The AP repeaters, and clients at the other end will only associate with
one AP, not both, so there is no loop.
Ken

Daniel Kalchev wrote:
>
> The primary problem this setup is facing is... the use of APs instead of
> Bridges. :-) APs don't unserdtand Spanning Tree and any Ethernet frame sent to
> the remote end will come back via the other link...
>
> Yes, it looks cheaper, but when you add the other stuff...
>
> If these were two pairs of Bridges, then you just connect them all the time.
> Spanning Tree will take care of loops by disabling one of the links (or
> rather, some of the Ethernet ports I believe).
>
> I forgot that newer APs have 10/100 Mbps ports - this indeed allows use of
> trunking (remember that most VLAN protocols don't trunk on 10 Mbps Ethernet).
> Just use pair of such switches and you may be able to use both links at the
> same time...
>
> Daniel
>
> >>>lostxampeopleart.net said:
>
> [...]
> > You also want the switch to be able to sense "down links" even when the
> > port's link is not down. Unless you can make the AP340
> > bridges/AP's/repeaters toss their ethernet ports up/down depending on
> > their RF link status, the switch won't be able to determing if the
> > ports in the trunk group are in fact, all up.
> >
> > This is where I'm thinking that a more advanced trunking protocol like (as
> > much as I hate to say it) cisco's FastEtherchannel. I beleive (correct me
> > if I'm wrong please) there are several types of ovehead and linkstate
> > frames being sent regularly over a set of ports participating in a Fast
> > Etherchannel trunk. This may take care of the 'link state' determination
> > part for you.
> >
> > Let me know if this doesn't help, maybe I'm forgeting something
> > easier/more obvious that may come up later.
> >
> > -lostxam
> >
> >
> > On Thu, 11 Oct 2001, W.Miller wrote:
> >
> > > Hi all,
> > >
> > > I have a bit of a tricky one,,,
> > >
> > > I have 2 AP340,s in access point mode linked to 2 AP340,s in repeater mo
> de, as a cheap alternative to a full bridge...
> > > They are working fine so far, and I am running fine on one link, with the
> other just lying idle ,(unplugged from network at this end)
> > > but linked by RF link as an emergency link to plug in if the first link
> dies...
> > > However this means a manual unplug of one, and manual replug of the other
> ,,, not good at 4 am...or if I am away!
> > >
> > > what I wish to do, ideally , is have them actually running as a dual fee
> d setup, load balancing so to speak,
> > > so as if one drops out, the other takes on rest of the the load so as to
> give no break in connectivity,
> > >
> > > or 2nd choice, have one link come online automatically as soon as the o
> ther link drops , to at least make it a backup system,
> > >
> > > What solution would be an affordeable way to do this without collision p
> roblems etc ...?
> > >
> > > All I have been able to find that does this easily so far is hardware b
> oxes that are way out of the budget....
> > >
> > > Any network McGyvers out there?
> > >
> > > I can usually tinker around with things, just need a few good pointers ,..
> .
> > >
> > > Cheers
> > >
> > > Will
> > >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Aironet mailing list - Aironetcsl.cse.ucsc.edu
> > http://csl.cse.ucsc.edu/mailman/listinfo/aironet
>
> _______________________________________________
> Aironet mailing list - Aironetcsl.cse.ucsc.edu
> http://csl.cse.ucsc.edu/mailman/listinfo/aironet
_______________________________________________
Aironet mailing list - Aironetcsl.cse.ucsc.edu
http://csl.cse.ucsc.edu/mailman/listinfo/aironet

• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]