You are on page 1of 4

White Paper

Wireless Testing Approach


From Functionality to Security
Last Updated: 9th August, 2007
Introduction Types of Testing
The implementation of Wireless LANs (WLAN) has become Functional Testing
the cornerstone of many organizations’ mobile computing
initiatives. The pervasive WLAN is the primary technology Functional testing should be performed at all level of the
platform for increasing the productivity of your mobile and technology stack, as failure at any level has the potential to
distributed knowledge workers. An efficient and optimized disrupt the availability of applications to their users.
WLAN implementation improves communication flows,
enables rapid access to senior management and enhances
Protocol Level Testing
collaboration. All of these benefits provide competitive Protocol level testing generally involves comparing
advantages that can positively affect your business. network traffic to a specification or standard. Often such
specifications or standards include bit-level protocol
Although your WLAN architecture may appear sound on
descriptions. Wireless client adapters and wireless access
paper, testing the actual system across the technology
points need to be tested at this level to ensure compliance
stack and from end-to-end is essential to ensure that your
with the protocols that the devices are designed to
WLAN implementation provides the essential capabilities support.
required to deliver the promised business benefits. Building
a WLAN infrastructure from scratch or extending an existing In the wireless medium, protocol level testing involves the
implementation can present issues and risks that need to expert use of wireless protocol analyzer(s) that allow the
be addressed through a robust and effective WLAN test tester to see what is happening at Layers 2-7 of the OSI
strategy. model. Testing at this level is exacting work that requires
the ability to understand and interpret the published
Despite the existence of the IEEE 802.11 standards-based specification or standard and compare it to the captured
WLAN market, there is still no guarantee that a WLAN network traffic. The following is typical of the output from
infrastructure constructed from multi-vendor, or even single a protocol analyzer and shows the low level nature of this
vendor, hardware and software will provide a seamless and type of testing:
transparent platform for end-to-end business processes.
==== 802.11 packet (encrypted) ====
Some of the issues that need to be addressed are:
08 41 02 01 00 40 96 21 DC 83 00 40 96 28 8D DC FF FF
 Wireless technology continues to outpace the capacity
FF FF FF FF A0 38 00 01 15 00 EB B1 C7 6A B1 96 B2 16
of industry interoperability consortia to provide
58 C4 04 5E 2D 6A F3 4B 92 EB FC FC ED 70 98 D0 64
comprehensive certification programmes;
6C 5E BB 1A DD D4 2A 26 2A 8B EF C2 41 67 75 9D FB
 Operational risks can be mitigated by implementing a FE 5D 4E CA A0 45 6D 7C 36 22 22 7D D0 BD 09 16 1D
homogeneous, single vendor solution but enhanced E6 41 D9 94 BE 9B 53 C5 CB
business benefits may only be realized from a ==== CK (basic CKIP key) ====
heterogeneous, multi-vendor solution;
19 59 8D F5 EF 19 59 8D F5 EF 19 59 8D F5 EF 19
 There is no single approach to building and operating
enterprise scale WLANs and new architectures continue ==== PK (permuted key) ====
to be developed;
00 01 15 E6 8B D6 03 23 0B 6A 60 B9 F4 EB 46 99
 Physical implementation needs to consider the impact
==== 802.11 packet decrypted ====
of RF interference on the operational mode and the
performance of the WLAN; 08 41 02 01 00 40 96 21 DC 83 00 40 96 28 8D DC FF FF
FF FF FF FF A0 38 00 01 15 00 AA AA 03 00 40 96 00 02
 Latency caused by roaming and re-authentication, 2F F1 C0 A6 00 00 00 C0 08 06 00 01 08 00 06 04 00 01
especially for real-time applications such as VoIP. 00 40 96 28 8D DC A1 2C EE 03 00 00 00 00 00 00 A1 2C
EE 14 21 BD D8 23 21 BD A8 AC 52 E1 01 00 00 00 28
AC 0F 82 46 86 F9 D9

AppLabs.com
App_Whitepaper_Wireless_Testing_Approach_1v00 Page  © 2007 AppLabs
==== Original MSDU ====

DA: FF FF FF FF FF FF

SA: 00 40 96 28 8D DC

Payload: 08 06 00 01 08 00 06 04 00 01 00 40 96 28 8D
DC A1 2C EE 03 00 00 00 00 00 00 A1 2C EE 14 21 BD D8
23 21 BD A8 AC 52 E1 01 00 00 00 28 AC 0F 82

Compatibility Testing
The 802.11 wireless world is governed by standards.
However the different wireless components do not always
interoperate well. Within a single WLAN infrastructure
there may be many combinations of client adapters and Although it may seem that these systems and mechanisms
wireless access points. Even if the model numbers of the should work together and that each one is being used
components are the same, there may be different software successfully and securely already, there are so many
versions deployed within the devices. Compatibility testing possible permutations that it is entirely possible that many
is required to prove that the chosen devices do actually WLAN implementations are effectively uniquely constructed
work together as expected. and security testing is required to verify their end-to-end
integrity.
Security Testing
Wireless networks are becoming more popular in the
Quality of Service Testing
corporate environment. As such, corporate network One of the ways that wireless networking has evolved
administrators rightfully insist on making the network as surrounds the use of multimedia applications (voice,
secure as possible. A secure wireless strategy includes video, etc) over the wireless medium. Such applications
encryption, authentication, and key management. require guaranteed access to the network in order that
Encryption ranges from static WEP to rotating keys the audio/video stream is of an acceptable quality. The
generated by the access point. The wireless network mechanism employed to ensure the quality of multimedia
can authenticate the wireless user or client using a variety communications over the network is called “Quality of
of authentication protocols and backend systems. Key Service” (QoS) and is implemented on a wireless network
management refers to the mechanism being employed to
using the Wi-Fi Multimedia (WMM) functionality. WMM
rotate the keys. Some of the most common systems and
is based on a subset of the IEEE 802.11e WLAN QoS
mechanism that are deployed are:
draft standard. The implementation of WMM is judged
 Microsoft Internet Authentication Service (IAS) by generating known traffic types on the network and
validating correct behavior in terms of priority values in the
 Cisco Access Control Server (ACS) packets and traffic flow through the network.

 Key Management:
End-to-End Testing
 Cisco Centralized Key Management (CCKM)
A comprehensive WLAN test strategy will include full end-
 WPA to-end business process testing within the test WLAN
 WPA2 environment allowing business risk mitigation before WLAN
deployment occurs on site. Due to the many configurations
 802.1x Extensible Authentication Protocol (EAP) of all
that may need to be tested, this is essentially application
kinds
regression testing. Regression testing is the form of testing
 EAP-TLS (certificate-based authentication) most amenable to test automation. Consideration needs
to be given to the feasibility of test automation and the
 EAP-GTC (password or token-based
potential cost and quality benefits that may be obtained
authentication)
through test automation.
 PEAP
 EAP-FAST
 LEAP

AppLabs.com
App_Whitepaper_Wireless_Testing_Approach_1v00 Page  © 2007 AppLabs
Performance Testing Summary
A common measure of wireless performance is throughput.
Modern enterprise IT infrastructures are already highly
Regardless of the 802.11 band (a/b/g), wireless client
complex entities. Adding WLAN capabilities only adds to
adapter vendors are concerned with throughput as a
the complexity, which increases the risk of implementation
performance metric and point of comparison. In the
defects, leading to operational failure. Testing is essential
wireless world, range is simulated by adding attenuation to
to uncover the defects prior to going live. If the defects
the antenna on the wireless access point.
are not identified and fixed before the WLAN becomes
Wireless throughput is a function of multiple factors, most operational it may never meet its service level agreements.
notably: A successful WLAN implementation requires a test strategy
that recognizes both the technology and business issues
 Distance between the client adapter and the access
that need to be addressed before the full business benefits
point (often simulated in the test environment by can be realized.
introducing attenuation to the wireless signal)

 Noise in the environment

 Relative orientation of the client and access point


antennas

The curve of throughput versus distance (attenuation)


varies from adapter to adapter. Even a single adapter’s
throughput curve varies with the implemented antenna and
its orientation.

Poor throughput will manifest itself to the end user as


increasing response times from their applications. To
determine the overall degradation in response times under
normal operating conditions load testing can be performed
to simulate multiple concurrent users.

AppLabs.com
App_Whitepaper_Wireless_Testing_Approach_1v00 Page  © 2007 AppLabs

You might also like