07-24-2012 06:31 PM - edited 07-03-2021 10:27 PM
Hi There,
Planning to migrate existing WAPs (which models are supported in LW mode and by the controller, already checked), currently running in Autonomous mode.
My question is what will happen when I bring the WLC online in the same LAN as these existing WAPs, will they be affected in anyway, if as I said they are running in autonomous mode, i dont think so, but just double checking just in case?
The plan is to migrate them over without any down time.
Cheers,
egua5261
Solved! Go to Solution.
07-24-2012 06:38 PM
It is fine if the WLC is placed in the same subnet as the current access points.
Sent from Cisco Technical Support iPad App
07-24-2012 06:38 PM
It is fine if the WLC is placed in the same subnet as the current access points.
Sent from Cisco Technical Support iPad App
07-24-2012 06:41 PM
Just to add, the suggestion is no more than 60 access points in the same subnet as the WLC. This is a suggestion though as I have seen larger number with no issues. Also your current access point are connected to a switch with a trunk port? If the access point will be converted and configured in local mode, the port should be changed to an access port.
Sent from Cisco Technical Support iPad App
07-24-2012 08:57 PM
Hi Scott,
Thanks for your prompt response.
Indeed the existing WAPs are connected to switchports in trunk mode, as the need to run multiple VLAN ids on the WAPs. So when migrated, are you saying there wont be a need to configure multiple VLANs on the access points but in the WLC controller only?
Cheers,
egua5261
07-24-2012 09:01 PM
When an ap is in local mode, all traffic is tunneled back to the wlc. So the wlc will be connected to a trunk port only allowing whatever vlans have been defined on the wlc.
Sent from Cisco Technical Support iPhone App
07-24-2012 09:38 PM
What is local mode? is that equivalent to Light Weight mode?
07-25-2012 04:35 AM
Local mode is the default mode on most Cisco lightweight access points. The other used mode is h-reap which is now called FlexConnect.
Sent from Cisco Technical Support iPhone App
08-01-2012 12:51 AM
Hi Scott,
I've enabled connectivity between the controller and the neighboring switch (catalyst 4500 series) using etherchannel. Since I decided to enable LAG in the controller. I have assigned an IP to the management interface and a VLAN ID (15) since I decided to use a tagged VLAN for it.
What I'm getting is the switchport interface in the catalyst switch in a suspended state. Not too sure why? see the config below,
sh int gi7/46
GigabitEthernet7/46 is up, line protocol is down (suspended)
switch1#sh int gi7/46 status
Port Name Status Vlan Duplex Speed Type
Gi7/46 suspended 1 a-full a-1000 10/100/1000-TX
I created a port-channel interface and only one interface is currently bound and only one port is being used in the controller.
interface Port-channel7
switchport
switchport trunk encapsulation dot1q
switchport trunk allowed vlan 10-20
switchport mode trunk
end
interface GigabitEthernet7/46
channel-group 7 mode on
I have made sure the speed and duplex setting are the same in the controller's port and the switch port.
(Cisco Controller) >show port summary
STP Admin Physical Physical Link Link
Pr Type Stat Mode Mode Status Status Trap POE SFPType
-- ------- ---- ------- ---------- ---------- ------ ------- ------- ----------
1 Normal Forw Enable Auto 1000 Full Up Enable N/A 1000BaseTX
Hope you can point me in the right direction here,
Cheers,
egua5261
08-01-2012 01:11 AM
Hi
Please could you do the following:
1. Do a shut and not shut. If the etherchannel does not come, go to step 2
2. Manually set the speed and duplex of the gigabit interface to 1000 and full.
3. After setting the speed and duplex, do a SH and no SH.
08-01-2012 05:17 PM
Hi Osita,
I followed the steps you provided but it did not bring the interface UP.
It came up once I added the trunking configuration to the interface itself,
int gi7/46
switchport trunk encapsulation dot1q
switchport mode trunk
I was under the impression, etherchannel would do it automatically, as long as the config was added to the port-channel interface. But it did not happen in this switch.
Thanks,
egua5261.
08-02-2012 01:24 AM
Nice to know that the problem is solved. Always remember that the switch port is configured first and properly b4 setting up etherchannel. The etheris dependent on the switchport.
Cheers
Discover and save your favorite ideas. Come back to expert answers, step-by-step guides, recent topics, and more.
New here? Get started with these tips. How to use Community New member guide