Matt, Perhaps obvious reminder: 7.6 gives you AP and client SSO. 7.4 only gives you AP failover. Client SSO is a thing of beauty: We see perhaps 1-2 lost client pings during the fail over. Not that there should ever be failovers, right?
I would definitely recommend the 7.6.120.6 engineering version which fixes some major crash issues that Curtis and others have alluded to. Are you going to do 1:1 to different locations for site redundancy? Several of us do HA / 1:1 to different chassis (non-VSS). Kitri -- University of Oregon On 7/18/14, 7:58 AM, Hector J Rios wrote: > > Matt, > > > > We have been running N+1 for quite a while and never had any major > issues. In our configuration we had three wireless core locations were > only two of those had enough HAs to back up an entire core site. But > this summer we are moving to AP and Client SSO for true high > availability. N+1 was fine in the past when wireless was not > considered mission critical, but today more and more students and > professors are relying on wireless and we must have a solution that > will have the least impact. SSO promises that. We are running 7.6 > > > > Thanks, > > > > Hector Rios > > Louisiana State University > > > > > > > > > > *From:* The EDUCAUSE Wireless Issues Constituent Group Listserv > [mailto:WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU] *On Behalf Of *Ashfield, > Matt (NBCC) > *Sent:* Thursday, July 17, 2014 7:21 PM > *To:* WIRELESS-LAN@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU > *Subject:* [WIRELESS-LAN] High Availability for 2+1 scenario with > Cisco WLCs > > > > Hello > > > > Up until now, we have had a very distributed approach to our > controllers, with no redundancy. We are centralizing our controllers > with the idea of having at least 2 5508 WLCs and one High Availability > 5508. When we were working with a consultant today, he indicated that > his experience in using an HA controller to act as HA for more than > one 5508 did not yield good results. He recommended using a 1:1 > relationship for controller and HA controller. He did state however > this was with 7.4.x code and he hadn't tried it with newer levels of code. > > > I thought I'd check here if anyone has had similar experiences and/or > comments about their experience in the N+1 scenario, and if they say > improvements or lack of issues with 7.6 code. > > > > Any help/advice is appreciated. > > > > Thanks > > > > > > > > Matt > > > > ********** Participation and subscription information for this > EDUCAUSE Constituent Group discussion list can be found at > http://www.educause.edu/groups/. > > ********** Participation and subscription information for this > EDUCAUSE Constituent Group discussion list can be found at > http://www.educause.edu/groups/. > ********** Participation and subscription information for this EDUCAUSE Constituent Group discussion list can be found at http://www.educause.edu/groups/.
