Re: [WISPA] Advanced Cybernetics Group?
They are the host company for SkyNet, you have found a advanced node. 2953 Bunker Hill Lane Suite 400 Santa Clara CA 95054 www.advancedcybernetics.com (The building looks like the same from the movie too) Jason wrote: Anyone know who they are and what they make? I saw a MAC id pop up in a site survey that started with 00:12:CE, which was new to me. When I ran it through some of the mac lookup databases it was registered by Advanced Cybernetics Group. Jason WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] How many switches can do RSTP?
Hello, Right now they are manually configured tunnels. -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Butch Evans Sent: Sunday, January 25, 2009 12:36 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] How many switches can do RSTP? On Sat, 2009-01-24 at 20:12 -0600, Nathan Stooke wrote: We rolled out MPLS more to get VPLS. This is one of the benefits I mentioned. There are other ways to gain this benefit, however. I'm not gonna go through all the possibilities with what can be done with MPLS and show the comparable option another way. The point I was making before was more that MPLS is a new (relatively speaking) technology and there are ways to accomplish the same benefits in ways that don't require MPLS. I agree that VPLS is a cool feature that can, for some networks, be a necessary feature. For most, however, MPLS is NOT worth the time and effort necessary to understand for the benefits gained. The person who started this thread sounded like he was searching for a technology without defining a need and I was just pointing out that design goals should come first. While we have plans to really utilize the MPLS we really need the VPLS for our clients that needed transport across our network. On another note ATT is pushing MPLS connections to multiple sites instead of their T1 services in our area. Even though they are really using the T1s for the service and they are really offering VPLS services. Yes. I have said for over 2 years that MPLS is more a marketing ploy than a necessary technology. I remember standing in front of Brad Belton's office discussing this exact subject. MPLS is likely to be a necessary item for some JUST to be able to sell the same product. Cisco does this all the time. They help corporations and government entities write up RFQs with requirements that include Cisco specific capabilities. Really pisses me off sometimes. :-) We have not really any issues with the MPLS or VPLS. Of course I have the best or one of the best network admin's around so he had everything tested and when we implemented it is was very smooth. I'm glad you have MPLS running and working on your network. Are you using manually configured tunnels or are you implementing this using a route reflector? -- * Butch Evans * Professional Network Consultation* * http://www.butchevans.com/* Network Engineering * * http://www.wispa.org/ * WISPA Board Member * * http://blog.butchevans.com/ * Wired or Wireless Networks * WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] How many switches can do RSTP?
Nathan, What type of router are you guys using? Cisco or Mikrotik? We also are implementing MPLS for the VPLS Gino A. Villarini g...@aeronetpr.com Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp. tel 787.273.4143 fax 787.273.4145 -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Nathan Stooke Sent: Saturday, January 24, 2009 11:41 PM To: 'WISPA General List' Subject: Re: [WISPA] How many switches can do RSTP? Hello, I just talked to my CTO, he loves MPLS and would never go back. It solves a ton of issues with routed networks. Here are some good sites with info, so you can make your own judgment. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multiprotocol_Label_Switching http://wiki.mikrotik.com/wiki/MPLSVPLS http://www.cisco.com/en/US/tech/tk436/tk428/technologies_configuration_e xamp le09186a0080093f23.shtml Thanks -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Nathan Stooke Sent: Saturday, January 24, 2009 8:43 PM To: 'WISPA General List' Subject: Re: [WISPA] How many switches can do RSTP? Hello, We have 3 on another part of our network, but I know you can do more. It works really well for our setup. We are using RSTP so we do not even loose a ping when it changes over. However, we do not care much for it. It does work in the right instances, but you have a limit as to the number of STP domains you can have on a switch. I think our switches limit is 8. Thanks -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Josh Luthman Sent: Saturday, January 24, 2009 8:20 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] How many switches can do RSTP? Soo.what is the most STP switches anyone has had on a single collision domain? On 1/24/09, Nathan Stooke nstooke...@wisperisp.com wrote: Hello, We rolled out MPLS more to get VPLS. While we have plans to really utilize the MPLS we really need the VPLS for our clients that needed transport across our network. On another note ATT is pushing MPLS connections to multiple sites instead of their T1 services in our area. Even though they are really using the T1s for the service and they are really offering VPLS services. We have not really any issues with the MPLS or VPLS. Of course I have the best or one of the best network admin's around so he had everything tested and when we implemented it is was very smooth. Thanks -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Butch Evans Sent: Saturday, January 24, 2009 2:44 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] How many switches can do RSTP? On Fri, 2009-01-23 at 17:23 +0100, Paolo Di Francesco wrote: to be honest mikrotik routing is not working well, and we are far from being happy about the OSPF implementation: too many bugs and lost routes. While there are some bugs in SOME versions of Mikrotik's RouterOS releases, it is far from being too many bugs to be used. Of course, I only have about 200 or so networks that I maintain with only about 2500 routers to base this on So, I would like to move to something more robust. Mikrotik MPLS implementation looks more at experimental stage and I would not use it for any reason in any production network. Maybe I am wrong and it's really stable, so if somebody is using mikrotik-MPLS let us know it! MPLS is not likely to be a best solution regardless of the platform you use. Like WiMAX, however, MPLS is a new buzzword that people will flock to. Mikrotik's MPLS implementation is brand new and not one I'd recommend for anyone at this point. I have 3 or 4 customers with networks large enough to gain some benefit from MPLS. One is attempting to get it working with some limited success. In most cases, you won't really need MPLS to accomplish your design goals. So far, I haven't seen you say what you are having trouble with, just that you have not correctly configured your OSPF implementation (you said it like it was purely a MT problem, but I doubt that is likely based on my own experiences). -- * Butch Evans * Professional Network Consultation* * http://www.butchevans.com/* Network Engineering * * http://www.wispa.org/ * WISPA Board Member * * http://blog.butchevans.com/ * Wired or Wireless Networks * WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
Re: [WISPA] How many switches can do RSTP?
Hello, Mikrotik all the way. I take great pride in the fact that we have no Cisco Routers on our network. Sure there are issues with firmware releases now and then with MT, but now that they are on 3.X is has become much much more stable. Thanks -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Gino Villarini Sent: Sunday, January 25, 2009 7:08 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] How many switches can do RSTP? Nathan, What type of router are you guys using? Cisco or Mikrotik? We also are implementing MPLS for the VPLS Gino A. Villarini g...@aeronetpr.com Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp. tel 787.273.4143 fax 787.273.4145 -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Nathan Stooke Sent: Saturday, January 24, 2009 11:41 PM To: 'WISPA General List' Subject: Re: [WISPA] How many switches can do RSTP? Hello, I just talked to my CTO, he loves MPLS and would never go back. It solves a ton of issues with routed networks. Here are some good sites with info, so you can make your own judgment. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multiprotocol_Label_Switching http://wiki.mikrotik.com/wiki/MPLSVPLS http://www.cisco.com/en/US/tech/tk436/tk428/technologies_configuration_e xamp le09186a0080093f23.shtml Thanks -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Nathan Stooke Sent: Saturday, January 24, 2009 8:43 PM To: 'WISPA General List' Subject: Re: [WISPA] How many switches can do RSTP? Hello, We have 3 on another part of our network, but I know you can do more. It works really well for our setup. We are using RSTP so we do not even loose a ping when it changes over. However, we do not care much for it. It does work in the right instances, but you have a limit as to the number of STP domains you can have on a switch. I think our switches limit is 8. Thanks -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Josh Luthman Sent: Saturday, January 24, 2009 8:20 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] How many switches can do RSTP? Soo.what is the most STP switches anyone has had on a single collision domain? On 1/24/09, Nathan Stooke nstooke...@wisperisp.com wrote: Hello, We rolled out MPLS more to get VPLS. While we have plans to really utilize the MPLS we really need the VPLS for our clients that needed transport across our network. On another note ATT is pushing MPLS connections to multiple sites instead of their T1 services in our area. Even though they are really using the T1s for the service and they are really offering VPLS services. We have not really any issues with the MPLS or VPLS. Of course I have the best or one of the best network admin's around so he had everything tested and when we implemented it is was very smooth. Thanks -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Butch Evans Sent: Saturday, January 24, 2009 2:44 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] How many switches can do RSTP? On Fri, 2009-01-23 at 17:23 +0100, Paolo Di Francesco wrote: to be honest mikrotik routing is not working well, and we are far from being happy about the OSPF implementation: too many bugs and lost routes. While there are some bugs in SOME versions of Mikrotik's RouterOS releases, it is far from being too many bugs to be used. Of course, I only have about 200 or so networks that I maintain with only about 2500 routers to base this on So, I would like to move to something more robust. Mikrotik MPLS implementation looks more at experimental stage and I would not use it for any reason in any production network. Maybe I am wrong and it's really stable, so if somebody is using mikrotik-MPLS let us know it! MPLS is not likely to be a best solution regardless of the platform you use. Like WiMAX, however, MPLS is a new buzzword that people will flock to. Mikrotik's MPLS implementation is brand new and not one I'd recommend for anyone at this point. I have 3 or 4 customers with networks large enough to gain some benefit from MPLS. One is attempting to get it working with some limited success. In most cases, you won't really need MPLS to accomplish your design goals. So far, I haven't seen you say what you are having trouble with, just that you have not correctly configured your OSPF implementation (you said it like it was purely a MT problem, but I doubt that is likely based on my own experiences). -- * Butch Evans * Professional Network Consultation* * http://www.butchevans.com/* Network
Re: [WISPA] How many switches can do RSTP?
Butch said: Yes. I have said for over 2 years that MPLS is more a marketing ploy than a necessary technology. I remember standing in front of Brad Belton's office discussing this exact subject. MPLS is likely to be a necessary item for some JUST to be able to sell the same product. Cisco does this all the time. They help corporations and government entities write up RFQs with requirements that include Cisco specific capabilities. Really pisses me off sometimes. :-) Butch, I agree with much of your thoughts here but the one above does not seem right to me. I read up on this some to make sure I was not mistaken. MPLS is supported by many vendors and is being touted by many to be the replacement for other platforms like ATM. Here is a quote from the Wikipedia article that Nathan had referenced which I believe substantiates that MPLS is an open platform supported by multiple vendors: It (MPLS) was a Cisco proprietary proposal, and was renamed Label Switching. It was handed over to the IETFhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_Engineering_Task_Forcefor open standardization. The IETF work involved proposals from other vendors, and development of a consensus protocol that combined features from several vendors' work. Obviously Cisco is used by so many that they have pull but they did not keep MPLS for themselves. By making it an open platform they have taken the high road I think. Had they not then I would be pissed to have it be part of RFPs also. Please note that I prefer to use Imagestream and Mikrotik for all of our routing work so I am not just trying to be Mr. Cisco here. In this instance though I think Cisco was not out of line in their support for and promotion of MPLS. I am guessing that the day Imagestream or Mikrotik develops a protocol variant that becomes an open standard used by multiple vendors that you will be very proud to tout it in your proposals.:-) Scriv WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] How many switches can do RSTP?
I'll have to agree with John here. There certainly is a LOT of hype surrounding MPLS, and many, if not most, of the people who are demanding it really don't need it. Don't mistake that for genuine applications that will require MPLS. Point-to-multipoint VPN is just one example. Jeff -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of John Scrivner Sent: Sunday, January 25, 2009 12:00 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] How many switches can do RSTP? Butch said: Yes. I have said for over 2 years that MPLS is more a marketing ploy than a necessary technology. I remember standing in front of Brad Belton's office discussing this exact subject. MPLS is likely to be a necessary item for some JUST to be able to sell the same product. Cisco does this all the time. They help corporations and government entities write up RFQs with requirements that include Cisco specific capabilities. Really pisses me off sometimes. :-) Butch, I agree with much of your thoughts here but the one above does not seem right to me. I read up on this some to make sure I was not mistaken. MPLS is supported by many vendors and is being touted by many to be the replacement for other platforms like ATM. Here is a quote from the Wikipedia article that Nathan had referenced which I believe substantiates that MPLS is an open platform supported by multiple vendors: It (MPLS) was a Cisco proprietary proposal, and was renamed Label Switching. It was handed over to the IETFhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_Engineering_Task_Forcefor open standardization. The IETF work involved proposals from other vendors, and development of a consensus protocol that combined features from several vendors' work. Obviously Cisco is used by so many that they have pull but they did not keep MPLS for themselves. By making it an open platform they have taken the high road I think. Had they not then I would be pissed to have it be part of RFPs also. Please note that I prefer to use Imagestream and Mikrotik for all of our routing work so I am not just trying to be Mr. Cisco here. In this instance though I think Cisco was not out of line in their support for and promotion of MPLS. I am guessing that the day Imagestream or Mikrotik develops a protocol variant that becomes an open standard used by multiple vendors that you will be very proud to tout it in your proposals.:-) Scriv WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] How many switches can do RSTP?
On Sun, 2009-01-25 at 10:59 -0600, John Scrivner wrote: Butch said: Yes. I have said for over 2 years that MPLS is more a marketing ploy than a necessary technology. I remember standing in front of Brad Belton's office discussing this exact subject. MPLS is likely to be a necessary item for some JUST to be able to sell the same product. Cisco does this all the time. They help corporations and government entities write up RFQs with requirements that include Cisco specific capabilities. Really pisses me off sometimes. :-) Butch, I agree with much of your thoughts here but the one above does not seem right to me. I read up on this some to make sure I was not mistaken. MPLS is supported by many vendors and is being touted by many to be the replacement for other platforms like ATM. You are correct. However, I'd request that you reread what I posted. I did not suggest that MPLS was a Cisco specific platform. My Cisco statement was a segue to a new, but related, thought. The idea I presented was that, while there are opinions that differ from my own, MPLS offers certain benefits that can be easily accomplished by other means without making the major network design changes required by MPLS. My statement was in no way intended to be a Cisco bash (Cisco offers plenty of opportunity for me to do that). Here is a quote from the Wikipedia article that Nathan had referenced which I believe substantiates that MPLS is an open platform supported by multiple vendors: It (MPLS) was a Cisco proprietary proposal, and was renamed Label Switching. It was handed over to the IETFhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_Engineering_Task_Forcefor open standardization. The IETF work involved proposals from other vendors, and development of a consensus protocol that combined features from several vendors' work. Yes. I have read the wikipedia entries referenced many times as part of my own research on MPLS. Obviously Cisco is used by so many that they have pull but they did not keep MPLS for themselves. By making it an open platform they have taken the high road I think. Had they not then I would be pissed to have it be part of RFPs also. Perhaps you misunderstood my point. Again, I was not suggesting that MPLS was a Cisco proprietary protocol. My point was that ATT is marketing MPLS very effectively and that they (like cisco does all the time) are assisting various businesses and agencies in developing RFPs that include MPLS. It is THAT behaviour that Cisco (along with Microsoft, ATT and a host of other big boys) that I was referencing negatively. Please note that I prefer to use Imagestream and Mikrotik for all of our routing work so I am not just trying to be Mr. Cisco here. In this instance though I think Cisco was not out of line in their support for and promotion of MPLS. Hmm..I may not have done a very good job of explaining myself with regard to MPLS. MPLS certainly offers some neat features. VPLS by itself is almost worth the struggle to undergo the pain of building and implementing it in a network. It does require a rather large network to be worthwhile, however from a usability standpoint. MPLS will ONLY work within a single administrative domain. The labels are only unique within that domain. Typically, labels (which are used to build paths) are not shared outside a single network. Because of this, a smaller network does not see a lot of benefit from MPLS. My main point was that the most useful benefits of MPLS (like VPLS for example) can be done in other ways without the limitations of MPLS (like the requirement for a single administrative domain or label sharing). One thing that ISN'T easily duplicated is the ability to use a route reflector (specially configured BGP server) to make VPLS circuits very easy to deploy and centrally maintain. The basic functionality provided by VPLS, however, IS easily duplicated. An example of this is Mikrotik's new ability to use PPtP on a bridge. I can build a network using this functionality and create a layer 2 bridge without regard to who owns the transport using this functionality. Even better, I can match the 1500 byte MTU that MPLS offers. I am guessing that the day Imagestream or Mikrotik develops a protocol variant that becomes an open standard used by multiple vendors that you will be very proud to tout it in your proposals.:-) I rarely include the specific protocols as part of my proposals unless it offers a specific benefit or meets a specific need that can't be matched otherwise. I understand your point, however, and I do often tout the benefits brought by my choice of products. More often that that, however, I tout the benefits of using MY service more than the equipment. ;-) -- * Butch Evans * Professional Network Consultation* * http://www.butchevans.com/* Network Engineering
Re: [WISPA] How many switches can do RSTP?
On Sun, 2009-01-25 at 12:58 -0500, Jeff Broadwick wrote: I'll have to agree with John here. There certainly is a LOT of hype surrounding MPLS, and many, if not most, of the people who are demanding it really don't need it. Don't mistake that for genuine applications that will require MPLS. Point-to-multipoint VPN is just one example. Well, I just sent a long email to the list that should address this, too. :-) -- * Butch Evans * Professional Network Consultation* * http://www.butchevans.com/* Network Engineering * * http://www.wispa.org/ * WISPA Board Member * * http://blog.butchevans.com/ * Wired or Wireless Networks * WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
[WISPA] Nanostation support, tips, etc.
We are considering using these units for 2 and 5 GHz Cpe. What is your experience with ubiquiti support, failure rates, and any deployment tips? I sure like what we see in our evaluation. Thanks in advance, Marshall -- Sent from my mobile device WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Nanostation support, tips, etc.
Use a hose clamp, instead of the included zip ties, to mount outdoors. If network cable is longer than 150ft, use an 18VDC power supply instead of the included 12VDC supply. If talking to an older 'B' only AP, set the radios to 'B' only mode. Adaptive antenna mode is not worth using. Make sure to update units to 3.x.x firmware. Many are still shipping with 2.1.x. All this is for the NS2 units. I've never used the NS5's. Good support, via their fourm. Haven't had and DOA's or needed to RMA any of these yet. rabbtux rabbtux wrote: We are considering using these units for 2 and 5 GHz Cpe. What is your experience with ubiquiti support, failure rates, and any deployment tips? I sure like what we see in our evaluation. Thanks in advance, Marshall WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Nanostation support, tips, etc.
I don't believe you'll lose voltage over a 150 ft line when you're only pulling an amp or two, but I could be wrong. Have you experienced something that proves me wrong? On 1/25/09, Blair Davis the...@wmwisp.net wrote: Use a hose clamp, instead of the included zip ties, to mount outdoors. If network cable is longer than 150ft, use an 18VDC power supply instead of the included 12VDC supply. If talking to an older 'B' only AP, set the radios to 'B' only mode. Adaptive antenna mode is not worth using. Make sure to update units to 3.x.x firmware. Many are still shipping with 2.1.x. All this is for the NS2 units. I've never used the NS5's. Good support, via their fourm. Haven't had and DOA's or needed to RMA any of these yet. rabbtux rabbtux wrote: We are considering using these units for 2 and 5 GHz Cpe. What is your experience with ubiquiti support, failure rates, and any deployment tips? I sure like what we see in our evaluation. Thanks in advance, Marshall -- Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 Those who don't understand UNIX are condemned to reinvent it, poorly. --- Henry Spencer WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Nanostation support, tips, etc.
Blair, How many units have you worked with so far? On 1/25/09, Blair Davis the...@wmwisp.net wrote: Use a hose clamp, instead of the included zip ties, to mount outdoors. If network cable is longer than 150ft, use an 18VDC power supply instead of the included 12VDC supply. If talking to an older 'B' only AP, set the radios to 'B' only mode. Adaptive antenna mode is not worth using. Make sure to update units to 3.x.x firmware. Many are still shipping with 2.1.x. All this is for the NS2 units. I've never used the NS5's. Good support, via their fourm. Haven't had and DOA's or needed to RMA any of these yet. rabbtux rabbtux wrote: We are considering using these units for 2 and 5 GHz Cpe. What is your experience with ubiquiti support, failure rates, and any deployment tips? I sure like what we see in our evaluation. Thanks in advance, Marshall -- Sent from my mobile device WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Nanostation support, tips, etc.
At 12v/0.6a you lose 1.1v over 150ft. http://www.wisp-router.com/poecalculator.php /Eje Sent via BlackBerry from T-Mobile -Original Message- From: Josh Luthman j...@imaginenetworksllc.com Date: Sun, 25 Jan 2009 22:01:59 To: WISPA General Listwireless@wispa.org Subject: Re: [WISPA] Nanostation support, tips, etc. I don't believe you'll lose voltage over a 150 ft line when you're only pulling an amp or two, but I could be wrong. Have you experienced something that proves me wrong? On 1/25/09, Blair Davis the...@wmwisp.net wrote: Use a hose clamp, instead of the included zip ties, to mount outdoors. If network cable is longer than 150ft, use an 18VDC power supply instead of the included 12VDC supply. If talking to an older 'B' only AP, set the radios to 'B' only mode. Adaptive antenna mode is not worth using. Make sure to update units to 3.x.x firmware. Many are still shipping with 2.1.x. All this is for the NS2 units. I've never used the NS5's. Good support, via their fourm. Haven't had and DOA's or needed to RMA any of these yet. rabbtux rabbtux wrote: We are considering using these units for 2 and 5 GHz Cpe. What is your experience with ubiquiti support, failure rates, and any deployment tips? I sure like what we see in our evaluation. Thanks in advance, Marshall -- Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 Those who don't understand UNIX are condemned to reinvent it, poorly. --- Henry Spencer WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Nanostation support, tips, etc.
At 12v/0.6a you lose 1.1v over 150ft. http://www.wisp-router.com/poecalculator.php /Eje Sent via BlackBerry from T-Mobile -Original Message- From: Josh Luthman j...@imaginenetworksllc.com Date: Sun, 25 Jan 2009 22:01:59 To: WISPA General Listwireless@wispa.org Subject: Re: [WISPA] Nanostation support, tips, etc. I don't believe you'll lose voltage over a 150 ft line when you're only pulling an amp or two, but I could be wrong. Have you experienced something that proves me wrong? On 1/25/09, Blair Davis the...@wmwisp.net wrote: Use a hose clamp, instead of the included zip ties, to mount outdoors. If network cable is longer than 150ft, use an 18VDC power supply instead of the included 12VDC supply. If talking to an older 'B' only AP, set the radios to 'B' only mode. Adaptive antenna mode is not worth using. Make sure to update units to 3.x.x firmware. Many are still shipping with 2.1.x. All this is for the NS2 units. I've never used the NS5's. Good support, via their fourm. Haven't had and DOA's or needed to RMA any of these yet. rabbtux rabbtux wrote: We are considering using these units for 2 and 5 GHz Cpe. What is your experience with ubiquiti support, failure rates, and any deployment tips? I sure like what we see in our evaluation. Thanks in advance, Marshall -- Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 Those who don't understand UNIX are condemned to reinvent it, poorly. --- Henry Spencer WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Nanostation support, tips, etc.
That link is amazing. Thanks a bunch! Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 Those who don't understand UNIX are condemned to reinvent it, poorly. --- Henry Spencer On Sun, Jan 25, 2009 at 10:33 PM, e...@wisp-router.com wrote: At 12v/0.6a you lose 1.1v over 150ft. http://www.wisp-router.com/poecalculator.php /Eje Sent via BlackBerry from T-Mobile -Original Message- From: Josh Luthman j...@imaginenetworksllc.com Date: Sun, 25 Jan 2009 22:01:59 To: WISPA General Listwireless@wispa.org Subject: Re: [WISPA] Nanostation support, tips, etc. I don't believe you'll lose voltage over a 150 ft line when you're only pulling an amp or two, but I could be wrong. Have you experienced something that proves me wrong? On 1/25/09, Blair Davis the...@wmwisp.net wrote: Use a hose clamp, instead of the included zip ties, to mount outdoors. If network cable is longer than 150ft, use an 18VDC power supply instead of the included 12VDC supply. If talking to an older 'B' only AP, set the radios to 'B' only mode. Adaptive antenna mode is not worth using. Make sure to update units to 3.x.x firmware. Many are still shipping with 2.1.x. All this is for the NS2 units. I've never used the NS5's. Good support, via their fourm. Haven't had and DOA's or needed to RMA any of these yet. rabbtux rabbtux wrote: We are considering using these units for 2 and 5 GHz Cpe. What is your experience with ubiquiti support, failure rates, and any deployment tips? I sure like what we see in our evaluation. Thanks in advance, Marshall -- Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 Those who don't understand UNIX are condemned to reinvent it, poorly. --- Henry Spencer WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Nanostation support, tips, etc.
Yes, it does. runs over 200ft have been unreliable with the 12VDC supply. Needing power cycling 2-3 times a day. Josh Luthman wrote: I don't believe you'll lose voltage over a 150 ft line when you're only pulling an amp or two, but I could be wrong. Have you experienced something that proves me wrong? On 1/25/09, Blair Davis the...@wmwisp.net wrote: Use a hose clamp, instead of the included zip ties, to mount outdoors. If network cable is longer than 150ft, use an 18VDC power supply instead of the included 12VDC supply. If talking to an older 'B' only AP, set the radios to 'B' only mode. Adaptive antenna mode is not worth using. Make sure to update units to 3.x.x firmware. Many are still shipping with 2.1.x. All this is for the NS2 units. I've never used the NS5's. Good support, via their fourm. Haven't had and DOA's or needed to RMA any of these yet. rabbtux rabbtux wrote: We are considering using these units for 2 and 5 GHz Cpe. What is your experience with ubiquiti support, failure rates, and any deployment tips? I sure like what we see in our evaluation. Thanks in advance, Marshall WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Nanostation support, tips, etc.
25 or so in service rabbtux rabbtux wrote: Blair, How many units have you worked with so far? On 1/25/09, Blair Davis the...@wmwisp.net wrote: Use a hose clamp, instead of the included zip ties, to mount outdoors. If network cable is longer than 150ft, use an 18VDC power supply instead of the included 12VDC supply. If talking to an older 'B' only AP, set the radios to 'B' only mode. Adaptive antenna mode is not worth using. Make sure to update units to 3.x.x firmware. Many are still shipping with 2.1.x. All this is for the NS2 units. I've never used the NS5's. Good support, via their fourm. Haven't had and DOA's or needed to RMA any of these yet. rabbtux rabbtux wrote: We are considering using these units for 2 and 5 GHz Cpe. What is your experience with ubiquiti support, failure rates, and any deployment tips? I sure like what we see in our evaluation. Thanks in advance, Marshall WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Nanostation support, tips, etc.
Well we know 10 to 10.5 volts aren't enough so they probably want 11 or 12 bare minimum. On 1/25/09, Blair Davis the...@wmwisp.net wrote: Yes, it does. runs over 200ft have been unreliable with the 12VDC supply. Needing power cycling 2-3 times a day. Josh Luthman wrote: I don't believe you'll lose voltage over a 150 ft line when you're only pulling an amp or two, but I could be wrong. Have you experienced something that proves me wrong? On 1/25/09, Blair Davis the...@wmwisp.net wrote: Use a hose clamp, instead of the included zip ties, to mount outdoors. If network cable is longer than 150ft, use an 18VDC power supply instead of the included 12VDC supply. If talking to an older 'B' only AP, set the radios to 'B' only mode. Adaptive antenna mode is not worth using. Make sure to update units to 3.x.x firmware. Many are still shipping with 2.1.x. All this is for the NS2 units. I've never used the NS5's. Good support, via their fourm. Haven't had and DOA's or needed to RMA any of these yet. rabbtux rabbtux wrote: We are considering using these units for 2 and 5 GHz Cpe. What is your experience with ubiquiti support, failure rates, and any deployment tips? I sure like what we see in our evaluation. Thanks in advance, Marshall -- Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 Those who don't understand UNIX are condemned to reinvent it, poorly. --- Henry Spencer WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Nanostation support, tips, etc.
Pretty happy with the dozen or so we have out there. No issues at all other than one on a 350' run of cat5 that needed at 24V power supply to be stable. Forrest pulled one apart and said the power supply max is around 18V so use caution on overpowering. __ Jerry Richardson airCloud Communications From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Blair Davis Sent: Sunday, January 25, 2009 8:04 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Nanostation support, tips, etc. Yes, it does. runs over 200ft have been unreliable with the 12VDC supply. Needing power cycling 2-3 times a day. Josh Luthman wrote: I don't believe you'll lose voltage over a 150 ft line when you're only pulling an amp or two, but I could be wrong. Have you experienced something that proves me wrong? On 1/25/09, Blair Davis the...@wmwisp.net mailto:the...@wmwisp.net wrote: Use a hose clamp, instead of the included zip ties, to mount outdoors. If network cable is longer than 150ft, use an 18VDC power supply instead of the included 12VDC supply. If talking to an older 'B' only AP, set the radios to 'B' only mode. Adaptive antenna mode is not worth using. Make sure to update units to 3.x.x firmware. Many are still shipping with 2.1.x. All this is for the NS2 units. I've never used the NS5's. Good support, via their fourm. Haven't had and DOA's or needed to RMA any of these yet. rabbtux rabbtux wrote: We are considering using these units for 2 and 5 GHz Cpe. What is your experience with ubiquiti support, failure rates, and any deployment tips? I sure like what we see in our evaluation. Thanks in advance, Marshall WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Nanostation support, tips, etc.
Just remember to use Eje's POE calculator first! :) On 1/26/09, Jerry Richardson jrichard...@aircloud.com wrote: Pretty happy with the dozen or so we have out there. No issues at all other than one on a 350' run of cat5 that needed at 24V power supply to be stable. Forrest pulled one apart and said the power supply max is around 18V so use caution on overpowering. __ Jerry Richardson airCloud Communications From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Blair Davis Sent: Sunday, January 25, 2009 8:04 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Nanostation support, tips, etc. Yes, it does. runs over 200ft have been unreliable with the 12VDC supply. Needing power cycling 2-3 times a day. Josh Luthman wrote: I don't believe you'll lose voltage over a 150 ft line when you're only pulling an amp or two, but I could be wrong. Have you experienced something that proves me wrong? On 1/25/09, Blair Davis the...@wmwisp.net mailto:the...@wmwisp.net wrote: Use a hose clamp, instead of the included zip ties, to mount outdoors. If network cable is longer than 150ft, use an 18VDC power supply instead of the included 12VDC supply. If talking to an older 'B' only AP, set the radios to 'B' only mode. Adaptive antenna mode is not worth using. Make sure to update units to 3.x.x firmware. Many are still shipping with 2.1.x. All this is for the NS2 units. I've never used the NS5's. Good support, via their fourm. Haven't had and DOA's or needed to RMA any of these yet. rabbtux rabbtux wrote: We are considering using these units for 2 and 5 GHz Cpe. What is your experience with ubiquiti support, failure rates, and any deployment tips? I sure like what we see in our evaluation. Thanks in advance, Marshall WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 Those who don't understand UNIX are condemned to reinvent it, poorly. --- Henry Spencer WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
