<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:taxo="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/taxonomy/" version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>topic Thanks for the quick response in Wireless</title>
    <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/wireless/guest-anchor-redundancy/m-p/2533770#M164901</link>
    <description>&lt;P&gt;Thanks for the quick response, I suspected active/passive wasn't an option.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I'll have to have a think if there is a simple way to tunnel the internet bound traffic from the backup guest DMZ across the WAN to the primary one.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Mon, 21 Jul 2014 14:47:44 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>jeremy.t</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2014-07-21T14:47:44Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>Guest Anchor redundancy</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/wireless/guest-anchor-redundancy/m-p/2533768#M164899</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;I have working two 5508 Guest Anchors running active/active, both are in the same location. I'd like to split them into two locations for resilience and have them ideally active/passive so the internet circuit at the backup location is only used if the primary was down. Is this possible?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;If it is not possible to be active/passive is it ok to have them active/active but in separate locations?&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 05 Jul 2021 08:15:49 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/wireless/guest-anchor-redundancy/m-p/2533768#M164899</guid>
      <dc:creator>jeremy.t</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2021-07-05T08:15:49Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>you can only go active/active</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/wireless/guest-anchor-redundancy/m-p/2533769#M164900</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;you can only go active/active. The internal WLC will load balance the users between the two anchors.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;As for where they are geographically, it won't matter so long as the EOIP and Mobility tunnels can establish.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;HTH,&lt;BR /&gt;Steve&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 21 Jul 2014 14:39:19 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/wireless/guest-anchor-redundancy/m-p/2533769#M164900</guid>
      <dc:creator>Stephen Rodriguez</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2014-07-21T14:39:19Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Thanks for the quick response</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/wireless/guest-anchor-redundancy/m-p/2533770#M164901</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Thanks for the quick response, I suspected active/passive wasn't an option.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I'll have to have a think if there is a simple way to tunnel the internet bound traffic from the backup guest DMZ across the WAN to the primary one.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 21 Jul 2014 14:47:44 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/wireless/guest-anchor-redundancy/m-p/2533770#M164901</guid>
      <dc:creator>jeremy.t</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2014-07-21T14:47:44Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title> The foreign controller</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/wireless/guest-anchor-redundancy/m-p/2533771#M164902</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;The foreign controller (internal) will round robin these connections. If you tie 2 or more controllers to the WLAN the foreign drops them into the mobility controllers. I know I asked, and other have, about a active passive solution. But to date not an option. I had one customer actually do a SHUT to the back up controller and then would do a no shut incase the primary ever died.&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 22 Jul 2014 16:12:20 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/wireless/guest-anchor-redundancy/m-p/2533771#M164902</guid>
      <dc:creator>George Stefanick</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2014-07-22T16:12:20Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

