Wireless Access

I have 4 remote sites and a HQ all in different cities. Can I implement with a single controller at the NOC, instead of putting one at each site ? The competition has told the customer that no need of putting a local controller for thousands of APs.

CAn somebody please point me to the right DG to understand the details of such an implementation.

Hi,

The Aruba validated reference designs are here: http://www.arubanetworks.com/resources/reference-design-guides/

You can deploy the scenario you've described with a single controller HOWEVER you've not given details of AP counts at any of the sites so I wouldn't go ahead and recommend this blindly.

How many APs and clients per site?

Cheers

James

THanks a lot for your quick revert.

There is one remote site which may go upto 200 APs in next 2 years. THe other sites will have less than 50 APs. The HQ may have less than 100 APs. Is there a recommendation for how much WAN bandwidth is needed per AP for management traffic ?

Yes, I went through that site, but not sure which DG to pick. From architecture perspective, without a site controller, I should be using RAPs and the guide - Aruba Remote Access Point (RAP) Networks Validated Reference Design. But I am not sure if the RAP can be used on sites with so many APs, and how will the roaming work seamlessly without a local controller on site ? Is there some other DG that depicts my situation more precisely ?

regards,

Amit

- How are these sites connected? (wan bandwidth)

- Where is the actual data ? (at a centralized site or distributed among all the sites)

Also, what kind of SSID are you planning to support (WPA2-PSK bridged locally or tunneled back to the NOC, WPA2-EAP-PEAP/TLS with RADIUS, etc)? The WAN bandwidth, latency, any boundary/firewall restritions you may have (remote campus APs require FTP/TFTP and a host of other ports and protocols listed in the user guide, etc). 

If you have a good relible connection between HQ and branhcs you can do it wil one controller but for my recommendation multi controller Infra. is better for your needs.

Hi All,

Thanks for the responses. I am sorry about my post lacking in details.. I was thinking of asking you for the right deployment guide for this model and then go through it properly before putting specific questions.

So here are the exact requirments:

1. 4 sites + HQ.

2. Number of APs 50-200 (final number)

    Number of users at each site - 500-2000.

3. Usecase - primarily Internet access (directly from each site). With some tunnel traffic to the NOC for Intranet access(Limited use)

    The split tunnel architecture fits perfectly here.

4. Auth + Encryption: Preferrably EAP/CCMP. with radius servers at the HQ.

    A few users may go to the other sites, and need to authenticate at the other site for wireless access.

5. WAN link: Currently they have 2 Mbps link for wired users and plan for additional 2 Mbps (can be dedicated for Wireless Management traffic). Can be increased to 5+ based on the recommendation.

  The tunnel will use the same link.

Yes, we recommended the controller model onsite. But as I mentioned, other competition has told them that no need of controller on-site. And the customer has asked whether we can do it. I am just trying to understand whether we can do it the same way and the pro-cons of both approachces. If controller-less model is very risky, then we will not propose it.

Please let me know what is the right architecture. And also let me know what is the right guide that depicts this requirement in detail.

regards,

Amit.

speedypanther,

You should contact the Aruba sales team in your region so that they can get the specifics about this deployment and give you the correct course of direction.  In the past, having a controller at each site would be a foregone conclusion.  With the advent of Aruba Instant you could deploy AP clusters at each site without a controller.  Please work with your local Aruba sales team to determine what is the best strategy for this potential customer.

Thanks Colin.

I have apprehensions using IAP because I do not want to go completely controller-less. tHe customer would like a contoller at the NOC at least. I did check with your local team, and they felt a local controller may be the right thing.

But I am curious to know how to make the decision as to when to use a local controller and when remote sites without a controller are acceptable. If there is a threshold for number of APs, or bandwidth per AP, etc. With a good WAN link, there should be no difference in branches with no controller and buildings with no controller within a campus ?

Can you suggest me the right guide that will help me for controller less deployments at multiple sites with 1 controller in the NOC ? Would RAP deployment guide be the right one ? 

regards,

Amit

speedypanther,

If the local team thinks that centralized would be the way to go, please ask them to see what reasons specifically.  Every customer is different..  There is no ultimate guide that will tell you either way, as it is possible technically to do either..