Our outdoor 1510 APs are currently a bit too far apart in some cases. Although I am currently planning fill-in nodes, I want to get something working on these nodes that are too far to mesh on 5.8.
I have enabled secondary backhaul on the system, and was expecting performance similar to what I am used to on other mesh systems that mesh on 2.4. However I saw no improvement at all. I can't even find any statistics on the usage (if any) of 2.4. At the moment, I am pretty disappointed.
It is almost like the feature doesn't work. I'm on 220.127.116.11 and am just a bit reluctant to switch to the mesh-only firmware until I hear some reports from actual users.
Does this feature even work? Is there anything else I must do besides turn on the feature from the CLI?
show mesh secbh-stats Will show you if the seconday is being used
I'm not sure if the first two are either/or though, and also what the second one actually does.
They also told me that RRM has to be disabled and the two radios have to be on the same B channel. That's a lot of management to have to do. I would have expected the B channels to listen ank know who and where their neighbors are and be able to handle this. If this is the case, I sure hope improvements are in the offing!
I'll try to get the config posted, but in the meantiime please let me know any insight you have on getting it TO work. The person I spoke with at TAC had never actually talked to anyone with it working.
Hi MH and thanks for the pointer to that Document.
It was about time I updayed y'all on this issue anyway, so here goes.
The feature does work now, although it didn't work until mesh release #2, as far as I can tell. Once I upgraded to that release, my WCS alarms started showing activity on the secondary backhaul. As a matter of fact- I currently see over 40,000 events of the use of secondary backhaul.
I found out a couple of weeks ago from some Cisco folks when I was out in SanJose that the feature switched on to the secondary backhaul almost on a per packet basis. Although it works for routing around interference, that is useless for what I wanted. If you recall,
I was wanting to permanantly use the 2.4 as backhaul in certain areas- essentially converting the radio to work like a 1505 (or a Tropos 5210).
Looks like that can't happen, but the Cisco folks listened and said they will consider it in the future.