Wireless Access

Reply
New Contributor
Posts: 3
Registered: ‎12-19-2012

Access Point support for "Passive POE"?

Do the latest access point models support Passive POE?

MVP
Posts: 1,302
Registered: ‎11-07-2008

Re: Access Point support for "Passive POE"?

Define what you mean by 'passive poe'? My recollection was passive PoE was limited to 10/100, but doesn't work on Gig. But I want to make sure I understand what you are asking.

Jerrod Howard
Sr. Techical Marketing Engineer
New Contributor
Posts: 3
Registered: ‎12-19-2012

Re: Access Point support for "Passive POE"?

From what I understand it's not part of the IEEE POE standard (AF & AT).   It's also my understanding that it doesn't negotiate to see if the end device requires POE, but instead just sends 24 or 48v constantly.   I believe you're correct in that there's also no gigabit support.    So my question is would this work for powering the latest Aruba APs?

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Power_over_Ethernet#Passive

 

 

MVP
Posts: 952
Registered: ‎04-13-2009

Re: Access Point support for "Passive POE"?

[ Edited ]

My understanding is that devices will either support passive PoE (less common) or the IEEE standards 802.3af / 802.3at. Never both passive & 802.3af/802.3at.

Cheers
James

-------------------------------------------------------
-------------------@whereisjrw-------------------
------------------------blog-------------------------
ACCX #540 | ACMX #353 | ACDX #216
-----------Mobility First Expert #11----------
-------------------------------------------------------

If a reply adequately addresses your issue, please click on the "Accept as Solution" and "Give Kudos" button so this information can benefit other users via search.
MVP
Posts: 1,302
Registered: ‎11-07-2008

Re: Access Point support for "Passive POE"?

I don't think we have tested 'passive' power, but all Aruba APs are gigiabit interfaces so would work. Would likely be best to use 802.3af/at spec'd POE. 

Jerrod Howard
Sr. Techical Marketing Engineer
Search Airheads
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: