Are there advantages in having separate networks for each device type (MR, MS, MX) for each location bound to separate templates for each device type rather than single combined networks per location with a combined template?
Solved! Go to solution.
There's no difference in functionality between those two scenarios. Templates by nature will enforce most settings with only a limited amount of overridable changes at the network level. Whether you have them as separate templates or a combined template doesn't change the functionality.
If templates make sense for your environment then I would choose combined templates and combined networks as it provides a more cohesive look and feel versus jumping around between templates and network types. Plus, it allows for one spot (per network) to specify thing like timezone or to view client details rather than jumping between a MR, MS, MX network all to view the same wireless client that traverses the entire stack. There's a reason templates and networks by default are set to combined 😉
Whether or not to use templates in general is a different question and needs to be made based on your requirements. They work great for some and for others impose limitations that can be problematic.
I’ve always stayed away from Templates due to the amount of issues highlighted in posts in the forum.
Run a quick search….
I particularly use templates to manage my clients' environment and I can assure you that it works very well, not to mention that it makes it much easier to manage. As mentioned by @DOC_Meraki problems can occur but usually, it's when the networks are not well planned, if you have a well planned network design you will hardly have any problems.
But each case is different and depends on your needs.
Hi @eye ,
If you have the time and desire to pursue the use of templates have a read through the best practice guides:
There's no difference in functionality between those two scenarios. Templates by nature will enforce most settings with only a limited amount of overridable changes at the network level. Whether you have them as separate templates or a combined template doesn't change the functionality.
If templates make sense for your environment then I would choose combined templates and combined networks as it provides a more cohesive look and feel versus jumping around between templates and network types. Plus, it allows for one spot (per network) to specify thing like timezone or to view client details rather than jumping between a MR, MS, MX network all to view the same wireless client that traverses the entire stack. There's a reason templates and networks by default are set to combined 😉
Whether or not to use templates in general is a different question and needs to be made based on your requirements. They work great for some and for others impose limitations that can be problematic.