08-09-2013 08:33 AM
We're considering deploying 18.104.22.168 on a pair of 7240s for our campus wlan. We have about 800 APS and 4,500 concurrent users. Is anyone here doing something similar? The license pooling feature is something we could use today and that is why we are considering the jump from the GA train to the Early Deployment code. We get the impression that the Early Deployment code is not really "beta", but I don't understand what keeps it from being GA. If you've done this I'd love to hear from you about your experience, positive or negative. We're also curious how long it typically takes for Early Release code to make it to GA.
08-09-2013 08:39 AM
I just deployed a 3400 and 2 M3's ~400 APs with the 6.3.01 code in order to get the centralized licensing and fast failover features. Both work great and I have not experienced any issues yet.
08-09-2013 08:44 AM
- one acting as a master / license server (vrrp setup)
- one acting as local / license backup (vrrp setup)
- one acting as local
It works really well so far no issues with the license pooling .
We only have about 40 APs attach and like 15 users , ClientMatch its been working well for most clients after doing some tweaking in the arm ClientMatch thresholds (SNR / signal ).
Our plan is to test the code for 3/4 weeks before deploying it in production .
Lead Mobility Engineer @ Integration Partners
AMFX | ACMX | ACDX | ACCX | CWAP | CWDP | CWNA
08-10-2013 02:18 AM
I just recently upgraded to Release 22.214.171.124 and I noticed that the built in/pre-defined ACLs associated with logon-control, captive portal and so on, don't exist.
So if you try applying the captive portal firewall policy to a Role, I noticed that no ACLs exist. Is that the case with you all? Is this a bug on the Code? Or does Aruba require us to implement the ACLs on our own?
08-11-2013 11:37 AM
I can't say I've moved on to 126.96.36.199 or even 188.8.131.52. But my experience with moving to the ED of 184.108.40.206 was really bad. It was quite buggy and unstable in my environment. Once the 6.2.0.x release went ot stable all my problems were gone. I will never upgrade to an ED release again. I only have 200 APs and not nearly as many connected users.
08-11-2013 11:40 PM
I couldn't agree more. There are a few concerns that I have with 220.127.116.11 at this point (especially with Wired 802.1x). Currently have a Ticket with TAC on the issue. But, it might just be a working as designed issue, however, I and TAC found it quite strange.
As much as it's doing most of what I expect it to do, I still have some reservations and I will definitely ask my Client to upgrade as soon as a Code becomes GA.