MFD3 – Link-Live Updates

This is the third blog from the Company-Previously-Known-As-Netscout’s session at Mobility Field Day 3. You can read about the AirCheck G2 v3.0 update and also the LinkRunner G2 v2.0 Update.

To catch you up, I came into MFD3 less enthusiastic than most regarding Netscout and their lineup of handheld network tools. With that said, I took notice in 2017 at MFD2 that the company was paying attention to feedback and looking for suggestions on how to improve their product offerings.

One of those improvements for MFD3 was a further expansion of the capabilities of Link-Live.

Link-Live has matured into a tool for consolidating all of your test results AND managing the tools at your disposal.

Many of these updates were covered in the LinkRunner and AirCheck updates, but bear repeating:

  • AirCheck software updates
  • AirCheck G2 Profile sharing
  • Packet capture sharing
  • Simplified App search for the LinkRunner G2
  • Files Folder – There is a lot more available that can be uploaded and saved to a project folder
  • Full AutoTest results

The most significant aspect of the Link-Live updates is a clear direction to make the LinkRunner and AirCheck entirely manageable without a Windows PC. This is a substantial shift from the past, and I am very excited to see it taking place because I stay away from Windows as much as possible.

So, the ultimate question, does the updates to the AirCheck G2 and LinkRunner G2, along with the new features of Link-Live make me change my opinion? Do I now see the ROI? Would I spend my budget, either personal or business on either tool?

The answer is “yes” to all of the above. With the divestiture of the handheld tools from Netscout into its own company, I expect the future to be bright. I think we will continue to see updates, new use cases, and great support. The handheld network tools team has won me over, and I’m happy to change my previous opinion. I will acquire both tools over the coming months for my personal toolkit, as I know my employer doesn’t have the budget. I don’t think there is more to say.

MFD3 – AirCheck G2 V3.0 Announcement

aircheckg2In case you missed it, MFD3 was an opportunity to reevaluate my opinion on the Aircheck G2 and LinkRunner G2. After my experiences at MFD2, I was no longer openly hostile towards the tools and saw that there was a legitimate desire to be open, fill the needs of users, and provide regular updates with new features.

As someone who identifies explicitly as a Wireless Network Engineer, the AirCheck G2 has been on my radar for a while, so I was interested, maybe even excited, about the opportunity to see the latest updates.

The AirCheck G2 v3.0 update adds:

  • Over-the-Network firmware updates – Sadly the V3.0 software update will have to be loaded from a PC, but from that point forward, a user with an active support contract can update the device directly.
  • Over-the-Network profile sharing – If your organization has more than one AirCheck G2, you can now ensure that everyone is testing using the same profile, all over-the-air through Link-Live.
  • Improved Link-Live interaction – manage device profiles, get test results, packet captures, etc.
  • Improved Locator Tool accuracy the Locator Tool now uses all three radio chains to enhance signal strength and accuracy
  • Enhanced AP name support – can now read AP names from Aerohive, Aruba, Cisco, Extreme Networks, and Huawei
  • Improved iPerf test performance – can now test using iPerf2, up to 300Mbps
  • Improved packet capture workflow – now users can be particular regarding the type of traffic they want to capture
  • Voice VLAN on ethernet test – if there is a voice VLAN assigned to the ethernet port, it will be displayed
  • Import certificates with a thumb drive – This simplifies importing certificates and is especially crucial for wireless engineers who might work at various customer sites.
  • Static IP’s can be assigned to the ethernet port
  • Other updates, which you should watch the video to see:

 

So, have I changed my mind? Am I ready to own a LinkSprinter G2 or AirCheck G2? Well, I think we should discuss Link-Live. That definitely factors into my decision.

MFD3 – Huge updates for AirCheck G2 and LinkRunner G2; then Netscout announces their sale

Mobility Field Day 3 was great! If you missed it, I will be releasing a few blogs over the coming weeks from my experience at the event. In the meantime, you can watch all of the videos here:

https://techfieldday.com/event/mfd3/

One of the most interesting developments this morning was the announcement from Netscout that it was divesting its handheld network test division to StoneCalibre.

The press release can be found here:
https://www.netscout.com/news/press-release/netscout-divests-handheld-network-test-business

While this announcement creates quite a few questions around the future, I firmly believe that the great group of people who have brought us the recently announced LinkRunner G2 v2.0 and AirCheck G2 v3.0 software updates are going to keep killing it. I’m excited to see what they bring to us in the future and hope to see them presenting once again at Mobility Field Day 4.

Arista announces acquisition of Mojo Networks

Today after the markets closed, Arista announced the acquisition of Mojo Networks. This is a very interesting development, and I am curious to see what Arista does with the technology.

You can read the press release here.

If you are asking “Who is Mojo Networks?” you clearly weren’t paying attention at MFD2 during the Mojo Networks presentation. Take a look at it here:

Mojo Presents at Mobility Field Day 2

You can see more at the Mobility Field Day 2 Event page:

http://techfieldday.com/appearance/mojo-networks-presents-at-mobility-field-day-2/

What do you think about this team up? Is this a good decision for Arista? How do you see it impacting the WiFi community?

Geek Tools – Ventev VenVolt

Any wireless engineer who has spent time completing AP-on-a-stick (APoS) surveys has probably used the Terrawave MIMO 802.3af POE battery. It was a heavy lead-acid battery in a metal case, which promised six hours of use before needing a recharge. Most days it did deliver 6 hours when powering an AP with a single radio enabled. However, I often found that if you ran both AP radios, it would regularly give you less; usually running right around 5 hours with a charge during a meal break.

Did I mention it was heavy? Travel through airports and the TSA was a lot of fun too!

Now, Ventev has a new battery, the VenVolt. It’s sleek, orange, and much lighter. The VenVolt has a bunch of new features which make this an essential addition to any wireless engineer’s toolkit.5132514

  • The battery is now a lithium iron phosphate. That’s the weight savings that makes this thing easy to take on the road. It also ensures plenty of power delivery when needed and long-term stability of that power. Additionally, LiFePO4 battery chemistry is known for higher cycle life and better stability, which should relieve any concerns of a Samsung Note 7 style battery fires.
  • Better power delivery allows the VenVolt to efficiently deliver 802.3at power; a requirement for 802.11ac access points.
  • If 802.3at power wasn’t enough, Ventev includes a three amp, 15 watt, USB power port. That port can be used to trickle charge a laptop, or it can power my favorite tool, an Odroid, which I always use when surveying.
  • That power port wouldn’t be nearly as exciting for me without the final major upgrade, ethernet passthrough.

There are lots of “little” updates that should be mentioned as well:

  • A single switch! No more guessing which switch combination was needed for charging.
  • An LCD screen that shows charge status, voltage, and gives you some guess of the available runtime.
  • The case is ruggedized and has been drop tested to ensure reliability.

Let’s talk through my “new normal” setup with the VenVolt. I connect the AP to the “802.3AF/AT Out” port. There is no difference between that and the old heavy battery.
Next, I connect an ethernet cable between the “Ethernet In” port on the VenVolt and the ethernet port on my Odroid.
Finally, I connect a micro-USB cable between the Odroid and the USB port on the front of the VenVolt.
The magic happens due to the flexibility of my Odroid. A few jobs it runs:

  • iPerf, HTTP, Ping endpoint for any throughput/active surveys that I need to run.
  • TFTP Server – This is where I host boot or firmware files for the many various AP’s that I might use for surveys.
  • DHCP/DNS Server – Makes it easy for the TFTP Updates, client connections, etc.
  • Encrypted File Storage – This is where I store backups of survey files, any building drawings that I am given, or any specifics that I might need at a location.

One final note. The VenVolt is labeled “MK1”. To me, this is a suggestion that updates will come in the future, rather than the “one-and-done” approach of the Terrawave Battery. While I’m excited to see what may come in MK2, this is an excellent upgrade and a definite requirement for anyone who spends time doing APoS surveys.

There was an excellent session at WLPC, where Ventev employees Dennis Burrell and Mike Parry, along with Sam Clements discussed the development process for the VenVolt. It’s worth watching:

Relevent Links:

Ventev VenVolt

Ventev Infrastructure

Ventev Infrastructure supplied me with a VenVolt for testing and provided me the ability to give feedback. All written content provided here is my personal opinion, and has not been manipulated in any way by Ventev. I appreciate all companies who welcome constructive feedback!

 

KRACK Attack Mitigation – A Call to Arms!

Ask any wireless engineer about the relationship with vendors who make the non-standard clients on their network and you’ll likely get a range of responses from quiet sobs to yelled expletives.

Problems ranging from bad driver or firmware updates, KRACKdevices which don’t follow the 802.11 standard, and long delays in problem resolution are all part of the experience.

Often we may say to a customer “These clients are causing problems and here is proof. You should look at replacing them.” While the vendor of those products are telling that same customer “Your network sucks!”

With that in mind, I want to consider a few things as we begin the KRACK Attack mitigation.

  • Check CERT’s Vulnerability Notes Database for the status of vendor updates. This is a pretty extensive list, and is worth following:
    CERT’s Vulnerability Database
  • Some vendors will be VERY slow to issue patches. It is absolutely essential that we as wireless engineers who have the ability to approve devices refuse any new client deployments without the appropriate patches.
    Bring the security team into the discussion, and ensure that as a united front, unpatched clients are refused!
    Those who work in a sales role should warn all customers away from vendors who are not actively communicating their patch strategy, with clearly defined release dates. We should not send money to any company that doesn’t see resolving this as one of their highest priorities. Those companies should wither and die.
  • Many large enterprises have specific budgets for IT security related expenditures. If the budget isn’t available from teams responsible for the devices, check with the security team. They may have a budget that can be utilized.
  • Communicate to the vendors this week. Ask about patching schedules for KRACK. Ask to be included in weekly updates on the status until patches are released. Make it very clear that you see this as a high priority and are not willing to accept a “Maybe, eventually” patch schedule.

As a group of wireless engineers, we cannot accept anything less than appropriate patches which clearly mitigate KRACK.

Geek Tools – Cape Networks for more than just wireless

In case you missed it, a couple of weeks ago I wrote about my experience testing Cape Networks solution for wireless monitoring. You can find that post here. I first learned about Cape Networks at WLPC, and was able to have a conversation with them at Mobility Field Day 2 that you can watch here.

One point that continues to impress me about Cape Networks is the ability to test much more than WiFi.

It really comes down to the strength of the dashboard and the various tests that each sensor can run. The ability to test against internal and external systems is one example.

Screen Shot 2017-09-15 at 11.57.05 AM

Each sensor can test against web servers, iperf, or custom ports of your choosing.

Users can configure a test to run against predefined external websites like Adobe Creative Cloud, Microsoft Office 365, Dropbox, and others. But, the sensor can also test against custom websites, checking not just “Is it up?” but HTTP status codes and latency as well.

I’ve used this recently to help an outside vendor truly understand that “No, our network is not to blame” for the high latency their users are complaining about.

When all other external websites are seeing ~20ms latency, and your web application is averaging ~90ms over a period of weeks, guess what? YOU have a problem!

Screen Shot 2017-09-15 at 12.06.02 PM

Averaging 96ms of latency. Maybe that’s why the application is always slow?

Obviously, due to the nature of these tests being performed over WiFi, latency, jitter, and packet loss are all expected to be a bit higher, especially if they are performed during times of peak WiFi utilization. However, when you have tests to compare across multiple online services, it’s easy to notice standout patterns.

One feature request I would make to Cape Networks is this: Allow test to be ran across both the LAN and WiFi connections. If we can compare across these two mediums, we may also see additional information useful in diagnosing wireless issues.

Have you found a non-WiFi use for the Cape Networks sensors? If so, tell me about them in the comments.

As a MFD2 delegate, I did receive a free sensor from Cape Networks and various stickers and other low value (but tasty) snacks. All other expenses for MFD were covered by Tech Field Day. I was not compelled to write about Cape Networks in any way other than personal user experience. My employers decision to purchase sensors was based solely on the user experience and ease of problem resolution.