HPE6-A47 Exam Dumps : Designing Aruba Solutions

The customer needs a solution that can terminate VPN tunnels for Aruba RAPs, which are remote access points that connect to the corporate network over the Internet. The customer has only one public IP address, which means that they need to use NAT to forward the IPsec traffic to the device that will terminate the VPN tunnel. The customer also wants N+1 redundancy, which means that they need at least two devices that can act as backup for each other in case of failure.

The solution that meets the customer requirements is to use two Aruba MCs on the same subnet that use VRRP without clustering. VRRP stands for Virtual Router Redundancy Protocol, and it is a protocol that allows multiple devices to share a virtual IP address and act as a single gateway for the network. This way, the customer can use the virtual IP address as the public IP address for the NAT, and the IPsec traffic will be forwarded to the device that is the VRRP master. If the master device fails, the backup device will take over the role of the master and continue to terminate the VPN tunnels. This provides N+1 redundancy for the customer.

The other options are not suitable for the customer requirements:

• Option B is not suitable because a Layer 3 cluster requires two public IP addresses, one for each MC. The customer only has one public IP address, so they cannot use this option.
• Option C is not suitable because VRRP does not work across different subnets. The customer needs to have the MCs on the same subnet to use VRRP.
• Option D is not suitable because a Layer 2 cluster does not support NAT. The customer needs to use NAT to forward the IPsec traffic to the MCs.

References:

• Aruba Remote Access Point (RAP) Networks Validated Reference Design)
• Aruba Mobility Controller Virtual IP Configuration Guide)
• ArubaOS 8.5 User Guide)

the new 802.11ac deployment should have a capacity-based design for the best performance, but the existing deployment sounds like a coverage-based design. This is because a capacity-based design takes into account the number and type of clients, the applications they use, and the bandwidth they require. A coverage-based design only considers the signal strength and the absence of coverage holes. A site survey is desirable to determine the optimal locations for the new APs because it can help the architect to assess the current and future capacity needs, identify the sources of interference and noise, and optimize the channel and power settings for the new APs.

Option A is incorrect because an 802.11ac deployment does not necessarily work better with side-mounted APs. The mounting location of the APs depends on the antenna type, the ceiling height, and the RF environment.

Option C is incorrect because 802.11ac AP radios are not more sensitive to 2.4 GHz interference than 802.11n APs. In fact, 802.11ac APs operate in the 5 GHz band, which is less crowded and prone to interference than the 2.4 GHz band.

Option D is incorrect because 802.11ac APs cannot support a higher density of clients by being deployed farther apart. On the contrary, 802.11ac APs need to be deployed closer together to provide the higher data rates and throughput that 802.11ac clients expect.

References: The information can be referenced from the official HPE documents and learning materials available on HPE Press and Aruba Networks. Specifically, it aligns with the objectives outlined in Chapter 4: Wireless LAN Design, where the capacity-based design and site survey methods are discussed. Designing Aruba Solutions Official Certification Study Guide Aruba Mobility Fundamentals Guide

The traditional guideline limits a wired VLAN to a /24 subnet, which provides enough IP addresses for 253 endpoints. You might have suggested one of three approaches: one VLAN per floor, one VLAN per building, or one VLAN per campus. The one VLAN per floor approach is not recommended because it interferes with roaming and adds complexity. If you did take this approach, the /24 subnets are not large enough for the requirements on every floor. You would need to ask for /23 subnets. The one VLAN per building approach would work if you considered each building its own RF domain. It provides roaming within a building and, if you are using a single cluster at the data center, between buildings. Ifyou deployed two MCs or clusters, one at each building, though, GRE tunneling would be required to support roaming between buildings.