[c-nsp] Cisco WCL- 4402 - Max AP & LAG

[Tor-Ivar Kristoffersen]

Hi all

Partially correct :)

The thing you are reffering to is a statement in the docs that states that in order to utilize 50 ap'on the 4402 you need to connect both interfaces. The maximum number of access points that is allowed on a single port on the 4402 is 48


Best regards
Tor-Ivar Kristoffersen



-----Opprinnelig melding-----
Fra: cisco-nsp-bounces at puck.nether.net [mailto:cisco-nsp-bounces at puck.nether.net] På vegne av Jeff Cartier
Sendt: 21. mai 2008 20:27
Til: Higham, Josh; cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
Emne: Re: [c-nsp] Cisco WCL- 4402 - Max AP & LAG

Thanks for the reply Josh!

I understand your statement below, and I agree with it 100% with the
understanding that your referencing a scenario with a 4404.
Unfortunately our customer has purchased a 4402...

-----Original Message-----
From: Higham, Josh [mailto:jhigham at epri.com]
Sent: Wednesday, May 21, 2008 2:26 PM
To: Jeff Cartier; cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
Subject: RE: [c-nsp] Cisco WCL- 4402 - Max AP & LAG

> [mailto:cisco-nsp-bounces at puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Jeff Cartier
> Sent: Wednesday, May 21, 2008 11:08 AM
> To: cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
> Subject: [c-nsp] Cisco WCL- 4402 - Max AP & LAG
>
> I've heard somewhere...and possibly read somewhere that in
> order to get
> the full 50 AP allotment out of a Cisco Wireless LAN Controller 4402
> model, 50 AP, you have to Port-Channel/LAG the two Gigabit ports
> together.

Not correct, to my knowledge.  We have the 4404 100 AP units and none of
our channels are bonded.

During the AP discovery process the controller assigns the AP to a given
port to maintain distribution, so I can't see any reason why it would be
necessary to have them bonded.

Thanks,
Josh

_______________________________________________
cisco-nsp mailing list  cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/