First of all, lets look at your whole solution. The 2125 is probably not the best solution for you here. The 2125 is not really an enterprise grade controller from a throughput, resources (memory and cpu), or powering standpoint. I have deployed more 2112 and 2125s (over 250) than any other partner Cisco has to date. We use these controllers within a very strict criteria. We size our deployments based on the following unpublished guidelines.
• Customer add a WLC-4404-100 at the corporate data center to control auto-RF settings for channel, power, and load balancing control at sites of less than 3 access points which will run in REAP/HREAP modes with local switching.
• Customer add a Cisco WLC 2106 at sites of 3-6 access points. This is done to reduce WAN traffic.
• Customer add a Cisco WLC 2112 to sites with 7-12 APs and less than 20 client devices. This is a more affordable solution than a 4400 but only provides 100mb of aggregate throughput.
• Customer add a Cisco WLC 2125 to sites with 12-25 APs and less than 20 client devices. This is a more affordable solution than a 4400 but only provides 100mb of aggregate throughput.
• Customer add a Cisco WLC 4400 series controller to all locations of 7-100 APs where more than 20 client devices will exist. This maintains local switching of wireless traffic and reduces loads on the WAN.
• Customer add a Cisco WLC 4402-12 as a Guest Access Mobility Anchor when needed. (2100 series WLCs are not supported)
• Customer install a WCS Server at the corporate data center for centralized management of all controller, access points, and WLANs within the Customer enterprise wireless network.
To answer your questions, yes you can use the PoE switch ports but it takes a great deal of configuration and the unit already has temperature issues. Adding PoE would add an additional themal load on the device and cause subsequent hardware failure so NO I would not use it in this case. I would use a 4402-25 with 2mb of aggregation via LAG on the two sfp ports.
