Network Management

Hello,

Our main Airwave box is well over capacity and performance is pretty ropey as a result. We do have another Airwave box _and_ another cluster (overspill as we were nearing the AP limit on our main cluster), so we could move APs from our main cluster (and main AW) to this overflow cluster and AW that would solve the issue (well, it would go some way to solving it). That's what we did with the APs that are currently on the overflow system.

But I think it's possible we could add the second Airwave box to the main cluster instead, then I guess we would need to go through and 'ignore' all the APs it finds that we don't want it to monitor on that AW box, and just add the APs we do want to groups/folders on it. It feels to me like it would be potentially very messy as we'd have two Airwave boxes, one monitoring two clusters (but only a few hundred of the main cluster APs). I'm also concerned about any performance hit on Airwave, but of course most importantly on the AOS system.

Does anyone have similar experience or thoughts about this?

Guy

Hi Guy,

 How many controller clusters are there and what is the approx AP count in each cluster?

AOS sends 90% of data through AMON. AirWave polls using SNMP for fraction of data only. So there is no load on controllers. AOS8 controllers can send AMON info to (uoto) 3 AMON receivers (like AirWave, COP etc). 

I wouldn't suggest splitting the AP's on same cluster to 2 different AirWave servers. Reason being client data will be split as they roam within the same cluster.

I would add the biggest controller cluster to one AirWave and others to other AirWave to have MAx of 4K devices on each AirWave server.

If the AirWave server is rightly spec'ed based on the HW guide, there shouldn't be problem with performance on AirWave with number of clusters/ MM's.

Hello,

Our main Airwave box is well over capacity and performance is pretty ropey as a result. We do have another Airwave box _and_ another cluster (overspill as we were nearing the AP limit on our main cluster), so we could move APs from our main cluster (and main AW) to this overflow cluster and AW that would solve the issue (well, it would go some way to solving it). That's what we did with the APs that are currently on the overflow system.

But I think it's possible we could add the second Airwave box to the main cluster instead, then I guess we would need to go through and 'ignore' all the APs it finds that we don't want it to monitor on that AW box, and just add the APs we do want to groups/folders on it. It feels to me like it would be potentially very messy as we'd have two Airwave boxes, one monitoring two clusters (but only a few hundred of the main cluster APs). I'm also concerned about any performance hit on Airwave, but of course most importantly on the AOS system.

Does anyone have similar experience or thoughts about this?

Guy

Hello Gowri,

Thank you, I think that is enough to make our minds up, especially the comment about people roaming within the cluster and data being split between the AW boxes.

The main cluster is way over recommended limits for AW (we're nearly at 8k!) , so we will keep moving APs across to the overflow cluster, though we are limited by other factors so this will be a slow process. 

Guy

Hi Guy,

 How many controller clusters are there and what is the approx AP count in each cluster?

AOS sends 90% of data through AMON. AirWave polls using SNMP for fraction of data only. So there is no load on controllers. AOS8 controllers can send AMON info to (uoto) 3 AMON receivers (like AirWave, COP etc). 

I wouldn't suggest splitting the AP's on same cluster to 2 different AirWave servers. Reason being client data will be split as they roam within the same cluster.

I would add the biggest controller cluster to one AirWave and others to other AirWave to have MAx of 4K devices on each AirWave server.

If the AirWave server is rightly spec'ed based on the HW guide, there shouldn't be problem with performance on AirWave with number of clusters/ MM's.

Hello,

Our main Airwave box is well over capacity and performance is pretty ropey as a result. We do have another Airwave box _and_ another cluster (overspill as we were nearing the AP limit on our main cluster), so we could move APs from our main cluster (and main AW) to this overflow cluster and AW that would solve the issue (well, it would go some way to solving it). That's what we did with the APs that are currently on the overflow system.

But I think it's possible we could add the second Airwave box to the main cluster instead, then I guess we would need to go through and 'ignore' all the APs it finds that we don't want it to monitor on that AW box, and just add the APs we do want to groups/folders on it. It feels to me like it would be potentially very messy as we'd have two Airwave boxes, one monitoring two clusters (but only a few hundred of the main cluster APs). I'm also concerned about any performance hit on Airwave, but of course most importantly on the AOS system.

Does anyone have similar experience or thoughts about this?

Guy