Aggregation needs to be done on the modem at layer 1
Gino A. Villarini President Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp. www.aeronetpr.com @aeronetpr From: "[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>" <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> Reply-To: "[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>" <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> Date: Wednesday, January 14, 2015 at 10:18 AM To: "[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>" <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] 1 Gigabit Licensed Link SAF has a good whitepaper on LAG and how it applies to each platform (currently being updated for Integra) – and certainly for instance our Lumina platform could only look at MAC addresses. Integra looks at the packet – just like better switches do. Or just do LAG on your router… or whatever other form of link aggregation you prefer. Honestly I think that is the better option. Control your network – let radios just be bridges (I’ve been saying that since my WISP days… watching features get added to radios that belong in a router/switch that cause more issues with proper operation due to firmware bugs). But that is a whole different can of worms :-D Sometimes I forget to put my vendor hat back on [cid:[email protected]] Daniel White | Managing Director SAF North America LLC Cell: (303) 746-3590 Skype: danieldwhite E-mail: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> From: Af [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Mark Radabaugh Sent: Wednesday, January 14, 2015 7:09 AM To: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] 1 Gigabit Licensed Link I’m really not crazy about using LAG on backhaul links to get higher bandwidth. Most backhaul links are carrying traffic between two routers and there is no diversity in the MAC address or IP address, and the internal switches in a lot of the gear can’t look deep enough in the packet to consider UDP/TCP port. Even if they can all your port 80 traffic ends up on one side of the link. An internal method in the radio tying 2 channels together is fine, but counting on LAG to evenly balance traffic across multiple links only works well where there is a lot of diversity in MAC and IP addresses. Mark On Jan 14, 2015, at 9:02 AM, Daniel White <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: We get there with 2+0 LAG as well. 11GHz won’t be until March though. Dual 80MHz wide channels will net well over 1.2Gbps without header compression. <image001.jpg> Daniel White | Managing Director SAF North America LLC Cell: (303) 746-3590 Skype: danieldwhite E-mail: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> From: Af [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Mike Hammett Sent: Wednesday, January 14, 2015 6:43 AM To: Animal Farm Subject: [AFMUG] 1 Gigabit Licensed Link The contenders are Dragonwave Quantum, Exalt ExtremeAir, Ceragon IP20, anyone else? I know SIAE, SAF and maybe some others (which others if you have them?) can get there with header compression. ----- Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com<http://www.ics-il.com/> [http://www.ics-il.com/images/fbicon.png]<https://www.facebook.com/ICSIL>[http://www.ics-il.com/images/googleicon.png]<https://plus.google.com/+IntelligentComputingSolutionsDeKalb>[http://www.ics-il.com/images/linkedinicon.png]<https://www.linkedin.com/company/intelligent-computing-solutions>[http://www.ics-il.com/images/twittericon.png]<https://twitter.com/ICSIL>
