cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

HA Configuration on C5210

HA Configuration on C5210

Casimiro
New Contributor II
In one installation we have a pair of C5210 in HA mode with fast failover enabled.

The network of registration of APs is 10.90.x.x in esa1 and the network HA is 1.1.1.x directly connected by esa3.

caf88a5629f94fcda47a7163f3cb2ec3_RackMultipart20170406-107092-1vsfe5u-HA-topologia2_inline.jpg



We note that in the configuration of APs these four interfaces appear as failover addresses:

caf88a5629f94fcda47a7163f3cb2ec3_RackMultipart20170406-45618-bko9ts-HA-ap-cfg_inline.jpg



And in the capture of the packets we noticed that there is an attempt to ping the four interfaces and, of course, without success in the interfaces of HA 1.1.1.x. And this occurs every 1 second.

caf88a5629f94fcda47a7163f3cb2ec3_RackMultipart20170406-81143-1dwsbrc-HA-dump-icmp_inline.jpg



Here's the questions: would these network configurations be incompatible with HA FastFailover and why do APs test connectivity with esa3?

Tks.
4 REPLIES 4

Craig_Guilmette
Extreme Employee
Hello
It is because you have ap Registration enabled on those 1.1.1.1 interfaces. The AP's are told of all interfaces with AP reg enabled and they try to reach them in case their primary interface fails. FYI we don't usually suggest using a separate interface for H/A.

Thanks, Craig.

We usually do yes to free the port to be used for other things, but your design is still valid, just not the norm....

Bingo, AP registration was enabled on the HA interfaces. I removed and corrected the information in the AP configuration:

# cat /home/config/current.cfg | grep "failoverIpAddr"
cset failoverIpAddr 1 10.90.0.1 Home
cset failoverIpAddr 1 10.90.0.2 Foreign

But then it is recommended to use the same AP registration interfaces as HA interfaces, in this case to esa1?

GTM-P2G8KFN