Wireless Access


Tri-Session with DNAT vs Controller IP Address on Client VLAN


Is one method necessarily better than the other - drawbacks to enabling Tri-Session with DNAT? - or sticking with the IP Address on the Guest Client? I was working on updating our "setup" network by duplicating our guest config (setup ssid, setup vlan, captive-portal page would be to our XpressConnect page) and after digging further occured to me about the IP Address requirement (Note - Controller is not default gateway) - but also discovered the Tri-Session with DNAT functionality.

Eventually we're going to look into the option of one ssid for both guest and setup - but was curious which of the two options I should pursue -> Enabling Tri-Session with DNAT did fix my problem - just wondering which one was best.

Guru Elite

Re: Tri-Session with DNAT vs Controller IP Address on Client VLAN

You typically would use tri-session with DNAT if you have more than one VLAN that you want to do captive portal with.  If you have a single VLAN, an ip address on that controller's VLAN, along with the ip cp-redirect-address command pointing to that ip address is sufficient.

Answers and views expressed by me on this forum are my own and not necessarily the position of Aruba Networks or Hewlett Packard Enterprise.
Search Airheads
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: