Bluesocket’s new WGX-4000 Switch Wireless Gateway supports thousands of users along with centralized management via their patented matrix architecture. Their Wireless Gateways communicate with each other so configuration is performed on one unit; changes are automatically pushed out to all other Wireless Gateway devices without the need for a central server.
Bluesocket’s “standards agnostic” approach supports wireless devices and Access Points from all major vendors, and support for current and future 802.11 versions. Bluesocket’s gateway boxes aggregates WLAN traffic from existing edge switches as well as directly connected access points. They provides Gigabit Managed and Protected interfaces and eight 10/100 interfaces on the managed side for traffic aggregation. The WGX-4000 is suited for high density deployments involving hundreds of users, devices and access points. It provides 800 Mbps throughput for clear traffic, and 400 Mbps for IPSec (3DES) encrypted traffic.
Bluesocket’s other products include the WG-1100 SOE, WG-1100 and WG-2100 Wireless Gateways. Competing gateway products include those from Vernier Networks, ReefEdge, SMC Networks and others.
Recently, a boatload of “Wi-Fi Switches” have been announced. These devices put the “smarts” in the switch not the access point for easier central control and coordination. These “Wi-Fi switches” include Aruba, Airspan, Bandspeed, Chantry Networks, Legra, Trapezenetworks, and others. Symbol’s new $249 802.11a Access Port, for example, includes multiple antenna options and a 2.4Ghz expansion slot. Symbol’s first generation Wireless Switch has been shipping since late 2002.
Legra claims their “Remote Radios” don’t need to be directly connected to their switches, but are instead logically connected to the switch units over any existing IP Network. This makes their system more easily scalable, and keeps costs down by requiring fewer physical switch units.
Chantry Networks also eliminates the direct connection between dumb AP and smart “switch”. According to Tim Higgins, Chantry’s approach supports only IP Layer 2 applications and requires changes to customer DHCP and DNS systems, while Legra’s architecture works without such changes and handles any flavor of network traffic, including Novell Netware and Microsoft NetBios.
The disadvantage of most “smart switches” is that they require a single vendor solution. A movement by some vendors to standardize these protocols is currently underway. Compatibility between different vendors though an IETF approval process would likely be lengthy. The IEEE is also working on a document laying out “recommended practice for inter access point protocol” via 802.11f.
