During the acceptance of the customer's wireless network, the engineer found that the terminal roaming failed. Which of the following situations may be the cause of the terminal roaming failure?…

Question

Options

• AThe customer's existing network is a Layer 3 roaming scenario, but the device is configured to
• BAP signal coverage is discontinuous and there are blind spots
• CThe user forwarding methods configured on the two roaming APs are inconsistent
• DThe security template names configured on the two roaming APs are inconsistent

• A
  70% (23)
• C
  21% (7)
• D
  9% (3)

Explanation

A is correct because a mismatch between the actual network topology (Layer 3 roaming) and the device's configured roaming mode (likely Layer 2) causes the handoff process to break - the AC cannot correctly handle client re-association across subnets when misconfigured. B is correct because physical coverage gaps force the terminal to lose its connection entirely rather than roam; seamless roaming requires overlapping AP coverage so the client can associate with the new AP before dropping the old one.

C is wrong because inconsistent user forwarding methods (e.g., tunnel vs. direct forwarding) between two APs in the same ESS do not inherently break the roaming handshake - the AC can still manage the client session transfer regardless of per-AP forwarding configuration.

D is wrong because security template names are just identifiers; what matters for roaming is that the actual security parameters (encryption type, authentication method, keys) match. Two APs can use differently named templates with identical settings and roaming will succeed.

Memory tip: Think of roaming as a relay race - you need continuous track (no blind spots = B) and the runners must know which type of race they're running (Layer 2 vs. Layer 3 = A). The name on the runner's jersey (D) and their personal running style (C) don't break the handoff.

No community discussion yet for this question.