The better approach for deploying AP is a complete site survey to determine the AP density , multipath propagation characteristics, interference, noise etc.. before setting up the AP.
The first immediate checkpoint for the scenario in-hand should be checking of SNR, RSSI and operating frequency/co-channel interference.
For optimal performance, placement of AP plays a key role. AP should be located centrally within areas requiring coverage. Ensure to avoid coverage holes with proper overlapping of APs coverage areas. The radio range and data rate are inversely proportional. That is, the nearer the user to the AP, the higher the data rate(Due to reduced path loss and high SNR). For effective radio range, also ensure to avoid buildings in-between.
The type of antenna, its placement and antenna gain are crucial in deciding the maximum radio range and the coverage area. The range is directly proportional to antenna height, however if the height is beyond certain limit, interference can be more. An istropic antenna provides coverage area in the form a sphere. Dipole antenna provides coverage area in the form of doughnut. There are also various directional antennas. Beware that the omni-directional antenna can lead to hidden node problem incase of large cell size. Antenna with focused beam can be helpful. Multi-sector directional antenna can give high capacity, range.
Determine if there are other active channels in your environment that introduce interference. Presence of other APs operating in the same frequency in the same radio coverage area can cause interference. The operating channel and channel separation can also play a role in connection speed / call drops. You may need to change the channel/separation accordingly to reduce interference incase if there are only 802.11 devices. However it might not solve the problem incase of presence of interference from other non-802.11 technology devices (Bluetooth/Cordless phones etc..).
Also note that interference need not necessarily from another 802.11 devices, but also from other non-802.11 devices(Microwave oven, Cordless phones, Bluetooth devices...) that can cause secondary effects such that data rate gets reduced. The impact can be due to high output power and the time/frequency the signal is on. For example, Microwave ovens mostly operate in the same frequency band as 802.11b/g and hence are more likely to cause interference. It is better to keep away such devices(Microwave ovens,bluetooth, cordless phones etc...) from the coverage area or shield those devices to continue presence in the coverage area.
There is a typical tradeoff between capacity and coverage. The higher power level can increase the range but if there are nearby APs, it can lead to interference. If the capacity is of importance, it is better to have the APs closer together. However if the APs are closely placed, the proper level should be set to low to reduce co-channel interference. So, ensure to keep optimal power levels.
Above such points should be analyzed along with site survey and the collected data should be analyzed for optimal performance.
From your observations of high PER, suggest that transmission channel is impacted due to high interference / multipath fading/channel noise. A proper site survey can be very helpful to you.
Solved: Finally i got where i was wrong. Actually, Ruckus by default, on standalone mode has the dhcp lease of 8 hours and that could have caused the problem. So what i did, with the help of technical support, is that i decreased the lease to 4 hours . Previously, i had the dhcp scope of 50 hosts and i increased the range to 100. Now the device is working fine. The command to decrease dhcp lease is :"set dhcps leasetime 14400". There is no way to change dhcp lease time from gui in standalone mode
Best Answer
I would say no, not a nutjob. Nor are you crazy for wanting to keep cabling where possible. However, this is not a totally unreasonable request although it goes a bit further than it probably should. Since the network is already in place, some sort of "happy medium" would probably work here.
There are several things that are driving this type of request:
These are ultimately both the same question but looking at different connections and the answer is the same for both. No. A wireless connection is not as good as a wired connection in almost all cases.
However the question shouldn't be "is it as good" but rather "is it sufficient to meet the client's needs (current and future)?" Having computers for every user with 64GB RAM, 4TB SSD storage (with RAID of course), the best CPU & GPU on the market and multiple large displays is probably certainly better than what they are currently using, but it is also probably overkill for what is actually needed.
Having a solid cabling plant providing the backbone that provides service to the APs themselves is important. Since they already have a reasonably solid cable plant, moderate upgrades and added wireless coverage/capacity would seem to be in order here.
You can definitely still get much higher speeds on copper/fiber than you can wireless. Generally speaking, fiber > copper > RF. But again, is it really speed the client is looking for?
Cabling is also more "stable" than wireless. 802.3 is much more mature and standardized. It isn't changing as quickly, is relatively simple in comparison and as a result doesn't run into many of the client inter-operability problems that can occur on wireless.
Cabling can also be more secure than wireless. RF energy sent out of a device is not limited to only reaching the intended device(s). Other devices can see and potentially make use of this information.
Yes, wireless has additional overhead and there are other limitations with how 802.11 operates.
The the specific claims of the client:
Again, I would personally propose some sort of happy medium here. Provide the full wireless coverage the client desires, but also propose upgrades to the current infrastructure that will benefit both the additional wireless support and the existing wired connections.
There is no reason to "throw out" the existing network. Make use of it where it makes sense (printers, copiers, servers, shared storage, etc) and enable the client's end users to be more mobile by losing the wires.
Just make sure you do it right and provide the correct information along the way. You did say that finances weren't an issue, so if it performs accurately to what you told the client, has the problems you warned them may occur, and they aren't happy, they shouldn't be upset about paying you more to transition some or all of the devices back to the wired network.