Cisco Wireless admins - failure-rate of APs, and Smartnet vs Spare AP

[seepy83]

I'm working with a Cisco VAR on a new Cisco Wireless deployment. I'm contemplating purchasing a spare AP (they're all Aironet 3502 a/g/n) instead of buying SmartNET for all of them. This deployment is relatively small (10 APs). My thought here is that if the Cisco AP failure rate is as low as their switches/routers, then I could save over the next few years by not purchasing SmartNet. But if the APs fail more frequently, I'll be better off buying SmartNet.

Anyone want to share their experiences and 2 cents?

 

[spidey07]

Can't say I've ever seen one fail out of deploying more than 10,000.

 

[imagoon]

Smartnets include tech support and software for them also. Technically if they are not covered by a smartnet, you cannot upgrade the firmware.

 

[spidey07]

Smartnets include tech support and software for them also. Technically if they are not covered by a smartnet, you cannot upgrade the firmware.

Go lightweight then and make sure to get maintenance on the controllers.

 

[drebo]

I've seen some of the Cisco wireless bridge power injectors go bad (which impacts the ability for the bridge to pass traffic, despite everything looking kosher), but those are a fairly cheap replacement at $120.

Seeing an actual radio go bad, though? Can't say that I have, and I've deployed my fair share.

 

[imagoon]

Go lightweight then and make sure to get maintenance on the controllers.

I wasn't aware they shifted it to the controllers finally.

 

[Cooky]

Allow me to clarify spidey's comment.
You still need SmartNet on the AP's to get hardware replacement, if an AP were to fail.
What he probably meant is that as long as you have support on the controller, you can get tech support as far as troubleshooting & configuration are concerned.

 

[spidey07]

Allow me to clarify spidey's comment.
You still need SmartNet on the AP's to get hardware replacement, if an AP were to fail.
What he probably meant is that as long as you have support on the controller, you can get tech support as far as troubleshooting & configuration are concerned.

Correct. For large installations it makes no sense to have maintenance on APs and just run a spare pool of 5-10 APs. For smaller ones with no controllers it probably does. It's incredibly cheap for 10 APs like the OP.

 

[seepy83]

Our 10 APs are between 2 sites. We're looking at a 5500 Controller at each location, and I will have Smartnet on the Controllers.

For the APs, Smartnet was coming out to about $2100 per year ($210 per year per AP). I could have my own spare sitting on a shelf for under $900, and assuming that less than 2 fail in the next 2 years, I'll be saving money. Not saving a lot of money, but budgets are already tight and don't look to be getting much better for me in the next 12 months.

 

[Emulex]

if you don't want to pay for smartnet - check out a procurve solution - not as flashy but will get the job done - lifetime warranty.

cisco is matching LLW on alot of their products now and pricing is extremely aggressive when you push the words procurve to the sales rep - work your salesrep man.

If you can get the job done with a procurve 5406 and some dumb ap's and it's all covered with lifetime warranty - capex/opex - do the math.

I agree cisco is better overall - just not on the pocketbook and the 3com/hp merger is going to force cisco to move their LLW into higher model products to survive.

 

[azev]

company I worked for get smartnet contracts on every little cisco gear we have.
Its pretty cool actually, we also get the 4hr response for every hardware replacement.
We do have hundreds of remote locations, so something like this does help alot with the process of replacing ap. Do i see these guys go bad?? yes, every now and then they would stop working, but then again, most of them are installed in warehouse & docks where they are somewhat expose to nature (inside nema boxes).