<?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 Mobility group membership in Wireless</title>
    <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/wireless/mobility-group-membership/m-p/749068#M37210</link>
    <description>&lt;P&gt;I have 4 WLC's deployed :&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;1. AnchorWLC - WLC4402 anchor in a DMZ for guest access&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;2. WLCA1 - WLC4402 on SiteA&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;3. WLCB1 - WLC2006 on SiteB&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;4. WLCB2 - WLC2006 on SiteB&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;SiteA &amp;amp; SiteB are geographically separated.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;On all WLC's there is the same mobility group 'group1' with the following group members:&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;1.on AnchorWLC: group1 members:WLCA1,WLCB1,WLCB2&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;2.on WLCA1: group1 members: anchorWLC&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;3.on WLCB1: group1 members: WLCB2,anchorWLC&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;4.on WLCB2: group1 members:WLCB1,anchorWLC&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;As SiteA and SiteB are geographically separated I have not included internal(non-anchor) WLC's that are on siteA in the mobility group created on WLC's on SiteB and vice versa . The only WLC that has all controllers added to his mobility group is the AnchorWLC as guest access is needed from both siteA and siteB.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Is this a valid config(anayway it is working...) or is it recommended to have 2 different mobility groups, one for each site(A &amp;amp; B) and create 2 seperate mobility groups on the anchorWLC ?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Sat, 03 Jul 2021 21:14:26 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>lldemeyer</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2021-07-03T21:14:26Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>Mobility group membership</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/wireless/mobility-group-membership/m-p/749068#M37210</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;I have 4 WLC's deployed :&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;1. AnchorWLC - WLC4402 anchor in a DMZ for guest access&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;2. WLCA1 - WLC4402 on SiteA&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;3. WLCB1 - WLC2006 on SiteB&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;4. WLCB2 - WLC2006 on SiteB&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;SiteA &amp;amp; SiteB are geographically separated.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;On all WLC's there is the same mobility group 'group1' with the following group members:&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;1.on AnchorWLC: group1 members:WLCA1,WLCB1,WLCB2&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;2.on WLCA1: group1 members: anchorWLC&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;3.on WLCB1: group1 members: WLCB2,anchorWLC&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;4.on WLCB2: group1 members:WLCB1,anchorWLC&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;As SiteA and SiteB are geographically separated I have not included internal(non-anchor) WLC's that are on siteA in the mobility group created on WLC's on SiteB and vice versa . The only WLC that has all controllers added to his mobility group is the AnchorWLC as guest access is needed from both siteA and siteB.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Is this a valid config(anayway it is working...) or is it recommended to have 2 different mobility groups, one for each site(A &amp;amp; B) and create 2 seperate mobility groups on the anchorWLC ?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Sat, 03 Jul 2021 21:14:26 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/wireless/mobility-group-membership/m-p/749068#M37210</guid>
      <dc:creator>lldemeyer</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2021-07-03T21:14:26Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Mobility group membership</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/wireless/mobility-group-membership/m-p/749069#M37211</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;I would recommend going for two separate mobility groups. Even though it is working since it is geographically separated, its always better to have different mobility groups.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 27 Jun 2007 12:40:36 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/wireless/mobility-group-membership/m-p/749069#M37211</guid>
      <dc:creator>smahbub</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2007-06-27T12:40:36Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

