7signal PoC AvansUoAS
1 like1,850 views
The WLAN performance baseline report for Avans University of Applied Sciences details a three-week trial of the 7signal Sapphire system, which aimed to assess WLAN performance in a learning center. The report highlights significant issues including low client attach success rates, poor throughput during peak hours, and high interference from Bluetooth devices, leading to suboptimal network performance. Recommendations for improvement include network optimization strategies to decrease airtime utilization and enhance overall connectivity and capacity.
7signal PoC AvansUoAS
- 1. WLAN performance baseline report Avans University of Applied Sciences, Netherlands 7signal Sapphire Trial Baseline Report March 21st, 2013
- 2. WLAN performance baseline report Background • Avans University of Applied Sciences is looking for an efficient solution to optimize and maintain Campus WLAN network performance • A three week onsite Trial of 7signal Sapphire was agreed • 7signal Sapphire with one 802.11 b/g/a/n Sapphire Eye device was deployed to Learning Center 1 during week 8. Eye was installed to in Learning center, floor 1 ceiling. 7signal software runs in Avans Linux server. • Target of the Trial was to find out how WLAN service performs in Learning Center. • Sonar server (test end point in LAN) is in the same subnet as Carat server • Automated measurement profile has been running since February 21th – Profile covers ”Eduroam” BSSID at 2.4 GHz and at 5 GHz – 4 AP’s with total of 8 BSSIDs were assigned to one Eye unit • The purpose of this Trial is to provide Avans University of Applied Sciences an opportunity to get familiar with the product. • This Trial does not include optimization of the network performance. No actions were yet taken to improve network performance. 2
- 3. WLAN performance baseline report Eye Location: Floor 1 –Learning Center 3 3 2 1 4 5 6 7signal Eye First Floor:
- 4. WLAN performance baseline report 4 • The following daily average metric’s do not meet target: Client attach success rate, Latency, FTP Throughputs DL/UL, VoIP MOS DL/UL scores 2.4 GHz Eduroam SLA Table Off-peak Hours / On-peak Hours Comparison Weekend Weekend Busy-Hours (9:00–15:00) SLA Target limits Network performance is insufficient during weeks and especially during the daytime
- 5. WLAN performance baseline report 2.4 GHZ BAND END-TO-END PERFORMANCE 5
- 6. WLAN performance baseline report 2.4 GHz Attach Success Rate (Daily Average) 6 • At times, attach success rate seems to to drop to zero with for example AP001080, even though the radio is active and sending beacons. (This needs to be studied in more detail) Target level 90% AP 1080 not accessible
- 7. WLAN performance baseline report 2.4 GHz Attach Success Rate (One Week, hourly) 7 Busy Hour effects on attach success rates Weekend Target level 90% • Attach success rate degrades significantly during high load • AP 1082 does allow Eye connections. (This needs to be studied in more detail)
- 8. WLAN performance baseline report 2.4 GHz Downlink Throughputs, daily 8 • Daily average values are on acceptable level Weekend
- 9. WLAN performance baseline report 2.4 GHz Downlink Throughputs, hourly 9 The DL throughput declines on average level to 1-7 Mbps on Busy Hours. Peak Hours are usually 11:00-12:00 • During the day time, hourly average thoughputs collapse remarkably, some of them to sub 1 Mbit/s level. This is likely insufficient level for end users. At 13.00 0.52Mbit/s At 11.00 0.17Mbit/s
- 10. WLAN performance baseline report 10 2.4 GHz Downlink Throughput (2 Days), hourly Throughput declines at 8:00 on weekdays and return after 16:00 At 11.00 0.17Mbit/s • Strong daily pattern and very low throughput values in some APs during the daytime
- 11. WLAN performance baseline report 2.4 GHz Uplink Throughputs, daily 11 • Daily average values mostly on acceptable level Weekend
- 12. WLAN performance baseline report 2.4 GHz Uplink Throughputs, hourly 12 The UL throughput declines on average level to 1-10 Mbps on Busy Hours. Peak Hours are 11:00-12:00 • During the day time, uplink hourly average thoughputs collapse remarkably, some of them to sub 1 Mbit/s level. This is likely insufficient level for end users. At 12.00 1.1Mbit/s At 10.00 0.6Mbit/s Very good performance when network is empty
- 13. WLAN performance baseline report 2.4 GHz Uplink Throughput (2 Days), hourly 13 Throughput declines at 8:00 on weekdays and return after 16:00 At 11.00 0.74Mbit/s • Like doewlink, also uplink day time, hourly average thoughputs collapse remarkably, some of them to sub 1 Mbit/s level
- 14. WLAN performance baseline report 2.4 GHz VoIP MOS Downlink Quality 14 Target level for MOS 3.6 Downlink MOS declines on busy-hours but there are also some drops at times when there are no traffic on WLAN • During the day time, hourly average thoughputs degrade significantly
- 15. WLAN performance baseline report 2.4 GHz VoIP MOS Uplink Quality 15 Target level for MOS 3.6 Uplink MOS declines clearly declines on busy hours • During the day time, hourly average thoughputs degrade significantly
- 16. WLAN performance baseline report 2.4 GHz Downlink Jitter 16 • Jitter increases significantly with the load
- 17. WLAN performance baseline report 2.4 GHz Uplink Jitter 17 • Jitter increases significantly with the load • Uplink increases more than downlink
- 18. WLAN performance baseline report 2.4 GHz Downlink Packet Loss 18 Target level 0.5% • Packet loss increases significantly with the load
- 19. WLAN performance baseline report 2.4 GHz Uplink Packet Loss 19 Target level 0.5% • Packet loss increases significantly with the load • Uplink packet loss higher than downlink
- 20. WLAN performance baseline report 2.4 GHz Latency 20 • Latency increases significantly with the load Target level 50ms
- 21. WLAN performance baseline report 2.4 GHZ DATA RATES AND RETRIES 21
- 22. WLAN performance baseline report 2.4 GHz – Downlink Data Rates in Synthetic Eye tests 22 • High data rates used when there is no other traffic in WLAN. • During busy hours the data rates vary a lot and low values also used
- 23. WLAN performance baseline report 23 2.4 GHz –Uplink Data Rates in Synthetic Eye Tests • There is no big difference in UL direction with data rates when comparing off-peak hours and on-peak hours. Mainly good data rates in use.
- 24. WLAN performance baseline report AP 1076 2.4 GHz data rate usage Downlink (AP to client) 24 • Low datarate usage from AP to clients Undesirable low codecs
- 25. WLAN performance baseline report AP 1076 2.4 GHz data rate usage Uplink (Client to AP) 25 • Low datarate usage from clients to AP Undesirable low codecs
- 26. WLAN performance baseline report 2.4 GHz AP Retransmissions towards clients 26 Undesired behavior • High amount of retries reduce network capacity and daytime throughput 10% limit for data traffic
- 27. WLAN performance baseline report 2.4 GHz Client Retransmissions towards AP 27 Undesired behavior 10% limit for data traffic • High amount of retries reduce network capacity and daytime throughput
- 28. WLAN performance baseline report 2.4 GHz Eye Retransmissions in Synthetic Tests, hourly 28 • High amount of retries in active tests
- 29. WLAN performance baseline report SPECTRUM AND INTERFERENCE 29
- 30. WLAN performance baseline report 2.4 GHz Spectrum Graph 30 Bluetooth interference presence on busy hours On off-peak hours the specturm graph shows an clean 1-6-11 WLAN utilization • Bluetooth interference has negative impact on WLAN receiver performance at AP and client
- 31. WLAN performance baseline report 31 2.4 GHz Average Spectrum (Busy Hours) WLAN Spectrum, Ch 1 WLAN Spectrum, Ch 6 WLAN Spectrum, Ch 11 • Clear 1-6-11 WLAN channel deployment. During Busy Hours the energy level on adjacent channels is around -82 dBm • Average interference level is 20 dB lower on the interim channels during off-peak hours WLAN Average Spectrum on off- peak hours (On weekend)
- 32. WLAN performance baseline report 32 2.4 GHz Max Spectrum (Busy Hours) WLAN Spectrum, Ch 1 WLAN Spectrum, Ch 6 WLAN Spectrum, Ch 11 Bluetooth creates 1 MHz seperated spikes to spectrum • At times, Bluetooth interference is on same level than the received signal strength from WLAN Access Points
- 33. WLAN performance baseline report RADIO ENVIROMENT, CONFIGURATION AND UTILIZATION 33
- 34. WLAN performance baseline report Radio channels at 2.4 Band 34 Well organized 1-6-11 channel plan. No adjancent channel interference from other APs
- 35. WLAN performance baseline report Channel allocation and changes 35 • No channel changes over the measurement period
- 36. WLAN performance baseline report 2.4 GHz Number of SSID/MAC–pairs per channel 36 • Rather well balanced 3 channel plan
- 37. WLAN performance baseline report Number of Clients in ”Eduroam” 2.4 GHz APs 37 On Busy Hour the usage is really high. AP001080 shows over 50 clients at times • Number of concurrent active clients per Access point Radio should be max 20 clients to keep up a sufficiently good performance
- 38. WLAN performance baseline report 2.4 GHz WLAN Traffic Utilization 38 Frame GI Frame GI Frame = 100% WLAN traffic utilization Beacon GIGIGI The 7signal WLAN air time utilization can show over 100% results if there are more packets in the air than properly GI separated (no –overlapping) packets allow Busy Hour WLAN utlization is on high level. This AP serves over 50 clients at times • Air time is severly congested during busines hours • This limits available thoughputs significantly
- 39. WLAN performance baseline report SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS 39
- 40. WLAN performance baseline report Observations/opportunities for improvements, 2.4 GHz band • 3 channel plan with 802.11n HT20. Channels are rather evenly allocated. No channel changes, automated channel allocations disabled (good) • Many AP’s have 802.11b rates enabled • Network is severely congested during daytime, throughputs drop regularly below 1 Mbit/s • Load is unevenly distributed. AP 1078 has at times over 65 clients. • Bluetooth like interference detected during daytime. It impacts negatively to WLAN performance • Retry rates are high and datarates unnecessarily low • WLAN air time utilization is very high during daytime • Performance less than optimal – High interference from Bluetooth and own WLAN traffic -> high retries -> low data rates -> air time congestion -> capacity runs out during daytime 40
- 41. WLAN performance baseline report Suggestions • Network performance can be significantly enhanced by optimizing it and maintaining the performance with End-to-End Key Performance Indicators (KPI’s) • Deploy Sapphire Eyes to other areas that require optimization and better WLAN performance. Take baseline there also. • Perform Optimization, key areas for improvement in Learning Center include – Reduce WLAN airtime utilization levels through WLAN parameter optimization • Utilization can likely be reduced by 50-70% through this process • This increases capacity and is expected to improve daytime minimum throughputs up to several 100%’s – Make radio more robust against Bluetooth interference • This lowers retries and reduces also further utilization – Balance load through power settings and AP positioning • This will allow more capacity and better user experience during peak load – Investigate AP 1082 • Reboot as the first action. Observe then impact. T-shoot further if needed – Other items to be defined after initial steps • Maintain Achieved Performance through proactive KPI driven actions 41
- 42. WLAN performance baseline report HOW DOES YOUR NETWORK PERFORM? - Connectivity, throughput, latency, packet loss, jitter, MOS… Contact 7signal to learn more about 7signal Sapphire Performance Assurance and Optimization products and services www.7signal.com info@7signal.com 7signal presents at Wireless Field Day #5 in August, 2013. Be sure to join us then virtually and learn more about this 7signal products and later phases of Avans University of Applied Sciences network optimization. More information on Avans results will be also posted to 7signal blog. 42