The N Crowd: Wireless N Put To The Test

Meru AP320
Meru's 802.11n offering bested its rival in management capabilities and logging and reporting features, but landed in second place. Reviewers felt the systems were on par with each other when it came to strength of features and profit potential for partners, but Meru trailed a bit in performance and couldn't match the ease of use and deployment of Ruckus.

Through a Web-based management interface, all standard configuration and management options are present. Reviewers found that configuration of the controller and stand-alone access point was quick and easy with the management utility. Within the utility, a variety of authentication options can be enabled, including 802.1X with EAP-TLS, Tunneled TLS, Protected EAP and open authentication. Encryption options include static and dynamic WEP keys (40-, 64- and 128-bit), TKIP and IPSec.

Multiple ESSIDs and VLANs can be generated via the management tool. Security policy management is centralized. Administrators can assign security policies to individual ESSIDs and VLANs.

The interface also allows for the management of virtual cells. Virtual cells are the foundation behind channel layering. Meru has devised a method in which differing channel blankets are created. Channel layering is for better signal throughput and less signal interference.

One of the more unique features of the interface is the management of quality of service and filtering rules. Both standard and dynamic rules can be created, based on applications, stations, uses and port numbers and are applied to clients. Filtering is done via access control by client or access point MAC address. There are also configurable firewall settings.

The Meru's dashboard interface allows for sophisticated and complex management that can seem intimidating to those not well-versed in wireless technology. However, it offers features and configuration options for a true enterprise-level solution.

Meru's solution performed marginally better than Ruckus on some of the tests but trailed on others. Because the clients were in close proximity to the access point, power to its antennas needed adjustment. The access point also required some tweaking. The Meru technology performed on par with the Ruckus access point on the downlink tests.

With only wireless-N clients running, Meru rated an average of 76.7 Mbps for downlink traffic. But when mixed with the Acer 802.11g client, the uplink traffic dropped substantially to 37.3 Mbps. On the ThinkPad in particular, performance dropped significantly.

Meru's AP320 performed well on the uplink/downlink with all the notebooks running. With the Toshiba and the Acer systems, the AP320 scored an average of 44.7 Mbps on the uplink/downlink test.

The uplink/downlink test at 45 degrees with all three clients scored an average of 36.9 Mbps. At 90 degrees, Chariot scored 44.2 Mbps. Without the IBM-Linksys client, the numbers did not improve. There were no noticeable changes in throughput with WPA2-PSK encryption turned on.

Next: The Bottom Line