Wireless Access

Hi all, have some AP105s configured as RAP over a 134 mesh link.  Native vlan 1, controller over a WAN link,  can I configure the far end VAP's to bridge to the local network, ie over the mesh far end ??

Thanks

I don't see why not, if it's working now in tunnel mode.

Thats what I thought but I need to drop the traffic into non default vlans that only exist over the other end of the mesh, IE the portal end.

You will have to put those VLANs on the RAP side for that work work, otherwise your're not going to have L2 to bridge to. If the networks only exist on the portal-side, then what benefit is there to bridge at the RAP? You might want to do a drawing to outline what you are trying to accomplish, but if you are trying to bridge the RAP connections to L2 on the portal's network, then likely no, as any RAP traffic over the mesh is already in the IPsec tunnel.

Hi Jerrod, yes the I am trying to break out the vlans on the portal side at the switch where the portal is connected. The site only use bridge mode to break out locally so I cannot tunell back to the controller.

So AP's on default vlan 1, no issue, bit various VAPs need to authenticate then drop locally into vlan x,y z.  Not seen this over mesh before. Any ideas

You would have to create the same L2 networks on the point side as what is needed on the portal side, enable the mesh into bridge mode AS WELL AS THE RAP on the point side to allow split tunneling (tunnel VLAN 1, bridge everything else). Then RAP traffic would bridge out of the RAP on the mesh point side into VLAN X/Y/Z, then get carried over tagged in VLAN X/Y/Z over the mesh link to the portal side. This requires you to have L2 switches connected to the point and portal, native on VLAN 1 (or whatever your current mgmt network is for your APs), trunked to carry VLAN X/Y/Z

That might work, but it's a fairly complex config.

Yes thats a thought, or campus AP intead of rap ??

Why are you using a RAP now then? Campus AP will still have the same configuration issue, you would have to allow bridge mode for the CAP, which then removes some features (AppRF, etc). 

Not my choice, it doubles the AP count (licence wise)