Free Cisco 300-425 ENWLSD Actual Exam Questions - Question 6 Discussion
• two Cisco Catalyst 9800 Series wireless controllers that are configured in a high-availability SSO
cluster to manage the APs in a local office network
• 100 APs in local mode that are registered to the high-availability cluster
• one Catalyst 9800 Series wireless controller that is deployed as an anchor in a DMZ
• a CAPWAP tunnel in UP state between the high-availability cluster and the anchor WLC
The customer wants the anchored traffic to remain up if a single WLC in the high-availability cluster
fails. How must this requirement be incorporated into the design?
A. Setting the APs to use the HA cluster as primary makes sure they stick with the cluster during failover, preventing dropped anchored traffic if one WLC goes down. Without that, failover won’t be seamless.
It’s A too. If APs aren’t set to use the HA cluster as primary, they might drop anchored traffic when one WLC fails, messing up the seamless failover the customer wants.
Makes sense that the mobility MAC is crucial here since it keeps the CAPWAP tunnel stable across failovers. So, D seems right to me because without it, the anchor might see the cluster as different devices. D
Guessing D here. The mobility MAC makes the cluster look like one device, so the CAPWAP tunnel stays up even if one controller fails. That’s key for seamless failover with anchored traffic.
A/D? Setting the APs to use the HA cluster as primary ensures they failover properly, and the mobility MAC in D keeps the CAPWAP tunnel stable during WLC failover. Both seem needed for smooth failover.
Maybe D. The mobility MAC address acts like a consistent ID for the entire HA cluster, so when one WLC fails, the anchored CAPWAP tunnel doesn’t flap because the anchor WLC still sees the same MAC. The other options don’t cover this continuity aspect well—like A just deals with AP primary base config, which doesn’t directly impact tunnel persistence during failover. So setting the mobility MAC cluster-wide makes sure the anchor WLC isn’t confused by a change in identity.
B tbh, deploying EMC APs as anchors with their own HA cluster could add redundancy on the anchor side too, which might help keep traffic flowing if one controller fails. The question’s focus seems broader than just MAC config.
I’m leaning towards D because configuring the mobility MAC address for the HA cluster helps maintain anchor connectivity even if one WLC fails. Anyone else think the same or have a different take?