Controller Architecture vs FAT APs

[Zeller, Tom S]

I would be interested in other opinions on the following analysis of this issue:     Using AirWave’s AMP management platform has almost eliminated the management advantage of the controller-based architecture (CBA).  AMP monitors, reports, and updates Fat APs just fine.  Also, some CBAs don’t yet have a single management platform for multiple controllers. CBA is considerably more expensive, in the 1.5 – 2.0 x range compared to Fat APs The other advantages of CBA boil down to the following.  If others I’d like to hear.  And if these are fictitious, also of interest: Roaming, theoretically across an entire campus, without requiring a single vlan Significantly faster handoff between APs due to 802.1x keys on the controller, important for voice support. Automagic dense AP deployment from radio feedback to and adjustments from controller (or Meru’s approach).   Obviously I’m considering sticking with Fat APs for another few years and allowing the CBA products to mature, but  I ain’t got no religion here, and would welcome success/horror stories from large scale CBA deployments.   Tom Zeller Indiana University [EMAIL PROTECTED] 812-855-6214   ********** Participation and subscription information for this EDUCAUSE Constituent Group discussion list can be found at http://www.educause.edu/groups/.