Most grids in the 5.8 range will work pretty well in the 5.3 range. Hech,
I've even seen them work at short distances in the 2.4 range in an
emergency.
Cameron
I am going to be setting up a very short range (think 300ft) 5.2GHz
link. Do you think I would have any problem using a 5.8GHz grid
How do I get the Last IP for a registered client from the CLI?
interface wireless registration-table print gives me no joy.
suggestions?
ryan
___
Mikrotik mailing list
Mikrotik@mail.butchevans.com
http://www.butchevans.com/mailman/listinfo/mikrotik
it's easy to do in winbox. Just add the last ip column.
Chris Gotstein
Sr Network Engineer
UP Logon/Computer Connection UP
500 N Stephenson Ave
Iron Mountain, MI 49801
Phone: 906-774-4847
Fax: 906-774-0335
ch...@uplogon.com
D. Ryan Spott wrote:
How do I get the Last IP for a registered client
Try print detail?
Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373
When you have eliminated the impossible, that which remains, however
improbable, must be the truth.
--- Sir Arthur Conan Doyle
On Wed, Jun 17, 2009 at 4:09 PM, D. Ryan Spott
All of mine are PPPoE so on the Winbox it's 0.0.0.0, presumably a null
value.
Try int wirel registration-table pr
Try int wirel registration-table get 0 last-ip
Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373
When you have eliminated the
I am going to be setting up a very short range (think 300ft) 5.2GHz
link. Do you think I would have any problem using a 5.8GHz grid for this
purpose? I have several 27dBi grids in stock and I want to save some of
the install cost.
These are the grids I have:
I am pretty sure they are snagging the radio name info from the neighbor
protocol (cdp)
Robert Andrews wrote:
I am of the opinion that their fights with StarOS has soured them on
interoperability. Note that Ubiquiti does show up in the MT AP with
the correct info, so someone has figured it
radio-name from MT wireless interfaces is not from CDP
Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373
When you have eliminated the impossible, that which remains, however
improbable, must be the truth.
--- Sir Arthur Conan Doyle
On Wed, Jun 10,
to share without getting to see the other guys too
:-
-Original Message-
From: mikrotik-boun...@mail.butchevans.com
[mailto:mikrotik-boun...@mail.butchevans.com] On Behalf Of Josh Luthman
Sent: Wednesday, June 10, 2009 9:12 AM
To: Mikrotik discussions
Subject: Re: [Mikrotik] Tranzeo
problem seems to be with WPA/AES and/or WPA2
Robert Andrews wrote:
that's a rog...
Chris Gotstein wrote:
wpa tkip?
Robert Andrews wrote:
No we do wpa, not wpa2 either... just wpa. Chris Gotstein wrote:
you doing AES though??
Robert Andrews wrote:
MT and tranzeo with WPA work great
Ok I would like some definite answers on what works and what doesn't. I
have 3 towers that I am dumping all the old StarOS Wrap boards off of and
going to RB411a. The only thing that attaches to these AP's is Tranzeo's.
I know that MT 3.17 works ok with Tranzeo's What about 3.24? What Tranzeo
There are issues with 4.0.2 if you are running WPA/AES on the Tranzeo
devices. Otherwise, i've been running 3.24 and 4.0.2 without encryption
without any problems.
Chris Gotstein
Sr Network Engineer
UP Logon/Computer Connection UP
500 N Stephenson Ave
Iron Mountain, MI 49801
Phone:
How can you set the radio name on the Tranzeo??? This is one of my
favorite features on Mikrotik.
On 6/8/09, Chris Gotstein ch...@uplogon.com wrote:
There are issues with 4.0.2 if you are running WPA/AES on the Tranzeo
devices. Otherwise, i've been running 3.24 and 4.0.2 without encryption
On Mon, 2009-06-08 at 11:21 -0400, Erik Turk wrote:
I miss being able to see the Radio Name from the Tranzeos in the
Registration List of the Mikrotiks. It means that I have to continue to
remember customers MAC addresses.
In the Mikrotik AP, do the following (Winbox instructions):
Manager
PCS-WIN
RCWiFi Wireless Internet Service
-Original Message-
From: mikrotik-boun...@mail.butchevans.com
[mailto:mikrotik-boun...@mail.butchevans.com] On Behalf Of Josh Luthman
Sent: Monday, June 08, 2009 12:56 PM
To: Mikrotik discussions
Subject: Re: [Mikrotik] Tranzeo - Mikrotik
: Monday, June 08, 2009 12:56 PM
To: Mikrotik discussions
Subject: Re: [Mikrotik] Tranzeo - Mikrotik versions
I do that sometimes, too. Works well but it drops the radio for a
second while you do it. Not a major concern, but neither is an itch
on the roof of your mouth :/
On 6/8/09, Butch Evans
-boun...@mail.butchevans.com] On Behalf Of Josh Luthman
Sent: Monday, June 08, 2009 2:18 PM
To: Mikrotik discussions
Subject: Re: [Mikrotik] Tranzeo - Mikrotik versions
I figured it was a MT proprietary thing in the frame actually. Didn't
realize it was SNMP related.
Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552
Wireless Internet Service
-Original Message-
From: mikrotik-boun...@mail.butchevans.com
[mailto:mikrotik-boun...@mail.butchevans.com] On Behalf Of Josh Luthman
Sent: Monday, June 08, 2009 2:18 PM
To: Mikrotik discussions
Subject: Re: [Mikrotik] Tranzeo - Mikrotik versions
I figured
On Mon, 2009-06-08 at 16:34 -0400, steve wrote:
I think your right. I think it is a Mikrotik special thing. Just not sure
why they didn't use the SNMP. Makes interoperability between vendors a lot
easier.
SNMP would be a nice option. They don't document this, but from what I
can tell from
MT and tranzeo with WPA work great here.. Solid as a rock, distances to
18 miles through heavy city noise/urban...
Robert
Chris Gotstein wrote:
There are issues with 4.0.2 if you are running WPA/AES on the Tranzeo
devices. Otherwise, i've been running 3.24 and 4.0.2 without
encryption
It would be nice if we could set the radio type, but we put that all in
the radio ID plus the end of the mac...
Butch Evans wrote:
On Mon, 2009-06-08 at 16:34 -0400, steve wrote:
I think your right. I think it is a Mikrotik special thing. Just not sure
why they didn't use the SNMP.
:-
:0
* ^From: *...@tranzeo\.*
/dev/null
-Original Message-
From: mikrotik-boun...@mail.butchevans.com
[mailto:mikrotik-boun...@mail.butchevans.com] On Behalf Of Butch Evans
Sent: Monday, June 08, 2009 4:13 PM
To: Mikrotik discussions; supp...@mikrotik.com
Subject: Re: [Mikrotik] Tranzeo
: Monday, June 08, 2009 4:13 PM
To: Mikrotik discussions; supp...@mikrotik.com
Subject: Re: [Mikrotik] Tranzeo - Mikrotik versions
On Mon, 2009-06-08 at 16:34 -0400, steve wrote:
I think your right. I think it is a Mikrotik special thing. Just not
sure
why they didn't use the SNMP. Makes
On Mon, 2009-06-08 at 16:46 -0700, Damian Wallace wrote:
They likely are doing it in the vendor extensions on the packet.
That has been my suspicion, but being as it isn't documented...
We do
both, the packet and SNMP. I'd gladly share our packet format with them
if they will share theirs
* ^From: *...@tranzeo\.*
/dev/null
-Original Message-
From: mikrotik-boun...@mail.butchevans.com
[mailto:mikrotik-boun...@mail.butchevans.com] On Behalf Of Butch Evans
Sent: Monday, June 08, 2009 4:13 PM
To: Mikrotik discussions; supp...@mikrotik.com
Subject: Re: [Mikrotik] Tranzeo - Mikrotik
I am of the opinion that their fights with StarOS has soured them on
interoperability. Note that Ubiquiti does show up in the MT AP with
the correct info, so someone has figured it out, don't know if that was
with help or without.
Robert
Butch Evans wrote:
On Mon, 2009-06-08 at 16:46
The far side is a tr5a-24, the regular panel antenna.That is a
customer...
Josh Luthman wrote:
Are both antennas 28dbi? That would explain why you can hit 18 miles.
I was think you had a ptmp ap with a customer at that distance.
On 6/8/09, Robert Andrews rob...@avantwireless.com
Right but with a dish you're not doing ptmp.
On 6/8/09, Robert Andrews rob...@avantwireless.com wrote:
The far side is a tr5a-24, the regular panel antenna.That is a
customer...
Josh Luthman wrote:
Are both antennas 28dbi? That would explain why you can hit 18 miles.
I was think you
you doing AES though??
Robert Andrews wrote:
MT and tranzeo with WPA work great here.. Solid as a rock, distances to
18 miles through heavy city noise/urban...
Robert
Chris Gotstein wrote:
There are issues with 4.0.2 if you are running WPA/AES on the Tranzeo
devices. Otherwise, i've been
No we do wpa, not wpa2 either... just wpa.
Chris Gotstein wrote:
you doing AES though??
Robert Andrews wrote:
MT and tranzeo with WPA work great here.. Solid as a rock, distances
to 18 miles through heavy city noise/urban...
Robert
Chris Gotstein wrote:
There are issues with 4.0.2 if
wpa tkip?
Robert Andrews wrote:
No we do wpa, not wpa2 either... just wpa.
Chris Gotstein wrote:
you doing AES though??
Robert Andrews wrote:
MT and tranzeo with WPA work great here.. Solid as a rock, distances
to 18 miles through heavy city noise/urban...
Robert
Chris Gotstein wrote:
that's a rog...
Chris Gotstein wrote:
wpa tkip?
Robert Andrews wrote:
No we do wpa, not wpa2 either... just wpa. Chris Gotstein wrote:
you doing AES though??
Robert Andrews wrote:
MT and tranzeo with WPA work great here.. Solid as a rock,
distances to 18 miles through heavy city
32 matches
Mail list logo
