Is their a way to judge OC200's current load and additional AP handling capacity
Is their a way to judge OC200's current load and additional AP handling capacity
I understand that OC200 WLAN Controller has a recommended AP handling capacity of 50 Access Points. Is this a hard limit ? And are their any additional factors like how many unique users/devices are using simultaneously/cumulatively ?
We currently have 46 AP on one of ourn controller. And we want to know what is the current load (overload) on the controller. is their a way to judge it quantitatively, other than 46/50 ? Can it handle 10/20/40 more APs ?
Is CPU or memory a constraint for this device and are their any plans to introduce a newer version with higher capacity or a setup-product with atleast 4X AP handling capacity ? if we use multiple controllers, then it seems their is duplication of some configuration items among controllers like User IDs (if used) if roaming between APs managed by different controllers is to be implemented (could not find a way to share) and number of APs in one WLAN Group exceeds 50 [WE may have one with 70-80]
We are not very keen to use a PC (if it can handle more than 50 AP per controller instance) to replace an alliance, because it brings additional factors like windows OS , AV software, etc into the mix.
- Copy Link
- Subscribe
- Bookmark
- Report Inappropriate Content
@JSchnee21: Since we are facing COVID-19 lockdown situation unable to carry out any big upgrades remotely for any equipment. The OC200 went conpletely down with 24 hour+ downtime. So temporarily I have moved the controller to a shared Windows PC (which is used for other purposes such as network management, remote login using anydesk, CCTV surveillance video processing, etc) to keep the services running. The PC is J1800 Dual Core motherboard equipped with 8GB RAM,120 GB SSD and a GT1030 GPU. 64 APs on it now with ~1800 users and its working reliably since last 2+ weeks. Had to do this as a contingency measure remotely as the OC200s just stopped working for unknown reason and other than this PC have no other substitute.
After lockdown ends (May 1st week), I will move the controller setup to the Linux 1U Intel atom box which is described earlier in this thread. Looking at the the CPU usage on the windows PC, I am more confident that the [Atom D2500 (2C2T), 4GB RAM device, 2x64 GB RAID-1 SSD] hardware *may be handle the controller workload and have room for expansion for another 30-40 APs. My observation till now is that Omada Controller does not need a very powerful hardware at all. I don't know what exactly happenned to the OC200 ;-((
JSchnee21 wrote
Hi @APRC-P3-Tel,
"Am not able to split among multiple OC200 beacuse multiple OC200 cannot share configuration, and we need smooth mobility between all these 75 APs"
I don't agree with your logic here. While you are correct that two OC-200's cannot "share" their configuration. You can export the settings from one, and import them into the other. Or just setup both by hand, it's very easy and you only have to do it once.
There is no reason why clients cannot move smothly between these segments. Surely not all 50+ EAPs are in the same room anyway? Unless this is an auditorium or stadium.
Clients can roam from AP to AP without the OC-200 at all. Granted the controller is needed for "Fast Roaming" but this new innovation is really oversold. STA's have been roaming from AP to AP for more than a decade before Fast Roaming was invented.
But certainly if you want a more powerful Omada solution deploy it on a workstation, server, VM, or AWS instance. That is why the software solution exisits.
As far as your wonky Ethernet connection, I also doubt this is in any way related to crossing the magic AP# threshold. It is much more likely to be a bad, cracked, kinked cable, poor termination, or cracked soldering joint on one of the RJ45 ports (in the OC200 or your switch).
-Jonathan
- Copy Link
- Report Inappropriate Content
Information
Helpful: 1
Views: 3527
Replies: 11
Voters 0
No one has voted for it yet.