Wireless Access

Hi there,

    I was wondering ... just for fun ... could I connect an AP93 to an IAP105 and get it to download the image and settings from the IAP105?

Thanks.

You can mix and match IAP models (IAP-93 and IAP-105), but you cannot add an AP to an IAP virtual controller setup.

Sooooo .... but what is the use of having a lot of IAP's in the cluster with the option of having one as a Master ?!?!?!

It would be like having a lot of smart AP's (doesn't matter the brand) with an airwave configured to push and collect data.

I would have believed that the idea would be to give you a limited number at least of AP's that could connect to an IAP.

IAPs run different software/OS than APs.   APs, therefore, do not communicate with iAPs.   So you can't 'add' 'subtract' etc. APs into an iAP cluster.

iAPs were created for those deployments where a site administrator deems that they don't want to put a controller.

        jfernyc - Aruba GuRu - than why is it presented like a BIG thing - there are other brands that do the same thing as your iAP and the only interesting thing with the IAP is the fact that you can control from one AP the others ...... that for other brands you can do as I mentioned already with Airwave.

        Thus I don't want to put down the IAP - I can see possibility of development with you guys that I did not see in others brands. One of the ways to go is to make the iAP's to work at least with a limited number of AP's maybe even RAP's.

         Given that in the Airheads meeting that I attended the word cluster was used - there is enough hardware in let's say 7-8 AP's that if they work as one AP - they have the hardware resources to act as a controller.

The "big thing" we see in the iAP is the decentralized control in the clusters with the centralized control afforded by Airwave.

Our stores each get an "independent" iAP instance, so the wireless works whether or not the T1 is up.

our NOC gets one central point of configuration and monitoring.

--Matthew

But what is the use of "decentralized control in the clusters" if with Airwave you can collect the data and push the config to all you stand alone ones?!

And if you want a "decentralized control" you just create groups for different store this way you can push the config and monitor based on the store/group. Thus making useless the store cluster of iAP's. 

We want the store to function even if the data-link to the HQ is down -- It's either a controller and set of APs for each store, or iAPs at the store and Airwave to aggregate the configuration and reporting.

The iAP provides a lower cost method of controlling the acces sin the store, and Airwave provides the "single point" for management and reporting.