I have a lot of towers with RB1100AHx2's and use a few ports for routed
backhauls, then bridge the rest for APs and other PTPs. So no real
switch at most sites. I really don't need wire-speed switching between
APs anyway. Some smaller sites using RB493AH & G's doing the same thing.
Do not try to use a CRS as a router. Do not try to use a CCR as a
switch. These are not Cisco's.
On 3/30/2015 6:06 PM, That One Guy wrote:
We have a Mikrotik friendly consultant lined up for the BGP
implementation. Our purpose in BGP right now is to have versatility
among our /24 and our extremely mismatched bandwidth between
providers. because we are currently statically routed, we are using
all our IP4 space on our smaller provider, and forced to NAT the
majority of our customers behind some of our bigger providers IP
space, I believe we are paying more for the smaller pipe than we are
for the much larger one, but we have limited options amongst our high
capacity backhaul locations... but that a whole other discussion.
I am trying to become familiar with the MT line of products so that
the hardware decisions are our own and not solely at the whim of the
consultant. The input from this list on hardware bears much more
weight on those decisions than that of a consultant.
Regarding their line of switches, Im conflicted here, if I stick to
using them as a switch is the consensus that they are good or bad?
On Mon, Mar 30, 2015 at 4:51 PM, Dennis Burgess
<[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
Steve,
I would suggest listening to the people here as well as maybe
getting a WISP consulting company to steer you in the right
direction . Also the MT vendor should be able to give you all of
the recommendations that you need on hardware. . Lots of options,
however, you may be able to get off with less expensive routers
but that’s depends on what you are doing, and/or what you are
planning for.
Dennis Burgess, CTO, Link Technologies, Inc.
[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> – 314-735-0270
<tel:314-735-0270> – www.linktechs.net <http://www.linktechs.net>
*From:*Af [mailto:[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>] *On Behalf Of *That One Guy
*Sent:* Monday, March 30, 2015 2:27 PM
*To:* [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
*Subject:* [AFMUG] Mikrotik Pros/Cons and recomendations
After poking around at many different brands, it seems Mikrotik is
the right fit for our network and budget.
I dont fully understand the licensing tiers
Is there a sizing chart on these?
Is the interface similar between the router models and the switch
models? Are the mikrotik switches comparable to the HP procurve in
reliability?
It would be the bees knees to see out network more universal as
far as management interfaces go, we have three purposes for routers:
our upstream routers, which we have 2, will ultimately be running
OSPF internally and BGP externally (current thought) 200mbps-1gbps
projected need through the next couple of years.
Our network/POP routers ranging from 1 customer at a POP to 150
A residential solution comparable to the UBNT AirRouters (1-25mbps
rate plans) wifi capable.
If the switches have similar interfaces, we would look toward
replacing a combination of UBNT toughswitch POE, and a variety of
HP procurves from 1810G to 2510G and their other POE models.
I note alot of discussion regarding MT ethernet negotiation
flakiness, how much of an impact does this present? Right now we
have imagestream and fortigate on the network, and have zero
issues with that.
The decision to go toward mikrotik is primarily based on cost and
community support availability within the industry. (this
consideration has alot to do with a single point of administrative
failure in only having one person, me, training to design,
maintain, support, and grow the network, in the event i became
absent from the picture) The winbox interface and feature
availability within was also a primary consideration for support
staff.
I would like to her from people entrenched in MT who love/hate it,
anybody who turned their back on it, and anybody who moved toward it.
--
If you only see yourself as part of the team but you don't see
your team as part of yourself you have already failed as part of
the team.
--
If you only see yourself as part of the team but you don't see your
team as part of yourself you have already failed as part of the team.
