Thanks Colin. Couple of follow ups:
1) I know the other methods I mention technically work, are you suggesting they technically are not supported?
2) The 6.2 user guide mentions the following for th e "Enable Controllers Load Balance" setting"
Enable this option to allow the VIA clientto failoverto the next available selected randomly from the list as configured in the VIA Servers option. If disabled,VIA will failover to the nextin the sequence ofordered list of VIA Servers.
Also, the VIA AppNote has this description for the same setting:
This parameter enables load balancing of VIA clients by randomly choosing a controller from the list of available VIA controllers that can be used for connection. This feature does not take the current load of the controller into account. NOTE: This option is available in VIA 2.1 with ArubaOS 6.1.3.1 and later
Unless I am interpreting it wrong, it sounds like it does have the ability to fail to the next by these descriptions. I don't have the ability to test this however.
3) The VIA AppNote suggests an all master design is recommended (master/standby) for Aruba mobile access deployments (page 7).
An all-master design is recommended for Aruba mobile access deployments. The use of redundant controllers and the SSL fallback option on VIA clients ensures high availability of this architecture.
But that's all it says, nothing further about how that redundancy is setup from a profile standpoint. Since the Active/Standby state of an all-master deployment is dependent on VRRP; would that in essence be the same as using the VRRP between a master and local?
Thanks....