<html><head><style type='text/css'>p { margin: 0; }</style></head><body><div style='font-family: Verdana; font-size: 10pt; color: #000000'>We do something similar on our wireless network, granted, without voice so far.<br><br>One of the biggest advantages of having all hosts on the same subnet is roaming. Roaming across subnets begins to introduce some difficulty and complexity. <br><br><br><span><br><span name="x"></span>---<br>Lelio Fulgenzi, B.A.<br>Senior Analyst (CCS) * University of Guelph * Guelph, Ontario N1G 2W1<br>(519) 824-4120 x56354 (519) 767-1060 FAX (JNHN)<br>^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^<br>Cooking with unix is easy. You just sed it and forget it. <br> - LFJ (with apologies to Mr. Popeil)<br><span name="x"></span><br></span><br><hr id="zwchr"><b>From: </b>"Mike King" <me@mpking.com><br><b>To: </b>"cisco-voip (cisco-voip@puck.nether.net)" <cisco-voip@puck.nether.net><br><b>Sent: </b>Wednesday, October 13, 2010 2:06:47 PM<br><b>Subject: </b>Re: [cisco-voip] 7925s across campus<br><br>Hey Jason.<br><br>The VLAN would be terminated on the Wireless LAN controller, so<br>technically the VLAN would not be across multiple buildings. (The AP's<br>take care of getting the traffic back to the WLAN controller)<br><br>The WLAN controller also does broadcast filtering, which would<br>alleviate the issue with having all those clients in a /16.<br><br>I can take a stab at the reasons they want them in the same Subnet.<br>A. They don't want to make more than 1 subnet for ease of ACL<br>B. They most likely want to use the PTT (Push to talk) button as a<br>walkie talkie/Nextel type service. The PTT requires multicast. They<br>might be mistakenly thinking that by being in the same subnet, they<br>won't have to enable multicast on the wireless LAN.<br><br><br>To throw some general advise, remember to disable ALL client load<br>balancing features on the WLAN controllers, as they will degrade<br>performance horribly. Also remember to turn Peer to Peer Blocking off,<br>as it will prevent phone calls to each other.<br><br>I'm in contact with several large colleges, and they routinely run /16<br>on they're wireless LAN. They haven't run into any specific issues<br>with Subnets being that large. Personally, I think it might be a<br>little more sane to break it up into something smaller.<br><br>Mike<br><br><br>On Wed, Oct 13, 2010 at 1:04 PM, Jason Aarons (US)<br><jason.aarons@us.didata.com> wrote:<br>> Customer is looking at about 800 7925s across a campus, they mentioned<br>> having a single 7925 voice vlan (10.x.x.x/16) across all Wireless LAN<br>> Controllers (4400s) for the whole campus for these 7925s. This doesn’t<br>> sound good having all 7925s on same subnet across multiple buildings.<br>><br>><br>><br>> What are others doing as the Enterprise Mobility Guide 4.1 doesn’t give much<br>> thought.<br>><br>> ________________________________<br>><br>> Disclaimer: This e-mail communication and any attachments may contain<br>> confidential and privileged information and is for use by the designated<br>> addressee(s) named above only. If you are not the intended addressee, you<br>> are hereby notified that you have received this communication in error and<br>> that any use or reproduction of this email or its contents is strictly<br>> prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received this communication in<br>> error, please notify us immediately by replying to this message and deleting<br>> it from your computer. Thank you.<br>><br>> _______________________________________________<br>> cisco-voip mailing list<br>> cisco-voip@puck.nether.net<br>> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip<br>><br>><br><br>_______________________________________________<br>cisco-voip mailing list<br>cisco-voip@puck.nether.net<br>https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip<br></div></body></html>