Wireless Access

Using AP-335's for the first time and it's been explained to me that there are 2 ethernet ports on the back that lead to 2 different POE modules, which is great.  It was also explained that 1 port is for 5GHZ traffic and the other is for 2.4GHZ traffic.  Need confirmation of this, as well as validation of an initial design.  I have a POE switch for the 2.4 and another switch for the 5, so one cable to each from each AP-335. I've read some stuff saying that the 2 ethernet ports should be port channeled to the same switch, which then blows the separate switch for each band out of the water.  Here is what I was thinking:

Good? Bad?  Ugly?  Appreciate any input.  

Why the need to dual-home the AP? Are you worried about throughput capacity of the wired link (not a realistic concern), or is this for redundancy (active/standby)?

High-availability with a POE controller for each port...should one switch die the AP stays up because of the second link.  In addition, with it being an AC implementation I'd like to have more than 1gb of throughput back to the core.  These will be high-capacity AP's with 30-40 devices on each. 

The HA argument makes sense, but I don't think that would need 2.4GHz and 5GHz traffic to be separated.

That is indeed what happens when LAGing for capacity, but keep in mind that 1Gbps (full-duplex) Ethernet capacity is more than enough to carry traffic from this AP in realistic use-cases and deployments. While the AP-335 can demonstrate up to ~1.5Gbps (unidirectional) L3 traffic in a lab setting, this will remain well below 1Gbps in a typical use and deployment (RF channel conditions, client mix and capabilities, etc.). And that's assuming you're using 80MHz (or 160MHz) channels, while most deployments are using 40MHz.

I'm not very familiar with LAG/LACP configuration, but would expect that for an active/standby HA use case, the traffic from both radios will not be separated.

Thanks for the input.  Regarding 2.4 and 5 using separate links, I was told by our sales engineer that you can run active-active links because 2 GRE tunnels are formed when both are connected.  2.4 will use 1, 5 will use the other.  It may have to participate in an LACP port channel for that to happen, and if so, I can't use 2 switches because you can't port channel across 2 chassis (unless you're using VPC on Cisco Nexus). 

I am curious if anyone has done this type of HA setup and how the AP functions if one switch does go down - can the AP have 2 different IP addresses if connected to two different switches; and if so, how does that fail-over work?