Wireless Networks Causing Headaches For Businesses

ElvaWSJ writes "Wi-Fi was supposed to reduce complications, not create new ones. But in many offices Wi-Fi has been a headache. Like all radio signals, Wi-Fi is subject to interference. Its low power — less than even a typical cellphone — means that walls and cabinets can significantly reduce signal strength. Wi-Fi also creates networks that are more open than wired ones, raising security issues. And Wi-Fi has caused problems for virtual private networks. Some VPNs require a lot of processing power. If a wireless access point — at home, at the office, or on the road — isn't robust enough, a user often gets bumped off the connection."

Comments

Um...

[cromar]

Duh?

Re:Um...

[Aqua_boy17]

Was that a tag, or a comment? Either way, it fits.

Re:Um...

[SenFo]

A while back, I thought this was general knowledge. What I found is that people get caught up in all the hype and think only of the positives. If you try to persuade them otherwise, you're ostracized.

A few years ago, I was tasked with setting up the network in a new building. There was already wiring in the building. Unfortunately, it was all CAT-3 (even the data lines). I was the only person on staff in the IT department so I asked if we could hire an outside consultant to help with the task of running new network lines that would be adequate for our company needs. My request was rejected and I was instructed to install WiFi for the entire company to run on (about 50 people, including sub-tenants, which shared the LAN for Internet access). I advised my company of the pitfalls involved with running a WiFi-only LAN; however, I was told I needed to "come into the 21st century". Not feeling as though it was reason enough to quit on the spot, I did as I was told and installed the wireless network. With the exception of my workstation and all of the servers, everybody connected to the LAN through a wireless access point. Within the first few hours of operation, I had already gotten a number of complaints about systems loosing connectivity to the servers. This became the norm as my days soon involved at least one reset of the access point at some point in the day. This lasted about a year and a half before my direct manager was walking over to my desk to ask me if I could reset the access point. To her surprise, I was sitting there working and still connected to the LAN. She asked me how that was possible and I explained to her that I was on a wired connection. The next thing I knew, I was installing CAT-5e throughout the entire building. In the end, it cost a lot of money in lost productivity, as well as the wireless hardware that barely gets used. Reasons like this are why I abandoned the system administrator world a few years ago in favor of becoming a software engineer. I have never looked back.

Well Then...

[AdmNaismith]

Make sure there are some bloody data ports where they are useful. The gods know how many office conference rooms I have walked into where there are two power/data/phone outlets on the far ends of the room behind heavy credenzas, instead of in the middle of the room accessible from the table top. Otherwise just blanket the place with WiFi and suck it up.

Re:Well Then...

[MightyMartian]

Having talked with a few guys in my neck of the woods that sell themselves as network architects, I have the feeling that most of these guys really don't have the vaguest idea how to properly plan and roll out a network. They're too lazy, or their bosses are too cheap, to put in, maintain and extend a decent wired network, and so buy into the idea that going out and buying some NetGear routers and access points will mean everything is hunky dorey. Then, as the months roll by, and people have an increasing number of problems both with security and with basic access, the whole pile of steaming crap starts to unravel.

To my mind anyone who comes up to me and says "Our network has problems, and I can't keep my VPN up because they put in a new partition walli n accounting" is pretty much stating that whoever it is that maintains and plans their network ought to be forceably removed from the building.

Surprising!

[gen0c1de]

Not really, if you are a business that is deploying wifi as a solution to allow laptop users to move around fine, however if it is cheap solution to installing hard wired cables to each desk then someone needs to be re-informed about the pitfalls.

Supplement not Replacement

[jeffy210]

Wifi should be a supplement for larger areas with changing configurations (meeting rooms, conference rooms, etc) not as a replacement for a typical wired setup. Unless you plan on constantly rearranging your cubes, there's no reason to do that. Also you should think of the two networks as being completely separate and treat the wireless network as a public access point (i.e. force VPN access to the wired portion of your network).

I see the problem coming in where people think it's a wired replacement.

Re:Supplement not Replacement

[Kadin2048]

Yep, that is exactly how I have it set up here. I cringe every time I go into a new client site and see them using OPEN wireless access points as an extension of their wired LAN. At the very least encrypt it....

There's no good reason to use encryption in a corporate environment. Put all the wireless APs in the DMZ, so that they're outside the network, and leave the APs open. That way you don't have to make users screw around trying to get WEP/WPA/whatever to work, or use crummy MAC-based authentication schemes (that are a steaming pile anyway; whoever decided authentication based on MAC addresses was a good idea should be shot). Until you do that, wireless security is (in my experience anyway) harmful, because it makes the PHBs think they're on a "secure network" and shouldn't have to VPN. And once you require everyone to VPN when they use wireless, there's no point in using WEP/WPA on top of it (particularly considering that WEP is so broken as to be useless, and lots of devices don't support WPA).

The problem isn't lack of encryption, it's putting wireless APs in on the trusted side of the network at all. Avoid doing that, and treat someone connecting from an AP just like you'd treat someone connecting from Kalamazoo (meaning they have to connect via a VPN and authenticate), and you avoid most of the security vulnerabilities that plague wireless installs.

low power -- less than even a typical cellphone

[niceone]

Good thing it doesn't have to work over as great a distance as a cell phone then. It's almost as it it was designed that way!

Metal objects block radio

[also-rr]

News at 11.

I used to do wireless mesh network algorythm development and we had (with 802.11b) acceptable, AES encrypted, coverage of a motor factory (think *lots* of wire and EM) with nodes running on 200mhz arm systems and 64mb of ram. No problems with VOIP either. You just need to do some (ok, expensive) system design and there's no reason why it wont work. In the demo system the nodes updated their routing tables using a ropey bash script even :)

Expecting that off the shelf gear can magically set itself up is the problem, not the protocol itself (which can be worked around in many interesting ways).

Re:Transmitter power

[morgan_greywolf]

lets see poor transmitter power output, integrated 1/8th wave PCB antennas, microwave frequencies, $3 of electronics
gee i wonder why its crap ? 1) To keep the cost down. Even 'commercial-grade' access points use inexpensive components to help keep the costs down to the point that people can afford them. Compare the cost of ham radio -- and then consider if you would buy a WAP that had that amount tacked on the sale price.

2) Government regulation. Governments around the world regulate these 2.4 GHz-range frequencies and given the number of devices in the range, transmitter power is kept necessarily low by regulation.

3) To keep the equipment from interfering with other devices such as cellphones, 2.4Ghz-range walkie talkies, and countless other devices that use this frequency range. See #2.

Re:drivers

[quanticle]

Oddly enough, with D-Link cards I've noticed that the third party connection software (D-Link Connection Manager) often works better than the Windows wireless network manager.

Re:This caught my eye, lets try formatting ;)

[N3WBI3]

"Things got so bad that Mr. Friemann sometimes had employees piggyback on a neighboring business's wireless connection that was more stable -- without the other business's consent or knowledge."

--

Ok so your neighbor could set up a network which worked fine even for you whom, presumably, are further away from his source than you are from your own. Despite this its somehow the technologies fault? WiFi is fine, established, and mature this admins understanding of it is not.

and then there is this

--

"Some wireless networking companies are taking steps to try to deal with customers' problems. One major issue is the stability of the wireless signal. Ruckus Wireless Inc., a wireless networking company based in Sunnyvale, Calif., tries to address that problem by providing wireless access points that have multiple antennas. That allows a Wi-Fi signal to have more than one pathway to an access point -- which can come in handy if something is in the way."

--

Its called a cable folks, there are plenty of ways to rig antennas and get them in existing wap points. Thats not to say there is no value in what Ruckus is doing just that its not like we cant do that.

Easy solution.

[Anonymous Coward]

Wireless Networks Causing Headaches For Businesses

A tin-foil hat. The problem goes away.

(You want me to read the what?)

Re:Some buildings just aren't "Wi-Fi compatible"

[multipartmixed]

Try putting your WiFi AP in your basement, on a floor joist. If it really is the roof that's giving you grief, that might be far enough away to weaken multipathed signals out of detection.

You could also try decreasing the transmit power if you suspect multipathing. And, of course, lower the basic rate.

No, not duh

[Poromenos1]

That's not the actual worst thing. I can handle all the "access from anywhere", that was what it's designed to do. The worst thing is when the access point sometimes decides to reset (I have a Linksys AP) and it reverts back to it's original, OPEN SETTINGS. I go to work one day and I notice that the AP changed its ssid back to "linksys", giving free access to everyone within the radius for the past week.

Seriously, wtf.

Conference rooms

[sczimme]

The gods know how many office conference rooms I have walked into where there are two power/data/phone outlets on the far ends of the room behind heavy credenzas, instead of in the middle of the room accessible from the table top.

Conference rooms are often populated by guests. I would not be surprised if your local security policy states that guests are not permitted to connect to the company network: having no easily-accessible jacks can be a decent physical security measure. Of course, this requires that guests not be left unattended, etc.

The placement of the credenza is either a calculated security move or a blunder of forehead-slapping magnitude, depending on your outlook. :-)

Re:Bullshit

[Mike Buddha]

VPN sessions are much more time sensitive than other applications. Any latency caused by, oh say, packet retransmission due to interference will cause the session to be invalidated. Try connecting a VPN through a satellite connection (HughesNet), or through an access point in an area with lots of other wireless networks overlapping. You WILL lose your connections. Heck, I've had problems using some dial-up services even.