11-08-2016 06:10 AM
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.
Solved! Go to Solution.
11-08-2016 06:22 AM
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.
Aruba Customer Engineering
Looking for an Answer? Search the Community Knowledge Base Here: Community Knowledge Base