02-02-2015 03:11 AM
Aruba makes a capital distinction between CAP and RAP. In terms of capacity on a controller, 1 CAP kills 4 RAP's, that is how I look at it.
But it appears that on a private ipsec or mpls network, there is no technical reason for this distinction. Or am I mistaken ? Sure, we tunnel twice with a RAP but that is a small price to pay between 8 AP or 32 AP's on a W620.
This is not a rant : I appreciate/respect businessmodels, aruba-personnel need to get paid, Aruba Networks deserves to grow etc etc.
It's just that the distinction is so great & blatant, that I feel I missed something in the configuration and I look for justification in the business side.
thx for killing this one for me
02-02-2015 03:53 AM
02-02-2015 04:20 AM
I see what you mean, but consider this :
If i configure ALL my AP's as RAP - even those that live on the campus of the controller, then I have the capacity of 32 AP on a W620, instead of 8. Why wouldn't I do that, on a gigabit network ?
02-02-2015 04:31 AM
02-02-2015 05:15 AM
Please relay your concerns to your local Aruba salesperson so that they can understand your specific issue. In the newer 7000 series controllers the AP to Remote AP ratio is 1:1. http://www.arubanetworks.com/pdf/products/matrix-m
Aruba Customer Engineering
Looking for an Answer? Search the Community Knowledge Base Here: Community Knowledge Base