Wireless Access

Reply
Contributor I
Posts: 48
Registered: ‎01-19-2011

VLAN Pooling Hash vs. Even

We have moved to even vlan pooling in efforts to stabilize the uneven distribution of IP's across the 4 /23 vlans we have in a pool.  What we're seeing is many clients are getting new IP's after deatuhs/ auths on the AP (i'm guessing devices going to sleep and waking up like mobile phones).

 

If we use even vlan pooling - and a device disconnects from an AP and connects back right away, it's back to Aruba using round-robin on what vlan the client will be place in, correct?  Only the HASH method contains a database of Mac -> Vlan? 

 

Any better way to keep client to vlan distribution in a pool more even?  

 

Currently on even pooling we have 2 vlans at 90% capacity and 2 vlans at 20% capacity.

 

Thoughs?

 

Thanks!

MVP
Posts: 4,271
Registered: ‎07-20-2011

Re: VLAN Pooling Hash vs. Even

 

Are you sharing these VLANs accross different controllers ?

 

Have you tried using the show ap vlan-usage to see the distribution accross VLANs on the controllers.

 

 

 

 

Thank you

Victor Fabian
Lead Mobility Engineer @ Integration Partners
AMFX | ACMX | ACDX | ACCX | CWAP | CWDP | CWNA
Guru Elite
Posts: 8,458
Registered: ‎09-08-2010

Re: VLAN Pooling Hash vs. Even

"When a VLAN pool is shared across multiple controllers, each controller has its own snapshot of VLAN usage. This
info is not explicitly shared across the controllers. Each controller works independently to determine the VLAN
assignment based on its snapshot of VLAN usage. If a large number of users leave a controller and move to a different
controller, it can cause a temporary drop in usage in some VLANs. However, because each of the controllers is always
trying to keep the VLAN usage even, we will not have a completely starved VLAN."


Tim Cappalli | Aruba Security TME
@timcappalli | timcappalli.me | ACMX #367 / ACCX #480
Contributor I
Posts: 48
Registered: ‎01-19-2011

Re: VLAN Pooling Hash vs. Even

That makes sense.  Thanks for the command and the explanation.

 

So if a client roams between ap's he should keep his IP throughout.

But if the nic disaccoiates for whatever reason and associates the controller continues it's calculation on what the next vlan should be based on vlan usage... correct?

 

Thank!

Search Airheads
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: