How we tested the WLAN tools

All products were installed on a Dell 710m equipped with an Intel 2915ABG wireless adapter, said adapter being used with only one of the tools tested. The objective was to install and use these products in a manner identical to how they would be applied in an end-user enterprise, and compare them functionally in a number of dimensions.

Our test network consisted of our standard office setup of five access points, a mix of 802.11a, 802.11g and 802.11n all on different channels. Since capture is non-destructive and non-interfering, there were no issues with using a production network for this test. We tested all of the documented packet capture and analysis features for each product, assembling a features table and noting special capabilities and especially ease-of-use (or lack thereof) - a difficult-to-use tool has no place in the urgency-driven environment that often motivates the need for these tools to begin with.

We used a different wireless adapter for each product so as to avoid driver conflicts; while this could affect sensitivity, all wireless devices involved in the test were in close proximity to one another, so the results we sought were unaffected by this element. Note that even though we tested a number of products that offer a broad range of functions, we examined only packet capture and analysis capabilities for this test. A weak score here is not necessarily indicative of poor functionality in the other capabilities of a particular product.

All of the products reviewed can filter packets according to a set of criteria, capture frames and assign sequence numbers, and save captures to a file. Any of the tools offering analysis would be suitable for solving most problems; the differences are in bells and whistles (many of which are of course useful) and ease-of-use, which is often a function of one's preferences for a particular user interface strategy. And we recommend keeping an assurance-enabled or capture-and-analysis-equipped notebook handy and uncommitted to other activities, as reconfiguring between normal operations and capture/analysis use can be difficult on short notice.

To continue reading, register here to become an Insider. You'll get free access to premium content from CIO, Computerworld, CSO, InfoWorld, and Network World. See more Insider content or sign in.

All products were installed on a Dell 710m equipped with an Intel 2915ABG wireless adapter, said adapter being used with only one of the tools tested. The objective was to install and use these products in a manner identical to how they would be applied in an end-user enterprise, and compare them functionally in a number of dimensions.

Our test network consisted of our standard office setup of five access points, a mix of 802.11a, 802.11g and 802.11n all on different channels. Since capture is non-destructive and non-interfering, there were no issues with using a production network for this test. We tested all of the documented packet capture and analysis features for each product, assembling a features table and noting special capabilities and especially ease-of-use (or lack thereof) - a difficult-to-use tool has no place in the urgency-driven environment that often motivates the need for these tools to begin with.

We used a different wireless adapter for each product so as to avoid driver conflicts; while this could affect sensitivity, all wireless devices involved in the test were in close proximity to one another, so the results we sought were unaffected by this element. Note that even though we tested a number of products that offer a broad range of functions, we examined only packet capture and analysis capabilities for this test. A weak score here is not necessarily indicative of poor functionality in the other capabilities of a particular product.

All of the products reviewed can filter packets according to a set of criteria, capture frames and assign sequence numbers, and save captures to a file. Any of the tools offering analysis would be suitable for solving most problems; the differences are in bells and whistles (many of which are of course useful) and ease-of-use, which is often a function of one's preferences for a particular user interface strategy. And we recommend keeping an assurance-enabled or capture-and-analysis-equipped notebook handy and uncommitted to other activities, as reconfiguring between normal operations and capture/analysis use can be difficult on short notice.

< Return to test: WLAN sniffers pass the sniff test >

Read more about wireless & mobile in Network World's Wireless & Mobile section.