Wireless Access

Hello, we have some new M3's and chassis and I am trying to figure out the best redundancy. We have 2 M3's and 2 chassis. Both M3's will be connected the same switch stack via 10Gb.

How should they be setup for redundancy and to have the load split among them, active/active. With only around 70AP's riht now active/active probably doesn't matter but I'd hate to have that M3 just sitting there passive. We'll have up to around 1600 clients on those AP's. AP105's.

When the M3's were purchased I didn't know about the master and local roles so I'm trying to figure out the redundancy now.

We do have Airwave and RFprotect purchased if that matters.

Thanks

Please see the campus Validated Reference design document here:  http://www.arubanetworks.com/wp-content/uploads/CampusVRDV8_20110913.pdf

 

Do a search for Redundancy and it will tell you what your options are.  

I don't want 2 masters right? So is it possible to make one M3 the active master and active local, make the 2nd M3 the passive master and active local?

If I was advising you, I would deploy master redundancy, which is two masters in an active passive configuration.

In this configuration, if one master goes down the other will be active and you retain the ability to configure your wlan. In any other redundancy, your wlan works, but you cannot make configuration changes without an active master.

how about the locals? Put them on both the active master and passive master?

 

 

So,

 

M3 # 1 - active master and active local

M3 # 2 - passive master and active local

 

?

 

Thanks

Wait. How many controller/cards do you have? I thought you only had two M3 controllers....

If you only have two, one is the master and the other is the backup master. There is NO local.

Ok, I'm confused, I thought I had to have a local?

 

yes, just 2 controllers so just make one active master and another passive master and that's it? No locals?

 

So I would be sending AP's to just one controller under normal conditions?

 

is an active/active setup possible?

---

@jcsd wrote:

Ok, I'm confused, I thought I had to have a local?

 

yes, just 2 controllers so just make one active master and another passive master and that's it? No locals?

 

So I would be sending AP's to just one controller under normal conditions?

 

is an active/active setup possible?

---

Here are your options with two controllers:

 

master-local or master-backup master

 

In master-local, you can have both controllers active, but only one controller, the master, has the ability to write and/or change the configuration.  You can leverage additional capacity, but if the master goes down, the local can step in, but will be a read-only controller;  you would have to change it to a master and reboot to regain write ability for your WLAN.

 

In master/backup master, only a single master is active at a time.  Both controllers share a VRRP, or high availability address that all the access points terminate their traffic on.  If the active master goes down, the backup master controller will take control of the high availability address and continue to pass traffic for those access points.  The backup master becomes the active master, and you can make changes on your network.

 

Does that make sense?

 

Yes, Thank You