Guest Mobility Anchor N+1 Redundancy Design

[roy.sam]

Anchor WLC redundancy is achieved through the mobility groups. For redundancy, we can increase the mobility group size, including additional controllers for redundancy.

Does N+1 redundancy works across different mobility groups (Anchor WLCs in different DMZ zones for different internet breakout points for Guest access)?

Does it supports pre-empt (preferred) action when the failed primary Anchor WLC recovers?

For WLC 4.1 version or later, mpings are used for keepalive packets between the foreign and anchor controllers. However, there is no setting to set the order of preferred Anchor controllers.

[Scott Fella]

You can have multiple anchor wlc in the DMZ. These will always have a different mobility group name than your foreign wlc's. There is no pre-empt in a multiple anchor wlc. I believe with 5.2 you can specify which anchor wlc you want traffic to go to, but then again, I don't like any of the 5.x code. With the 4.x and earlier versions of the 5.x code, the decision on where traffic will go to is calculated by the foreign wlc that has to anchor the trafic to one of the anchor wlc's in the DMZ. Local WLC uses these anchor wlc's in the order WLCs are configuredIs failover transparent to the user.... no. Since best practice is to make sure your dhcp scopes on the wlc do not overlap, users who is anchored to one that fails, will move to the other wlc. This usually will make the client renew its dhcp address.