I can't speak to the 1100's capabilities.  Newer enterprise APs do
have some features that allow channel sharing, though I'm surprised
they recommend the same channel twice in one small area.  However, the
core of your point is valid - there is only one channel between the
two, and the bandwidth is finite.  There may be other concerns they
are not sharing with you, however, such as the overall plan for the
whole building.

I understand it can be useful to have two APs mounted orthogonally,
but even then it's recommended to go on different channels, but with
the same connection setup so a client can choose the strongest signal
without user intervention.

The key point you need to find out is whether the two APs will share
the channel and still fully use the bandwidth, or whether they will
conflict and provide less bandwidth together than one alone would. 
This should be solved with a quick call to cisco, or looking through
the manual.

-Adam

On 1/6/06, Mike Hord <mike.hord@gmail.com> wrote:
> Short version:
>
> I'm wondering if anyone has any insight into how
> more than one WAP can function on the same
> channel in the same space at the same time.
>
> I'm now looking for specific information about
> Aironet 1100 series WAPs.  Do any of you
> know how these guys deal with having the same
> channel in the same room?
>
> Long version:
>
> In particular, we have four Aironet 1100 series
> power over ethernet WAPs in one classroom,
> two of which are on channel 1.  In addition, we
> will shortly have at least four more in a classroom
> directly beneath that one, which will almost
> certainly bleed through.
>
> I have over and over expressed my concerns
> about this, and about the fact that the people
> making the decisions surrounding this project
> are expecting 150 students to get servicable
> network access over wireless network in one
> room at one time, but I'm ignored because I'm
> not an "expert".  The "experts" are the ones
> who set up this four WAPs/three channels
> system.  The explanation is that because
> these are "enterprise level" WAPs, that's
> doable.
>
> My feeling is that the 1100's are smart enough
> not to interfere with each other (i.e., not talk
> at the same time and garble the data), but
> there's a big difference between that and
> adding another WAP improving matters.  I
> expect that the overall throughput of two WAPs
> on one channel would be slightly less than the
> throughput of one WAP.
>
> Anyone have any input on this particular
> situation?
>
> Mike H.
>
> PS- First stress test the other day- 120
> students downloading a 6 MB file simultaneously.
> It was pandemonium.
>
> --
> http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
> View/change your membership options at
> http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist
>

-- 
http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist