Mesh Calculations

Mesh Calculations

Thought I’d take some time to discuss bandwidth using Mesh APs and the associated mesh calculations.

This blog entry is aimed at a slightly advanced level, so I am working on the assumption that you already know how a Mesh works.

Basically, the node APs (MAPS or Node APs – do we call them “NAPs”?) are nodes that connect wirelessly back to a main node, sometimes called a Root AP or RAP. The nodes build a mesh that is self-building and self-repairing without any user intervention. If a node in the path to the RAP (this is the guy that connects the wired world, remember) fails, it just works its way around it, and rebuilds the path automatically.

All good so far but, with wireless, the available bandwidth on a network connection can be assumed to be 50% of the connection speed (simple math assumption for this exercise). This bandwidth is shared by everyone on the channel. You, your neighbors, and so on.

Well the problem here is that all the mesh APs are going to be on the same channel. They usually service one radio for clients (maybe two in certain circumstances) but then all connect one radio on a common channel for the path back to the RAP (this is called the “Backhaul”).

We can assume 4 Mesh APs share the bandwidth ¼ each, right? Well… maybe. If the Mesh APs are all one hop from the RAP, they will share the bandwidth 1/n (where n is the number of APs). See Diagram 1.

Mesh Calculations – Diagram 1.

Mesh calculations - A diagram of a switch , rap , map , and map.

What if we connect our APs differently? Take a peek at Diagram 2.

If 2 APs are one hop away from the RAP (called children of the RAP – that would make a great horror story, but I digress…), then they will share the bandwidth to the RAP. We know this calculates out to approximately 1/n each.

Then we connect the next 2 APs, each one hop away from the above mentioned children (technically, children of the children, so grandchildren of the RAP as it were). Now the math gets different. The data from these APs will first go across the wireless link up to the first hop (children), then continue over the wireless link a second time, up to the RAP.

So, data from a MAP (which is two hops away) crossed the network twice. Similarly, data from a MAP three hops away will cross the network three times.

Mesh Calculations – Diagram 2.

Mesh calculations - diagram of a switch , rap , map , and map.

This means that when you calculate the available bandwidth, you have to take into account the number of hops away the node is.

The calculation actually becomes a share of 1 / [(1xhop_1_aps) + (2xhop_2_aps) + (3xhop_3_aps)] and so on.

The configuration, from above, becomes 1 / [(1*2) + (2*2)], which means that having the 4 APs laid out so the 2 “grandchildren” APs link back to the two “children” APs will give each AP effectively 1/6 of the available bandwidth.

This is an oversimplification because, in a real mesh network, two distant MAPs may be far enough apart to not interfere which causes the numbers to improve slightly but, in general, it is a real-world phenomenon that causes rapid deterioration of bandwidth when you start deploying mesh networks with large depth (large number of hops away from the RAP). So you can summarize this discussion on Mesh, by saying “It’s not just the number of MAPs you have, it’s a function of the total the number and the number of hops they are away from the RAP”.

This is the bad news about mesh. Mesh is built for comfort and not for speed.

 

If you are looking to make your mark in the IT Industry, then NC-Expert offers excellent training courses aimed at relevant IT industry certifications –  contact us  today to get started.

NC-Expert Blog

By Rie Morgan August 20, 2026
When Wi-Fi performance suddenly deteriorates, interference is often the first culprit to be suspected and, when this (interference) enters the conversation, attention tends to turn immediately toward neighboring Wi-Fi networks. “Someone must have installed another AP.” “The office next door is probably using our channel.” “There are too many SSIDs around here.” Sometimes, this diagnosis is exactly right, but RF interference has a much larger cast of characters than just neighboring APs. In fact, some of the most frustrating wireless problems occur when the interfering device isn’t speaking 802.11 at all! The spectrum doesn’t particularly care whether the energy occupying it came from an enterprise AP, a Bluetooth headset, a microwave oven, or something considerably stranger. To a Wi-Fi radio trying to communicate, unwanted RF energy is simply unwanted RF energy. Wi-Fi Has to Share the Neighborhood The 2.4 GHz band has always been something of an RF “community center”. Wi-Fi operates alongside Bluetooth, Zigbee and other technologies, while various consumer, industrial, medical, and electronic devices may also generate energy within or around the same spectrum. Microwave ovens are perhaps the most famous example. Their emissions can interfere with 2.4 GHz Wi-Fi, particularly when clients are operating nearby. Bluetooth devices, cordless equipment, wireless cameras, sensors, and other transmitters can also contribute RF energy. Some interferers transmit continuously. Others appear periodically. Some hop frequencies. Others produce wideband noise. That last category can be particularly entertaining to troubleshoot... in the very specific sense of “entertaining” that wireless engineers use when they have been staring at spectrum analysis for three hours! The important point is that interference doesn’t need to understand Wi-Fi to disrupt it.
By Rie Morgan August 13, 2026
There is something wonderfully reassuring about seeing a row of green APs on a wireless dashboard: APs connected; radios operational; no obvious alarms; everything green. Excellent! The Wi-Fi must be fine... Except, of course, the users are complaining that Teams calls are breaking up, handheld scanners keep disconnecting, authentication takes forever, and someone in Accounting has discovered that turning Wi-Fi off and back on again temporarily fixes everything. Welcome to one of the more persistent myths in enterprise wireless: if the AP is up, the Wi-Fi must be working. An operational AP tells us something useful... but it tells us surprisingly little about the experience of the clients actually using the network. “Up” is an Infrastructure State When a monitoring platform reports that an AP is up, it usually means the infrastructure can communicate with it. It tells us: - the AP has power - its Ethernet connection is functioning - it may have established its management or CAPWAP connection - its radios are probably operational - it hasn't disappeared into the networking equivalent of a “black hole” ...all good things. But none of those things proves that a client can successfully use an application. Consider what still has to happen after the AP proudly announces its existence. A client must: discover the WLAN associate authenticate obtain the appropriate network configuration reach its default gateway resolve DNS access the required network resources, and maintain sufficient RF performance to exchange data reliably. Depending on the environment, that journey may involve: 802.1X RADIUS DHCP DNS VLANs ACLs firewalls roaming mechanisms upstream switching WAN connectivity cloud services ...and several other systems waiting for their opportunity to make your afternoon more “interesting”. ;-) The AP actually being operational is merely one part of that chain!
By Rie Morgan August 6, 2026
If there's one thing network users love, it's bandwidth. Need faster Wi-Fi? More bandwidth. Application running slowly? More bandwidth. Video buffering? More bandwidth. Someone sneezed near the wireless network? Probably needs more bandwidth. :) As Wi-Fi engineers, we've all heard it. Somewhere along the way, bandwidth became synonymous with performance. But while bandwidth certainly matters, it's only one ingredient in a much larger recipe. In many deployments, increasing available bandwidth produces little improvement and, in some cases, it can actually make things worse! Like many Wi-Fi myths, this one contains just enough truth to be convincing. Let's bust it...