A wireless LAN is used for providing an Internet connection through a simple access point. It allows users to connect to the Internet anywhere within the local coverage area, and it is popular among corporate organizations, libraries, other public areas, as well as homes. There are, however, two distinct forms of wireless LAN architecture that any customer must choose.
Each of these architecture types has its own advantages and disadvantages, and a mistake in choosing the wireless LAN architecture can lead to a waste of time and money. The focal point where these architectures differ is in the role of your access point.
Autonomous or distributed wireless LAN architecture
In this form of wireless LAN architecture, the wireless access points support a wide range of functions, from switching and data security to advanced networking functions for routing the wireless traffic. Any change in a single wireless access point requires individual reconfiguration of each wireless access point. However, if it the entire wireless LAN needs to be changed, each wireless access point must be configured individually. In this form of wireless LAN architecture, the access points don't have any visibility or control of other access points in its vicinity. Therefore, the access points cannot adjust their power levels or load the balance with each other.
Lightweight or centralized wireless LAN architecture
In this form of wireless LAN architecture, the access points have a very limited role to play, with most of the control and intelligence given to a WLAN controller. In contrast to the access points found in an autonomous wireless LAN architecture, lightweight access points have a much reduced functionality. They work together with the central WLAN controller and cannot function independently. This kind of architecture allows all the access points to be managed and configured through a single device.
Moreover, access points are aware and visible to their neighboring access points, and they can alert the central controller if any device around them malfunctions. The control, in turn, can compensate for the failed access point by adjusting the power levels on other access points. Not only is the centralized wireless LAN architecture self-healing, but it also balances the load on the network. In case a single wireless access point is overloaded, the WLAN controller can balance the load with other counterparts.
Irrespective of what advantages the lightweight model may have over the autonomous model, the final decision of choosing the right wireless LAN architecture depends on factors like your network size, costs, and migration.
Network size
The autonomous wireless LAN architecture is difficult to maintain and manage if the network you need is large. Although there is no standard difference between a large and small network, the thumb rule followed is if you need more than 5 or 10 access points, the network is large.
Costs involved
The costs involved would not only include set up, but also maintenance costs, configuration costs, and repair costs, among other things. Lightweight access points are cheaper than autonomous access points, but when you choose a lightweight wireless LAN architecture, you would also have to add the costs of a WLAN controller.
Migration
This involves the chance of migrating from one form of wireless LAN architecture to another. A small deployment would require just an autonomous architecture, but as the number of access points increases, you can upgrade to a lightweight LAN architecture.
