network as vital to achieving a high return on investment. While both architectures remain popular today, the trend is shifting to lightweight architectures taking over the WLAN market.

Distribution layer Router Access layer Desktop Ethernet switch Autonomous AP Wireless client Ethernet switch Ethernet switch Desktop Autonomous AP Router

Wireless client
Source: Panduit

Two hierarchical models

0606cimwire

In the face of this changing landscape, An autonomous, or distributed, WLAN architecture does not include a wireless how do you choose your WLAN archi- controller. Wireless access points support switching, security, and advanced tecture? The two main architectures used networking functions. in the WLAN environment dier in the extent that the wireless access point (WAP) has auton- ed hierarchical model that identies network devices by omy over access, security, and operation. classifying them into one of three layers. Lightweight WAPs, which form part of a centralized The model is straightforward; it identies the devices WLAN architecture, have limited functionality, with that provide communications to the end user as the acmost of the wireless intelligence residing at a central cess layer, the devices providing internetwork communicontrolling device (i.e., the WLAN controller). cations as the distribution layer, and the core layer as the By contrast, an autonomous architecture uses dis- top layer responsible for transporting data quickly and tributed WAPs that usually do not require a wireless reliable among networks. WAPs provide the rst comcontroller. munications interface to the end user regardless of the To dierentiate between a lightweight and an auton- architecture deployed, and reside at the edge of the netomous WLAN architecture requires an understanding work, or at the access layer. of the role and hierarchy of devices in a network. For In an autonomous architecture as depicted in the instance, in the network world, there is a widely accept- gure above, a wireless controller is not required. The autonomous WAPs support all necessary switching, seBOB ELLIOT is product development manager and ELSA MADRIGAL is a research engineer at Panduit Corp. (www.panduit.com). curity, and advanced networking functions necessary to
Reprinted with revisions to format, from the June 2006 edition of CABLING INSTALLATION & MAINTENANCE Copyright 2006 by PennWell Corporation

route wireless trac. By contrast, in lightweight WLAN architectures (page 45), hardware consists of reduced-functionality WAPs that operate together with a centralized wireless controller. The controller resides deeper in the LAN, at the distribution or possibly the core layer. The WAPs do not function independently of the wireless controller.
Network management and layout

Traditionally, autonomous WAPs require individual manLightweight architecture model

Core layer Backbone device Backbone device

self-healing. It cannot load balance because it does not have control of its neighboring WAPs. In addition, it cannot distinguish whether a neighboring WAP is part of the WLAN infrastructure or an illicit rogue WAP. The dierence between the physical infrastructures of lightweight versus autonomous WLAN architectures (shown above) is minimal. The only additional component in a lightweight WLAN architecture is the WLAN controller. Both lightweight and autonomous WAPs need physical protection, such as that provided by a wireless access point enclosure, power from such power-sourcing equipment as Panduits DPoE Power Patch Panel, structured cabling, optional zone enclosures, and available switch ports from an Ethernet switch to provide connectivity with the wired LAN.
Choosing the architecture

Ultimately, the choice between an autonomous and a Router Router lightweight WLAN architecture will come after considering such important factors as network size, migration, Access layer and costs: Ethernet Desktop Ethernet Desktop Network size. Autonomous WAPs can become dicult switch switch to manage if deployed in large numbers. There are no Ethernet Lightweight Lightweight dened rules as to how large a deployment must be beswitch AP AP fore it can be considered too large to manage. As a basic rule of thumb, if more than 5 to 10 WAPs are deployed, a Wireless Wireless client lightweight solution can potentially be more cost-eective client Source: Panduit than0606cimwirelessF2 an autonomous architecture. A lightweight architecture could translate into lower operational costs because There are minimal differences in physical infrastructures between lightnetwork policies, security settings, and radio-frequency powweight and autonomous WLAN architectures. The lightweight includes er settings can be managed from a single device. This archia wireless controller, while the autonomous does not. tecture saves time versus managing individual WAPs, and it agement. Any conguration changes can be accomplished reduces human error. via a console port session, a telnet session, an http Web WLAN physical network layout connection, or with an SNMP command. If a change Lightweight must be made across the entire WLAN, every autonoAutonomous AP AP mous WAP must be recongured individually. Zone Zone Wireless enclosure enclosure A lightweight architecture eases management of large enclosure PoE deployments by permitting control of all WAPs from a power patch panel single device. Because the lightweight WAPs also have Autonomous Lightweight visibility and awareness of the neighboring WAPs, they AP AP can supervise and alert the wireless controller if one of their neighbors becomes faulty. Lightweight WLANs can be self-healing because the controller commands neighborWLAN controller ing WAPs to adjust their power levels to compensate for a failed counterpart. Switch Switch In addition, the wireless controller can ooad wireless clients to a neighboring WAP if a single WAP becomes overloaded. Load balancing and self-healing are important in Source: Panduit mission-critical applications, such as wireless Voice over A lightweight, or centralized, WLAN architecture includes wireless Internet Protocol (VoIP). access points with reduced functionality, which operate together with a An autonomous WAP usually has no visibility of its WAP centralized wireless controller. neighbors, and so cannot adjust its power levels to perform

Distribution layer

Wireless controller

The amount of intelligence desired is a fac- While basic coverage can be obtained with a few tor when choosing a WLAN architecture. While basic coverage can be obtained with autonomous WAPs, advanced self-healing and a few autonomous WAPs, advanced selfhealing and optimization can be seamlessly optimization can be seamlessly performed with a performed with a lightweight architecture. Additionally, wireless VoIP, asset tracking, lightweight architecture. and other intelligent applications are best served by a lightweight WLAN solution because of the centroubleshooting, or making additions to the WLAN. In an autralized management. tonomous solution, the cost of operational expenses increasDensely packed WAPs can yield seamless wireless coveres signicantly per WAP, whereas in the lightweight solution age, but often result in a large number of WAPs that are best the operational expenses are minimally aected by network managed with a lightweight WLAN solution. The number of size. In a lightweight WLAN, it is possible to manage multiple WAPs deployed depends on the number of users, the amount WAPs with network-wide policies from a single controller. of data trac, and the desired data rate. A strict hardware price comparison between lightweight Migration. If a small wireless deployment requires only a few and autonomous WLAN architectures may not be possible, WAPs, the WLAN can be designed using autonomous WAPs. considering the feature sets of each will not be identical. InAs wireless coverage is expanded with the addition of WAPs, stead, the total cost of the WLAN must take into account both the solution can be converted into a centralized lightweight capital and operational expenses. architecture. Migration from an autonomous to a lightweight solution is possible with the addition of the wireless controlArchitecture dictates choice ler and an operating system upgrade to selected WAPs from The type of architecture deployed in a WLAN is a major certain equipment providers. consideration. It is important to understand the dierences Costs. Generally, the hardware cost of a lightweight WAP between the two WLAN architectures, and the technical diftends to be lower than that of an autonomous WAP, but the ferences that aect management, operability, and the overall cost of the wireless controller must be factored into the toreturn on investment. tal cost. Furthermore, the lightweight solution often includes If futureproong is a concern, you should choose a lightadditional bundled security features, such as Virtual Private weight solution, since it can more readily ease management Networks and rewalls that otherwise would be purchased and improve security. If the size of your deployment is fairseparately with an autonomous solution. ly small and the initial hardware cost is a concern, an auIn addition to capital expenses, operational expenses are tonomous solution may be suitable since the investment is associated with each solution. These include time spent conprotected with a migration path with certain equipment guring network-wide policies, performing maintenance, choices.

As smart as you want to be