Is it recommended to use the management port on C5210 wireless controller

  • 0
  • 1
  • Question
  • Updated 1 year ago
  • Answered
We are upgrading from a pair of C4110 wireless controllers to a pair of C5210 controllers. With the C4110 it was recommended to not use the management port to manage the controller but to use 1 of the interfaces. This recommendation goes years back. I was wondering if this is still best practice and applies to the C5210 controllers
Photo of Chris Taylor

Chris Taylor

  • 796 Points 500 badge 2x thumb

Posted 1 year ago

  • 0
  • 1
Photo of Ronald Dvorak

Ronald Dvorak, Embassador

  • 45,306 Points 20k badge 2x thumb
Yes it's the same = don't use it.
Photo of Steve Ballantyne

Steve Ballantyne

  • 5,566 Points 5k badge 2x thumb
I can speak from experience. After wasting a lot of time with a lot of people, I have learned this lesson. Don't use it!  :-)
Photo of Patrick Koppen

Patrick Koppen

  • 750 Points 500 badge 2x thumb
You configure a default route with the esa/data-topologies and a default gateway in the admin/mgmt
topology. But you have only one Linux. Yes, it might work.

If you don't how linux with multiple routing tables and routing rules works:

  Dont' use it!

For the others:
root@ewc41:~# ip route show table all | grep 254
default via 192.168.10.254 dev eth0  table mgmt
default via 10.0.40.254 dev csi1  proto zebra

root@ewc41:~# ip rule show
0:      from all lookup local
32765:  from 192.168.10.1 lookup mgmt
32766:  from all lookup main
32767:  from all lookup default


Edit: removed some <pre>
(Edited)