Wireless Access

as I knwo If I changed the Access point form tunnel to bridge it will make trrafic do not passed to thecontroller right ? and whatif controller is down will it remain working well?

You are correct that bridge mode means the traffic will be dropped directly on the wire rather than tunneled back to the controller. However, the controller is handling your authentication so if it is down, clients will not be authenticated.

In terms of performance, I suppose it’s possible that bridge mode would remove some of the overhead, especially if there is a heavy load on your controller and the infrastructure around it. There are so many variables involved that it’s hard to say whether or not that improvement would be negligible or not.

There's many reasons why you may want to change to bridge mode, but bear in mind that a number of features are not supported.

http://www.arubanetworks.com/techdocs/ArubaOS_63_Web_Help/Web_Help_Index.htm#ArubaFrameStyles/Defaults/Mode_Support.htm

It may improve performance if your controller is across a wan, but there's many other things to consider as well.

just to stir the pot, I'll add that we're actually seeing improvements in performance for some devices by tunneling their service back the LAN where their client connects.

We see fewer dropped telnet sessions on bar-code scanning clients when we tunnel them back to the headquarters and drop them off in the VLAN where the AS400 resides than when we drop them off locallay and route them back.

Just gotta love those old protocols...

Simply never se it if you don't know whatit will do and you can find a very useful information in the link above an for voice deployments it will be a pain in the head as there is voice related features that is not supported

I would say that yes it could improve the performance but then you will loose features that are only available on tunnel mode.

Also you can enhance the performance on tunnel mode if you do a link aggregation bettween controller and the switch core which you got it connected...

Also if you got access switch in which you are connecting your APS

Let say you got a 24 port switch with 20 APS, and your uplink is just a 1 Gig... not even if you are bridging will improve the performance...

In that case you will need to do a link agg between tha switch and the distribution switch... or having a s2500 or something similar with 10G of uplink...

So at the end it does DEPENDS on your network, and how you build it... it will not Magically improve the performance...

I do have most of my clients with tunnel mode, but i advicse them to have Link aggregation everyone to improve speed... from the access switch to the distribution swithc and form the distribution swithc to the core switch and from the core switch to the wireless controller...

If they got 10gigs uplink then use it.   It also depends on how many APs you got... if you got like 5 APS  you migh not need to do anything... if you got 500 aps then you will need to do stuff to tune your network.

Just my 2 cents

Cheers

Carlos

NightShade1, that was more like 75cents! and advice worth the money.

We are a very low packet/data volume shop, and nearly all clients talk to servers at the HQ. Tunneling appears to improve our performance. If we have local services in our various offices, or let clients talk to each other we might have cases where local-controllers or bridged connections made more sense.

Always consider your traffic patterns and data-flows when designing your network.

A bottleneck is a bottleneck, tunneling and bridging won't help anything if the plumbing is blocked up.