03-21-2014 07:46 AM
we currently have a master - local design setup. Taking into account redundancy, we need to upgrade as the master is currently serving 67 ap's. And the local 3. When reading the redundancy design guide, seems that the active-active n-1 is the most interesting setup we can make, when purchasing an extra controller?
Only thing which isn't clear yet... Do we create a master (main) - master (backup) - local setup, or master (main) - local - local setup? I guess the first one would make more sense?
Solved! Go to Solution.
03-21-2014 08:05 AM
What model controllers do you have right now?
What are your redundancy requirements? (full redundancy, partial)
Aruba Customer Engineering
Looking for an Answer? Search the Community Knowledge Base Here: Community Knowledge Base
03-21-2014 08:14 AM
You would not gain any AP-room with a redundant master + local setup.
The master-backup would never terminate any APs untill the master-main goes down so you would not be able to terminate any more APs than you do now and still have no 100% redundancy.
Your best bet would be to go with a single master and 2 local controllers. Terminate all APs to the local controllers and have both locals failover to the master. This way you can load up both locals up to 64 campus APs each and still have any 1 controller fail without interruptions.
-- Found something helpful, important, or cool? Click the Kudos Star in a post.
-- Problem Solved? Click "Accept as Solution" in a post.
03-22-2014 11:24 AM
03-23-2014 03:35 AM
Requirement is very important, no point getting all the redundancy information and it did not solve your issue. From your environment I would still do 1 X Master and 2 X local. Master shoul dnot hold any APs like menytion is earlier post. The local controllers can do fast failover to one another, I have attached a link for your reference.