I tend to look at this as if it were ethernet, right or wrong. Most of
my customers that need a public ip for a specific reason I would
rather pseudobridge as if it were a bridge on an ethernet or cable
system. This helps me so that I don't have to mess with port
forwarding etc for special
To: Mikrotik discussions
Subject: Re: [Mikrotik] RB OS v 3.7
For allowing the customer to have the IP in their equipment
versus the radio, is using straight WDS bridge mode still the best way?
Problem with that, is if you change channels.. you need to sign
into every client radio and move
On Wed, 30 Apr 2008, Eric Sooter wrote:
I thought that pseudobridge had better performance in
p-t-multipoint. On the Mikrotik forum, I noticed alot of
complaining about WDS performance dropping when you get over 5 or 6
WDS sessions on an AP. Is this true?
Let's say that you have an AP with
On Wed, 30 Apr 2008, Keith Barber wrote:
I have an AP (RB600) with about 40 clients and 3 full wds links at
the moment. We are looking at providing the customer with their IP
on their own equipment. Station-wds was looking like the answer.
If all 40 of those clients were in station-wds,
above their
router.
-Keith-
- Original Message -
From: Butch Evans [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wed, 4/30/2008 3:12pm
To: Mikrotik discussions mikrotik@mail.butchevans.com
Subject: Re: [Mikrotik] RB OS v 3.7
On Wed, 30 Apr 2008, Keith Barber wrote:
I have an AP (RB600) with about 40 clients
On Wed, 30 Apr 2008, Keith Barber wrote:
Right, which we'll have a fair split of customer's that don't have
publics running in plain station mode. But in some of the business
districts about 90% of those clients are going to be putting the
public IP into their equipment, with the ap as the
That's why I use Tranzeo's for clients.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Keith Barber
Sent: Thursday, April 24, 2008 6:26 AM
To: Mikrotik discussions
Subject: Re: [Mikrotik] RB OS v 3.7
For allowing the customer to have
7 matches
Mail list logo
