Our company uses Pakedge and Luxul switch/router/Wi-Fi equipment. I see in a lot of the threads on Stack Exchange that Pakedge and Luxul are rarely or never mentioned, (Network Engineering, Super User, Server Fault). However, I see Ruckus and Aruba have a littler more status online. I have always had issues implementing and maintaining Pakedge systems (Wi-Fi managed/unmanaged) and Luxul (wifi managed/unmanaged switches managed and routers). Constant firmware issues/upgrades/downgrades, controllers that are supposed to manage a Wi-Fi network more efficiently but don't.
Sorry for the background, now for the question:
I would like to change what equipment we use what are your experiences with, Ruckus, Aruba or Cisco? This is for the scope of a large network setup for a Control4 system, (20 APs on six 28 port managed PoE switches).
I would prefer Cisco for switches/routers, but what about its Wi-Fi? I don't really get a chance to mess around with Cisco's Wi-Fi except for low end Linksys devices, which I think Belkin owns now.
I would like to use Ruckus or Aruba now. What should I know before I get either one? Anyone ever have problems with either, tech-support or setup wise?
I keep having head aches with Pakedge and Luxul. I just want something that is more reliable and least when it comes to setup. Can't tell you how many times I have to fight with a Luxul AP just to get it setup and save the configuration I want.
Please share any experiences with me.
Best Answer
If this is a large Wi-Fi deployment, you probably want to look at a system based on a wireless controller and LWAPs. The only real experience I have with such a combination is with Cisco. Cisco has a large product line of controllers, LWAPs, and WAPs.
Fortunately, the Cisco devices seem to perform well. There are occasional updates which we thoroughly test if the added features interest us. The wireless controller-based system allows the LWAP updates to be fairly painless since the LWAPs get their software and configurations from the controller.
Using Local mode means that both the management and data traffic are tunneled back to the controller, which can be remote from the LWAP. This has both advantages and disadvantages. The newer Cisco switches (3850, 45xx Supervisor 8, etc.) provide some wireless controller functionality built in to the switch to allow data traffic to be dropped locally. This mode allows for seamless roaming between LWAPs, regardless of subnet/VLAN, without re-authentication.
You could also use FlexConnect mode which only uses a tunnel back to the wireless controller for management traffic, but it will drop data traffic locally. Cisco called this a kludge, because roaming can only happen on the same subnet/VLAN with re-authentication. The switches with built-in controller functions can do something similar to this, on Local mode, without the kludge of FlexConnect mode.