Eap225v3 OC200 mesh with wired backhaul
I have 3x EAP225 v3 with multiple SSIDs on 2 different VLANs, thinking about adding an OC200 to support mesh (objective: fast roaming and band steering) All EAPs are connected to a POE smart switch - which is connected to a VLAN-capable router.
The OC200 manual assumes the EAPs are connected with one "Root" EAP wired, and the others "Meshed" using wireless backhaul.
What is the proper way to set this up with all the EAPs wired? With other hardware I am aware of, the mesh APs would need to be "downstream" of the device running as controller, with spanning tree protocol turned off on that portion of the network, for example.
Step-by-step instrunctions -- added to the OC200 manual -- would be real handy.
Thanks for your help.
- Copy Link
- Subscribe
- Bookmark
- Report Inappropriate Content
@SpeedyMe, a mesh can have any number of root nodes, but I wonder why you would want to use a mesh nework anyway?
Basic roaming, seamless roaming and band steering do not depend on setting up a mesh network.
You can use the former features with any network topology, even with wired-only EAPs.
For basic roaming you just need to use the same ESSID and wireless settings (mode, encryption etc.). In addition, for seamless roaming you need a controller.
- Copy Link
- Report Inappropriate Content
@SpeedyMe, a mesh can have any number of root nodes, but I wonder why you would want to use a mesh nework anyway?
Basic roaming, seamless roaming and band steering do not depend on setting up a mesh network.
You can use the former features with any network topology, even with wired-only EAPs.
For basic roaming you just need to use the same ESSID and wireless settings (mode, encryption etc.). In addition, for seamless roaming you need a controller.
- Copy Link
- Report Inappropriate Content
@R1D2 Thank you. Sounds like I do not need a mesh for my wired APs. The objective was just to enhance roaming between my APs (not that I have a problem, just a retired guy tinkering at home).
- Copy Link
- Report Inappropriate Content
Hi SpeedyMe, you're welcome anytime.
A mesh network is useful if a cable connection to the EAP isn't possible. The advantage of meshing is to save a cable for easy deployment of an EAP, but the dis-advantage is that a mesh network will be able to serve only the same number of client devices a single EAP of this mesh does. If you ask me, cabling is the preferred method to connect EAPs to an existing network.
You even don't need a controller for basic roaming: just set all three EAPs to the same SSID, same WiFi security, same WiFi modes. Only »seamless« (fast) roaming needs a controller. Seamless roaming avoids the scanning for nearby SSIDs on a client when roaming. In seamless roaming mode, the controller will send a list of suitable nearby EAPs to the client which than can connect faster. Note that this particular mode (802.11k/v) for seamless roaming requires the client to support this mode, too.
But an OC200 controller can be useful anyway: you define all settings only once and they get applied to all your three EAPs automatically.
The controller offers more functions compared to an EAP in stand-alone mode. You could also install the software controller version on your PC to test it before considering to buy an OC200 or as a permanent replacement for an OC200.
Happy tinkering at home! ;-)
- Copy Link
- Report Inappropriate Content
The OC200 is really nice for management and works well with the Omada Cloud and Omada App (I use iOS) functionality. I've had TP-LINK EAP's for my home for several years now (before the OC200).
Honestly, my experience is that roaming works really well on these AP's (even without the controller) when they are configured using the same SSID and encryption/security/password info (as others have said).
Since acquiring the OC200 about a year ago, I've enable "FAST ROAMING" using the controller but honestlyI don't really notice much (if any) difference.
-Jonathan
- Copy Link
- Report Inappropriate Content
- Copy Link
- Report Inappropriate Content
Information
Helpful: 0
Views: 4452
Replies: 5
Voters 0
No one has voted for it yet.