Re: [WISPA] VoIP Vendor Recommendation
John, Did you switch from Momentum to Nextiva? I didn't think Nextiva had a true wholesale offering? They want to have you sell their brand, and get a lousy 20 to 50 percent commission. We are buying seats for under $8, and then marking them up to $20+ dollar per seat. On Mon, Mar 13, 2017 at 4:14 PM, John Hendrich wrote: > We switched to Nextiva and haven't regretted it for a second. Their > support is US based and top notch. Email me offline if you want our rep. > She did a great job for us. > > John Hendrich > > > On Mon, 2017-03-13 at 09:50 -0500, Joey Craig wrote: > > We are having many problems with our current VoIP vendor and would like > any recommendations that anyone would have. > > > > Currently, our phone service for in our office is not working and hasn’t > since last Friday. > > > > Please make any recommendations ASAP. Please use my mobile number listed > below with any phone calls. > > > > Thank You. > > > > Joey Craig > > Firenet1,Com > > Phone: (662) 510-0764 > > Mobile: (662) 404-1118 > > > ___ > Wireless mailing > listWireless@wispa.orghttp://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > > > > ___ > Wireless mailing list > Wireless@wispa.org > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > > ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
[WISPA] Procera vs Sandive
How much does Procera and Sandive cost for WISP deployements? How are these products priced, and where do they fit into the network? Which of the two vendors has the better solution for WISPs, FTTH, and DSL networks? Is one more focused on the WISP market than the other? Do you deploy either of these two solutions? Would you deploy them again if you were building from the ground up? Are there technologies required when bandwidth is cheap, and the access network (GPON for example) has little to no congestion? ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
Re: [WISPA] Static IP Pricing
Seth, Looks like you are right based on this http://www.ipv4auctions.com/previous_auctions/ So that comes out to $15 per IP, but that's a one-time cost to me right? The I assume I have to pay ARIN fees on the block I would buy once transferred to me. So on a monthly basis, how do you calculate the cost of the IP? So most of you would pay for the actual cost of the IP within the 1st month or two of monthly service to the customer? On Thu, Feb 2, 2017 at 9:36 AM, Seth Mattinen wrote: > On 2/2/17 7:33 AM, Colton Conor wrote: > > Let me ask this a different way. If I ran out of IP space today, and had > > to go buy a /24 for someone how much would that cost on the open market? > > Probably $4k for a /24. > > ~Seth > ___ > Wireless mailing list > Wireless@wispa.org > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
Re: [WISPA] Static IP Pricing
Let me ask this a different way. If I ran out of IP space today, and had to go buy a /24 for someone how much would that cost on the open market? I know you can't get them from ARIN anymore, so would it be a per year or per month cost from whoever we leased them from? The customer is on a bonded VDSL2 connection. 12 lines to be exact, so it is a business class product with $500+ per month pricing. However, charging the client an extra $620 per month for 62 statics seems excessive. On Thu, Feb 2, 2017 at 9:29 AM, Bryce Duchcherer wrote: > Agreed, at that point you should be selling them a dedicated connection, > not just a regular business account. > > I don’t think that $5-10/IP is too much. > > > > Bryce D > > NETAGO > > > > *From:* wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] *On > Behalf Of *Brad Belton > *Sent:* Thursday, February 2, 2017 8:25 AM > *To:* 'WISPA General List' > > *Subject:* Re: [WISPA] Static IP Pricing > > > > If they are able to legitimately justify a /26 in IP space then it’s > possible you aren’t charging enough for your service. > > > > Brad > > > > *From:* wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org > ] *On Behalf Of *Tim Way > *Sent:* Thursday, February 02, 2017 9:14 AM > *To:* WISPA General List > *Subject:* Re: [WISPA] Static IP Pricing > > > > Life in IPv4 is getting more expensive as scarcity increases. > > > > On Feb 2, 2017 9:13 AM, "Colton Conor" wrote: > > So a /26 has 64 total IPs, but only 62 are useable. So you are saying you > would charge $5 - $10 per IP times 62 IPs? The cost of their statics would > then cost more than the actual service? > > > > On Thu, Feb 2, 2017 at 8:44 AM, Scott Pope wrote: > > We charge $8.50 per month/per IP for our Static IP addresses. This has > been our pricing for 10+ years. > > > > > -- > > Scott Pope > > Network and Operations Officer > > Arbuckle Communications, LLC > > Office: 580-226-1234 <(580)%20226-1234> > > Mobile: 580-277-1108 <(580)%20277-1108> > > sp...@arbucklecomm.com > > www.arbucklecomm.com > > *"We Are Built For Business"* > > > > > > On Thu, Feb 2, 2017 at 7:16 AM, Troy Gibson, Byhalia.net > wrote: > > $5/month/IP > > > > > > > > Sent from my Verizon, Samsung Galaxy smartphone > > > > Original message > > From: Judd Dare > > Date: 2/1/17 9:28 PM (GMT-05:00) > > To: WISPA General List > > Subject: Re: [WISPA] Static IP Pricing > > > > Typical cost is around $1-2/IP/Month with various fiber providers. > > I've been planning to charge something like $10-20/IP/Mo for commercial in > order to only sell to people who really need it. > > > > On Wed, Feb 1, 2017 at 7:22 PM, Colton Conor > wrote: > > How much do you charge business customers for static IPs? > > > > Comcast Business class cable internet charges > > *1 - $14.95/mo.* > > * 5 - $19.95/mo* > > * 13 - $34.95/mo*. > > > > What do fiber providers charge? > > > > I have a potential client that currently has a /27 with his current > provider, and would like at least a /27 or preferably a /26 from us. > > > > We only have a /21 worth of space from ARIN. > > > ___ > Wireless mailing list > Wireless@wispa.org > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > > > > > ___ > Wireless mailing list > Wireless@wispa.org > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > > > > > ___ > Wireless mailing list > Wireless@wispa.org > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > > > > > ___ > Wireless mailing list > Wireless@wispa.org > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > > ___ > Wireless mailing list > Wireless@wispa.org > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > > ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
Re: [WISPA] Static IP Pricing
Agreed, but I need to be able to justify this pricing somehow. What does AT&T charge if you get their Fiber MIS product? Is it unlimited with justification or what? What are most fiber providers doing even the ones that have extremely large blocks? On Thu, Feb 2, 2017 at 9:14 AM, Tim Way wrote: > Life in IPv4 is getting more expensive as scarcity increases. > > On Feb 2, 2017 9:13 AM, "Colton Conor" wrote: > >> So a /26 has 64 total IPs, but only 62 are useable. So you are saying you >> would charge $5 - $10 per IP times 62 IPs? The cost of their statics would >> then cost more than the actual service? >> >> On Thu, Feb 2, 2017 at 8:44 AM, Scott Pope >> wrote: >> >>> We charge $8.50 per month/per IP for our Static IP addresses. This has >>> been our pricing for 10+ years. >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Scott Pope >>> Network and Operations Officer >>> Arbuckle Communications, LLC >>> Office: 580-226-1234 <(580)%20226-1234> >>> Mobile: 580-277-1108 <(580)%20277-1108> >>> sp...@arbucklecomm.com >>> www.arbucklecomm.com >>> >>> *"We Are Built For Business"* >>> >>> >>> On Thu, Feb 2, 2017 at 7:16 AM, Troy Gibson, Byhalia.net < >>> t...@byhalia.net> wrote: >>> >>>> $5/month/IP >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Sent from my Verizon, Samsung Galaxy smartphone >>>> >>>> Original message >>>> From: Judd Dare >>>> Date: 2/1/17 9:28 PM (GMT-05:00) >>>> To: WISPA General List >>>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] Static IP Pricing >>>> >>>> Typical cost is around $1-2/IP/Month with various fiber providers. >>>> >>>> I've been planning to charge something like $10-20/IP/Mo for commercial >>>> in order to only sell to people who really need it. >>>> >>>> On Wed, Feb 1, 2017 at 7:22 PM, Colton Conor >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> How much do you charge business customers for static IPs? >>>>> >>>>> Comcast Business class cable internet charges >>>>> *1 - $14.95/mo.* >>>>> * 5 - $19.95/mo* >>>>> * 13 - $34.95/mo*. >>>>> >>>>> What do fiber providers charge? >>>>> >>>>> I have a potential client that currently has a /27 with his current >>>>> provider, and would like at least a /27 or preferably a /26 from us. >>>>> >>>>> We only have a /21 worth of space from ARIN. >>>>> >>>>> ___ >>>>> Wireless mailing list >>>>> Wireless@wispa.org >>>>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> ___ >>>> Wireless mailing list >>>> Wireless@wispa.org >>>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless >>>> >>>> >>> >>> ___ >>> Wireless mailing list >>> Wireless@wispa.org >>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless >>> >>> >> >> ___ >> Wireless mailing list >> Wireless@wispa.org >> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless >> >> > ___ > Wireless mailing list > Wireless@wispa.org > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > > ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
Re: [WISPA] Static IP Pricing
So a /26 has 64 total IPs, but only 62 are useable. So you are saying you would charge $5 - $10 per IP times 62 IPs? The cost of their statics would then cost more than the actual service? On Thu, Feb 2, 2017 at 8:44 AM, Scott Pope wrote: > We charge $8.50 per month/per IP for our Static IP addresses. This has > been our pricing for 10+ years. > > > -- > Scott Pope > Network and Operations Officer > Arbuckle Communications, LLC > Office: 580-226-1234 <(580)%20226-1234> > Mobile: 580-277-1108 <(580)%20277-1108> > sp...@arbucklecomm.com > www.arbucklecomm.com > > *"We Are Built For Business"* > > > On Thu, Feb 2, 2017 at 7:16 AM, Troy Gibson, Byhalia.net > wrote: > >> $5/month/IP >> >> >> >> Sent from my Verizon, Samsung Galaxy smartphone >> >> Original message >> From: Judd Dare >> Date: 2/1/17 9:28 PM (GMT-05:00) >> To: WISPA General List >> Subject: Re: [WISPA] Static IP Pricing >> >> Typical cost is around $1-2/IP/Month with various fiber providers. >> >> I've been planning to charge something like $10-20/IP/Mo for commercial >> in order to only sell to people who really need it. >> >> On Wed, Feb 1, 2017 at 7:22 PM, Colton Conor >> wrote: >> >>> How much do you charge business customers for static IPs? >>> >>> Comcast Business class cable internet charges >>> *1 - $14.95/mo.* >>> * 5 - $19.95/mo* >>> * 13 - $34.95/mo*. >>> >>> What do fiber providers charge? >>> >>> I have a potential client that currently has a /27 with his current >>> provider, and would like at least a /27 or preferably a /26 from us. >>> >>> We only have a /21 worth of space from ARIN. >>> >>> ___ >>> Wireless mailing list >>> Wireless@wispa.org >>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless >>> >>> >> >> ___ >> Wireless mailing list >> Wireless@wispa.org >> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless >> >> > > ___ > Wireless mailing list > Wireless@wispa.org > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > > ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
[WISPA] Static IP Pricing
How much do you charge business customers for static IPs? Comcast Business class cable internet charges *1 - $14.95/mo.* * 5 - $19.95/mo* * 13 - $34.95/mo*. What do fiber providers charge? I have a potential client that currently has a /27 with his current provider, and would like at least a /27 or preferably a /26 from us. We only have a /21 worth of space from ARIN. ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
[WISPA] PLANET Technology Ethernet Switches
For those of you using PLANET Technology Corporation's switches, what is your overall thoughts on their product? The price point of their products looks great. Reading over their user guides they seem to have the L2/L3 security options needed for access networks. Hows their SNMP implementation? What chip sets are most of their products using (Broadcom ?). Is their operating system / CLI the same across their products? How is technical support (if such thing exists) and bug fixes? My only worry is that most of their products latest software release is from years ago, and usually there is only one update after their initial product release. That either means their products are so good from launch that they have very litter bugs, or there are so few people using them and reporting bugs that the have little reason to fix them. ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
Re: [WISPA] MDU Ethernet Switch
I see the switching results specs of the CRS, and they do appear to be line rate. However, its still very unclear if enabling those features on the CRS features list use the slow CPU, and then get you into the bridging results which are much slower than line rate. I don't see the L2 security features I am looking for. Are they missing from Mikrotik, or just called something else? On Thu, Nov 3, 2016 at 8:47 AM, Faisal Imtiaz wrote: > I have not used them, buthere is what you are asking about.. > > http://wiki.mikrotik.com/wiki/Manual:CRS_features > > http://wiki.mikrotik.com/wiki/Manual:CRS_examples > > specs on performance as a switch and or Router are listed on the bottom of > the specs's page on the routerboard.com web site. > > https://routerboard.com/CRS112-8G-4S-IN > > > > Regards > > Faisal Imtiaz > Snappy Internet & Telecom > 7266 SW 48 Street > Miami, FL 33155 > Tel: 305 663 5518 x 232 > > Help-desk: (305)663-5518 Option 2 or Email: supp...@snappytelecom.net > > -- > > *From: *"Colton Conor" > *To: *"WISPA General List" > *Sent: *Thursday, November 3, 2016 9:27:18 AM > *Subject: *Re: [WISPA] MDU Ethernet Switch > > Dan and Faisal, > > I am now looking at the CRS112-8G-4S-IN. Cost and port wise its seems to > be a great fit for this application. Looks like you can also power it by > POE In which is nice. > > Can you help me understand how something like a CRS112-8G-4S-IN compares > to a tradition Mikrotik router that has a switch build in like > the RB2011iLS-IN? > > Does Mikrotik support the following features you would find in a typical > access platform like: > > > Private VLAN (Protected port) > DHCP Snooping and DHCP Option 82 > port security > limit the number MACs per Port > > Would features like these be done on the switch, or on the slow CPU > causing it to not be line rate? At this point, I don't understand what > would be line rate features, and what would be CPU slow features. My > understanding is there is a switch interface section? > > For comparison, it looks like the Planet switch supports all of these > features http://www.planet.com.tw/en/product/product.php?id=48527#spec > > > > On Thu, Nov 3, 2016 at 1:23 AM, Dan Harling > wrote: > >> RouterOS has a CLI in addition to the Winbox GUI, and you can connect >> via MAC (from the same subnet) as well as IP. It also has 'netwatch' >> and scripting, very configurable local & remote logging, traffic >> shaping, pretty much all you'd expect from a proper router. >> >> The devices I mentioned have switch chips that allow either some or >> all ports to operate at wire speed. But you'd also have the option of >> going to a routed topology, should that become desirable in the >> future. (If your design links pairs of these devices in addition to >> the home runs, for fail-over in case of a break, a routed network >> would let you make use of that capacity; whereas in a bridged network, >> STP would simply disable the extra link until it's needed.) >> >> >> On Wed, Nov 2, 2016 at 3:25 PM, Colton Conor >> wrote: >> > Daniel, >> > >> > What functions would I want in RouterOS that are no in SwOS for this >> > application? Can RouterOS devices be turned into a switch, and operate >> at >> > full line speed rates? 1 Gbps in and out? >> > >> > On Wed, Nov 2, 2016 at 1:59 PM, Dan Harling >> wrote: >> >> >> >> On Wed, Nov 2, 2016 at 2:43 PM, Colton Conor >> >> wrote: >> >> > >> >> > - At Least 1 SFP fiber uplink port. 2 would be nice for daisy >> chaining, >> >> > but >> >> > not required. >> >> > - 4 to 8 Copper Gigabit Ports. I don't need POE output power on these >> >> > ports. >> >> > - SNMP For remote monitoring >> >> > - CLI or some sort of web based remote management >> >> > - Temperature Hardened or able to be in a hot attic >> >> > - Some sort of L2 port isolation or private vlans where other >> >> > subscribers >> >> > can see each other. All traffic goes in and out of uplink >> >> > - Rate limiting for each individual port >> >> > - Full duplex speed and wireline switching is preferred. >> >> > - We be nice to be remotely powered using PoE in, but not required. >> ... >> >> There have been several updates to SwOS over the past couple years >> >> (cur
Re: [WISPA] MDU Ethernet Switch
Dan and Faisal, I am now looking at the CRS112-8G-4S-IN. Cost and port wise its seems to be a great fit for this application. Looks like you can also power it by POE In which is nice. Can you help me understand how something like a CRS112-8G-4S-IN compares to a tradition Mikrotik router that has a switch build in like the RB2011iLS-IN? Does Mikrotik support the following features you would find in a typical access platform like: Private VLAN (Protected port) DHCP Snooping and DHCP Option 82 port security limit the number MACs per Port Would features like these be done on the switch, or on the slow CPU causing it to not be line rate? At this point, I don't understand what would be line rate features, and what would be CPU slow features. My understanding is there is a switch interface section? For comparison, it looks like the Planet switch supports all of these features http://www.planet.com.tw/en/product/product.php?id=48527#spec On Thu, Nov 3, 2016 at 1:23 AM, Dan Harling wrote: > RouterOS has a CLI in addition to the Winbox GUI, and you can connect > via MAC (from the same subnet) as well as IP. It also has 'netwatch' > and scripting, very configurable local & remote logging, traffic > shaping, pretty much all you'd expect from a proper router. > > The devices I mentioned have switch chips that allow either some or > all ports to operate at wire speed. But you'd also have the option of > going to a routed topology, should that become desirable in the > future. (If your design links pairs of these devices in addition to > the home runs, for fail-over in case of a break, a routed network > would let you make use of that capacity; whereas in a bridged network, > STP would simply disable the extra link until it's needed.) > > > On Wed, Nov 2, 2016 at 3:25 PM, Colton Conor > wrote: > > Daniel, > > > > What functions would I want in RouterOS that are no in SwOS for this > > application? Can RouterOS devices be turned into a switch, and operate at > > full line speed rates? 1 Gbps in and out? > > > > On Wed, Nov 2, 2016 at 1:59 PM, Dan Harling > wrote: > >> > >> On Wed, Nov 2, 2016 at 2:43 PM, Colton Conor > >> wrote: > >> > > >> > - At Least 1 SFP fiber uplink port. 2 would be nice for daisy > chaining, > >> > but > >> > not required. > >> > - 4 to 8 Copper Gigabit Ports. I don't need POE output power on these > >> > ports. > >> > - SNMP For remote monitoring > >> > - CLI or some sort of web based remote management > >> > - Temperature Hardened or able to be in a hot attic > >> > - Some sort of L2 port isolation or private vlans where other > >> > subscribers > >> > can see each other. All traffic goes in and out of uplink > >> > - Rate limiting for each individual port > >> > - Full duplex speed and wireline switching is preferred. > >> > - We be nice to be remotely powered using PoE in, but not required. > ... > >> There have been several updates to SwOS over the past couple years > >> (currently at 1.17), but I would recommend a 2011, 3011, or CRS--all > >> of which run RouterOS--over a SwOS device. ROS has far, far more > >> features that you would want to have in this situation. (I only use > >> SwOS for passive PoE distribution: RB260GSP.) > > > Daniel Harling <>< > Engineering, Cape Ann Communications > 183 Main Street, Gloucester, MA 01930 > 978-879-7744 (cell) > harl...@capeanncomm.com > ___ > Wireless mailing list > Wireless@wispa.org > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
Re: [WISPA] MDU Ethernet Switch
Bryce, While the ME-3400G-12CS-A does have 12 ports, at over $350+ on the used market I don't think its a viable option. On Wed, Nov 2, 2016 at 9:53 PM, Bryce Duchcherer wrote: > Cisco ME3400. There is a 12-port Ethernet/sfp combo version. > > > > Bryce Duchcherer > > NETAGO > > > > *From:* wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] *On > Behalf Of *Colton Conor > *Sent:* Wednesday, November 2, 2016 12:44 > *To:* WISPA General List > *Subject:* [WISPA] MDU Ethernet Switch > > > > I am in need of a recommendation for a small Ethernet switch for an MDU > applications. This is a garden style community where each building has > between 4 to 8 units inside of the building. There are 15 buildings on the > property. We would run a new CAT6 drop from a central point in the building > to each unit. This central point would either be in the attic, or on the > side of the exterior wall in some type of enclosure. > > > > Then we would run fiber uplink from each building's switch to a headend > room. The headend room would have the aggergation fiber switch, a router, > and an uplink to the internet. > > > > We would hand a copper Ethernet hand off to the client in a unit, and then > the could use whatever router they wanted, or plug their computer in > directly to the wall. > > > > I think all I need is a switch per building (not a router), and ideally > this switch needs to have: > > > > - At Least 1 SFP fiber uplink port. 2 would be nice for daisy chaining, > but not required. > > - 4 to 8 Copper Gigabit Ports. I don't need POE output power on these > ports. > > - SNMP For remote monitoring > > - CLI or some sort of web based remote management > > - Temperature Hardened or able to be in a hot attic > > - Some sort of L2 port isolation or private vlans where other subscribers > can see each other. All traffic goes in and out of uplink > > - Rate limiting for each individual port > > - Full duplex speed and wireline switching is preferred. > > - We be nice to be remotely powered using PoE in, but not required. Might > be hard however to get power to the attic or side of building. > > > > > > So far, options that come to mind are: > > > > https://routerboard.com/RB260GS for $36. Looks like a good option, but > not sure about SwitchOS. Worried Mikrotik won't continue to improve > switchOS. Feature set seems limited. Not sure about port isolation options? > Says it support Poe-In for power. Temp range looks good. No CLI. > > > > https://www.ubnt.com/edgemax/edgerouter-x-sfp/ $72. Double the price of > the Mikrotik. OS seems more robust. Seem more like a router than switch so > might be overkill for application. NO Poe-IN power option, but could I used > a passive poe injector to still power it remotely? > > > > https://www.ubnt.com/edgemax/edgepoint/ The EP-R6 is about $105. Looks > like its basically the edgerouter-x-sfp but in an outdoor case, and this > model supports PoE Input. This smaller unit doesn't seem to have any fiber > slack management like the other units in the edgepoint lineup. Includes POE > injector to power unit. > > > > I was thinking maybe a GPON ONT per building that has 4 to 8 Ethernet > ports on it. However, there are no small GPON OLTs out there. Plus, most > outdoor ONT's are like $250+ each. > > > > > > What else is out there? I would say price range would be sub $200 per > building max. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ___ > Wireless mailing list > Wireless@wispa.org > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > > ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
Re: [WISPA] MDU Ethernet Switch
Saurabh, Thank you for the information. You have some interesting products to say the least. Basically, it looks like low cost pon solutions which is what I am looking for. Can you provide more information on "The 8 port out door switch ONU allows you to give Ethernet ports to customers house and option has reversed POE"? I do not see this on your website. On Wed, Nov 2, 2016 at 8:10 PM, Saurabh Nagpal wrote: > Hello Colton , > REVO has all the solutions in FTTH application including 24 port MDU with > the voice feature L2 managed > http://multilink.us/REVO-624FE-24FXS-24-Port-24-FXS-ONU_p_910.html > > You can drop cat 5 to customer house and draw voice too in same port in > analogue format. > > In case you want to use any other switch like Mikrotik we have solutions > so that you can use EMS based OLT switch at central location which allows > you to create point to multipoint distribution network on passive fibre > without carrying power. > http://multilink.us/REVO-612-OLT-2-Ports_p_909.html > > And use SFP https://routerboard.com/SFPONU > To act Mikrotik or Cisco as ONU if it has SFP slot. > > > But in case you want to use Indoor or outdoor ONU the options are many > > The 8 port out door switch ONU allows you to give Ethernet ports to > customers house and option has reversed POE , so power is drown from any of > the customer drops. So no need to arrange power at drop location. > > http://multilink.us/GPON-Basic-Link-_b_2.html > > You can just use fast connector and splitter using a clever in case You > don't want to use FUSION Splicer although we have that too . Cost is very > reasonable. > Offer can be given as on revenue sharing model also for the entire > equipment cost as we are confident of the solution which perfectly works > and gives performance too. > We are able experts in this case > Also Miikrotik master distributors > > We can guide you more about it weather you want to use just switches or > ONU > Please call us or drop a mail > Saurabh > Multilink Solutions Inc > > > > Sent from my iPhone > > On 02-Nov-2016, at 2:43 PM, Colton Conor wrote: > > I am in need of a recommendation for a small Ethernet switch for an MDU > applications. This is a garden style community where each building has > between 4 to 8 units inside of the building. There are 15 buildings on the > property. We would run a new CAT6 drop from a central point in the building > to each unit. This central point would either be in the attic, or on the > side of the exterior wall in some type of enclosure. > > Then we would run fiber uplink from each building's switch to a headend > room. The headend room would have the aggergation fiber switch, a router, > and an uplink to the internet. > > We would hand a copper Ethernet hand off to the client in a unit, and then > the could use whatever router they wanted, or plug their computer in > directly to the wall. > > I think all I need is a switch per building (not a router), and ideally > this switch needs to have: > > - At Least 1 SFP fiber uplink port. 2 would be nice for daisy chaining, > but not required. > - 4 to 8 Copper Gigabit Ports. I don't need POE output power on these > ports. > - SNMP For remote monitoring > - CLI or some sort of web based remote management > - Temperature Hardened or able to be in a hot attic > - Some sort of L2 port isolation or private vlans where other subscribers > can see each other. All traffic goes in and out of uplink > - Rate limiting for each individual port > - Full duplex speed and wireline switching is preferred. > - We be nice to be remotely powered using PoE in, but not required. Might > be hard however to get power to the attic or side of building. > > > So far, options that come to mind are: > > https://routerboard.com/RB260GS for $36. Looks like a good option, but > not sure about SwitchOS. Worried Mikrotik won't continue to improve > switchOS. Feature set seems limited. Not sure about port isolation options? > Says it support Poe-In for power. Temp range looks good. No CLI. > > https://www.ubnt.com/edgemax/edgerouter-x-sfp/ $72. Double the price of > the Mikrotik. OS seems more robust. Seem more like a router than switch so > might be overkill for application. NO Poe-IN power option, but could I used > a passive poe injector to still power it remotely? > > https://www.ubnt.com/edgemax/edgepoint/ The EP-R6 is about $105. Looks > like its basically the edgerouter-x-sfp but in an outdoor case, and this > model supports PoE Input. This smaller unit doesn't seem to have any fiber > slack management like the other units in the edgepoint lineup. Includes POE > injector to power unit. > > I was thinking
Re: [WISPA] MDU Ethernet Switch
Gino, Do you have any expierence with that Planet switch? I believe its this one: http://www.planet.com.tw/en/product/product.php?id=48527#ov Price point looks great at $118 https://planetechusa.com/gsd-1002m-ipv6-managed-8-port-10-100-1000mbps-2-port-100-1000x-sfp-gigabit-desktop-ethernet-switch-poe-pd-external-pwr/ How is Planet's OS compared to the other solutions? On Wed, Nov 2, 2016 at 7:16 PM, Gino Villarini wrote: > Planet has a nice managed 8 Gige 2 SFP port SW you can power with POE, > GS-1002 or somethink like that… iirc $150 price > > From: on behalf of Colton Conor < > colton.co...@gmail.com> > > > > *Gino Villarini* > President > Metro Office Park #18 Suite 304 Guaynabo, Puerto Rico 00968 > > Reply-To: WISPA General List > Date: Wednesday, November 2, 2016 at 8:13 PM > To: WISPA General List > Subject: Re: [WISPA] MDU Ethernet Switch > > I will agree the cisco 3750's are awesome for the feature set and price, > but the form factor is just not there for me. They can not be remotely > powered by POE input, and the only the 24 count units and higher have SFP > and GIG-e ports. The 12 port versions are all SFP's only. Yes, I am aware > there are copper SFP's, but that adds to cost. These switches would require > a larger case, take up more power, and space. I don't think this is an > valid option for this environment. > > > On Wed, Nov 2, 2016 at 6:41 PM, Eric Tykwinski > wrote: > >> Late to the discussion, but my 2 cents. >> >> Personally the 3750 switches are kick ass, personally I run the 3750E’s >> in my home lab with ISIS to a SRX. >> They are still EOL and dirt cheap as well with 10Gb uplinks. >> >> But I agree with Daniel Harling, and would probably go with 3011’s with >> the 10Gb uplinks. >> They still have the ASIC switch hardware in ROS so you aren’t loosing >> much at L2 and can still do VLAN isolation as well as routing. >> The CRS is severely hampered by the proc on any routing, so I would stay >> away from it. >> >> > On Nov 2, 2016, at 7:08 PM, Tim Way wrote: >> > >> > They come in all shapes and sizes. >> > >> > http://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/products/switches/catalyst-3750 >> -series-switches/models-comparison.html >> > >> > You can find used 24 port ones cheap on eBay or surplus as others have >> suggested. There are compact 8/12/16 port models but they typically use >> different chipsets so I shy away from us in them. >> > >> > If you need a good 10/40gb capable fiber switch the 3850-xs work great. >> They have a pretty nice complement of features to include neat stuff like >> on device packet capture with IP Services and you can buy support for them >> from TAC if that wets your whistle. >> > >> >> >> ___ >> Wireless mailing list >> Wireless@wispa.org >> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless >> > > > ___ > Wireless mailing list > Wireless@wispa.org > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > > ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
Re: [WISPA] MDU Ethernet Switch
I will agree the cisco 3750's are awesome for the feature set and price, but the form factor is just not there for me. They can not be remotely powered by POE input, and the only the 24 count units and higher have SFP and GIG-e ports. The 12 port versions are all SFP's only. Yes, I am aware there are copper SFP's, but that adds to cost. These switches would require a larger case, take up more power, and space. I don't think this is an valid option for this environment. On Wed, Nov 2, 2016 at 6:41 PM, Eric Tykwinski wrote: > Late to the discussion, but my 2 cents. > > Personally the 3750 switches are kick ass, personally I run the 3750E’s in > my home lab with ISIS to a SRX. > They are still EOL and dirt cheap as well with 10Gb uplinks. > > But I agree with Daniel Harling, and would probably go with 3011’s with > the 10Gb uplinks. > They still have the ASIC switch hardware in ROS so you aren’t loosing much > at L2 and can still do VLAN isolation as well as routing. > The CRS is severely hampered by the proc on any routing, so I would stay > away from it. > > > On Nov 2, 2016, at 7:08 PM, Tim Way wrote: > > > > They come in all shapes and sizes. > > > > http://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/products/switches/catalyst- > 3750-series-switches/models-comparison.html > > > > You can find used 24 port ones cheap on eBay or surplus as others have > suggested. There are compact 8/12/16 port models but they typically use > different chipsets so I shy away from us in them. > > > > If you need a good 10/40gb capable fiber switch the 3850-xs work great. > They have a pretty nice complement of features to include neat stuff like > on device packet capture with IP Services and you can buy support for them > from TAC if that wets your whistle. > > > > > ___ > Wireless mailing list > Wireless@wispa.org > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
Re: [WISPA] MDU Ethernet Switch
Mike, I agree with you on price point and functionality, but the form factor is a concern. By the looks of the switch, it is not temperature hardened. Plus, there is no way to remotely power it. Meaning I have to get the landlord to supply power to wherever I am putting this switch. On Wed, Nov 2, 2016 at 4:02 PM, Mike Francis wrote: > For the price, functionality and stability I think it is a very good > choice... Especially if you are going to do more of these, then standardize > on something. Who cares if it has too many ports. > > http://www.ebay.com/itm/Cisco-Catalyst-3750-24-Port- > Ethernet-Switch-WS-C3750-24TS-S-/262701129682?hash=item3d2a351fd2:g: > bPAAAOSwXeJYGPZy > > Regards, > John Michael Francis II > JMF Solutions, Inc > Wavefly - Internet Voip Cloud > INC 5000 #2593 > CRN Fast Growth #105 > 251-517-5069 > http://jmfsolutions.net > http://wavefly.com > > "People are unreasonable, illogical, and self-centered. Love them anyway. > If you do good, people may accuse you of selfish motives. Do good anyway. > If you are successful, you may win false friends and true enemies. Succeed > anyway. The good you do today may be forgotten tomorrow. Do good anyway. > Honesty and transparency make you vulnerable. Be honest and transparent > anyway. What you spend years building may be destroyed overnight. Build > anyway. People who really want help may attack you if you help them. Help > them anyway. Give the world the best you have and you may get hurt. Give > the world your best anyway." By: Mother Teresa > On 11/2/2016 3:52 PM, Colton Conor wrote: > > Mike, > > Isn't a Cisco 3750 switch a 24 or 48 port switch? I would think that would > be overkill since I only need 4 to 8 ports? > > On Wed, Nov 2, 2016 at 3:47 PM, Mike Francis > wrote: > >> We have ton of MDUs, Cisco 3750 switches. >> John Michael Francis II >> JMF Solutions, Inc >> Wavefly - Internet Voip Cloud >> INC 5000 #2593 >> CRN Fast Growth #105 >> 251-517-5069 >> http://jmfsolutions.net >> http://wavefly.com >> >> "People are unreasonable, illogical, and self-centered. Love them anyway. >> If you do good, people may accuse you of selfish motives. Do good anyway. >> If you are successful, you may win false friends and true enemies. Succeed >> anyway. The good you do today may be forgotten tomorrow. Do good anyway. >> Honesty and transparency make you vulnerable. Be honest and transparent >> anyway. What you spend years building may be destroyed overnight. Build >> anyway. People who really want help may attack you if you help them. Help >> them anyway. Give the world the best you have and you may get hurt. Give >> the world your best anyway." By: Mother Teresa >> On 11/2/2016 1:43 PM, Colton Conor wrote: >> >> I am in need of a recommendation for a small Ethernet switch for an MDU >> applications. This is a garden style community where each building has >> between 4 to 8 units inside of the building. There are 15 buildings on the >> property. We would run a new CAT6 drop from a central point in the building >> to each unit. This central point would either be in the attic, or on the >> side of the exterior wall in some type of enclosure. >> >> Then we would run fiber uplink from each building's switch to a headend >> room. The headend room would have the aggergation fiber switch, a router, >> and an uplink to the internet. >> >> We would hand a copper Ethernet hand off to the client in a unit, and >> then the could use whatever router they wanted, or plug their computer in >> directly to the wall. >> >> I think all I need is a switch per building (not a router), and ideally >> this switch needs to have: >> >> - At Least 1 SFP fiber uplink port. 2 would be nice for daisy chaining, >> but not required. >> - 4 to 8 Copper Gigabit Ports. I don't need POE output power on these >> ports. >> - SNMP For remote monitoring >> - CLI or some sort of web based remote management >> - Temperature Hardened or able to be in a hot attic >> - Some sort of L2 port isolation or private vlans where other subscribers >> can see each other. All traffic goes in and out of uplink >> - Rate limiting for each individual port >> - Full duplex speed and wireline switching is preferred. >> - We be nice to be remotely powered using PoE in, but not required. Might >> be hard however to get power to the attic or side of building. >> >> >> So far, options that come to mind are: >> >> https://routerboard.com/RB260GS for $36. Looks like a good option, but >> not sure about Switch
Re: [WISPA] MDU Ethernet Switch
Mike, Isn't a Cisco 3750 switch a 24 or 48 port switch? I would think that would be overkill since I only need 4 to 8 ports? On Wed, Nov 2, 2016 at 3:47 PM, Mike Francis wrote: > We have ton of MDUs, Cisco 3750 switches. > John Michael Francis II > JMF Solutions, Inc > Wavefly - Internet Voip Cloud > INC 5000 #2593 > CRN Fast Growth #105 > 251-517-5069 > http://jmfsolutions.net > http://wavefly.com > > "People are unreasonable, illogical, and self-centered. Love them anyway. > If you do good, people may accuse you of selfish motives. Do good anyway. > If you are successful, you may win false friends and true enemies. Succeed > anyway. The good you do today may be forgotten tomorrow. Do good anyway. > Honesty and transparency make you vulnerable. Be honest and transparent > anyway. What you spend years building may be destroyed overnight. Build > anyway. People who really want help may attack you if you help them. Help > them anyway. Give the world the best you have and you may get hurt. Give > the world your best anyway." By: Mother Teresa > On 11/2/2016 1:43 PM, Colton Conor wrote: > > I am in need of a recommendation for a small Ethernet switch for an MDU > applications. This is a garden style community where each building has > between 4 to 8 units inside of the building. There are 15 buildings on the > property. We would run a new CAT6 drop from a central point in the building > to each unit. This central point would either be in the attic, or on the > side of the exterior wall in some type of enclosure. > > Then we would run fiber uplink from each building's switch to a headend > room. The headend room would have the aggergation fiber switch, a router, > and an uplink to the internet. > > We would hand a copper Ethernet hand off to the client in a unit, and then > the could use whatever router they wanted, or plug their computer in > directly to the wall. > > I think all I need is a switch per building (not a router), and ideally > this switch needs to have: > > - At Least 1 SFP fiber uplink port. 2 would be nice for daisy chaining, > but not required. > - 4 to 8 Copper Gigabit Ports. I don't need POE output power on these > ports. > - SNMP For remote monitoring > - CLI or some sort of web based remote management > - Temperature Hardened or able to be in a hot attic > - Some sort of L2 port isolation or private vlans where other subscribers > can see each other. All traffic goes in and out of uplink > - Rate limiting for each individual port > - Full duplex speed and wireline switching is preferred. > - We be nice to be remotely powered using PoE in, but not required. Might > be hard however to get power to the attic or side of building. > > > So far, options that come to mind are: > > https://routerboard.com/RB260GS for $36. Looks like a good option, but > not sure about SwitchOS. Worried Mikrotik won't continue to improve > switchOS. Feature set seems limited. Not sure about port isolation options? > Says it support Poe-In for power. Temp range looks good. No CLI. > > https://www.ubnt.com/edgemax/edgerouter-x-sfp/ $72. Double the price of > the Mikrotik. OS seems more robust. Seem more like a router than switch so > might be overkill for application. NO Poe-IN power option, but could I used > a passive poe injector to still power it remotely? > > https://www.ubnt.com/edgemax/edgepoint/ The EP-R6 is about $105. Looks > like its basically the edgerouter-x-sfp but in an outdoor case, and this > model supports PoE Input. This smaller unit doesn't seem to have any fiber > slack management like the other units in the edgepoint lineup. Includes POE > injector to power unit. > > I was thinking maybe a GPON ONT per building that has 4 to 8 Ethernet > ports on it. However, there are no small GPON OLTs out there. Plus, most > outdoor ONT's are like $250+ each. > > > What else is out there? I would say price range would be sub $200 per > building max. > > > > > > > > > ___ > Wireless mailing > listWireless@wispa.orghttp://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > > > > ___ > Wireless mailing list > Wireless@wispa.org > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > > ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
Re: [WISPA] MDU Ethernet Switch
Sean, Which distributor do you recommend for planet switches? On Wed, Nov 2, 2016 at 3:20 PM, Sean Heskett wrote: > planet > > > On Wed, Nov 2, 2016 at 12:43 PM, Colton Conor > wrote: > >> I am in need of a recommendation for a small Ethernet switch for an MDU >> applications. This is a garden style community where each building has >> between 4 to 8 units inside of the building. There are 15 buildings on the >> property. We would run a new CAT6 drop from a central point in the building >> to each unit. This central point would either be in the attic, or on the >> side of the exterior wall in some type of enclosure. >> >> Then we would run fiber uplink from each building's switch to a headend >> room. The headend room would have the aggergation fiber switch, a router, >> and an uplink to the internet. >> >> We would hand a copper Ethernet hand off to the client in a unit, and >> then the could use whatever router they wanted, or plug their computer in >> directly to the wall. >> >> I think all I need is a switch per building (not a router), and ideally >> this switch needs to have: >> >> - At Least 1 SFP fiber uplink port. 2 would be nice for daisy chaining, >> but not required. >> - 4 to 8 Copper Gigabit Ports. I don't need POE output power on these >> ports. >> - SNMP For remote monitoring >> - CLI or some sort of web based remote management >> - Temperature Hardened or able to be in a hot attic >> - Some sort of L2 port isolation or private vlans where other subscribers >> can see each other. All traffic goes in and out of uplink >> - Rate limiting for each individual port >> - Full duplex speed and wireline switching is preferred. >> - We be nice to be remotely powered using PoE in, but not required. Might >> be hard however to get power to the attic or side of building. >> >> >> So far, options that come to mind are: >> >> https://routerboard.com/RB260GS for $36. Looks like a good option, but >> not sure about SwitchOS. Worried Mikrotik won't continue to improve >> switchOS. Feature set seems limited. Not sure about port isolation options? >> Says it support Poe-In for power. Temp range looks good. No CLI. >> >> https://www.ubnt.com/edgemax/edgerouter-x-sfp/ $72. Double the price of >> the Mikrotik. OS seems more robust. Seem more like a router than switch so >> might be overkill for application. NO Poe-IN power option, but could I used >> a passive poe injector to still power it remotely? >> >> https://www.ubnt.com/edgemax/edgepoint/ The EP-R6 is about $105. Looks >> like its basically the edgerouter-x-sfp but in an outdoor case, and this >> model supports PoE Input. This smaller unit doesn't seem to have any fiber >> slack management like the other units in the edgepoint lineup. Includes POE >> injector to power unit. >> >> I was thinking maybe a GPON ONT per building that has 4 to 8 Ethernet >> ports on it. However, there are no small GPON OLTs out there. Plus, most >> outdoor ONT's are like $250+ each. >> >> >> What else is out there? I would say price range would be sub $200 per >> building max. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> ___ >> Wireless mailing list >> Wireless@wispa.org >> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless >> >> > > ___ > Wireless mailing list > Wireless@wispa.org > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > > ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
Re: [WISPA] MDU Ethernet Switch
Netonix switches look nice, but at $249 for the 8 port with SFP uplink that's a bit pricy compared to the other options. I really don't need at the POE functionality that the Netonix switches provide. On Wed, Nov 2, 2016 at 2:51 PM, Chadwick Wachs wrote: > Netonix switches. > > On Nov 2, 2016 12:43 PM, "Colton Conor" wrote: > >> I am in need of a recommendation for a small Ethernet switch for an MDU >> applications. This is a garden style community where each building has >> between 4 to 8 units inside of the building. There are 15 buildings on the >> property. We would run a new CAT6 drop from a central point in the building >> to each unit. This central point would either be in the attic, or on the >> side of the exterior wall in some type of enclosure. >> >> Then we would run fiber uplink from each building's switch to a headend >> room. The headend room would have the aggergation fiber switch, a router, >> and an uplink to the internet. >> >> We would hand a copper Ethernet hand off to the client in a unit, and >> then the could use whatever router they wanted, or plug their computer in >> directly to the wall. >> >> I think all I need is a switch per building (not a router), and ideally >> this switch needs to have: >> >> - At Least 1 SFP fiber uplink port. 2 would be nice for daisy chaining, >> but not required. >> - 4 to 8 Copper Gigabit Ports. I don't need POE output power on these >> ports. >> - SNMP For remote monitoring >> - CLI or some sort of web based remote management >> - Temperature Hardened or able to be in a hot attic >> - Some sort of L2 port isolation or private vlans where other subscribers >> can see each other. All traffic goes in and out of uplink >> - Rate limiting for each individual port >> - Full duplex speed and wireline switching is preferred. >> - We be nice to be remotely powered using PoE in, but not required. Might >> be hard however to get power to the attic or side of building. >> >> >> So far, options that come to mind are: >> >> https://routerboard.com/RB260GS for $36. Looks like a good option, but >> not sure about SwitchOS. Worried Mikrotik won't continue to improve >> switchOS. Feature set seems limited. Not sure about port isolation options? >> Says it support Poe-In for power. Temp range looks good. No CLI. >> >> https://www.ubnt.com/edgemax/edgerouter-x-sfp/ $72. Double the price of >> the Mikrotik. OS seems more robust. Seem more like a router than switch so >> might be overkill for application. NO Poe-IN power option, but could I used >> a passive poe injector to still power it remotely? >> >> https://www.ubnt.com/edgemax/edgepoint/ The EP-R6 is about $105. Looks >> like its basically the edgerouter-x-sfp but in an outdoor case, and this >> model supports PoE Input. This smaller unit doesn't seem to have any fiber >> slack management like the other units in the edgepoint lineup. Includes POE >> injector to power unit. >> >> I was thinking maybe a GPON ONT per building that has 4 to 8 Ethernet >> ports on it. However, there are no small GPON OLTs out there. Plus, most >> outdoor ONT's are like $250+ each. >> >> >> What else is out there? I would say price range would be sub $200 per >> building max. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> ___ >> Wireless mailing list >> Wireless@wispa.org >> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless >> >> > ___ > Wireless mailing list > Wireless@wispa.org > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > > ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
Re: [WISPA] MDU Ethernet Switch
Daniel, What functions would I want in RouterOS that are no in SwOS for this application? Can RouterOS devices be turned into a switch, and operate at full line speed rates? 1 Gbps in and out? On Wed, Nov 2, 2016 at 1:59 PM, Dan Harling wrote: > On Wed, Nov 2, 2016 at 2:43 PM, Colton Conor > wrote: > > > > - At Least 1 SFP fiber uplink port. 2 would be nice for daisy chaining, > but > > not required. > > - 4 to 8 Copper Gigabit Ports. I don't need POE output power on these > ports. > > - SNMP For remote monitoring > > - CLI or some sort of web based remote management > > - Temperature Hardened or able to be in a hot attic > > - Some sort of L2 port isolation or private vlans where other subscribers > > can see each other. All traffic goes in and out of uplink > > - Rate limiting for each individual port > > - Full duplex speed and wireline switching is preferred. > > - We be nice to be remotely powered using PoE in, but not required. > Might be > > hard however to get power to the attic or side of building. > > > > > > So far, options that come to mind are: > > > > https://routerboard.com/RB260GS for $36. Looks like a good option, but > not > > sure about SwitchOS. Worried Mikrotik won't continue to improve switchOS. > > Feature set seems limited. Not sure about port isolation options? Says it > > support Poe-In for power. Temp range looks good. No CLI. > > There have been several updates to SwOS over the past couple years > (currently at 1.17), but I would recommend a 2011, 3011, or CRS--all > of which run RouterOS--over a SwOS device. ROS has far, far more > features that you would want to have in this situation. (I only use > SwOS for passive PoE distribution: RB260GSP.) > > Daniel Harling <>< > Engineering, Cape Ann Communications > 183 Main Street, Gloucester, MA 01930 > 978-879-7744 (cell) > harl...@capeanncomm.com > ___ > Wireless mailing list > Wireless@wispa.org > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
Re: [WISPA] MDU Ethernet Switch
Shawn, We would prefer to run CAT5 or CAT6 instead of fiber due to cost. The cost of the cable and install is about the same, but the cost of splicing and electronics is widely different. With fiber, you are talking about a cost of at least $40 per unit for the most basic fiber ONT or media convert with 1 optical in and 1 electrical Gig-e out. So with a building of 8 units you are looking at $320. Not to mention you either have to have a OLT in the case of GPON/EPON, or a multi port fiber switch if using media converts. If you go with a media converter option like the IgniteNet Fiber Switch and their media convert, you then have to buy an SFP for each side as well. Plus you have to have a SFP for both the swith and media convert. All for the same 1G electrical handoff. I would think fiber to the unit would cost at least 4x the cost. On Wed, Nov 2, 2016 at 1:53 PM, Shawn C. Peppers < videodirectwispal...@gmail.com> wrote: > If you going to run a new cat5 why wouldn't you just do a FTTH > application? Anyways You can pick up decent cisco switches on ebay. I use > all cisco on my mdu applications. > > Shawn C. Peppers > Video Direct Satellite & Entertainment > 866-680-8433 Toll Free > 480-287-9960 Fax > http://www.video-direct.tv > > On Nov 2, 2016, at 1:43 PM, Colton Conor wrote: > > I am in need of a recommendation for a small Ethernet switch for an MDU > applications. This is a garden style community where each building has > between 4 to 8 units inside of the building. There are 15 buildings on the > property. We would run a new CAT6 drop from a central point in the building > to each unit. This central point would either be in the attic, or on the > side of the exterior wall in some type of enclosure. > > Then we would run fiber uplink from each building's switch to a headend > room. The headend room would have the aggergation fiber switch, a router, > and an uplink to the internet. > > We would hand a copper Ethernet hand off to the client in a unit, and then > the could use whatever router they wanted, or plug their computer in > directly to the wall. > > I think all I need is a switch per building (not a router), and ideally > this switch needs to have: > > - At Least 1 SFP fiber uplink port. 2 would be nice for daisy chaining, > but not required. > - 4 to 8 Copper Gigabit Ports. I don't need POE output power on these > ports. > - SNMP For remote monitoring > - CLI or some sort of web based remote management > - Temperature Hardened or able to be in a hot attic > - Some sort of L2 port isolation or private vlans where other subscribers > can see each other. All traffic goes in and out of uplink > - Rate limiting for each individual port > - Full duplex speed and wireline switching is preferred. > - We be nice to be remotely powered using PoE in, but not required. Might > be hard however to get power to the attic or side of building. > > > So far, options that come to mind are: > > https://routerboard.com/RB260GS for $36. Looks like a good option, but > not sure about SwitchOS. Worried Mikrotik won't continue to improve > switchOS. Feature set seems limited. Not sure about port isolation options? > Says it support Poe-In for power. Temp range looks good. No CLI. > > https://www.ubnt.com/edgemax/edgerouter-x-sfp/ $72. Double the price of > the Mikrotik. OS seems more robust. Seem more like a router than switch so > might be overkill for application. NO Poe-IN power option, but could I used > a passive poe injector to still power it remotely? > > https://www.ubnt.com/edgemax/edgepoint/ The EP-R6 is about $105. Looks > like its basically the edgerouter-x-sfp but in an outdoor case, and this > model supports PoE Input. This smaller unit doesn't seem to have any fiber > slack management like the other units in the edgepoint lineup. Includes POE > injector to power unit. > > I was thinking maybe a GPON ONT per building that has 4 to 8 Ethernet > ports on it. However, there are no small GPON OLTs out there. Plus, most > outdoor ONT's are like $250+ each. > > > What else is out there? I would say price range would be sub $200 per > building max. > > > > > > > ___ > Wireless mailing list > Wireless@wispa.org > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > > > ___ > Wireless mailing list > Wireless@wispa.org > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > > ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
[WISPA] MDU Ethernet Switch
I am in need of a recommendation for a small Ethernet switch for an MDU applications. This is a garden style community where each building has between 4 to 8 units inside of the building. There are 15 buildings on the property. We would run a new CAT6 drop from a central point in the building to each unit. This central point would either be in the attic, or on the side of the exterior wall in some type of enclosure. Then we would run fiber uplink from each building's switch to a headend room. The headend room would have the aggergation fiber switch, a router, and an uplink to the internet. We would hand a copper Ethernet hand off to the client in a unit, and then the could use whatever router they wanted, or plug their computer in directly to the wall. I think all I need is a switch per building (not a router), and ideally this switch needs to have: - At Least 1 SFP fiber uplink port. 2 would be nice for daisy chaining, but not required. - 4 to 8 Copper Gigabit Ports. I don't need POE output power on these ports. - SNMP For remote monitoring - CLI or some sort of web based remote management - Temperature Hardened or able to be in a hot attic - Some sort of L2 port isolation or private vlans where other subscribers can see each other. All traffic goes in and out of uplink - Rate limiting for each individual port - Full duplex speed and wireline switching is preferred. - We be nice to be remotely powered using PoE in, but not required. Might be hard however to get power to the attic or side of building. So far, options that come to mind are: https://routerboard.com/RB260GS for $36. Looks like a good option, but not sure about SwitchOS. Worried Mikrotik won't continue to improve switchOS. Feature set seems limited. Not sure about port isolation options? Says it support Poe-In for power. Temp range looks good. No CLI. https://www.ubnt.com/edgemax/edgerouter-x-sfp/ $72. Double the price of the Mikrotik. OS seems more robust. Seem more like a router than switch so might be overkill for application. NO Poe-IN power option, but could I used a passive poe injector to still power it remotely? https://www.ubnt.com/edgemax/edgepoint/ The EP-R6 is about $105. Looks like its basically the edgerouter-x-sfp but in an outdoor case, and this model supports PoE Input. This smaller unit doesn't seem to have any fiber slack management like the other units in the edgepoint lineup. Includes POE injector to power unit. I was thinking maybe a GPON ONT per building that has 4 to 8 Ethernet ports on it. However, there are no small GPON OLTs out there. Plus, most outdoor ONT's are like $250+ each. What else is out there? I would say price range would be sub $200 per building max. ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
Re: [WISPA] DNS Name Resolver for WISP
Still though if we are currently just using Google's DNS (8.8.8.8), handing out OpenDNS free DNS would be a better solution right? I don't believe Google's free DNS offers any malware protections, but I could be wrong. If we hand out OpenDNS as our default, then we can advertise to our users that they can go to opendns.com and create a free personal account to filter their home as they wish. Since we would be handing out OpenDNS already, there would be no configuration change needed by the end user on their gateway/router that we already provide. On Fri, Jun 24, 2016 at 12:12 AM, John J. Thomas wrote: > As an ISP, you might consider blocking malware sites. OpenDNS used to be > free for anyone that wanted to use it, businesses included, but they > changed their terms of service. What they told us was the free service used > a database that didn't get updated very frequently, and filtered about 5000 > malware sites. When you used the paid for service, there were like 100,000 > malware sites in that database. We met with them awhile back, when they > were still developing their Active Directory implementation. > > On June 23, 2016 12:56:42 PM PDT, Colton Conor > wrote: > >> What dns name solvers do you use to hand out to your customers via DHCP >> and why? Today we just hand out Google's 8.8.8.8 and 8.8.4.4 as a name >> resolvers. I recently learned about OpenDNS's free service for homes where >> a home user can monitor and potentially block certain websites, but that >> would require the home to signup at open dns, and then enter open DNS in >> their router. However if we handed out OpenDNS's IPs instead of googles, >> and provided a gateway, then that would remove that step of the client >> having to enter opendns IPs into their router right? >> >> Does OpenDNS have a service for ISP's? That gives us insight as to where >> traffic on our network is heading based dns lookups? I know about Netflow >> etc, but doing this though DNS seems like a cool option as well. We >> wouldn't want to block anything as an ISP, but it would be useful to know >> the top visited site by our customers is facebook.com for example. >> >> If not OpenDNS, then is there some other hosted DNS service for ISP's? >> >> >> -- >> >> Wireless mailing list >> Wireless@wispa.org >> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless >> >> > -- > Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity. > ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
[WISPA] DNS Name Resolver for WISP
What dns name solvers do you use to hand out to your customers via DHCP and why? Today we just hand out Google's 8.8.8.8 and 8.8.4.4 as a name resolvers. I recently learned about OpenDNS's free service for homes where a home user can monitor and potentially block certain websites, but that would require the home to signup at open dns, and then enter open DNS in their router. However if we handed out OpenDNS's IPs instead of googles, and provided a gateway, then that would remove that step of the client having to enter opendns IPs into their router right? Does OpenDNS have a service for ISP's? That gives us insight as to where traffic on our network is heading based dns lookups? I know about Netflow etc, but doing this though DNS seems like a cool option as well. We wouldn't want to block anything as an ISP, but it would be useful to know the top visited site by our customers is facebook.com for example. If not OpenDNS, then is there some other hosted DNS service for ISP's? ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
Re: [WISPA] 2dbi vs 3dbi vs 5 dbi vs 100mw vs 400mw
Is there anyway to see this type of information through a Windows based computer. I would like the see the tx and rx bit rate. On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 3:43 PM, Ben West wrote: > Yes, radios will negotiate different rx/tx rates to each other, so up to 2 > distinct rates for a single link. On the open source mac80211 > linux-wireless driver you can see this explicitly. The rx/tx on one radio > is the tx/rx on the other. > > root@ap1:~# iw wlan0 station dump > Station 52:e6:fc:XX:XX:XX (on wlan0) > inactive time:70 ms > rx bytes:769202553 > rx packets:4644034 > tx bytes:326581907 > tx packets:465139 > tx retries:76461 > tx failed:4 > signal: -56 [-57, -62] dBm > signal avg:-55 [-57, -62] dBm > tx bitrate:117.0 MBit/s MCS 14 > rx bitrate:86.7 MBit/s MCS 12 short GI > authorized:yes > authenticated:yes > preamble:long > WMM/WME:yes > MFP:no > TDLS peer:no > > root@ap2:~# iw wlan0 station dump > Station 62:66:b3:XX:XX:XX (on wlan0) > inactive time:10 ms > rx bytes:569548806 > rx packets:3191667 > tx bytes:412571117 > tx packets:490879 > tx retries:104831 > tx failed:1 > signal: -57 [-67, -57] dBm > signal avg:-55 [-62, -56] dBm > tx bitrate:86.7 MBit/s MCS 12 short GI > rx bitrate:117.0 MBit/s MCS 14 > authorized:yes > authenticated:yes > preamble: long > WMM/WME:yes > MFP:no > TDLS peer:no > > > > > On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 3:27 PM, Colton Conor > wrote: > >> In my situation, we are assuming we are dealing with a location with one >> and only one AP (typical home) and most devices are tablets and smartphones >> who's antenna's and power output can't be modified. Can be either a 1 or 2 >> story home. >> >> So, how much truth is in this article: >> http://tomatousb.org/tut:increasing-wrt54g-transmit-power >> >> The author is claiming that wifi negotiates speed (correct) but in both >> directions in the uplink and downlink side. He is basically claiming if you >> increase the power output at the AP, then the downstream (from AP to >> client) link rate will increase, while the uplink (Client to AP) will stay >> the same. This make sense, but does wifi really established a different PHY >> rate for up and down stream. Is this correct? >> >> >> >> On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 3:09 PM, Jack Unger wrote: >> >>> Going from 20 dB to 26 dB will allow the AP to be heard (with the same >>> reliability) at double the distance away. >>> >>> Yes. If the client power (actually the client EIRP which includes the >>> antenna gain) stays the same then the "uplink" distance from client to AP >>> will still be the same. >>> >>> Yes, increasing the number of APs is one possible solution. Another is >>> to use a higher-gain (more directional) antenna on the AP recognizing that >>> when you increase the AP antenna gain in one direction, you are reducing >>> the gain (and the coverage) in all other directions. >>> >>> jack >>> >>> On 11/13/2014 11:10 AM, Colton Conor wrote: >>> >>> So going from a regular powered 100mw (20db) to a high powered 400mw >>> (26db) is a 6db increase in output power. So you are saying going from >>> regular to high powered is a double in coverage size? >>> Doesn't increasing the power output at the AP only increase how loud the >>> AP can "shout" which in term dictates how far the receiver can hear from? >>> If the client can't shout back does this do any good? >>> >>> Most client devices today like iPads, Smartphones, and some laptops >>> can't be modified to increase their antenna gain or power output. So the >>> only option is to increase the numbers of APs, or the transmit >>> power/antennas at the AP right? >>> >>> On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 12:25 PM, Jack Unger wrote: >>> >>>> To double the communications distance (everything else holding >>>> steady) requires an additional 6 dB. Knowing this, you can do the math with >>>> the various antenna gains and power levels to determine performance. >>>> >>>> Regards, >>>> >>>> Jack Unger >>>> WISPA FCC Technical Consultant >>>> >>>> >>>> On 11/13/2014 10:15 AM, Colton Conor
[WISPA] A-MPDU & A-MSDU
Is there any tool you can run on the client side of a network to see if an AP supports or has enabled A-MPDU & A-MSDU. Both of these settings seem to substantially increase overall net throughput on wireless networks. However, some of the APs we are using don't have an on/off switch for these two settings, and we are unsure if the manufacturer has them enabled or disabled. ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
Re: [WISPA] 2dbi vs 3dbi vs 5 dbi vs 100mw vs 400mw
Tim, Yes, I understand that. I understand the factors that have to be enabled for the PHY rate to be the full 300Mbps that 802.11N 2x2 configuration allows for. You have to use 40Mhz band, short guards, and both AP and client have to have 2x2 setup. What I am talking about here is trying to improve signal strength which increases speed. On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 7:00 PM, Tim Kerns wrote: > A little caution ... transmit power does not necessarily equate to > speed. > > Speed is a combination of signal strength, signal quality (lack of noise > or interference) and distance. And doubling the output power will not > result in double the speed. > > Transmit power will give you further distance, but depending on the other > factors above and the client output power you may not see any gain in > distance. > > > *From:* Colton Conor > *Sent:* Thursday, November 13, 2014 4:42 PM > *To:* r...@sbnettech.com ; WISPA General List > *Subject:* Re: [WISPA] 2dbi vs 3dbi vs 5 dbi vs 100mw vs 400mw > > We are deploying a DSL network, and Broadcom is the leader in the DSL > chipset market. So most all these modems we are using have a Broadcom SoC > design with the VDSL2 modem, 802.11N 2x2 MIMO, Ethernet Switch, and CPU all > built in. The only thing the modem manufacturers change is the power output > on the Broadcom wifi (via a amp on the broad) and the selection of internal > or external omni antennas for the most part. Plus some tweak the wifi > settings. > > We are trying to decide if it is worth the small price premium to pay for > the modem that has the high powered amp at 400mw vs the regular ones that > only have 100mw. Sounds like the the high powered ones are worth it > especially since we have no control of the clients devices (I guess you > rarely ever do anyways) and we are only supplying one AP/router per home. > > I guess this is why AT&T uverse gets such good ratings and reviews from > their customers on wifi? They are using 2Wire/Pace modems for the most part > that have all high powered wifi. Thats why in an AT&T area you can see tons > of them. > > > > > > > > On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 5:59 PM, Ryan McKenzie wrote: > >> I second what Josh is saying. I build out a lot of hotels and large >> offices, and because of iPhones and iPads, we've started doubling up on the >> AP's we normally would deploy. In an indoor environment, it's really tough >> to do a very directional antenna because you are usually trying to cover a >> 360 deg area, so high power AP's, low gain antennas, and more AP's is >> usually the best approach. >> >> That being said, I'm curious about your specific choice of Broadcom >> radios in your first post. Usually that means you are trying to utilize >> custom firmware such as DD-WRT or Sputnik, etc. Is this the case? If so, >> it would be interesting to hear what you are trying to accomplish. I've >> played with many of those for a long time, until I really saw the >> capability and power of the Unifi, and stopped messing around with anything >> else. >> >> Just curious as Broadcom is not a radio chipset you hear much about on >> this list. >> >> Thanks, >> >> >> >> *Ryan McKenzieOffice 385-215-WIFICell 801-309-6161 <801-309-6161>* >> On 11/13/14 4:41 PM, Josh Luthman wrote: >> >> You are correct. It never will. Rx can only be improved by a bigger >> antenna to listen with. Antenna gain always has and will be better than >> raw power. >> >> Unless you include the other side's Tx, in which case more power and gain >> will help. In the Wifi world you're totally screwed because it's a >> terrible laptop/phone/game console/tablet/etc in which case you can't do >> ANYTHING to their devices. >> >> >> Josh Luthman >> Office: 937-552-2340 >> Direct: 937-552-2343 >> 1100 Wayne St >> Suite 1337 >> Troy, OH 45373 >> >> On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 6:34 PM, Colton Conor >> wrote: >> >>> Awesome, I am already learning so much from this mailing list. So it >>> sound like the author was right. So boosting the power output on the AP >>> will more than likely boost the TX (downlink) speed on the AP side, but do >>> nothing on the RX speed side of the AP since nothing from the clients >>> sending perspective has changed right? >>> >>> On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 3:43 PM, Ben West wrote: >>> >>>> Yes, radios will negotiate different rx/tx rates to each other, so up >>>> to 2 distinct rates for a single link. On the open source mac80211 &g
Re: [WISPA] 2dbi vs 3dbi vs 5 dbi vs 100mw vs 400mw
We are deploying a DSL network, and Broadcom is the leader in the DSL chipset market. So most all these modems we are using have a Broadcom SoC design with the VDSL2 modem, 802.11N 2x2 MIMO, Ethernet Switch, and CPU all built in. The only thing the modem manufacturers change is the power output on the Broadcom wifi (via a amp on the broad) and the selection of internal or external omni antennas for the most part. Plus some tweak the wifi settings. We are trying to decide if it is worth the small price premium to pay for the modem that has the high powered amp at 400mw vs the regular ones that only have 100mw. Sounds like the the high powered ones are worth it especially since we have no control of the clients devices (I guess you rarely ever do anyways) and we are only supplying one AP/router per home. I guess this is why AT&T uverse gets such good ratings and reviews from their customers on wifi? They are using 2Wire/Pace modems for the most part that have all high powered wifi. Thats why in an AT&T area you can see tons of them. On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 5:59 PM, Ryan McKenzie wrote: > I second what Josh is saying. I build out a lot of hotels and large > offices, and because of iPhones and iPads, we've started doubling up on the > AP's we normally would deploy. In an indoor environment, it's really tough > to do a very directional antenna because you are usually trying to cover a > 360 deg area, so high power AP's, low gain antennas, and more AP's is > usually the best approach. > > That being said, I'm curious about your specific choice of Broadcom radios > in your first post. Usually that means you are trying to utilize custom > firmware such as DD-WRT or Sputnik, etc. Is this the case? If so, it > would be interesting to hear what you are trying to accomplish. I've > played with many of those for a long time, until I really saw the > capability and power of the Unifi, and stopped messing around with anything > else. > > Just curious as Broadcom is not a radio chipset you hear much about on > this list. > > Thanks, > > > > *Ryan McKenzie Office 385-215-WIFI Cell 801-309-6161 <801-309-6161> * > On 11/13/14 4:41 PM, Josh Luthman wrote: > > You are correct. It never will. Rx can only be improved by a bigger > antenna to listen with. Antenna gain always has and will be better than > raw power. > > Unless you include the other side's Tx, in which case more power and > gain will help. In the Wifi world you're totally screwed because it's a > terrible laptop/phone/game console/tablet/etc in which case you can't do > ANYTHING to their devices. > > > Josh Luthman > Office: 937-552-2340 > Direct: 937-552-2343 > 1100 Wayne St > Suite 1337 > Troy, OH 45373 > > On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 6:34 PM, Colton Conor > wrote: > >> Awesome, I am already learning so much from this mailing list. So it >> sound like the author was right. So boosting the power output on the AP >> will more than likely boost the TX (downlink) speed on the AP side, but do >> nothing on the RX speed side of the AP since nothing from the clients >> sending perspective has changed right? >> >> On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 3:43 PM, Ben West wrote: >> >>> Yes, radios will negotiate different rx/tx rates to each other, so up to >>> 2 distinct rates for a single link. On the open source mac80211 >>> linux-wireless driver you can see this explicitly. The rx/tx on one radio >>> is the tx/rx on the other. >>> >>> root@ap1:~# iw wlan0 station dump >>> Station 52:e6:fc:XX:XX:XX (on wlan0) >>> inactive time:70 ms >>> rx bytes:769202553 >>> rx packets:4644034 >>> tx bytes:326581907 >>> tx packets:465139 >>> tx retries:76461 >>> tx failed:4 >>> signal: -56 [-57, -62] dBm >>> signal avg:-55 [-57, -62] dBm >>> tx bitrate:117.0 MBit/s MCS 14 >>> rx bitrate:86.7 MBit/s MCS 12 short GI >>> authorized:yes >>> authenticated:yes >>> preamble:long >>> WMM/WME:yes >>> MFP:no >>> TDLS peer:no >>> >>> root@ap2:~# iw wlan0 station dump >>> Station 62:66:b3:XX:XX:XX (on wlan0) >>> inactive time:10 ms >>> rx bytes:569548806 >>> rx packets: 3191667 >>> tx bytes:412571117 >>> tx packets:490879 >>> tx retries:104831 >>> tx failed:1 >>> signal: -57 [-67, -57] dBm >>> signal avg:
Re: [WISPA] 2dbi vs 3dbi vs 5 dbi vs 100mw vs 400mw
Awesome, I am already learning so much from this mailing list. So it sound like the author was right. So boosting the power output on the AP will more than likely boost the TX (downlink) speed on the AP side, but do nothing on the RX speed side of the AP since nothing from the clients sending perspective has changed right? On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 3:43 PM, Ben West wrote: > Yes, radios will negotiate different rx/tx rates to each other, so up to 2 > distinct rates for a single link. On the open source mac80211 > linux-wireless driver you can see this explicitly. The rx/tx on one radio > is the tx/rx on the other. > > root@ap1:~# iw wlan0 station dump > Station 52:e6:fc:XX:XX:XX (on wlan0) > inactive time:70 ms > rx bytes:769202553 > rx packets:4644034 > tx bytes:326581907 > tx packets:465139 > tx retries:76461 > tx failed:4 > signal: -56 [-57, -62] dBm > signal avg:-55 [-57, -62] dBm > tx bitrate:117.0 MBit/s MCS 14 > rx bitrate:86.7 MBit/s MCS 12 short GI > authorized:yes > authenticated:yes > preamble:long > WMM/WME:yes > MFP:no > TDLS peer:no > > root@ap2:~# iw wlan0 station dump > Station 62:66:b3:XX:XX:XX (on wlan0) > inactive time:10 ms > rx bytes:569548806 > rx packets:3191667 > tx bytes:412571117 > tx packets:490879 > tx retries:104831 > tx failed:1 > signal: -57 [-67, -57] dBm > signal avg:-55 [-62, -56] dBm > tx bitrate:86.7 MBit/s MCS 12 short GI > rx bitrate:117.0 MBit/s MCS 14 > authorized:yes > authenticated:yes > preamble: long > WMM/WME:yes > MFP:no > TDLS peer:no > > > > > On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 3:27 PM, Colton Conor > wrote: > >> In my situation, we are assuming we are dealing with a location with one >> and only one AP (typical home) and most devices are tablets and smartphones >> who's antenna's and power output can't be modified. Can be either a 1 or 2 >> story home. >> >> So, how much truth is in this article: >> http://tomatousb.org/tut:increasing-wrt54g-transmit-power >> >> The author is claiming that wifi negotiates speed (correct) but in both >> directions in the uplink and downlink side. He is basically claiming if you >> increase the power output at the AP, then the downstream (from AP to >> client) link rate will increase, while the uplink (Client to AP) will stay >> the same. This make sense, but does wifi really established a different PHY >> rate for up and down stream. Is this correct? >> >> >> >> On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 3:09 PM, Jack Unger wrote: >> >>> Going from 20 dB to 26 dB will allow the AP to be heard (with the same >>> reliability) at double the distance away. >>> >>> Yes. If the client power (actually the client EIRP which includes the >>> antenna gain) stays the same then the "uplink" distance from client to AP >>> will still be the same. >>> >>> Yes, increasing the number of APs is one possible solution. Another is >>> to use a higher-gain (more directional) antenna on the AP recognizing that >>> when you increase the AP antenna gain in one direction, you are reducing >>> the gain (and the coverage) in all other directions. >>> >>> jack >>> >>> On 11/13/2014 11:10 AM, Colton Conor wrote: >>> >>> So going from a regular powered 100mw (20db) to a high powered 400mw >>> (26db) is a 6db increase in output power. So you are saying going from >>> regular to high powered is a double in coverage size? >>> Doesn't increasing the power output at the AP only increase how loud the >>> AP can "shout" which in term dictates how far the receiver can hear from? >>> If the client can't shout back does this do any good? >>> >>> Most client devices today like iPads, Smartphones, and some laptops >>> can't be modified to increase their antenna gain or power output. So the >>> only option is to increase the numbers of APs, or the transmit >>> power/antennas at the AP right? >>> >>> On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 12:25 PM, Jack Unger wrote: >>> >>>> To double the communications distance (everything else holding >>>> steady) requires an additional 6 dB. Knowing this, you can do the math with >>>> the various antenna gains and power levels to determine performance. >>>> &
Re: [WISPA] 2dbi vs 3dbi vs 5 dbi vs 100mw vs 400mw
In my situation, we are assuming we are dealing with a location with one and only one AP (typical home) and most devices are tablets and smartphones who's antenna's and power output can't be modified. Can be either a 1 or 2 story home. So, how much truth is in this article: http://tomatousb.org/tut:increasing-wrt54g-transmit-power The author is claiming that wifi negotiates speed (correct) but in both directions in the uplink and downlink side. He is basically claiming if you increase the power output at the AP, then the downstream (from AP to client) link rate will increase, while the uplink (Client to AP) will stay the same. This make sense, but does wifi really established a different PHY rate for up and down stream. Is this correct? On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 3:09 PM, Jack Unger wrote: > Going from 20 dB to 26 dB will allow the AP to be heard (with the same > reliability) at double the distance away. > > Yes. If the client power (actually the client EIRP which includes the > antenna gain) stays the same then the "uplink" distance from client to AP > will still be the same. > > Yes, increasing the number of APs is one possible solution. Another is to > use a higher-gain (more directional) antenna on the AP recognizing that > when you increase the AP antenna gain in one direction, you are reducing > the gain (and the coverage) in all other directions. > > jack > > On 11/13/2014 11:10 AM, Colton Conor wrote: > > So going from a regular powered 100mw (20db) to a high powered 400mw > (26db) is a 6db increase in output power. So you are saying going from > regular to high powered is a double in coverage size? > Doesn't increasing the power output at the AP only increase how loud the > AP can "shout" which in term dictates how far the receiver can hear from? > If the client can't shout back does this do any good? > > Most client devices today like iPads, Smartphones, and some laptops > can't be modified to increase their antenna gain or power output. So the > only option is to increase the numbers of APs, or the transmit > power/antennas at the AP right? > > On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 12:25 PM, Jack Unger wrote: > >> To double the communications distance (everything else holding steady) >> requires an additional 6 dB. Knowing this, you can do the math with the >> various antenna gains and power levels to determine performance. >> >> Regards, >> >> Jack Unger >> WISPA FCC Technical Consultant >> >> >> On 11/13/2014 10:15 AM, Colton Conor wrote: >> >> We are comparing multiple SOHO routers and modems that have the same >> Broadcom chipsets. All of them have 802.11N 2x2 configuration. The only >> differences between them are if they have internal or external antennas and >> the gain of the antennas (either 2, 3, or 5dbi ratings). In addition, some >> sell a high powered wifi radio (400mw) while others have the basic (100mw). >> >> How much a difference does each of these hardware features make in >> overall wifi performance? >> >> >> ___ >> Wireless mailing >> listWireless@wispa.orghttp://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless >> >> >> -- >> Support Honest Gil Fulbright for Senate<http://honestgil.com/#up> >> <http://honestgil.com/#up> >> >> Jack Unger - President, Ask-Wi.Com, Inc. >> Author (2003) - "Deploying License-Free Wireless Wide-Area Networks" >> Serving the WISP Community since 1993760-678-5033 jun...@ask-wi.com >> >> >> >> ___ >> Wireless mailing list >> Wireless@wispa.org >> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless >> >> > > > ___ > Wireless mailing > listWireless@wispa.orghttp://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > > > -- > Support Honest Gil Fulbright for Senate<http://honestgil.com/#up> > <http://honestgil.com/#up> > > Jack Unger - President, Ask-Wi.Com, Inc. > Author (2003) - "Deploying License-Free Wireless Wide-Area Networks" > Serving the WISP Community since 1993760-678-5033 jun...@ask-wi.com > > > > ___ > Wireless mailing list > Wireless@wispa.org > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > > ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
Re: [WISPA] 2dbi vs 3dbi vs 5 dbi vs 100mw vs 400mw
So going from a regular powered 100mw (20db) to a high powered 400mw (26db) is a 6db increase in output power. So you are saying going from regular to high powered is a double in coverage size? Doesn't increasing the power output at the AP only increase how loud the AP can "shout" which in term dictates how far the receiver can hear from? If the client can't shout back does this do any good? Most client devices today like iPads, Smartphones, and some laptops can't be modified to increase their antenna gain or power output. So the only option is to increase the numbers of APs, or the transmit power/antennas at the AP right? On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 12:25 PM, Jack Unger wrote: > To double the communications distance (everything else holding steady) > requires an additional 6 dB. Knowing this, you can do the math with the > various antenna gains and power levels to determine performance. > > Regards, > > Jack Unger > WISPA FCC Technical Consultant > > > On 11/13/2014 10:15 AM, Colton Conor wrote: > > We are comparing multiple SOHO routers and modems that have the same > Broadcom chipsets. All of them have 802.11N 2x2 configuration. The only > differences between them are if they have internal or external antennas and > the gain of the antennas (either 2, 3, or 5dbi ratings). In addition, some > sell a high powered wifi radio (400mw) while others have the basic (100mw). > > How much a difference does each of these hardware features make in > overall wifi performance? > > > ___ > Wireless mailing > listWireless@wispa.orghttp://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > > > -- > Support Honest Gil Fulbright for Senate<http://honestgil.com/#up> > <http://honestgil.com/#up> > > Jack Unger - President, Ask-Wi.Com, Inc. > Author (2003) - "Deploying License-Free Wireless Wide-Area Networks" > Serving the WISP Community since 1993760-678-5033 jun...@ask-wi.com > > > > ___ > Wireless mailing list > Wireless@wispa.org > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > > ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
[WISPA] 2dbi vs 3dbi vs 5 dbi vs 100mw vs 400mw
We are comparing multiple SOHO routers and modems that have the same Broadcom chipsets. All of them have 802.11N 2x2 configuration. The only differences between them are if they have internal or external antennas and the gain of the antennas (either 2, 3, or 5dbi ratings). In addition, some sell a high powered wifi radio (400mw) while others have the basic (100mw). How much a difference does each of these hardware features make in overall wifi performance? ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
