Hi, I have a mesh network with Cisco 1510, and a Cisco Controller 4400 with 22.214.171.124. I am planing to upgrade to 126.96.36.199 to use the mesh secondary-backhaul command. I want to know if anyone of you guys have used it before.
Can I disable in the controller the 802.11a interface to reroute all my traffic to the 802.11b interface? Can the mesh network be recreated using the 802.11b/g interface?
In theory this could be done but bear in mind the performance consequences of doing it. Your usable throughput would drop significantly as all traffic would be on the b/g radio. This would only happen in the event of failure to the .11a network. As it will be supported in later releases it is intended to support the multiple radio (4)feature of the 1524.
Oh and one other thing. Move to the MESH release of 188.8.131.52. This is the mesh only code and supports MESH Aps only but has a lot of new features just for the MESH space. See the attached release note.
I installed the new firmware 184.108.40.206 and configured the secondary mesh backhaul, but when I disable the 5Ghz interface in the controller, I was expecting the connection from the APs use the 2.4Ghz interface, but never happened.
What I saw when you have both interfaces working, is that the traffic sometimes is transmitted using the two ways (5Ghz and 2.4Ghz).
Has anybody had a different experience regarding secondary backhaul?
Do you have other indoor APs? If not, move to the MESH code, 220.127.116.11. This is the MESH only code and supports the new MESH features. the 185 code is the last rev of the unified code. It doesn't have all of the support for the new MESH features.
I am adding some information about my problem as well. I am having the same issue. Well sort of. I don't believe I have ever seen any traffic on the secondary backhaul. I nave nodes that are not within 5.8 range of each other, but can see each other on 2.4 and I would expect traffic to pass there. This is 18.104.22.168
I was thinking of going on ahead to the mesh firmware- especially if I can find out if there is an issue with this feature on 185.
Anything you foks post to help Cesar will help me as well.
Cesar- what report are you running or what statistic are you viewing to see the 2.4 traffic that *is* taking place? Did you do anything else to enable this, other than the secondary backhaul command on the CLI?