In a WLAN network, if a user is associated with the same WAC before and after roaming, it can be regarded as a special case of inter-WAC roaming, that is, the HAC and FAC overlap.

Question

Options

• ATrue
• BFalse

• A
  27% (12)
• B
  73% (32)

Explanation

B is correct because when a user remains associated with the same WAC before and after roaming, this is classified as intra-WAC roaming - a fundamentally distinct category from inter-WAC roaming, not a special case of it. Inter-WAC roaming, by definition, requires two different controllers: the HAC (Home Access Controller) and FAC (Foreign Access Controller) must be separate entities. If the user stays on the same WAC, the HAC/FAC distinction is irrelevant - there is only one controller involved, so they cannot meaningfully "overlap."

A is wrong because it misapplies the inter-WAC framework to a same-WAC scenario. Saying HAC and FAC "overlap" when there's only one controller is a category error - you can't have inter-controller roaming without two controllers.

Memory tip: Use the prefixes: intra = within (one WAC), inter = between (two WACs). Same WAC = intra. Different WACs = inter. They are sibling categories, not parent-child - intra-WAC roaming is never a "special case" of inter-WAC roaming.

No community discussion yet for this question.