topic Is it recommended to use the management port on C5210 wireless controller in ExtremeWireless (Identifi)

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

Christopher_Tay — Tue, 21 Mar 2017 21:28:00 GMT

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

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

Ronald_Dvorak — Tue, 21 Mar 2017 21:29:00 GMT

Yes it's the same = don't use it.

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

Steve_Ballantyn — Tue, 21 Mar 2017 21:29:00 GMT

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! 

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

Patrick_Koppen — Wed, 22 Mar 2017 01:58:00 GMT

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