HREAP vs AP local mode

Answered Question
Jan 19th, 2009

Hello,

Could someone explain the advantages or differences in using HREAP (when the traffic is centrally switched), to just using the APs in local mode with a centralized WLC?

Scenario- 1 HQ and several branch offices. All resources are at the HQ including DHCP and internet break-out.

Thanks

I have this problem too.
0 votes
Correct Answer by Scott Fella about 8 years 5 days ago

In local mode, all traffic will get tunneled back to the wlc. Also in local mode constanc communication is required from AP to the WLC. In h-reap, you can still have some ssid's locally switched and some that are centrally switched. In most of my installs, clients that have high bandwidth WAN like a gig, have no issues with bandwidth. So the answer is yes... there is more traffic in local mode than in h-reap (locally or centrally switched).

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Overall Rating: 4.5 (2 ratings)
Loading.
andrew-mccabe Mon, 01/19/2009 - 05:46

It allows for central management of access points in remote offices (seperate subnets). I employ the same service and is very good for monitoring purposes.

Employing a seperate WLC may not be feasible in remote offices so this is a great way of centralising AP managment.

But, this does depend on the type of encryption you use as AP's in HREAP mode only support certain encryption when in standalone mode.

jcetkoooo Mon, 01/19/2009 - 06:12

Thanks Andrew,

Do I need to use HREAP or can I just leave the APs in local mode and connect them over the WAN to the centralized controllers? Then use AP Grouping to seperate the different subnets.

I don't really have any use for the APs when they are in standalone mode because all of the resources that wireless clients will use are in the location of the centralized controllers.

thanks,

Justin

Scott Fella Mon, 01/19/2009 - 19:55

Well it depends if the lwapp traffic takes up too much of your WAN bandwidth. If not, then run local.... I have clients that have gig connections to their branch offices that run every ap in local mode. I also have clients that run the branch office ap's in h-reap due to bandwidth constraints. Even though traffic will end up back in the central site doesn't mean you can't run the ap's in h-reap. The good thing with h-reap is that if the wlc becomes unreachable for some reason, the ap's will still be up and running. Encryption that can be run in local mode can still be ran in h-reap. The senerio that is in alot of docs is that if your wan goes down, users who need to authenticate back to a radius server in the central site will fail.... that is because the wan is down. Again, you can run locally first and see how that works.

jcetkoooo Wed, 01/21/2009 - 07:27

Thanks Fella,

One more question.

Will I be using more WAN bandwidth in local mode than with HREAP mode centrally switched?

Correct Answer
Scott Fella Wed, 01/21/2009 - 07:34

In local mode, all traffic will get tunneled back to the wlc. Also in local mode constanc communication is required from AP to the WLC. In h-reap, you can still have some ssid's locally switched and some that are centrally switched. In most of my installs, clients that have high bandwidth WAN like a gig, have no issues with bandwidth. So the answer is yes... there is more traffic in local mode than in h-reap (locally or centrally switched).

Scott Fella Wed, 01/21/2009 - 07:58

No problem.. agian.... if you run h-reap centrally switched monitor your bandwidth. There is no reason why you can just do locally switched and just have the traffic route back centrally... save more bandwidth.

andrew-mccabe Thu, 01/22/2009 - 07:29

Locally switched would make more sense as the control and wireless planes are split. If the WAN link goes down then they can still run, its just the control process will be down.

Actions

This Discussion

 

 

Trending Topics: Other Wireless Mobility

client could not be authenticated
Network Analysis Module (NAM) Products
Cisco 6500 nam
reason 440 driver failure
Cisco password cracker
Cisco Wireless mode