9136 AP support on 5520 WLC

[andrewcisco1]

While I've read the list of supported WLCs for the 9136 AP and it does say it only works with the 9800 WLCs, I was surprised to see the 5520 doesn't offer support for this, given it's still a supported model.   Does anyone have any insight into this?

We've a customer who's looking to replace their old APs with 9136, but won't be replacing their 5520 WLCs for another few years (budget wouldn't stretch to replacing both in 1 year).  Suspect this would be a deal breaker for them.

[Kasun Bandara]

@andrewcisco1 correct as per the matrix, 9136 only supports 9800 WLC. it does not support 5530.

https://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/td/docs/wireless/compatibility/matrix/compatibility-matrix.html#cisco-catalyst-9800-series-wireless-controller-matrix

[andrewcisco1]

Thnaks though like I'd said, i had read that   My question was more, will it be added, or is there some other workaround to make this work?  For Cisco to expect a customer to replace their entire wireless estate all at once is both unfeasible financially as it is practically.  I'd be staggered if Cisco was actually suggesting this.

[eglinsky2012 · Accepted solution]

AireOS, which 5520s run, is itself end of software support, so there will be no APs added to that product line:

https://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/products/collateral/wireless/8500-series-wireless-controllers/wireless-software-8-10-pb.html

Notice the January 2023 end of software maintenance support on the 5520 itself:

https://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/products/collateral/wireless/5520-wireless-controller/eos-eol-notice-c51-744430.html

This is typical of Cisco, even when just replacing APs. When 9130 APs were out and we were replacing 3500s and 3600s, we had to upgrade AireOS code to 8.10 to support the 9130s, but the old APs were limited to 8.5, so we kept buying 2800s, which results in a shorter service life for those APs. Good for Cisco, bad for me. While hardware is still in support, software goes out of support, making it difficult for old and new to coexist.

On 9800, x700 series APs and 916x APs can coexist on version 17.9.3 and above, thankfully. But, I’m told IOS-XE releases after x700 series is end of hardware support this April will drop support (so 17.9.5 will probably be the last). I feel that’s reasonable and hope that’s how it’s done in the future for the x800 series and beyond.

[andrewcisco1]

Thanks, yeah, I had a feeling this would be the case.  Stunned at Cisco's attitude, this customer refuses to buy 2802 just to add a few extra APs, and I don't blame them.  Thier budget is always tight so they can't waste money.

If you can just start buying the newer APs and have them on your existing controller, then in time you're going to buy the newer controller to keep using your existing APs.  Instead this customer will likely look elsewhere as they've nothing left which will be in support in 2 year's time.  You know where this all leads, though it takes a few years to filter though.


Thanks as always for your help everyone.

[eglinsky2012]

If your customer has all 2802s currently, it's best practice to keep the same model in a given building, or at least within a floor of a building. 2802s are going for around $20 on eBay, so buying a few of those would keep them going until all the APs and controller get replaced. Just make sure there are enough licenses on the controller for the added APs.

Be prepared for pricing shock when it comes to DNA licensing on the newer APs. A DNA license necessary for APs on the 9800 controllers even if you don't have/use DNA. If you purchase a term (say 3-year) DNA license, it comes with a perpetual "network stack" license that gets added to your Smart Account. That allows you to use 1 AP on a 9800 controller without DNAC (called Catalyst Center now) perpetually. You just have to buy that license initially to get that perpetual license. My sales team was insistent that a DNA subscription must be maintained even if not using DNA, but thanks to a discussion on this forum, I realized that that's not the case, which they and TAC later confirmed.

An enterprise agreement would save money per AP per year if you do choose to use DNA and maintain subscriptions, but I'm not sure if there's a minimum AP count for that, and it locks you in to paying for at least x amount of APs for x amount of years.

Your Cisco account rep will best be able to explain how all that works and what the options are. 

My point in bringing this up is that you may want to get that information sooner than later so your customer can plan ahead or look at other vendors. It's not just cost of hardware and SmartNet anymore.

[Leo Laohoo]

---

@andrewcisco1 wrote:
Stunned at Cisco's attitude, this customer refuses to buy 2802 just to add a few extra APs, and I don't blame them.  Thier budget is always tight so they can't waste money.

---

Unfortunately, aside from planned or accelerated obsolescence, things are just going to get worse in the future because Cisco conducts "price adjustments" every 6 months.  

And to make matters more difficult for the consumers, any new Cisco products equates to more expensive prices.  (When the 3500, 3600 and 3700 were rolled out, Cisco made the prices for all three generations of APs to be the same.)

And price increases is the only thing "consistent" with Cisco right now.  

How many APs does the customer have?  Personally, if the customer is unable to part with the 5520, I'd seriously consider buying 2600/3600 (if the controller is on 8.5.X.X).  Why 2600/3600 instead of 2700/3700 or 2800/3800?  I would never recommend anyone use 2800/3800/4800/1560/IW6300 because there is a hardware design fault in them.  From time to time, the 2800/3800/4800/1560/IW6300 would drop traffic.  Firmware upgrade is not going to help because Cisco has been unable to fix this bug (or workaround) for more than 5 years.  The only known "workaround" to work is regularly (and constantly) rebooting the infernal 2800/3800/4800/1560/IW6300.  

Next, why not 2700/3700?  Because the 2700/3700 suffers from another design fault with the 5.0 Ghz radio where it completely fails after several years of operation.  I have, so far, RMAed more than 40 x 3700 with dead 5.0 Ghz.  I have a few more and I will be RMAing them until End of Support date.  

But why 2600/3600?  Because 3500 and 2600/3600 can be supported on 8.5.X.X and the firmware and hardware are rock solid.  I rarely RMA 3500 and 2600/3600 (which I still have some in the network).  The 8540 on 8.5.X.X have an uptime of >5 years in a hospital and the OS and the APs have been operating without any fails or issues.  

[Rich R]

> If you can just start buying the newer APs and have them on your existing controller, then in time you're going to buy the newer controller to keep using your existing APs.
To be fair to Cisco - that is exactly what they did for the WiFi 6 APs a few years ago.  You're just very late to the party.  But 9136 came much later and therefore was not added on AireOS platforms.  The customer's failure to plan based on Cisco EOL policy and announcements (which have been out for ages) is not Cisco's fault.  They have to draw a line somewhere.

> so 17.9.5 will probably be the last)
Yes expect 17.9.5 and 17.12.2 to be the last releases to support x700 APs.