Extreme Campus Controller

 Wi-Fi controller redundancy, HA vs. primary, secondary

Jump to Best Answer
tfsnetman's profile image
tfsnetman posted 07-28-2021 03:05


We are considering an Extreme wireless solution consisting of 2 x VE6120 ECC VMs set up redundantly.


  • 2 sites with equal number of APs and clients approx. 1km apart
  • 250 APs total
  • 2000 clients total - staff crossing sites
  • sufficient redundancy and bandwidth (dark fibre, multiple 10G links)

Based on our scenario what would be your recommendation and why:

  • HA pair (active/passive)
  • DHCP options specifying primary and secondary controller
  • other?

While an HA active / passive setup seems to be recommended by Extreme
I am not convinced it’s a good idea having all control traffic going to the active unit which requires both units to be sized for 250+AP, etc..


Thank you,


Miguel-Angel RODRIGUEZ-GARCIA's profile image

Hi Klaus,

Here some answers:

  • In active active you don’t control the hosting of the APs by an XCC. In Active-Passive you can play with this to force a precedence:

  • Both units should be sized to be able to host all the APs in case of fail-over (upgrades, reboots, etc)

In your case (I used this also) I would configure two sites. Each site config having a preferred connection to the XCC on the same site (Active-Passive mode):





tfsnetman's profile image

Thank you Mig

and apologies for being late with this.

Cheers, Klaus