cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

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

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

tfsnetman
Contributor

Hello,

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

Scenario:

  • 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,

Klaus

1 ACCEPTED SOLUTION

Miguel-Angel_RO
Valued Contributor II

Hi Klaus,

Here some answers:

  • 26474b10346f40418e5b372f6ced5735_e74038f3-3c6a-4f74-a056-216f18293e15.png

    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:

  • 26474b10346f40418e5b372f6ced5735_a72fd33a-9258-48b1-8635-59d90252869f.png

    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):

26474b10346f40418e5b372f6ced5735_5a6c39ba-cd0a-44b8-a994-371068226a0f.png

 

Regards

 

Mig

View solution in original post

2 REPLIES 2

tfsnetman
Contributor

Thank you Mig

and apologies for being late with this.

Cheers, Klaus

Miguel-Angel_RO
Valued Contributor II

Hi Klaus,

Here some answers:

  • 26474b10346f40418e5b372f6ced5735_e74038f3-3c6a-4f74-a056-216f18293e15.png

    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:

  • 26474b10346f40418e5b372f6ced5735_a72fd33a-9258-48b1-8635-59d90252869f.png

    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):

26474b10346f40418e5b372f6ced5735_5a6c39ba-cd0a-44b8-a994-371068226a0f.png

 

Regards

 

Mig

GTM-P2G8KFN