Cisco Aironet 1800 Series Access Points (discontinued)
Score 9.8 out of 10
N/A
Currently supported by Cisco, but no longer sold, Cisco recommends migration to the Cisco Catalyst 9100 Family of Access Points, which offer greater performance and flexibility.
N/A
Cisco Wireless LAN Controllers
Score 8.9 out of 10
N/A
Cisco offers wireless LAN.
N/A
Pricing
Cisco Aironet 1800 Series Access Points (discontinued)
Cisco Wireless LAN Controllers
Editions & Modules
No answers on this topic
No answers on this topic
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
Cisco Aironet 1800 Series Access Points (discontinued)
The integration with Cisco solutions are excellet, with WLC 9800 plus Cisco DNAC the troubleshoot are made easy, if you have 3D maps on DNAC, you can navigate on the place were the problem is marked and see how the signal are near it. All connections are stable and trustfull.
Cisco Aironet 1800 Series Access Points (discontinued)
Cisco Wireless LAN Controllers
Likelihood to Recommend
Discontinued Products
Cisco [Aironet Access Points] are well suited in offices where they can be managed by a wireless LAN controller (WLC). Using them in this way allows the APs to be well managed and security policies can easily be enforced down to users connecting to these APs for wireless access. Scenarios, where Cisco [Aironet Access Points] are less appropriate, are in small-office-home-office (SOHO) situations because of price and licensing costs to use a WLC to manage them. Thus, using them, in this case, would be that the APs would have to be in Autonomous mode, and the technical know-how in converting a lightweight AP to an Autonomous one is not straightforward.
I believe that Cisco Wireless LAN Controllers are well suited for the enterprise environment for medium sized to very large companies. While there are smaller WLC appliances for smaller sized businesses, a case can be made for simpler or more cost effective wireless licensing solutions (e.g. Cisco Meraki). Cisco Wireless LAN Controllers are extremely well suited for dense deployments like stadiums, arenas, hospitals, theaters, and large offices because of their ability to support a large number of APs with a very diverse technology feature set.
Until 2018, our Aironets were 1560 series, and each was managed separately. We had about 9 devices, 3-4 per floor, strategically placed on each floor to get a good coverage map over a three-floor environment. Their coverage was greater than expected. With the latest 1852 models we have, they are managed by a controller, and frankly, the coverage is a smaller area, requiring more units. We have worked with support for months and this is the final outcome of all the setting changes - we simply need more devices to cover the same area.
None of the models I have used have needed reboots. We usually only reboot the devices annually, and they don't have issues requiring restarts.
With the 1560 series, the connection strength was extremely consistent. With the new 1852 model, which is managed by one of the WAPs as a controller, it is supposed to use smart technology to load balance (optional) and determine which of the WAPs is appropriate to connect the requesting device to - great idea - but it does NOT work well.
Configuring wireless settings is very confusing because various settings are scattered all over the interface in different tabs
Lots of settings use Cisco's technical verbiage rather than common phrasing, so it's confusing what a lot of settings will do and requires researching the meaning before modifying the setting
The interface could be easier to use to do simple tasks such as reboot an access point
If Cisco keeps innovating the feature sets on the next 1800 models, I would definitely try it out to improve the experience of my users and to keep them on the latest technologies
Although it is a very good product, support is easy and can manage by Level 1 support persons and downtime is too much less but still there is a cost factor matters which is consider by each organization. Furthermore, organizations also compare with other competitors so it is hard to pursue and defend the high prices.
Pretty straightforward guide, which was built since OEAP600 AP's and never improved, this is a good thing for user to tackle when they configure the personal SSID, but does not reflect how it should be in 2020, where everything is mobile compatible and app ready. Cisco are going to have an app for this, but it comes with greater cost.
As I said before, the only thing we miss in our old model is the fact that the management interface never received an improvement in design. It has the same look and feels since it was launched. It's not that it's hard to use. It's just the case of could be modernized.
Downtime fear is the first fear which IT persons look and want to eliminate as much as they can but eventually you have to face it as nothing is perfect. Cisco Wireless Lan controller are feasible to use and easy to manage and other than this their issue reported are pretty low so you can get the best up time. now it also depends on scenario as well as environment.
Performance is great until you hit load towards the higher end of its rated load. So if you have a super highly congested wifi area, you will want to either deploy a higher end unit or split the traffic to a few of these guys to not see bandwidth issues that you may see otherwise.
Cisco Wireless Lan controller are feasible to use and easy to manage and other than this their issue reported are pretty low so you get the better uptime. if your get the uptime then it means its a stable product in your environment. Product performance also depends on the product management and Cisco Wireless Lan controller management is easy so you can get the great output.
If you are able to identify the problem initially, you would be able to explain it to the TAC. In order for the TAC to understand it, the TAC engineer must be competent enough to understand it, and have the devices already in lab to test with. Each bug I encountered the TAC was able to help. And I was able to file at least 3 bugs on the 1815T and M.
As usual, the support from Cisco's TAC (Technical Assistance Center) is lacking. Granted, they always get the job done, but the amount of lead time on a non-emergency is enough to make you just handle it yourself. The good news is that if you ask for Cisco's assistance and forget about it, they'll jump on by the time you've forgotten where you were in troubleshooting it and have it fixed for you.
Originally, when we deployed our first controller it was on a very limited basis. We only deployed it to our administration building and our High School. It was pretty straight forward. Because this was new to us we leaned heavily on our Cisco partner to assist us. With our last upgrade, we upgraded the controllers, added redundancy and expanded the building count along with new SSID's and restrictions. It went much easier, but again, we did rely on Cisco TAC and our partner to clarify and assist as needed. Having already been familiar with the product help tremendously.
Cisco Aironet has it place in the modern workplace and is great for single location deployments creating a good robust affordable solution. Installing them in a plant that has exposure to environmental elements they have stood the test of time, well so far. If you are looking for multi-location, multi-national or international deployments with a single plane of glass the Cisco Meraki MR's are a better choice, enhancing the time to deploy and ease of management.
The Aironet access points are used for employee WiFi access, and they integrate well with Meraki. They would offer a separate guest network, too, but the decision was made to physically separate the guest network, so even if a bad actor would gain access to the ethernet port of the AP, they'd still not see any company traffic.
It can easily support growth and be deployed in multiple locations. The access point has an integrated controller that can manage up to a certain amount of equipment in different locations. Setup is instantaneous and takes approximately 10 minutes to configure itself.
Cisco is a brand name and people trust on it. if any one thing about the networking then Cisco is among those brand which is count as trusted brand and people rely on it. Also it support is good so people can use it. Cisco Wireless Lan controller are easy to use and manage so it requires less effort.
We can be in Mobility Express mode where the AP provides the controller functionality to support a small to medium deployment without requiring a dedicated controller.
Access Points are centrally managed via a WLC reducing the management overhead for deployment, configuration, and upgrade.
We have had our [Cisco Wireless LAN Controller] 5508s for a very long time now and although they are getting dated, they have earned us our money's worth with consistency, stability, and ease of use. Users have minimal wireless complaints and when they do seldom are they WLC-related.
