Why Wireless Mesh Networks are Outdated and Belong in the Past

What are wireless mesh networks?

In the realm of network connectivity, wireless mesh networks have emerged as a unique solution. A network design is established by interconnecting several wireless access points and strategically installing them within a designated locale. This approach creates a “web” or “mesh” of connectivity, hence the name “wireless mesh networks.”

To break it down further, imagine each access point as a node in a web. When these nodes are interconnected, they form a mesh-like structure that allows data to be transmitted seamlessly from one point to another. This unique configuration sets wireless mesh networks apart from traditional networking systems.

Wireless mesh networks offer an alternative when conventional cabling isn’t feasible or cost-effective. This makes them particularly suitable for small office spaces or home offices (SOHO), or other small areas where only one access point is required and bandwidth demands are low.

One of the key features of these networks is their ability to leverage WiFi-6E access points. These modern devices can utilize the 6 GHz radio for backhaul, significantly reducing interference compared to the older 5 GHz systems. This leaves the 2.4/5 GHz radios free for client-serving, thereby enhancing the overall performance of the network.

Further, stability can be a concern with wireless mesh networks. They are susceptible to both wireless and physical interference. Wireless interference could come from other devices transmitting on the same frequency, while physical interference could be due to obstacles like walls or furniture. This could lead to inconsistent connections, particularly problematic for mobile devices used in large spaces like warehouses.

Lastly, traditional dual-band APs often use the 5 GHz bands as backhaul, leaving the 2.4 GHz band for client-serving. While this can optimize the use of available resources, it can also lead to congestion and slower speeds for users. In a busy office environment, this could result in slow file transfers, buffering during video conferences, and overall reduced efficiency. If a mesh solution is still desired, it is recommended to design it based on WiFi-6E and future WiFi 7 based APs.

The Verdict: Wireless Mesh Networks as a Last Resort

In the complex world of network connectivity, different solutions come with their own set of advantages and drawbacks. Wireless mesh networks, while offering unique advantages, have significant limitations that often relegate them to a last-resort option.

For a clearer understanding, let’s consider the perspective of many wireless local-area network (WLAN) professionals. They often rank potential backhaul options for access points in a specific order, based on their reliability, speed, and overall performance. The order of desired access point backhaul is:

1. Fiber: This is the gold standard for backhaul connections, providing high-speed, reliable data transmission over long distances.
2. Copper: Although not as fast or capable as fiber, copper cabling is still a dependable, cost-effective choice for many businesses.
3. Dedicated Wireless Bridge: This is a wireless connection dedicated solely to backhaul. While it doesn’t offer the same performance as physical connections, it’s a good option when cabling isn’t feasible.
4. One-hop Wireless Mesh: This involves a single wireless ‘hop’ or transmission from one access point to another. It’s a step down from a dedicated bridge but can be useful in certain scenarios.
5. Multi-hop Wireless Mesh: This is the least desirable option, involving multiple wireless ‘hops’ or transmissions. Each ‘hop’ can potentially degrade the signal, leading to lower performance. 

In the context of wireless mesh networks, achieving optimal performance requires a delicate balance between cost savings and network throughput. Our experience at Network Zen has shown that the sweet spot for this balance is often found at two mesh access points (APs), or what we refer to as one mesh hop.

To clarify, a mesh hop refers to the transmission of data from one mesh access point to another within a wireless mesh network. Picture a series of stepping stones across a stream; each stone represents an access point, and hopping from one stone to the next symbolizes data moving across the network.

When you add more than two APs or more than one mesh hop, the cost savings are minimal compared to the significant drop in network throughput, or the rate at which data can be transferred. This is because each additional hop introduces potential points of failure and latency, resulting in slower data transmission rates. See the graphic below to better understand how the data center interacts with the access points and vice versa.

The Pros & Cons of Wireless Mesh Networks Summarized

Pros:

• Alternative to Physical Cabling: Wireless mesh networks provide an alternative when physical cabling isn’t feasible or cost-effective. This makes them useful for small offices, home offices, or other small areas where only one access point is required.
• WiFi-6E Compatibility: Modern wireless mesh networks can leverage WiFi-6E access points, utilizing the 6 GHz radio for backhaul and reducing interference compared to older 5 GHz systems. This leaves the 2.4/5 GHz radios free for serving clients, enhancing overall network performance.
• Cost Saving: Wireless mesh networks often save on installation costs due to less reliance on physical infrastructure.

Cons:

• Reduced Bandwidth: Wireless mesh networks divide available bandwidth, impacting speed and capacity. This can lead to slower internet speeds and decreased data transfer rates, potentially affecting productivity.
• Power over Ethernet (PoE) Requirement: Despite their ‘wireless’ label, mesh networks require a PoE source to power the unit. This means some degree of physical installation is still needed, which might not be feasible in all scenarios.
• Stability Concerns: Wireless mesh networks can face interference from other devices transmitting on the same frequency or physical obstacles like walls or furniture. This can lead to inconsistent connections, especially problematic in large spaces or for mobile devices.
• Potential Congestion: Traditional dual-band APs often use the 5 GHz band as backhaul, leaving the 2.4 GHz band for client-serving. In busy environments, this can lead to congestion and slower speeds for users.