Re: [WISPA] Nanostation support, tips, etc.

2009-01-25 Thread rabbtux rabbtux 
Anyone ever rma a Nanostation?  Ubiquity good to work with?


On 1/25/09, Josh Luthman  wrote:
> Just remember to use Eje's POE calculator first! :)
>
> On 1/26/09, Jerry Richardson  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 
>>   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/
>

-- 
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.

2009-01-25 Thread Josh Luthman 
Just remember to use Eje's POE calculator first! :)

On 1/26/09, Jerry Richardson  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 
>   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/

Re: [WISPA] Nanostation support, tips, etc.

2009-01-25 Thread Jerry Richardson 
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 
  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.

2009-01-25 Thread Josh Luthman 
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  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  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.

2009-01-25 Thread Blair Davis 




25 or so in service

rabbtux rabbtux wrote:

  Blair,
How many units have you worked with so far?


On 1/25/09, Blair Davis  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.

2009-01-25 Thread Blair Davis 




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  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.

2009-01-25 Thread Josh Luthman 
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,  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 
>
> Date: Sun, 25 Jan 2009 22:01:59
> To: WISPA General List
> 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  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.

2009-01-25 Thread eje 
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 

Date: Sun, 25 Jan 2009 22:01:59 
To: WISPA General List
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  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.

2009-01-25 Thread eje 
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 

Date: Sun, 25 Jan 2009 22:01:59 
To: WISPA General List
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  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.

2009-01-25 Thread rabbtux rabbtux 
Blair,
How many units have you worked with so far?


On 1/25/09, Blair Davis  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.

2009-01-25 Thread Josh Luthman 
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  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.

2009-01-25 Thread Blair Davis 




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/

[WISPA] Nanostation support, tips, etc.

2009-01-25 Thread rabbtux rabbtux 
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] How many switches can do RSTP?

2009-01-25 Thread Butch Evans 
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/

Re: [WISPA] How many switches can do RSTP?

2009-01-25 Thread Butch Evans 
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
> IETFfor
> 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 AT&T 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, AT&T 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 Consu

Re: [WISPA] bonding

2009-01-25 Thread Jeff Broadwick 
I'll do some checking on this Travis.
 
Jeff

  _  

From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
Behalf Of Travis Johnson
Sent: Saturday, January 24, 2009 12:01 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] bonding


Hi,

That's not good news... when we use Cisco CEF and per-packet load balancing,
we get the full speed. We currently have a customer that has 4 bonded 4Mbps
DSL lines, and they get 16Mbps any time they run a speed test.

And, now that I think about it, at one of our very remote POP's, we have two
T1 lines from Verizon using MLPPP and we get a full 3Mbps. We are using an
Imagestream router at this location... I'm not sure what Verizon is using.

Travis
Microserv

Adam Greene wrote: 

Yep, we're bonding DSL with MLPPP as well, with direct PVCs through Verizon.


Caveat: we generally see only about 80% performance rates (i.e. if [4] 1Mbps


circuits are bonded together, we get 3.2Mbps throughput). Have not found a 

way to improve this. Using Cisco gear on both ends.





- Original Message - 

From: "Jeff Broadwick"   

To:   ; "'WISPA General
List'"   

Sent: Friday, January 23, 2009 5:32 PM

Subject: Re: [WISPA] bonding





  

Hi Eje,



Yes, you are correct.  We can bond DSL using MLPPP.



Jeff





-Original Message-

From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On

Behalf Of e...@wisp-router.com

Sent: Friday, January 23, 2009 11:28 AM

To: WISPA General List

Cc: Jeff Broadwick

Subject: Re: [WISPA] bonding



I do believe you would be able to use an Imagestream. If memory serves me

right they do support mlppp. I'm sure Jeff can correct me if I'm wrong.



/Eje

--Original Message--

From: Travis Johnson

Sender: wireless-boun...@wispa.org

To: WISPA General List

ReplyTo: WISPA General List

Subject: [WISPA] bonding

Sent: Jan 23, 2009 11:22



Hi,



We currently provide DSL service using Qwest. We are a "megahost"

provider, meaning we have a DS3 directly to Qwest, and then we can sell 

DSL

circuits using our bandwidth, etc.



In the past, we have been able to "bond" multiple DSL lines using a Cisco

router on the customer side and then using Cisco's CEF protocol.

This provides a true bonded connection, because it does a "per packet"

load balance.



Is there a better solution? I have to use a Cisco on our NOC side, but I

would prefer to find something cheaper. Any ideas on what protocol may 

work?

MLPPP or ?



Travis

Microserv









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/





Sent via BlackBerry from T-Mobile









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/





  




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?

2009-01-25 Thread Jeff Broadwick 
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
IETFfor
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?

2009-01-25 Thread John Scrivner 
>
> 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
IETFfor
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?

2009-01-25 Thread Nathan Stooke 
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  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:/

Re: [WISPA] How many switches can do RSTP?

2009-01-25 Thread Gino Villarini 
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  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/
>


>

Re: [WISPA] How many switches can do RSTP?

2009-01-25 Thread Nathan Stooke 
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] Advanced Cybernetics Group?

2009-01-25 Thread jree...@18-30chat.net 
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/