When many units are preparing to go on WiFi, the focus is on which manufacturer to choose and what package to buy, and it is only when actually deployed that a whole set of problems in the network environment is not clear. The switchboard does not support mirrors, the AC controller version is too old, DHCP addresses are inadequate, wireless coverage has dead corners, and these issues are not big enough to look at alone, but they can be combined so that the authentication page cannot pop up or the authentication server gets out.
Model and solid version of core network devices to check item by item
Wireless authentication is normal, and access to switches, convection switches, wireless ACs, APs, and the versions of these devices must support Portal re-direction and necessary message processing. Some units have networks built over several periods, possibly three or four branded equipment in the same building, with different hardware versions. There was a project where AP is an old brand, solids were parked three years ago, Portal reoriented support was bugs and the vendor had to check remotely for a week before it became solid and upgraded. Such things could be eliminated half a day if pre-deployment versions were confirmed.
Authentication of deployment position and return link quality for servers
The authentication server is placed in a network section, through a link and through the front-end device, which directly affects the certification success rate. Many units have authentication servers located in the core room, but the front AP is distributed across branches with several jumpers and firewalls between them. If the return chain is lost or there are delays in shaking, the user is finished"Connect WiFi"The waiting time to eject the authentication page is long, and many people think the network is broken. The peak period is also measured when checking the delay and drop rates from user terminals to the end of the authentication server. If the chain quality does not meet, either the server is deployed or pre-released on the branch side, which cannot wait until it is online.
The DHCP Address Pool and IP reservation strategy need to be clear.
In the certification scene, the terminal first gets an IP before it pops the authentication page, so the size of the DHCP address pool and distribution strategy is particularly critical. Some units are small, have been left with a large amount of printer, camera, joint equipment, little left for cellular users, a peak period of overcrowding, new terminals will not get IP, and certified pages will not be able to play out naturally. The screening involves regional peaks, partitioning the addresses pool into regions, leaving separate pools for visitors and employees, and then converting fixed devices like video head to static IP or separate retention sections.
Wireless coverage of blind areas and end compatibility cannot be perceived
The signal is not available, and wireless authentication cannot be said to be possible. When checking, it must not only look at the AP-point map, but take a few different brands, different systems, and go to various regions to measure signal strength and connectivity stability. Andre and Apple have differences in wireless support, and some national phones have problems matching specific frequency bands. There was a mall project where the P-pointing of the p-paints was evenly balanced, but it was detected that the elevator hall and bathroom doors were leaking, so users couldn't connect to each other, let alone the certification pages. The terminal compatibility section, which is recommended to cover at least two generations of apples and four major Andre brands, is not used solely for the one in their possession.
DNS dissecting and Portal reoriented configuration prerequisites
The user first opens the web page after it is connected to WiFi, and the system uses DNS and HTTP to redirect him to the authentication page. This process relies on correct DNS release and reorientation rules. Checks to confirm that the authentication server domain name can be properly solved and not certified for access to the exterior are precisely directed to Portal instead of being cut off directly. Some units have a conservative security strategy whereby uncertified terminals will only use default access to the white list, with DNS banned and redirection triggered. The configuration details are to be finalized at the screening stage, without waiting for temporary changes when deployed.
Firewall and security strategy release of certified traffic
Wireless authentication involves multiple communications between terminals, authentication servers, SMS gateways, each with a mouth on the firewall. A matrix of communication is drawn during the check-ups, indicating who visits who uses which protocols and which port to walk, and then checking by section whether the existing strategy has been released. The most common problem is that text message identification code access is blocked by a firewall, user cannot receive it, and the authentication card dies. These words are not opened early, and they are intermittently failed when they are online."Security strategy", each communication corresponds to a confirmed release policy number.
The pressure to export bandwidth and issue a simultaneous certification is assessed separately.
A lot of people are putting it"Width on the Internet"and"How much do you think the certifications will take?"The output bandwidth determines how fast the user can run and how many people can pass through certification. A 2,000-person complex, with a possible 1,000 mobile phones running at the start of the field two minutes before opening, will be over-exposured if the authentication server is able to carry only 300 co-mingles, and the rest will experience confusion on the ground. The screening phase will be certified and released by top viewing, and then select the specifications of the authentication server instead of pushing it by export bandwidth. This is easily ignored because regular tests are carried by dozens of individuals slowly and without problems.
Checking conclusions to form a signed document
The results of the network environment check, equipment models, versions, links and site pool planning, strategy release lists should be in a document that is signed by the responsible party for confirmation. This document is both the basis for deployment and the boundary of responsibility for the problems that follow. We have seen too many projects, but we only find one half of them to find an old switcher that doesn't support the required functionality."It's not in the request.""A" says"You didn't ask."The final schedule is delayed by half a month. Detailing and writing the check seems slow, actually the fastest way.