[WISPA] RouterBoard 532(a)
I am looking for a few (2-5) RouterBoard 532 or 532A. New or used at a reasonable price... Off list is likely better than on... Thanks, Blair WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] RouterBoard 532(a)
We have 2x 532's and 2x 532A's here. They are repaired MikroTIk RMA's so like almost new :) Give us a call in the office if you want them. Ask for Mike. Regards, Titan Wireless WISPA Vendor 3914 Gattis School Rd Suite 102 Round Rock, TX 78664 Office (512) 942-6069 Fax (877) 538-6571 www.titanwirelessonline.com The content of this message is Titan Wireless LLC Confidential. If you are not the intended recipient and have received this message in error, any use or distribution is prohibited. Please notify me immediately by reply e-mail and delete this message from your computer system. Thank you. Blair Davis wrote: I am looking for a few (2-5) RouterBoard 532 or 532A. New or used at a reasonable price... Off list is likely better than on... Thanks, Blair WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] RouterBoard 532(a)
I'll have to double check but I think we have new new ones - bought them from the hidden shelves of Roc Noc years ago. Let me know if you need me to double check. Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 10:02 AM, Titan Wireless WISPA Vendor wi...@titan-wireless.com wrote: We have 2x 532's and 2x 532A's here. They are repaired MikroTIk RMA's so like almost new :) Give us a call in the office if you want them. Ask for Mike. Regards, Titan Wireless WISPA Vendor 3914 Gattis School Rd Suite 102 Round Rock, TX 78664 Office (512) 942-6069 Fax (877) 538-6571 www.titanwirelessonline.com The content of this message is Titan Wireless LLC Confidential. If you are not the intended recipient and have received this message in error, any use or distribution is prohibited. Please notify me immediately by reply e-mail and delete this message from your computer system. Thank you. Blair Davis wrote: I am looking for a few (2-5) RouterBoard 532 or 532A. New or used at a reasonable price... Off list is likely better than on... Thanks, Blair WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Routerboard 532 Speeds
I actually think it is an issue with their BW tester (the windows version) that is. cause that is where I am seeing this. I am getting wire speed 90+ mbps on FTP Transfers. Mikrotik uses two 1gig MT routers around the 532 to do their testing. They are setting around 100mbits using that configuration and their built in bandwidth tester, not their windows version though. I have two 3.06 gig Dual Core HPs that I have setup with a 532 266mhz for testing right now, next is to load up a USB Flash card with a temp licence to see what they do. Dennis On 5/21/07, Mike Hammett [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I would imagine as with all technology, they were able to run it faster with less heat. MT has a slew of new products coming (I believe 300, 600, 800, and 1000 series though I'm not 100% sure) - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com - Original Message - From: Tom DeReggi [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Monday, May 21, 2007 1:59 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Routerboard 532 Speeds I do not have an opinion or data on the Ethernet to Ethernet configuration you mention. But it is important that we define both ways, expecially when dealing with Wireless cards. The max data we've been able to get out of a Mikrotik 532 AP, with 20Mhz channel 5.8G, connection tracking off, no type of compression considered, is about 20mbps thoughput. That means 20mbps in the Ethernet and 20mbps out the wireless card or Vice versa. It Does NOT mean 20mbps Full Duplex over the wireless. The big advantage that StarOS had over Mikrotik was the ability to run on a 533Mhz board allowing Wireless speeds as high as 35-40mbps without compression on a single 20mhz channel. Mikrotik 266Mhz boards in my opinion are wasteful to Wifi, if using 20Mhz channels, because the bottle neck is the CPU not the Wifi Card. With that said, I saw the press release on the Mikrotik 400Mhz 532 board, however, I have yet to see one sold any where. Are these available yet? Are they just 532 boards being overclocked? Are they stable? Tom DeReggi RapidDSL Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - From: Dennis Burgess [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, May 18, 2007 5:38 PM Subject: [WISPA] Routerboard 532 Speeds I wanted to post a message to make sure everyone understands a post that I made a while back on the speed of the 532s. First, I want to make sure that I say, that I CURRENTLY use Routerboard 532s on ALL my towers. I use it as all of the APs on my wireless network, and I use MT for 99% of my consulting customers router needs. I think that Mikrotik is a great product, heck, I even certified in the product, use it every day for WISP and network operations! With that said, I had stated that the thoughput of a 532 is around 20-25 meg. I want to clarify that it is MY EXPERIENCE that a 532 running as a CORE router, such as doing NAT, connection tracking, having simple queues, SFQ queueing, OSPF, ya name, it, the speed I have seen the processor at that point at 100% would be around 20meg BOTH WAYS, this does not account for wireless cards, just ETHERNET to ETHERNET! So, on the 266mhz processors, about 20 meg both ways, and around 25 meg for the new 400mhz boards. It has NOTHING to do with wireless connectivity, just pure processing power doing tones of tasks. Now with that said, with two workstaitons 3 foot of ethernet between them, and a 532 Rev5 with the 400mhz processor, one way I can do a FTP Transfer at 92 meg, and I see 2-3 meg going the other way.This is ONE connection, not a bunch, this is STRIGHT routing, no OSPF, no NAT, with connection tracking turned on. I also use TCP packets vs UDP, this 92meg/2meg would be very close to the limit of two 10/100 nics. I just wanted to clarify this, as many of my customers have asked me what is a good limit to start looking at puttting in something a bit bigger as they have grown. My opinion, depends on what you are doing with the MT, but a total thoughput of around 50meg is a good starting point, depending on how many features you are using on the MT, i.e. NAT, OSFP, etc. Now, looking at that, if you are moving more than 20 meg both ways on your network, doing it using a $200 router sounds awsome to me! Not to menton all of the other features you have! I don't doubt, that if you put up a wireless link and test with it, you can see much higher 50+ meg thoughput, depending on what the router is doing. In my case, we are looking at customers that use their 532 as a do everything router. If you have any thoughts, comments or questions, or if you have some real world experience, with NOTHING on, or only a few things on, be sure to post, i'm sure that many users will enjoy reading your findings. -- Dennis Burgess, MCP, CCNA
Re: [WISPA] Routerboard 532 Speeds
I have found that MT test tools are accurate with enough CPU power. Thats part of the reason higher CPU's are needed. How does one troubleshoot and certify their links remotely on an ongoing basis? In the field, having a 1GB Router on each side usually isn't an option, and with Firewall trends, often only 1 router accessable on the ISP's end, provided they run a routed network at the cell, with a Linux box. It is imparative to have a radio device with enough horsepower to perform a linktest of itself. So sure it may be fine to have a 175mhz processor for subs that don;t need to be tested at speeds higher than a few mbps. But for APs, the CPU cycles are needed, to run a certifiable network. A 266Mhz board does not have enough CPU to keep up with full speed of a wireless card when test devices are outside each side of the router, and even less inability to self generate the tests from within MT. I recognize that my response/argument is not on topic with your thread, discussing Wired Ethernet MT Routers. I just like to throw in my pitch for higher CPU devices, whenever I have a window to :-) To keep the manufacturer's working on it, and aware that we need it. Tom DeReggi RapidDSL Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - From: Dennis Burgess [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Tuesday, May 22, 2007 10:06 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Routerboard 532 Speeds I actually think it is an issue with their BW tester (the windows version) that is. cause that is where I am seeing this. I am getting wire speed 90+ mbps on FTP Transfers. Mikrotik uses two 1gig MT routers around the 532 to do their testing. They are setting around 100mbits using that configuration and their built in bandwidth tester, not their windows version though. I have two 3.06 gig Dual Core HPs that I have setup with a 532 266mhz for testing right now, next is to load up a USB Flash card with a temp licence to see what they do. Dennis On 5/21/07, Mike Hammett [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I would imagine as with all technology, they were able to run it faster with less heat. MT has a slew of new products coming (I believe 300, 600, 800, and 1000 series though I'm not 100% sure) - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com - Original Message - From: Tom DeReggi [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Monday, May 21, 2007 1:59 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Routerboard 532 Speeds I do not have an opinion or data on the Ethernet to Ethernet configuration you mention. But it is important that we define both ways, expecially when dealing with Wireless cards. The max data we've been able to get out of a Mikrotik 532 AP, with 20Mhz channel 5.8G, connection tracking off, no type of compression considered, is about 20mbps thoughput. That means 20mbps in the Ethernet and 20mbps out the wireless card or Vice versa. It Does NOT mean 20mbps Full Duplex over the wireless. The big advantage that StarOS had over Mikrotik was the ability to run on a 533Mhz board allowing Wireless speeds as high as 35-40mbps without compression on a single 20mhz channel. Mikrotik 266Mhz boards in my opinion are wasteful to Wifi, if using 20Mhz channels, because the bottle neck is the CPU not the Wifi Card. With that said, I saw the press release on the Mikrotik 400Mhz 532 board, however, I have yet to see one sold any where. Are these available yet? Are they just 532 boards being overclocked? Are they stable? Tom DeReggi RapidDSL Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - From: Dennis Burgess [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, May 18, 2007 5:38 PM Subject: [WISPA] Routerboard 532 Speeds I wanted to post a message to make sure everyone understands a post that I made a while back on the speed of the 532s. First, I want to make sure that I say, that I CURRENTLY use Routerboard 532s on ALL my towers. I use it as all of the APs on my wireless network, and I use MT for 99% of my consulting customers router needs. I think that Mikrotik is a great product, heck, I even certified in the product, use it every day for WISP and network operations! With that said, I had stated that the thoughput of a 532 is around 20-25 meg. I want to clarify that it is MY EXPERIENCE that a 532 running as a CORE router, such as doing NAT, connection tracking, having simple queues, SFQ queueing, OSPF, ya name, it, the speed I have seen the processor at that point at 100% would be around 20meg BOTH WAYS, this does not account for wireless cards, just ETHERNET to ETHERNET! So, on the 266mhz processors, about 20 meg both ways, and around 25 meg for the new 400mhz boards. It has NOTHING to do with wireless connectivity, just pure processing power doing
Re: [WISPA] Routerboard 532 Speeds
I thought MT was going to release a 1ghz routerboard next week at the MUM? Travis Microserv Tom DeReggi wrote: I have found that MT test tools are accurate with enough CPU power. Thats part of the reason higher CPU's are needed. How does one troubleshoot and certify their links remotely on an ongoing basis? In the field, having a 1GB Router on each side usually isn't an option, and with Firewall trends, often only 1 router accessable on the ISP's end, provided they run a routed network at the cell, with a Linux box. It is imparative to have a radio device with enough horsepower to perform a linktest of itself. So sure it may be fine to have a 175mhz processor for subs that don;t need to be tested at speeds higher than a few mbps. But for APs, the CPU cycles are needed, to run a certifiable network. A 266Mhz board does not have enough CPU to keep up with full speed of a wireless card when test devices are outside each side of the router, and even less inability to self generate the tests from within MT. I recognize that my response/argument is not on topic with your thread, discussing Wired Ethernet MT Routers. I just like to throw in my pitch for higher CPU devices, whenever I have a window to :-) To keep the manufacturer's working on it, and aware that we need it. Tom DeReggi RapidDSL Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - From: Dennis Burgess [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Tuesday, May 22, 2007 10:06 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Routerboard 532 Speeds I actually think it is an issue with their BW tester (the windows version) that is. cause that is where I am seeing this. I am getting wire speed 90+ mbps on FTP Transfers. Mikrotik uses two 1gig MT routers around the 532 to do their testing. They are setting around 100mbits using that configuration and their built in bandwidth tester, not their windows version though. I have two 3.06 gig Dual Core HPs that I have setup with a 532 266mhz for testing right now, next is to load up a USB Flash card with a temp licence to see what they do. Dennis On 5/21/07, Mike Hammett [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I would imagine as with all technology, they were able to run it faster with less heat. MT has a slew of new products coming (I believe 300, 600, 800, and 1000 series though I'm not 100% sure) - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com - Original Message - From: Tom DeReggi [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Monday, May 21, 2007 1:59 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Routerboard 532 Speeds I do not have an opinion or data on the Ethernet to Ethernet configuration you mention. But it is important that we define both ways, expecially when dealing with Wireless cards. The max data we've been able to get out of a Mikrotik 532 AP, with 20Mhz channel 5.8G, connection tracking off, no type of compression considered, is about 20mbps thoughput. That means 20mbps in the Ethernet and 20mbps out the wireless card or Vice versa. It Does NOT mean 20mbps Full Duplex over the wireless. The big advantage that StarOS had over Mikrotik was the ability to run on a 533Mhz board allowing Wireless speeds as high as 35-40mbps without compression on a single 20mhz channel. Mikrotik 266Mhz boards in my opinion are wasteful to Wifi, if using 20Mhz channels, because the bottle neck is the CPU not the Wifi Card. With that said, I saw the press release on the Mikrotik 400Mhz 532 board, however, I have yet to see one sold any where. Are these available yet? Are they just 532 boards being overclocked? Are they stable? Tom DeReggi RapidDSL Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - From: Dennis Burgess [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, May 18, 2007 5:38 PM Subject: [WISPA] Routerboard 532 Speeds I wanted to post a message to make sure everyone understands a post that I made a while back on the speed of the 532s. First, I want to make sure that I say, that I CURRENTLY use Routerboard 532s on ALL my towers. I use it as all of the APs on my wireless network, and I use MT for 99% of my consulting customers router needs. I think that Mikrotik is a great product, heck, I even certified in the product, use it every day for WISP and network operations! With that said, I had stated that the thoughput of a 532 is around 20-25 meg. I want to clarify that it is MY EXPERIENCE that a 532 running as a CORE router, such as doing NAT, connection tracking, having simple queues, SFQ queueing, OSPF, ya name, it, the speed I have seen the processor at that point at 100% would be around 20meg BOTH WAYS, this does not account for wireless cards, just ETHERNET to ETHERNET! So, on the 266mhz processors, about 20 meg both ways, and around
Re: [WISPA] Routerboard 532 Speeds
That would be exciting. Tom DeReggi RapidDSL Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - From: Travis Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Tuesday, May 22, 2007 10:52 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Routerboard 532 Speeds I thought MT was going to release a 1ghz routerboard next week at the MUM? Travis Microserv Tom DeReggi wrote: I have found that MT test tools are accurate with enough CPU power. Thats part of the reason higher CPU's are needed. How does one troubleshoot and certify their links remotely on an ongoing basis? In the field, having a 1GB Router on each side usually isn't an option, and with Firewall trends, often only 1 router accessable on the ISP's end, provided they run a routed network at the cell, with a Linux box. It is imparative to have a radio device with enough horsepower to perform a linktest of itself. So sure it may be fine to have a 175mhz processor for subs that don;t need to be tested at speeds higher than a few mbps. But for APs, the CPU cycles are needed, to run a certifiable network. A 266Mhz board does not have enough CPU to keep up with full speed of a wireless card when test devices are outside each side of the router, and even less inability to self generate the tests from within MT. I recognize that my response/argument is not on topic with your thread, discussing Wired Ethernet MT Routers. I just like to throw in my pitch for higher CPU devices, whenever I have a window to :-) To keep the manufacturer's working on it, and aware that we need it. Tom DeReggi RapidDSL Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - From: Dennis Burgess [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Tuesday, May 22, 2007 10:06 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Routerboard 532 Speeds I actually think it is an issue with their BW tester (the windows version) that is. cause that is where I am seeing this. I am getting wire speed 90+ mbps on FTP Transfers. Mikrotik uses two 1gig MT routers around the 532 to do their testing. They are setting around 100mbits using that configuration and their built in bandwidth tester, not their windows version though. I have two 3.06 gig Dual Core HPs that I have setup with a 532 266mhz for testing right now, next is to load up a USB Flash card with a temp licence to see what they do. Dennis On 5/21/07, Mike Hammett [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I would imagine as with all technology, they were able to run it faster with less heat. MT has a slew of new products coming (I believe 300, 600, 800, and 1000 series though I'm not 100% sure) - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com - Original Message - From: Tom DeReggi [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Monday, May 21, 2007 1:59 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Routerboard 532 Speeds I do not have an opinion or data on the Ethernet to Ethernet configuration you mention. But it is important that we define both ways, expecially when dealing with Wireless cards. The max data we've been able to get out of a Mikrotik 532 AP, with 20Mhz channel 5.8G, connection tracking off, no type of compression considered, is about 20mbps thoughput. That means 20mbps in the Ethernet and 20mbps out the wireless card or Vice versa. It Does NOT mean 20mbps Full Duplex over the wireless. The big advantage that StarOS had over Mikrotik was the ability to run on a 533Mhz board allowing Wireless speeds as high as 35-40mbps without compression on a single 20mhz channel. Mikrotik 266Mhz boards in my opinion are wasteful to Wifi, if using 20Mhz channels, because the bottle neck is the CPU not the Wifi Card. With that said, I saw the press release on the Mikrotik 400Mhz 532 board, however, I have yet to see one sold any where. Are these available yet? Are they just 532 boards being overclocked? Are they stable? Tom DeReggi RapidDSL Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - From: Dennis Burgess [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, May 18, 2007 5:38 PM Subject: [WISPA] Routerboard 532 Speeds I wanted to post a message to make sure everyone understands a post that I made a while back on the speed of the 532s. First, I want to make sure that I say, that I CURRENTLY use Routerboard 532s on ALL my towers. I use it as all of the APs on my wireless network, and I use MT for 99% of my consulting customers router needs. I think that Mikrotik is a great product, heck, I even certified in the product, use it every day for WISP and network operations! With that said, I had stated that the thoughput of a 532 is around 20-25 meg. I want to clarify that it is MY EXPERIENCE that a 532 running as a CORE router, such as doing NAT, connection tracking, having simple
Re: [WISPA] Routerboard 532 Speeds
Faster, more powerful MT boards are on the way. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com - Original Message - From: Tom DeReggi [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Tuesday, May 22, 2007 9:51 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Routerboard 532 Speeds I have found that MT test tools are accurate with enough CPU power. Thats part of the reason higher CPU's are needed. How does one troubleshoot and certify their links remotely on an ongoing basis? In the field, having a 1GB Router on each side usually isn't an option, and with Firewall trends, often only 1 router accessable on the ISP's end, provided they run a routed network at the cell, with a Linux box. It is imparative to have a radio device with enough horsepower to perform a linktest of itself. So sure it may be fine to have a 175mhz processor for subs that don;t need to be tested at speeds higher than a few mbps. But for APs, the CPU cycles are needed, to run a certifiable network. A 266Mhz board does not have enough CPU to keep up with full speed of a wireless card when test devices are outside each side of the router, and even less inability to self generate the tests from within MT. I recognize that my response/argument is not on topic with your thread, discussing Wired Ethernet MT Routers. I just like to throw in my pitch for higher CPU devices, whenever I have a window to :-) To keep the manufacturer's working on it, and aware that we need it. Tom DeReggi RapidDSL Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - From: Dennis Burgess [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Tuesday, May 22, 2007 10:06 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Routerboard 532 Speeds I actually think it is an issue with their BW tester (the windows version) that is. cause that is where I am seeing this. I am getting wire speed 90+ mbps on FTP Transfers. Mikrotik uses two 1gig MT routers around the 532 to do their testing. They are setting around 100mbits using that configuration and their built in bandwidth tester, not their windows version though. I have two 3.06 gig Dual Core HPs that I have setup with a 532 266mhz for testing right now, next is to load up a USB Flash card with a temp licence to see what they do. Dennis On 5/21/07, Mike Hammett [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I would imagine as with all technology, they were able to run it faster with less heat. MT has a slew of new products coming (I believe 300, 600, 800, and 1000 series though I'm not 100% sure) - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com - Original Message - From: Tom DeReggi [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Monday, May 21, 2007 1:59 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Routerboard 532 Speeds I do not have an opinion or data on the Ethernet to Ethernet configuration you mention. But it is important that we define both ways, expecially when dealing with Wireless cards. The max data we've been able to get out of a Mikrotik 532 AP, with 20Mhz channel 5.8G, connection tracking off, no type of compression considered, is about 20mbps thoughput. That means 20mbps in the Ethernet and 20mbps out the wireless card or Vice versa. It Does NOT mean 20mbps Full Duplex over the wireless. The big advantage that StarOS had over Mikrotik was the ability to run on a 533Mhz board allowing Wireless speeds as high as 35-40mbps without compression on a single 20mhz channel. Mikrotik 266Mhz boards in my opinion are wasteful to Wifi, if using 20Mhz channels, because the bottle neck is the CPU not the Wifi Card. With that said, I saw the press release on the Mikrotik 400Mhz 532 board, however, I have yet to see one sold any where. Are these available yet? Are they just 532 boards being overclocked? Are they stable? Tom DeReggi RapidDSL Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - From: Dennis Burgess [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, May 18, 2007 5:38 PM Subject: [WISPA] Routerboard 532 Speeds I wanted to post a message to make sure everyone understands a post that I made a while back on the speed of the 532s. First, I want to make sure that I say, that I CURRENTLY use Routerboard 532s on ALL my towers. I use it as all of the APs on my wireless network, and I use MT for 99% of my consulting customers router needs. I think that Mikrotik is a great product, heck, I even certified in the product, use it every day for WISP and network operations! With that said, I had stated that the thoughput of a 532 is around 20-25 meg. I want to clarify that it is MY EXPERIENCE that a 532 running as a CORE router, such as doing NAT, connection tracking, having simple queues, SFQ queueing, OSPF, ya name, it, the speed I have
Re: [WISPA] Routerboard 532 Speeds
Yep. There is several products that they should be talking about next week! Be sure to check out my site, as i will post some information about it, if possabe, etc. http://www.mikrotikconsulting.com. One of them includes a gigabit board that should have some power behind it! Should be very intresting to see. On 5/22/07, Mike Hammett [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Faster, more powerful MT boards are on the way. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com - Original Message - From: Tom DeReggi [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Tuesday, May 22, 2007 9:51 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Routerboard 532 Speeds I have found that MT test tools are accurate with enough CPU power. Thats part of the reason higher CPU's are needed. How does one troubleshoot and certify their links remotely on an ongoing basis? In the field, having a 1GB Router on each side usually isn't an option, and with Firewall trends, often only 1 router accessable on the ISP's end, provided they run a routed network at the cell, with a Linux box. It is imparative to have a radio device with enough horsepower to perform a linktest of itself. So sure it may be fine to have a 175mhz processor for subs that don;t need to be tested at speeds higher than a few mbps. But for APs, the CPU cycles are needed, to run a certifiable network. A 266Mhz board does not have enough CPU to keep up with full speed of a wireless card when test devices are outside each side of the router, and even less inability to self generate the tests from within MT. I recognize that my response/argument is not on topic with your thread, discussing Wired Ethernet MT Routers. I just like to throw in my pitch for higher CPU devices, whenever I have a window to :-) To keep the manufacturer's working on it, and aware that we need it. Tom DeReggi RapidDSL Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - From: Dennis Burgess [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Tuesday, May 22, 2007 10:06 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Routerboard 532 Speeds I actually think it is an issue with their BW tester (the windows version) that is. cause that is where I am seeing this. I am getting wire speed 90+ mbps on FTP Transfers. Mikrotik uses two 1gig MT routers around the 532 to do their testing. They are setting around 100mbits using that configuration and their built in bandwidth tester, not their windows version though. I have two 3.06 gig Dual Core HPs that I have setup with a 532 266mhz for testing right now, next is to load up a USB Flash card with a temp licence to see what they do. Dennis On 5/21/07, Mike Hammett [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I would imagine as with all technology, they were able to run it faster with less heat. MT has a slew of new products coming (I believe 300, 600, 800, and 1000 series though I'm not 100% sure) - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com - Original Message - From: Tom DeReggi [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Monday, May 21, 2007 1:59 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Routerboard 532 Speeds I do not have an opinion or data on the Ethernet to Ethernet configuration you mention. But it is important that we define both ways, expecially when dealing with Wireless cards. The max data we've been able to get out of a Mikrotik 532 AP, with 20Mhz channel 5.8G, connection tracking off, no type of compression considered, is about 20mbps thoughput. That means 20mbps in the Ethernet and 20mbps out the wireless card or Vice versa. It Does NOT mean 20mbps Full Duplex over the wireless. The big advantage that StarOS had over Mikrotik was the ability to run on a 533Mhz board allowing Wireless speeds as high as 35-40mbps without compression on a single 20mhz channel. Mikrotik 266Mhz boards in my opinion are wasteful to Wifi, if using 20Mhz channels, because the bottle neck is the CPU not the Wifi Card. With that said, I saw the press release on the Mikrotik 400Mhz 532 board, however, I have yet to see one sold any where. Are these available yet? Are they just 532 boards being overclocked? Are they stable? Tom DeReggi RapidDSL Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - From: Dennis Burgess [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, May 18, 2007 5:38 PM Subject: [WISPA] Routerboard 532 Speeds I wanted to post a message to make sure everyone understands a post that I made a while back on the speed of the 532s. First, I want to make sure that I say, that I CURRENTLY use Routerboard 532s on ALL my towers. I use it as all of the APs on my wireless network, and I use MT for 99% of my consulting
Re: [WISPA] Routerboard 532 Speeds
http://www.czfree-ol.net/forum/viewtopic.php?p=2745 The new MT boards. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com - Original Message - From: Dennis Burgess [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, May 18, 2007 4:38 PM Subject: [WISPA] Routerboard 532 Speeds I wanted to post a message to make sure everyone understands a post that I made a while back on the speed of the 532s. First, I want to make sure that I say, that I CURRENTLY use Routerboard 532s on ALL my towers. I use it as all of the APs on my wireless network, and I use MT for 99% of my consulting customers router needs. I think that Mikrotik is a great product, heck, I even certified in the product, use it every day for WISP and network operations! With that said, I had stated that the thoughput of a 532 is around 20-25 meg. I want to clarify that it is MY EXPERIENCE that a 532 running as a CORE router, such as doing NAT, connection tracking, having simple queues, SFQ queueing, OSPF, ya name, it, the speed I have seen the processor at that point at 100% would be around 20meg BOTH WAYS, this does not account for wireless cards, just ETHERNET to ETHERNET! So, on the 266mhz processors, about 20 meg both ways, and around 25 meg for the new 400mhz boards.It has NOTHING to do with wireless connectivity, just pure processing power doing tones of tasks. Now with that said, with two workstaitons 3 foot of ethernet between them, and a 532 Rev5 with the 400mhz processor, one way I can do a FTP Transfer at 92 meg, and I see 2-3 meg going the other way.This is ONE connection, not a bunch, this is STRIGHT routing, no OSPF, no NAT, with connection tracking turned on. I also use TCP packets vs UDP, this 92meg/2meg would be very close to the limit of two 10/100 nics. I just wanted to clarify this, as many of my customers have asked me what is a good limit to start looking at puttting in something a bit bigger as they have grown. My opinion, depends on what you are doing with the MT, but a total thoughput of around 50meg is a good starting point, depending on how many features you are using on the MT, i.e. NAT, OSFP, etc. Now, looking at that, if you are moving more than 20 meg both ways on your network, doing it using a $200 router sounds awsome to me! Not to menton all of the other features you have! I don't doubt, that if you put up a wireless link and test with it, you can see much higher 50+ meg thoughput, depending on what the router is doing. In my case, we are looking at customers that use their 532 as a do everything router. If you have any thoughts, comments or questions, or if you have some real world experience, with NOTHING on, or only a few things on, be sure to post, i'm sure that many users will enjoy reading your findings. -- Dennis Burgess, MCP, CCNA, A+, N+, Mikrotik Certified Consultant www.mikrotikconsulting.com [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Routerboard 532 Speeds
The RB1000 is listed as rack mountable aluminum case. Wonder if that means no outdoor PoE use? Travis Microserv Mike Hammett wrote: http://www.czfree-ol.net/forum/viewtopic.php?p=2745 The new MT boards. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com - Original Message - From: Dennis Burgess [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, May 18, 2007 4:38 PM Subject: [WISPA] Routerboard 532 Speeds I wanted to post a message to make sure everyone understands a post that I made a while back on the speed of the 532s. First, I want to make sure that I say, that I CURRENTLY use Routerboard 532s on ALL my towers. I use it as all of the APs on my wireless network, and I use MT for 99% of my consulting customers router needs. I think that Mikrotik is a great product, heck, I even certified in the product, use it every day for WISP and network operations! With that said, I had stated that the thoughput of a 532 is around 20-25 meg. I want to clarify that it is MY EXPERIENCE that a 532 running as a CORE router, such as doing NAT, connection tracking, having simple queues, SFQ queueing, OSPF, ya name, it, the speed I have seen the processor at that point at 100% would be around 20meg BOTH WAYS, this does not account for wireless cards, just ETHERNET to ETHERNET! So, on the 266mhz processors, about 20 meg both ways, and around 25 meg for the new 400mhz boards.It has NOTHING to do with wireless connectivity, just pure processing power doing tones of tasks. Now with that said, with two workstaitons 3 foot of ethernet between them, and a 532 Rev5 with the 400mhz processor, one way I can do a FTP Transfer at 92 meg, and I see 2-3 meg going the other way.This is ONE connection, not a bunch, this is STRIGHT routing, no OSPF, no NAT, with connection tracking turned on. I also use TCP packets vs UDP, this 92meg/2meg would be very close to the limit of two 10/100 nics. I just wanted to clarify this, as many of my customers have asked me what is a good limit to start looking at puttting in something a bit bigger as they have grown. My opinion, depends on what you are doing with the MT, but a total thoughput of around 50meg is a good starting point, depending on how many features you are using on the MT, i.e. NAT, OSFP, etc. Now, looking at that, if you are moving more than 20 meg both ways on your network, doing it using a $200 router sounds awsome to me! Not to menton all of the other features you have! I don't doubt, that if you put up a wireless link and test with it, you can see much higher 50+ meg thoughput, depending on what the router is doing. In my case, we are looking at customers that use their 532 as a do everything router. If you have any thoughts, comments or questions, or if you have some real world experience, with NOTHING on, or only a few things on, be sure to post, i'm sure that many users will enjoy reading your findings. -- Dennis Burgess, MCP, CCNA, A+, N+, Mikrotik Certified Consultant www.mikrotikconsulting.com [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Routerboard 532 Speeds
I do not have an opinion or data on the Ethernet to Ethernet configuration you mention. But it is important that we define both ways, expecially when dealing with Wireless cards. The max data we've been able to get out of a Mikrotik 532 AP, with 20Mhz channel 5.8G, connection tracking off, no type of compression considered, is about 20mbps thoughput. That means 20mbps in the Ethernet and 20mbps out the wireless card or Vice versa. It Does NOT mean 20mbps Full Duplex over the wireless. The big advantage that StarOS had over Mikrotik was the ability to run on a 533Mhz board allowing Wireless speeds as high as 35-40mbps without compression on a single 20mhz channel. Mikrotik 266Mhz boards in my opinion are wasteful to Wifi, if using 20Mhz channels, because the bottle neck is the CPU not the Wifi Card. With that said, I saw the press release on the Mikrotik 400Mhz 532 board, however, I have yet to see one sold any where. Are these available yet? Are they just 532 boards being overclocked? Are they stable? Tom DeReggi RapidDSL Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - From: Dennis Burgess [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, May 18, 2007 5:38 PM Subject: [WISPA] Routerboard 532 Speeds I wanted to post a message to make sure everyone understands a post that I made a while back on the speed of the 532s. First, I want to make sure that I say, that I CURRENTLY use Routerboard 532s on ALL my towers. I use it as all of the APs on my wireless network, and I use MT for 99% of my consulting customers router needs. I think that Mikrotik is a great product, heck, I even certified in the product, use it every day for WISP and network operations! With that said, I had stated that the thoughput of a 532 is around 20-25 meg. I want to clarify that it is MY EXPERIENCE that a 532 running as a CORE router, such as doing NAT, connection tracking, having simple queues, SFQ queueing, OSPF, ya name, it, the speed I have seen the processor at that point at 100% would be around 20meg BOTH WAYS, this does not account for wireless cards, just ETHERNET to ETHERNET! So, on the 266mhz processors, about 20 meg both ways, and around 25 meg for the new 400mhz boards.It has NOTHING to do with wireless connectivity, just pure processing power doing tones of tasks. Now with that said, with two workstaitons 3 foot of ethernet between them, and a 532 Rev5 with the 400mhz processor, one way I can do a FTP Transfer at 92 meg, and I see 2-3 meg going the other way.This is ONE connection, not a bunch, this is STRIGHT routing, no OSPF, no NAT, with connection tracking turned on. I also use TCP packets vs UDP, this 92meg/2meg would be very close to the limit of two 10/100 nics. I just wanted to clarify this, as many of my customers have asked me what is a good limit to start looking at puttting in something a bit bigger as they have grown. My opinion, depends on what you are doing with the MT, but a total thoughput of around 50meg is a good starting point, depending on how many features you are using on the MT, i.e. NAT, OSFP, etc. Now, looking at that, if you are moving more than 20 meg both ways on your network, doing it using a $200 router sounds awsome to me! Not to menton all of the other features you have! I don't doubt, that if you put up a wireless link and test with it, you can see much higher 50+ meg thoughput, depending on what the router is doing. In my case, we are looking at customers that use their 532 as a do everything router. If you have any thoughts, comments or questions, or if you have some real world experience, with NOTHING on, or only a few things on, be sure to post, i'm sure that many users will enjoy reading your findings. -- Dennis Burgess, MCP, CCNA, A+, N+, Mikrotik Certified Consultant www.mikrotikconsulting.com [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.467 / Virus Database: 269.7.3/809 - Release Date: 5/17/2007 5:18 PM -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Routerboard 532 Speeds
I am seeing 20mbps BOTH WAYS on the older 266 boards. I also have a stack of 400mhz boards here, got them from WISP-ROUTER a while back for a project I was doing. Just a FYI on the last question. On the speed, I am speaking of the Ethernet, I am also getting one way speeds in excess of 90mbit doing FTP transfers one-way. This is just eithernet to ethernet not wireless at all. It would show that the 532 board is capable of doing more via ethernet, than wirelesss if this is the case. I will be getting some new wifi cards, to check out and see what the speeds are though them in a test lab, will let you know! Just a FYI, I do have a 5 mile, 5 gig link now that does 25 meg on-way using 532s, it is nstream, but not dual radios/antennas. Dennis On 5/21/07, Tom DeReggi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I do not have an opinion or data on the Ethernet to Ethernet configuration you mention. But it is important that we define both ways, expecially when dealing with Wireless cards. The max data we've been able to get out of a Mikrotik 532 AP, with 20Mhz channel 5.8G, connection tracking off, no type of compression considered, is about 20mbps thoughput. That means 20mbps in the Ethernet and 20mbps out the wireless card or Vice versa. It Does NOT mean 20mbps Full Duplex over the wireless. The big advantage that StarOS had over Mikrotik was the ability to run on a 533Mhz board allowing Wireless speeds as high as 35-40mbps without compression on a single 20mhz channel. Mikrotik 266Mhz boards in my opinion are wasteful to Wifi, if using 20Mhz channels, because the bottle neck is the CPU not the Wifi Card. With that said, I saw the press release on the Mikrotik 400Mhz 532 board, however, I have yet to see one sold any where. Are these available yet? Are they just 532 boards being overclocked? Are they stable? Tom DeReggi RapidDSL Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - From: Dennis Burgess [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, May 18, 2007 5:38 PM Subject: [WISPA] Routerboard 532 Speeds I wanted to post a message to make sure everyone understands a post that I made a while back on the speed of the 532s. First, I want to make sure that I say, that I CURRENTLY use Routerboard 532s on ALL my towers. I use it as all of the APs on my wireless network, and I use MT for 99% of my consulting customers router needs. I think that Mikrotik is a great product, heck, I even certified in the product, use it every day for WISP and network operations! With that said, I had stated that the thoughput of a 532 is around 20-25 meg. I want to clarify that it is MY EXPERIENCE that a 532 running as a CORE router, such as doing NAT, connection tracking, having simple queues, SFQ queueing, OSPF, ya name, it, the speed I have seen the processor at that point at 100% would be around 20meg BOTH WAYS, this does not account for wireless cards, just ETHERNET to ETHERNET! So, on the 266mhz processors, about 20 meg both ways, and around 25 meg for the new 400mhz boards.It has NOTHING to do with wireless connectivity, just pure processing power doing tones of tasks. Now with that said, with two workstaitons 3 foot of ethernet between them, and a 532 Rev5 with the 400mhz processor, one way I can do a FTP Transfer at 92 meg, and I see 2-3 meg going the other way.This is ONE connection, not a bunch, this is STRIGHT routing, no OSPF, no NAT, with connection tracking turned on. I also use TCP packets vs UDP, this 92meg/2meg would be very close to the limit of two 10/100 nics. I just wanted to clarify this, as many of my customers have asked me what is a good limit to start looking at puttting in something a bit bigger as they have grown. My opinion, depends on what you are doing with the MT, but a total thoughput of around 50meg is a good starting point, depending on how many features you are using on the MT, i.e. NAT, OSFP, etc. Now, looking at that, if you are moving more than 20 meg both ways on your network, doing it using a $200 router sounds awsome to me! Not to menton all of the other features you have! I don't doubt, that if you put up a wireless link and test with it, you can see much higher 50+ meg thoughput, depending on what the router is doing. In my case, we are looking at customers that use their 532 as a do everything router. If you have any thoughts, comments or questions, or if you have some real world experience, with NOTHING on, or only a few things on, be sure to post, i'm sure that many users will enjoy reading your findings. -- Dennis Burgess, MCP, CCNA, A+, N+, Mikrotik Certified Consultant www.mikrotikconsulting.com [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- No virus found in this incoming message
Re: [WISPA] Routerboard 532 Speeds
I would imagine as with all technology, they were able to run it faster with less heat. MT has a slew of new products coming (I believe 300, 600, 800, and 1000 series though I'm not 100% sure) - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com - Original Message - From: Tom DeReggi [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Monday, May 21, 2007 1:59 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Routerboard 532 Speeds I do not have an opinion or data on the Ethernet to Ethernet configuration you mention. But it is important that we define both ways, expecially when dealing with Wireless cards. The max data we've been able to get out of a Mikrotik 532 AP, with 20Mhz channel 5.8G, connection tracking off, no type of compression considered, is about 20mbps thoughput. That means 20mbps in the Ethernet and 20mbps out the wireless card or Vice versa. It Does NOT mean 20mbps Full Duplex over the wireless. The big advantage that StarOS had over Mikrotik was the ability to run on a 533Mhz board allowing Wireless speeds as high as 35-40mbps without compression on a single 20mhz channel. Mikrotik 266Mhz boards in my opinion are wasteful to Wifi, if using 20Mhz channels, because the bottle neck is the CPU not the Wifi Card. With that said, I saw the press release on the Mikrotik 400Mhz 532 board, however, I have yet to see one sold any where. Are these available yet? Are they just 532 boards being overclocked? Are they stable? Tom DeReggi RapidDSL Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - From: Dennis Burgess [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, May 18, 2007 5:38 PM Subject: [WISPA] Routerboard 532 Speeds I wanted to post a message to make sure everyone understands a post that I made a while back on the speed of the 532s. First, I want to make sure that I say, that I CURRENTLY use Routerboard 532s on ALL my towers. I use it as all of the APs on my wireless network, and I use MT for 99% of my consulting customers router needs. I think that Mikrotik is a great product, heck, I even certified in the product, use it every day for WISP and network operations! With that said, I had stated that the thoughput of a 532 is around 20-25 meg. I want to clarify that it is MY EXPERIENCE that a 532 running as a CORE router, such as doing NAT, connection tracking, having simple queues, SFQ queueing, OSPF, ya name, it, the speed I have seen the processor at that point at 100% would be around 20meg BOTH WAYS, this does not account for wireless cards, just ETHERNET to ETHERNET! So, on the 266mhz processors, about 20 meg both ways, and around 25 meg for the new 400mhz boards. It has NOTHING to do with wireless connectivity, just pure processing power doing tones of tasks. Now with that said, with two workstaitons 3 foot of ethernet between them, and a 532 Rev5 with the 400mhz processor, one way I can do a FTP Transfer at 92 meg, and I see 2-3 meg going the other way.This is ONE connection, not a bunch, this is STRIGHT routing, no OSPF, no NAT, with connection tracking turned on. I also use TCP packets vs UDP, this 92meg/2meg would be very close to the limit of two 10/100 nics. I just wanted to clarify this, as many of my customers have asked me what is a good limit to start looking at puttting in something a bit bigger as they have grown. My opinion, depends on what you are doing with the MT, but a total thoughput of around 50meg is a good starting point, depending on how many features you are using on the MT, i.e. NAT, OSFP, etc. Now, looking at that, if you are moving more than 20 meg both ways on your network, doing it using a $200 router sounds awsome to me! Not to menton all of the other features you have! I don't doubt, that if you put up a wireless link and test with it, you can see much higher 50+ meg thoughput, depending on what the router is doing. In my case, we are looking at customers that use their 532 as a do everything router. If you have any thoughts, comments or questions, or if you have some real world experience, with NOTHING on, or only a few things on, be sure to post, i'm sure that many users will enjoy reading your findings. -- Dennis Burgess, MCP, CCNA, A+, N+, Mikrotik Certified Consultant www.mikrotikconsulting.com [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.467 / Virus Database: 269.7.3/809 - Release Date: 5/17/2007 5:18 PM -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
[WISPA] Routerboard 532 Speeds
I wanted to post a message to make sure everyone understands a post that I made a while back on the speed of the 532s. First, I want to make sure that I say, that I CURRENTLY use Routerboard 532s on ALL my towers. I use it as all of the APs on my wireless network, and I use MT for 99% of my consulting customers router needs. I think that Mikrotik is a great product, heck, I even certified in the product, use it every day for WISP and network operations! With that said, I had stated that the thoughput of a 532 is around 20-25 meg. I want to clarify that it is MY EXPERIENCE that a 532 running as a CORE router, such as doing NAT, connection tracking, having simple queues, SFQ queueing, OSPF, ya name, it, the speed I have seen the processor at that point at 100% would be around 20meg BOTH WAYS, this does not account for wireless cards, just ETHERNET to ETHERNET! So, on the 266mhz processors, about 20 meg both ways, and around 25 meg for the new 400mhz boards.It has NOTHING to do with wireless connectivity, just pure processing power doing tones of tasks. Now with that said, with two workstaitons 3 foot of ethernet between them, and a 532 Rev5 with the 400mhz processor, one way I can do a FTP Transfer at 92 meg, and I see 2-3 meg going the other way.This is ONE connection, not a bunch, this is STRIGHT routing, no OSPF, no NAT, with connection tracking turned on. I also use TCP packets vs UDP, this 92meg/2meg would be very close to the limit of two 10/100 nics. I just wanted to clarify this, as many of my customers have asked me what is a good limit to start looking at puttting in something a bit bigger as they have grown. My opinion, depends on what you are doing with the MT, but a total thoughput of around 50meg is a good starting point, depending on how many features you are using on the MT, i.e. NAT, OSFP, etc. Now, looking at that, if you are moving more than 20 meg both ways on your network, doing it using a $200 router sounds awsome to me! Not to menton all of the other features you have! I don't doubt, that if you put up a wireless link and test with it, you can see much higher 50+ meg thoughput, depending on what the router is doing. In my case, we are looking at customers that use their 532 as a do everything router. If you have any thoughts, comments or questions, or if you have some real world experience, with NOTHING on, or only a few things on, be sure to post, i'm sure that many users will enjoy reading your findings. -- Dennis Burgess, MCP, CCNA, A+, N+, Mikrotik Certified Consultant www.mikrotikconsulting.com [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Routerboard 532 and NStreme2
Lonnie is famous for hijacking threads Regardless of the original thread topic, I'd argue that... The goal is to find a manufacturer that can deliver what we need, the complete solution, at the price we need. If someone can do that, there is not much more to find out, in my mind. Its not about who is better, its who can deliver, because WISPs are starving for solutions. When I think about it, until just recently, I have been using the same product that I selected as best for me 5 years ago and there are two reasons for it. 1) Loyalty to vendor and 2) there is lots of advancement, but not enough of a value to justify change. A great OS does nothing if it can;t run on adequate hardware, and adequate hardware can't do much without adequate software. I am exstatic to hear about what Lonnie has accomplished with his new War/V3 solution. To my recognition, he is the first to deliver a complete low cost solution to meet todays ISP's backhaul needs. (that means he's listening to WISPs). It delivers low cost, total link w/ antennas, radios, cases, etc, under $1000, it allows us to transparently bridge without compromising MTU delivery, and it will pass 35 mbps, adeqaute speed for backhauling a 6 six sector cell site. First, a product must meet the need of the solution. Every other component of the OS's I feel are almost pointless, or just value add to help tip the scale. A 12-20 mbps solution is just not enough. I'm not saying there are not other vendors with adeqaute solutions, nor that the other products don't have valueable features for other solutions. But War/V3 might have been the first to deliver all three needs in a PTP (also possibly PtMP sectors, but thats a different discussion with different things to compare.). For that recognition is due, and I commend him. Tom DeReggi RapidDSL Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - From: JohnnyO [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: 'WISPA General List' wireless@wispa.org Sent: Thursday, August 17, 2006 11:37 AM Subject: RE: [WISPA] Routerboard 532 and NStreme2 -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Brad Belton Sent: Thursday, August 17, 2006 10:32 AM To: 'WISPA General List' Subject: RE: [WISPA] Routerboard 532 and NStreme2 11MByte/sec as in approx 88Mbps? Sounds about like NStreme Turbo (40MHz channel) or Alvarion B100 (40MHz channel). Considering this thread was originally about the RB532 and its shortcomings, has anyone tried loading MikroTik OS onto the StarOS 533MHz hardware? *Lonnie is famous for hijacking threads to promote his products. We shouldn't punish him for it because after all, he is canadian ! :)~ JohnnyO Brad -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Tom DeReggi Sent: Thursday, August 17, 2006 10:25 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Routerboard 532 and NStreme2 Lonnie, Wow, that was fast. Great New! Testing starts this week. Tom DeReggi RapidDSL Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - From: Lonnie Nunweiler [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Thursday, August 17, 2006 2:24 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Routerboard 532 and NStreme2 Tom, The new V3 release has been posted and you can set MTU to very high values if your cards support jumbo frames. Our WAR board, with its very advanced Intel Ethernet can do 16K for the MTU. Most other cards have limits in the 2K to 4K range. We also have released the first x86 PC Architecture version and the updated x86 WRAP version. They have the same features as the WAR version. I'm not sure if we mentioned it but the x86 version has a free mode that is no longer a 24 hour trial. It saves settings and everything works, except of course the advanced features that we use to add value. You can use it for fairly advance routing (quagga has ospf and rip) for free. We'll require a paid license for wireless, policy or source routing, bandwidth control and our firewall scripting. We are pretty sure that more than 11 MBytes/sec in Turbo mode on a power machine will meet with approval. Device bonding will be coming fairly soon and it will allow simple hdx bonding, fdx bonding and failover bonding. We use the Linux 2.6 kernel and we have been able to get this image to well under 8 MB and average ram use on bootup is about 16 MB. It took a long time to get here and we have to thank everybody for being patient. Some of you wrote us off and figured that V3 would never reach the light of day, so I hope you take a look at what this new release can do. Lonnie On 8/15/06, Tom DeReggi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Lonnie, When you get that feature solved / added, please let me know, or make a public announcement. If you let me know, I'll do a bunch of talk for you persoanlly, to promote the feature. Thanks. Tom DeReggi RapidDSL Wireless
RE: [WISPA] Routerboard 532 and NStreme2
Let me add that the new version of StarOs is passing vlans like a charm... Kudos for Valemount for such a quick response to customer request... Gino A. Villarini [EMAIL PROTECTED] Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp. tel 787.273.4143 fax 787.273.4145 -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Tom DeReggi Sent: Friday, August 18, 2006 10:12 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Routerboard 532 and NStreme2 Lonnie is famous for hijacking threads Regardless of the original thread topic, I'd argue that... The goal is to find a manufacturer that can deliver what we need, the complete solution, at the price we need. If someone can do that, there is not much more to find out, in my mind. Its not about who is better, its who can deliver, because WISPs are starving for solutions. When I think about it, until just recently, I have been using the same product that I selected as best for me 5 years ago and there are two reasons for it. 1) Loyalty to vendor and 2) there is lots of advancement, but not enough of a value to justify change. A great OS does nothing if it can;t run on adequate hardware, and adequate hardware can't do much without adequate software. I am exstatic to hear about what Lonnie has accomplished with his new War/V3 solution. To my recognition, he is the first to deliver a complete low cost solution to meet todays ISP's backhaul needs. (that means he's listening to WISPs). It delivers low cost, total link w/ antennas, radios, cases, etc, under $1000, it allows us to transparently bridge without compromising MTU delivery, and it will pass 35 mbps, adeqaute speed for backhauling a 6 six sector cell site. First, a product must meet the need of the solution. Every other component of the OS's I feel are almost pointless, or just value add to help tip the scale. A 12-20 mbps solution is just not enough. I'm not saying there are not other vendors with adeqaute solutions, nor that the other products don't have valueable features for other solutions. But War/V3 might have been the first to deliver all three needs in a PTP (also possibly PtMP sectors, but thats a different discussion with different things to compare.). For that recognition is due, and I commend him. Tom DeReggi RapidDSL Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - From: JohnnyO [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: 'WISPA General List' wireless@wispa.org Sent: Thursday, August 17, 2006 11:37 AM Subject: RE: [WISPA] Routerboard 532 and NStreme2 -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Brad Belton Sent: Thursday, August 17, 2006 10:32 AM To: 'WISPA General List' Subject: RE: [WISPA] Routerboard 532 and NStreme2 11MByte/sec as in approx 88Mbps? Sounds about like NStreme Turbo (40MHz channel) or Alvarion B100 (40MHz channel). Considering this thread was originally about the RB532 and its shortcomings, has anyone tried loading MikroTik OS onto the StarOS 533MHz hardware? *Lonnie is famous for hijacking threads to promote his products. We shouldn't punish him for it because after all, he is canadian ! :)~ JohnnyO Brad -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Tom DeReggi Sent: Thursday, August 17, 2006 10:25 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Routerboard 532 and NStreme2 Lonnie, Wow, that was fast. Great New! Testing starts this week. Tom DeReggi RapidDSL Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - From: Lonnie Nunweiler [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Thursday, August 17, 2006 2:24 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Routerboard 532 and NStreme2 Tom, The new V3 release has been posted and you can set MTU to very high values if your cards support jumbo frames. Our WAR board, with its very advanced Intel Ethernet can do 16K for the MTU. Most other cards have limits in the 2K to 4K range. We also have released the first x86 PC Architecture version and the updated x86 WRAP version. They have the same features as the WAR version. I'm not sure if we mentioned it but the x86 version has a free mode that is no longer a 24 hour trial. It saves settings and everything works, except of course the advanced features that we use to add value. You can use it for fairly advance routing (quagga has ospf and rip) for free. We'll require a paid license for wireless, policy or source routing, bandwidth control and our firewall scripting. We are pretty sure that more than 11 MBytes/sec in Turbo mode on a power machine will meet with approval. Device bonding will be coming fairly soon and it will allow simple hdx bonding, fdx bonding and failover bonding. We use the Linux 2.6 kernel and we have been able to get this image to well under 8 MB and average ram use on bootup is about 16 MB. It took
Re: [WISPA] Routerboard 532 and NStreme2
Tom, The new V3 release has been posted and you can set MTU to very high values if your cards support jumbo frames. Our WAR board, with its very advanced Intel Ethernet can do 16K for the MTU. Most other cards have limits in the 2K to 4K range. We also have released the first x86 PC Architecture version and the updated x86 WRAP version. They have the same features as the WAR version. I'm not sure if we mentioned it but the x86 version has a free mode that is no longer a 24 hour trial. It saves settings and everything works, except of course the advanced features that we use to add value. You can use it for fairly advance routing (quagga has ospf and rip) for free. We'll require a paid license for wireless, policy or source routing, bandwidth control and our firewall scripting. We are pretty sure that more than 11 MBytes/sec in Turbo mode on a power machine will meet with approval. Device bonding will be coming fairly soon and it will allow simple hdx bonding, fdx bonding and failover bonding. We use the Linux 2.6 kernel and we have been able to get this image to well under 8 MB and average ram use on bootup is about 16 MB. It took a long time to get here and we have to thank everybody for being patient. Some of you wrote us off and figured that V3 would never reach the light of day, so I hope you take a look at what this new release can do. Lonnie On 8/15/06, Tom DeReggi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Lonnie, When you get that feature solved / added, please let me know, or make a public announcement. If you let me know, I'll do a bunch of talk for you persoanlly, to promote the feature. Thanks. Tom DeReggi RapidDSL Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - From: Lonnie Nunweiler [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Monday, August 14, 2006 8:37 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Routerboard 532 and NStreme2 It will just be easier to support an insane MTU size so that people can go and do whatever they want. I can imagine people doing some vlan in vlan and then running the whole works over a tunnel, and each one adds tags and headers to the actual 1500 byte payload. Lonnie On 8/14/06, Tom DeReggi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Lonnie, I just wrote to you off list, before seeing your onlist response. V3 has support for a fully transparent client bridge when it talks to an appropriately configured V3 AP system. That is good news! License Fee after 1 year. The policy you explained, is fair and reasonable. We are currently working on a custom MTU size interface for every device to be able to handle whatever you want for MTU size. Great. To be more clear... Its easy for people (like me) to get confused between IP versus Ethernet headers. In our VLAN applications, its the Ethernet packet that needs to be supported above 1500bytes (for addition of VLAN to Ethernet header), we'd rarely ever need to increase IP packet MTU above 1500 MTU. (although I see applications for IPSEC if larger MTU allowed or possibly for passing MPLS). Tom DeReggi RapidDSL Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband -- Lonnie Nunweiler Valemount Networks Corporation http://www.star-os.com/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- Lonnie Nunweiler Valemount Networks Corporation http://www.star-os.com/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
RE: [WISPA] Routerboard 532 and NStreme2
So with this MTU increase is there any chance of packet aggregation so we can make use of it? -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lonnie Nunweiler Sent: 17 August 2006 07:24 To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Routerboard 532 and NStreme2 Tom, The new V3 release has been posted and you can set MTU to very high values if your cards support jumbo frames. Our WAR board, with its very advanced Intel Ethernet can do 16K for the MTU. Most other cards have limits in the 2K to 4K range. We also have released the first x86 PC Architecture version and the updated x86 WRAP version. They have the same features as the WAR version. I'm not sure if we mentioned it but the x86 version has a free mode that is no longer a 24 hour trial. It saves settings and everything works, except of course the advanced features that we use to add value. You can use it for fairly advance routing (quagga has ospf and rip) for free. We'll require a paid license for wireless, policy or source routing, bandwidth control and our firewall scripting. We are pretty sure that more than 11 MBytes/sec in Turbo mode on a power machine will meet with approval. Device bonding will be coming fairly soon and it will allow simple hdx bonding, fdx bonding and failover bonding. We use the Linux 2.6 kernel and we have been able to get this image to well under 8 MB and average ram use on bootup is about 16 MB. It took a long time to get here and we have to thank everybody for being patient. Some of you wrote us off and figured that V3 would never reach the light of day, so I hope you take a look at what this new release can do. Lonnie On 8/15/06, Tom DeReggi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Lonnie, When you get that feature solved / added, please let me know, or make a public announcement. If you let me know, I'll do a bunch of talk for you persoanlly, to promote the feature. Thanks. Tom DeReggi RapidDSL Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - From: Lonnie Nunweiler [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Monday, August 14, 2006 8:37 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Routerboard 532 and NStreme2 It will just be easier to support an insane MTU size so that people can go and do whatever they want. I can imagine people doing some vlan in vlan and then running the whole works over a tunnel, and each one adds tags and headers to the actual 1500 byte payload. Lonnie On 8/14/06, Tom DeReggi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Lonnie, I just wrote to you off list, before seeing your onlist response. V3 has support for a fully transparent client bridge when it talks to an appropriately configured V3 AP system. That is good news! License Fee after 1 year. The policy you explained, is fair and reasonable. We are currently working on a custom MTU size interface for every device to be able to handle whatever you want for MTU size. Great. To be more clear... Its easy for people (like me) to get confused between IP versus Ethernet headers. In our VLAN applications, its the Ethernet packet that needs to be supported above 1500bytes (for addition of VLAN to Ethernet header), we'd rarely ever need to increase IP packet MTU above 1500 MTU. (although I see applications for IPSEC if larger MTU allowed or possibly for passing MPLS). Tom DeReggi RapidDSL Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband -- Lonnie Nunweiler Valemount Networks Corporation http://www.star-os.com/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- Lonnie Nunweiler Valemount Networks Corporation http://www.star-os.com/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.405 / Virus Database: 268.11.1/421 - Release Date: 16/08/2006 -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.405 / Virus Database: 268.11.1/421 - Release Date: 16/08/2006 -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Routerboard 532 and NStreme2
I'm not sure I understand the question. The Atheros card already does packet aggregation and compression. We have tested with and without the features and it does make a difference, with the better numbers once the features are enabled. We would not be planning on adding this for Ethernet. Lonnie On 8/17/06, Paul Hendry [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: So with this MTU increase is there any chance of packet aggregation so we can make use of it? -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lonnie Nunweiler Sent: 17 August 2006 07:24 To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Routerboard 532 and NStreme2 Tom, The new V3 release has been posted and you can set MTU to very high values if your cards support jumbo frames. Our WAR board, with its very advanced Intel Ethernet can do 16K for the MTU. Most other cards have limits in the 2K to 4K range. We also have released the first x86 PC Architecture version and the updated x86 WRAP version. They have the same features as the WAR version. I'm not sure if we mentioned it but the x86 version has a free mode that is no longer a 24 hour trial. It saves settings and everything works, except of course the advanced features that we use to add value. You can use it for fairly advance routing (quagga has ospf and rip) for free. We'll require a paid license for wireless, policy or source routing, bandwidth control and our firewall scripting. We are pretty sure that more than 11 MBytes/sec in Turbo mode on a power machine will meet with approval. Device bonding will be coming fairly soon and it will allow simple hdx bonding, fdx bonding and failover bonding. We use the Linux 2.6 kernel and we have been able to get this image to well under 8 MB and average ram use on bootup is about 16 MB. It took a long time to get here and we have to thank everybody for being patient. Some of you wrote us off and figured that V3 would never reach the light of day, so I hope you take a look at what this new release can do. Lonnie On 8/15/06, Tom DeReggi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Lonnie, When you get that feature solved / added, please let me know, or make a public announcement. If you let me know, I'll do a bunch of talk for you persoanlly, to promote the feature. Thanks. Tom DeReggi RapidDSL Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - From: Lonnie Nunweiler [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Monday, August 14, 2006 8:37 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Routerboard 532 and NStreme2 It will just be easier to support an insane MTU size so that people can go and do whatever they want. I can imagine people doing some vlan in vlan and then running the whole works over a tunnel, and each one adds tags and headers to the actual 1500 byte payload. Lonnie On 8/14/06, Tom DeReggi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Lonnie, I just wrote to you off list, before seeing your onlist response. V3 has support for a fully transparent client bridge when it talks to an appropriately configured V3 AP system. That is good news! License Fee after 1 year. The policy you explained, is fair and reasonable. We are currently working on a custom MTU size interface for every device to be able to handle whatever you want for MTU size. Great. To be more clear... Its easy for people (like me) to get confused between IP versus Ethernet headers. In our VLAN applications, its the Ethernet packet that needs to be supported above 1500bytes (for addition of VLAN to Ethernet header), we'd rarely ever need to increase IP packet MTU above 1500 MTU. (although I see applications for IPSEC if larger MTU allowed or possibly for passing MPLS). Tom DeReggi RapidDSL Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband -- Lonnie Nunweiler Valemount Networks Corporation http://www.star-os.com/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- Lonnie Nunweiler Valemount Networks Corporation http://www.star-os.com/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.405 / Virus Database: 268.11.1/421 - Release Date: 16/08/2006 -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.405 / Virus Database: 268.11.1/421 - Release Date: 16/08/2006 -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http
Re: [WISPA] Routerboard 532 and NStreme2
Lonnie, Wow, that was fast. Great New! Testing starts this week. Tom DeReggi RapidDSL Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - From: Lonnie Nunweiler [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Thursday, August 17, 2006 2:24 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Routerboard 532 and NStreme2 Tom, The new V3 release has been posted and you can set MTU to very high values if your cards support jumbo frames. Our WAR board, with its very advanced Intel Ethernet can do 16K for the MTU. Most other cards have limits in the 2K to 4K range. We also have released the first x86 PC Architecture version and the updated x86 WRAP version. They have the same features as the WAR version. I'm not sure if we mentioned it but the x86 version has a free mode that is no longer a 24 hour trial. It saves settings and everything works, except of course the advanced features that we use to add value. You can use it for fairly advance routing (quagga has ospf and rip) for free. We'll require a paid license for wireless, policy or source routing, bandwidth control and our firewall scripting. We are pretty sure that more than 11 MBytes/sec in Turbo mode on a power machine will meet with approval. Device bonding will be coming fairly soon and it will allow simple hdx bonding, fdx bonding and failover bonding. We use the Linux 2.6 kernel and we have been able to get this image to well under 8 MB and average ram use on bootup is about 16 MB. It took a long time to get here and we have to thank everybody for being patient. Some of you wrote us off and figured that V3 would never reach the light of day, so I hope you take a look at what this new release can do. Lonnie On 8/15/06, Tom DeReggi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Lonnie, When you get that feature solved / added, please let me know, or make a public announcement. If you let me know, I'll do a bunch of talk for you persoanlly, to promote the feature. Thanks. Tom DeReggi RapidDSL Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - From: Lonnie Nunweiler [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Monday, August 14, 2006 8:37 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Routerboard 532 and NStreme2 It will just be easier to support an insane MTU size so that people can go and do whatever they want. I can imagine people doing some vlan in vlan and then running the whole works over a tunnel, and each one adds tags and headers to the actual 1500 byte payload. Lonnie On 8/14/06, Tom DeReggi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Lonnie, I just wrote to you off list, before seeing your onlist response. V3 has support for a fully transparent client bridge when it talks to an appropriately configured V3 AP system. That is good news! License Fee after 1 year. The policy you explained, is fair and reasonable. We are currently working on a custom MTU size interface for every device to be able to handle whatever you want for MTU size. Great. To be more clear... Its easy for people (like me) to get confused between IP versus Ethernet headers. In our VLAN applications, its the Ethernet packet that needs to be supported above 1500bytes (for addition of VLAN to Ethernet header), we'd rarely ever need to increase IP packet MTU above 1500 MTU. (although I see applications for IPSEC if larger MTU allowed or possibly for passing MPLS). Tom DeReggi RapidDSL Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband -- Lonnie Nunweiler Valemount Networks Corporation http://www.star-os.com/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- Lonnie Nunweiler Valemount Networks Corporation http://www.star-os.com/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
RE: [WISPA] Routerboard 532 and NStreme2
11MByte/sec as in approx 88Mbps? Sounds about like NStreme Turbo (40MHz channel) or Alvarion B100 (40MHz channel). Considering this thread was originally about the RB532 and its shortcomings, has anyone tried loading MikroTik OS onto the StarOS 533MHz hardware? Brad -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Tom DeReggi Sent: Thursday, August 17, 2006 10:25 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Routerboard 532 and NStreme2 Lonnie, Wow, that was fast. Great New! Testing starts this week. Tom DeReggi RapidDSL Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - From: Lonnie Nunweiler [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Thursday, August 17, 2006 2:24 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Routerboard 532 and NStreme2 Tom, The new V3 release has been posted and you can set MTU to very high values if your cards support jumbo frames. Our WAR board, with its very advanced Intel Ethernet can do 16K for the MTU. Most other cards have limits in the 2K to 4K range. We also have released the first x86 PC Architecture version and the updated x86 WRAP version. They have the same features as the WAR version. I'm not sure if we mentioned it but the x86 version has a free mode that is no longer a 24 hour trial. It saves settings and everything works, except of course the advanced features that we use to add value. You can use it for fairly advance routing (quagga has ospf and rip) for free. We'll require a paid license for wireless, policy or source routing, bandwidth control and our firewall scripting. We are pretty sure that more than 11 MBytes/sec in Turbo mode on a power machine will meet with approval. Device bonding will be coming fairly soon and it will allow simple hdx bonding, fdx bonding and failover bonding. We use the Linux 2.6 kernel and we have been able to get this image to well under 8 MB and average ram use on bootup is about 16 MB. It took a long time to get here and we have to thank everybody for being patient. Some of you wrote us off and figured that V3 would never reach the light of day, so I hope you take a look at what this new release can do. Lonnie On 8/15/06, Tom DeReggi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Lonnie, When you get that feature solved / added, please let me know, or make a public announcement. If you let me know, I'll do a bunch of talk for you persoanlly, to promote the feature. Thanks. Tom DeReggi RapidDSL Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - From: Lonnie Nunweiler [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Monday, August 14, 2006 8:37 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Routerboard 532 and NStreme2 It will just be easier to support an insane MTU size so that people can go and do whatever they want. I can imagine people doing some vlan in vlan and then running the whole works over a tunnel, and each one adds tags and headers to the actual 1500 byte payload. Lonnie On 8/14/06, Tom DeReggi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Lonnie, I just wrote to you off list, before seeing your onlist response. V3 has support for a fully transparent client bridge when it talks to an appropriately configured V3 AP system. That is good news! License Fee after 1 year. The policy you explained, is fair and reasonable. We are currently working on a custom MTU size interface for every device to be able to handle whatever you want for MTU size. Great. To be more clear... Its easy for people (like me) to get confused between IP versus Ethernet headers. In our VLAN applications, its the Ethernet packet that needs to be supported above 1500bytes (for addition of VLAN to Ethernet header), we'd rarely ever need to increase IP packet MTU above 1500 MTU. (although I see applications for IPSEC if larger MTU allowed or possibly for passing MPLS). Tom DeReggi RapidDSL Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband -- Lonnie Nunweiler Valemount Networks Corporation http://www.star-os.com/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- Lonnie Nunweiler Valemount Networks Corporation http://www.star-os.com/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
RE: [WISPA] Routerboard 532 and NStreme2
-Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Brad Belton Sent: Thursday, August 17, 2006 10:32 AM To: 'WISPA General List' Subject: RE: [WISPA] Routerboard 532 and NStreme2 11MByte/sec as in approx 88Mbps? Sounds about like NStreme Turbo (40MHz channel) or Alvarion B100 (40MHz channel). Considering this thread was originally about the RB532 and its shortcomings, has anyone tried loading MikroTik OS onto the StarOS 533MHz hardware? *Lonnie is famous for hijacking threads to promote his products. We shouldn't punish him for it because after all, he is canadian ! :)~ JohnnyO Brad -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Tom DeReggi Sent: Thursday, August 17, 2006 10:25 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Routerboard 532 and NStreme2 Lonnie, Wow, that was fast. Great New! Testing starts this week. Tom DeReggi RapidDSL Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - From: Lonnie Nunweiler [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Thursday, August 17, 2006 2:24 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Routerboard 532 and NStreme2 Tom, The new V3 release has been posted and you can set MTU to very high values if your cards support jumbo frames. Our WAR board, with its very advanced Intel Ethernet can do 16K for the MTU. Most other cards have limits in the 2K to 4K range. We also have released the first x86 PC Architecture version and the updated x86 WRAP version. They have the same features as the WAR version. I'm not sure if we mentioned it but the x86 version has a free mode that is no longer a 24 hour trial. It saves settings and everything works, except of course the advanced features that we use to add value. You can use it for fairly advance routing (quagga has ospf and rip) for free. We'll require a paid license for wireless, policy or source routing, bandwidth control and our firewall scripting. We are pretty sure that more than 11 MBytes/sec in Turbo mode on a power machine will meet with approval. Device bonding will be coming fairly soon and it will allow simple hdx bonding, fdx bonding and failover bonding. We use the Linux 2.6 kernel and we have been able to get this image to well under 8 MB and average ram use on bootup is about 16 MB. It took a long time to get here and we have to thank everybody for being patient. Some of you wrote us off and figured that V3 would never reach the light of day, so I hope you take a look at what this new release can do. Lonnie On 8/15/06, Tom DeReggi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Lonnie, When you get that feature solved / added, please let me know, or make a public announcement. If you let me know, I'll do a bunch of talk for you persoanlly, to promote the feature. Thanks. Tom DeReggi RapidDSL Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - From: Lonnie Nunweiler [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Monday, August 14, 2006 8:37 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Routerboard 532 and NStreme2 It will just be easier to support an insane MTU size so that people can go and do whatever they want. I can imagine people doing some vlan in vlan and then running the whole works over a tunnel, and each one adds tags and headers to the actual 1500 byte payload. Lonnie On 8/14/06, Tom DeReggi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Lonnie, I just wrote to you off list, before seeing your onlist response. V3 has support for a fully transparent client bridge when it talks to an appropriately configured V3 AP system. That is good news! License Fee after 1 year. The policy you explained, is fair and reasonable. We are currently working on a custom MTU size interface for every device to be able to handle whatever you want for MTU size. Great. To be more clear... Its easy for people (like me) to get confused between IP versus Ethernet headers. In our VLAN applications, its the Ethernet packet that needs to be supported above 1500bytes (for addition of VLAN to Ethernet header), we'd rarely ever need to increase IP packet MTU above 1500 MTU. (although I see applications for IPSEC if larger MTU allowed or possibly for passing MPLS). Tom DeReggi RapidDSL Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband -- Lonnie Nunweiler Valemount Networks Corporation http://www.star-os.com/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- Lonnie Nunweiler Valemount Networks Corporation http://www.star
Re: [WISPA] Routerboard 532 and NStreme2
Not exactly full featured packet aggregation. What it does it joins two packets together into one bigger. If you have 14 100 bytes packets (which is avg over regular networks) it will join each two of them into one 200 bytes packet and send it through as 7 packets. Real packet aggregation implementation joins all 14 of these packets into one 1400 bytes packet and sends it as one bigger instead of 7 smaller. This makes huge impact under heavy load. Regards, Leszek Lonnie Nunweiler wrote: I'm not sure I understand the question. The Atheros card already does packet aggregation and compression. We have tested with and without the features and it does make a difference, with the better numbers once the features are enabled. We would not be planning on adding this for Ethernet. Lonnie On 8/17/06, Paul Hendry [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: So with this MTU increase is there any chance of packet aggregation so we can make use of it? -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lonnie Nunweiler Sent: 17 August 2006 07:24 To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Routerboard 532 and NStreme2 Tom, The new V3 release has been posted and you can set MTU to very high values if your cards support jumbo frames. Our WAR board, with its very advanced Intel Ethernet can do 16K for the MTU. Most other cards have limits in the 2K to 4K range. We also have released the first x86 PC Architecture version and the updated x86 WRAP version. They have the same features as the WAR version. I'm not sure if we mentioned it but the x86 version has a free mode that is no longer a 24 hour trial. It saves settings and everything works, except of course the advanced features that we use to add value. You can use it for fairly advance routing (quagga has ospf and rip) for free. We'll require a paid license for wireless, policy or source routing, bandwidth control and our firewall scripting. We are pretty sure that more than 11 MBytes/sec in Turbo mode on a power machine will meet with approval. Device bonding will be coming fairly soon and it will allow simple hdx bonding, fdx bonding and failover bonding. We use the Linux 2.6 kernel and we have been able to get this image to well under 8 MB and average ram use on bootup is about 16 MB. It took a long time to get here and we have to thank everybody for being patient. Some of you wrote us off and figured that V3 would never reach the light of day, so I hope you take a look at what this new release can do. Lonnie On 8/15/06, Tom DeReggi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Lonnie, When you get that feature solved / added, please let me know, or make a public announcement. If you let me know, I'll do a bunch of talk for you persoanlly, to promote the feature. Thanks. Tom DeReggi RapidDSL Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - From: Lonnie Nunweiler [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Monday, August 14, 2006 8:37 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Routerboard 532 and NStreme2 It will just be easier to support an insane MTU size so that people can go and do whatever they want. I can imagine people doing some vlan in vlan and then running the whole works over a tunnel, and each one adds tags and headers to the actual 1500 byte payload. Lonnie On 8/14/06, Tom DeReggi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Lonnie, I just wrote to you off list, before seeing your onlist response. V3 has support for a fully transparent client bridge when it talks to an appropriately configured V3 AP system. That is good news! License Fee after 1 year. The policy you explained, is fair and reasonable. We are currently working on a custom MTU size interface for every device to be able to handle whatever you want for MTU size. Great. To be more clear... Its easy for people (like me) to get confused between IP versus Ethernet headers. In our VLAN applications, its the Ethernet packet that needs to be supported above 1500bytes (for addition of VLAN to Ethernet header), we'd rarely ever need to increase IP packet MTU above 1500 MTU. (although I see applications for IPSEC if larger MTU allowed or possibly for passing MPLS). Tom DeReggi RapidDSL Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband -- Lonnie Nunweiler Valemount Networks Corporation http://www.star-os.com/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- Lonnie Nunweiler Valemount Networks Corporation http://www.star-os.com/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman
Re: [WISPA] Routerboard 532 and NStreme2
*Lonnie is famous for hijacking threads to promote his products. We shouldn't punish him for it because after all, he is canadian ! :)~ JohnnyO Johnny.. Where do you come from that you think it is ok to practice Bigotry. On this list, it is not ok to be a bigot. We have had numerous people complain about your slams. Some are vendors who have said they will not contribute financially and others were wisps who will not subscribe to a list that your on. I am going to ask the board to consider removing your posting privileges. George -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
RE: [WISPA] Routerboard 532 and NStreme2
George - can you tell me if calling me a bigot is a slam ? IF it is, then you fall under the same category. I guess it's ok for a vendor to hijack threads to promote his own stuff ? The thread was about the Routerboard 532As and Mikrotik. This is my opinion and I will post my opinions. I guess you think it's ok for you to practice DICTATORSHIP ? I was not interested in reading posts labled Routerboard 532 and Star-OS crap. If I were interested in Star-OS crap instead of Mikrotik, then I would look for posts labled Star-OS ! Maybe you should put more time into managing the posts and subject lines of the threads. I do have an opinion and am a paying member. Which vendors are you talking about ? Which WISPs ? Don't throw out bullcrap unless you're willing to provide the proof. I banter/kid/joke with the Canadians and have for several years and will continue to do so. I have slammed vendors on Part-15s lists and also Judd's list who have proved to me to be substandard in customer service or product quality, but I can't recall the last time I slammed a vendor on WISPA. JohnnyO -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of George Rogato Sent: Thursday, August 17, 2006 12:50 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Routerboard 532 and NStreme2 *Lonnie is famous for hijacking threads to promote his products. We shouldn't punish him for it because after all, he is canadian ! :)~ JohnnyO Johnny.. Where do you come from that you think it is ok to practice Bigotry. On this list, it is not ok to be a bigot. We have had numerous people complain about your slams. Some are vendors who have said they will not contribute financially and others were wisps who will not subscribe to a list that your on. I am going to ask the board to consider removing your posting privileges. George -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
RE: [WISPA] Routerboard 532 and NStreme2
George, who wedged your panties in a wad this morning? Have you nothing better to do than to pick a fight with JohnnyO? Brad -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of JohnnyO Sent: Thursday, August 17, 2006 1:07 PM To: 'WISPA General List' Subject: RE: [WISPA] Routerboard 532 and NStreme2 George - can you tell me if calling me a bigot is a slam ? IF it is, then you fall under the same category. I guess it's ok for a vendor to hijack threads to promote his own stuff ? The thread was about the Routerboard 532As and Mikrotik. This is my opinion and I will post my opinions. I guess you think it's ok for you to practice DICTATORSHIP ? I was not interested in reading posts labled Routerboard 532 and Star-OS crap. If I were interested in Star-OS crap instead of Mikrotik, then I would look for posts labled Star-OS ! Maybe you should put more time into managing the posts and subject lines of the threads. I do have an opinion and am a paying member. Which vendors are you talking about ? Which WISPs ? Don't throw out bullcrap unless you're willing to provide the proof. I banter/kid/joke with the Canadians and have for several years and will continue to do so. I have slammed vendors on Part-15s lists and also Judd's list who have proved to me to be substandard in customer service or product quality, but I can't recall the last time I slammed a vendor on WISPA. JohnnyO -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of George Rogato Sent: Thursday, August 17, 2006 12:50 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Routerboard 532 and NStreme2 *Lonnie is famous for hijacking threads to promote his products. We shouldn't punish him for it because after all, he is canadian ! :)~ JohnnyO Johnny.. Where do you come from that you think it is ok to practice Bigotry. On this list, it is not ok to be a bigot. We have had numerous people complain about your slams. Some are vendors who have said they will not contribute financially and others were wisps who will not subscribe to a list that your on. I am going to ask the board to consider removing your posting privileges. George -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Routerboard 532 and NStreme2
Calm down kids!! First of all to JohnnyO - you need to spend a lot more time practicing some self-control. Instead of digging into Lonnie, why not just make a request to change the name of the thread. FWIW, Lonnie did NOT hijack this thread - others who were testing WAR boards out brought up their experiences with it and testing and Lonnie responded. That is entirely appropriate. There would not be a response like George's if you didn't have a history of pissing people off on this and other lists. What George said is true - there are companies and other WISPs that won't subscribe to a list of you are on it. I'm not going to go into details here, but you are welcome to hit me up offlist if you want a breakdown. Also it is not George's responsibility to manage posts and subject lines, so it is not fair to dig into him about list management. Second, to George. I appreciate your desire to maintain decorum on the lists, but I think it would have been more appropriate to respond to JohnnyO offlist. I don't think this was a situation of bigotry, just a slightly misunderstood bit of joking around between a couple of people who are a little bit sensitive toward ribbing coming from each other. Not a big deal at all. Finally, to everyone... I am very happy to see that we have built up a nice community on the WISPA lists, and I hope we continue to build that sense of community. I am all for a little bit of spice and it is good to see some legitimate, real world experience and testing get exchanged between the members. Of all the lists I'm on, this is now the most useful one to me by FAR, and that is not something that happened overnight. It has taken some time and unfortunately we do still have to try to put people in their place when things get a little too out of hand, but overall I think that we have done a very good job of maintaining the balance between total control and anarchy. Peace out, Matt Larsen [EMAIL PROTECTED] JohnnyO wrote: George - can you tell me if calling me a bigot is a slam ? IF it is, then you fall under the same category. I guess it's ok for a vendor to hijack threads to promote his own stuff ? The thread was about the Routerboard 532As and Mikrotik. This is my opinion and I will post my opinions. I guess you think it's ok for you to practice DICTATORSHIP ? I was not interested in reading posts labled Routerboard 532 and Star-OS crap. If I were interested in Star-OS crap instead of Mikrotik, then I would look for posts labled Star-OS ! Maybe you should put more time into managing the posts and subject lines of the threads. I do have an opinion and am a paying member. Which vendors are you talking about ? Which WISPs ? Don't throw out bullcrap unless you're willing to provide the proof. I banter/kid/joke with the Canadians and have for several years and will continue to do so. I have slammed vendors on Part-15s lists and also Judd's list who have proved to me to be substandard in customer service or product quality, but I can't recall the last time I slammed a vendor on WISPA. JohnnyO -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of George Rogato Sent: Thursday, August 17, 2006 12:50 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Routerboard 532 and NStreme2 *Lonnie is famous for hijacking threads to promote his products. We shouldn't punish him for it because after all, he is canadian ! :)~ JohnnyO Johnny.. Where do you come from that you think it is ok to practice Bigotry. On this list, it is not ok to be a bigot. We have had numerous people complain about your slams. Some are vendors who have said they will not contribute financially and others were wisps who will not subscribe to a list that your on. I am going to ask the board to consider removing your posting privileges. George -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Routerboard 532 and NStreme2
Can I have an AMEN! Woo Hoo! On 8/17/06 2:03 PM, Matt Larsen - Lists [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Calm down kids!! First of all to JohnnyO - you need to spend a lot more time practicing some self-control. Instead of digging into Lonnie, why not just make a request to change the name of the thread. FWIW, Lonnie did NOT hijack this thread - others who were testing WAR boards out brought up their experiences with it and testing and Lonnie responded. That is entirely appropriate. There would not be a response like George's if you didn't have a history of pissing people off on this and other lists. What George said is true - there are companies and other WISPs that won't subscribe to a list of you are on it. I'm not going to go into details here, but you are welcome to hit me up offlist if you want a breakdown. Also it is not George's responsibility to manage posts and subject lines, so it is not fair to dig into him about list management. Second, to George. I appreciate your desire to maintain decorum on the lists, but I think it would have been more appropriate to respond to JohnnyO offlist. I don't think this was a situation of bigotry, just a slightly misunderstood bit of joking around between a couple of people who are a little bit sensitive toward ribbing coming from each other. Not a big deal at all. Finally, to everyone... I am very happy to see that we have built up a nice community on the WISPA lists, and I hope we continue to build that sense of community. I am all for a little bit of spice and it is good to see some legitimate, real world experience and testing get exchanged between the members. Of all the lists I'm on, this is now the most useful one to me by FAR, and that is not something that happened overnight. It has taken some time and unfortunately we do still have to try to put people in their place when things get a little too out of hand, but overall I think that we have done a very good job of maintaining the balance between total control and anarchy. Peace out, Matt Larsen [EMAIL PROTECTED] JohnnyO wrote: George - can you tell me if calling me a bigot is a slam ? IF it is, then you fall under the same category. I guess it's ok for a vendor to hijack threads to promote his own stuff ? The thread was about the Routerboard 532As and Mikrotik. This is my opinion and I will post my opinions. I guess you think it's ok for you to practice DICTATORSHIP ? I was not interested in reading posts labled Routerboard 532 and Star-OS crap. If I were interested in Star-OS crap instead of Mikrotik, then I would look for posts labled Star-OS ! Maybe you should put more time into managing the posts and subject lines of the threads. I do have an opinion and am a paying member. Which vendors are you talking about ? Which WISPs ? Don't throw out bullcrap unless you're willing to provide the proof. I banter/kid/joke with the Canadians and have for several years and will continue to do so. I have slammed vendors on Part-15s lists and also Judd's list who have proved to me to be substandard in customer service or product quality, but I can't recall the last time I slammed a vendor on WISPA. JohnnyO -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of George Rogato Sent: Thursday, August 17, 2006 12:50 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Routerboard 532 and NStreme2 *Lonnie is famous for hijacking threads to promote his products. We shouldn't punish him for it because after all, he is canadian ! :)~ JohnnyO Johnny.. Where do you come from that you think it is ok to practice Bigotry. On this list, it is not ok to be a bigot. We have had numerous people complain about your slams. Some are vendors who have said they will not contribute financially and others were wisps who will not subscribe to a list that your on. I am going to ask the board to consider removing your posting privileges. George -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Routerboard 532 and NStreme2
Brad, Fact is we have had numerous vendors not want to join or have anything to do with wispa specifically because of JohnnyO's postings. We have had numerous wisps say they didn't want to join or have anything to do with wispa because of JohnnyO's postings. WISPA will not be an uncomfortable place for some, it will be a list that you can make informative posts without fear of getting slammed. I have lots better to do than mess with Johnny but I also have a responsibility to set the rules. Do not attack your fellow wisp. George Brad Belton wrote: George, who wedged your panties in a wad this morning? Have you nothing better to do than to pick a fight with JohnnyO? Brad -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of JohnnyO Sent: Thursday, August 17, 2006 1:07 PM To: 'WISPA General List' Subject: RE: [WISPA] Routerboard 532 and NStreme2 George - can you tell me if calling me a bigot is a slam ? IF it is, then you fall under the same category. I guess it's ok for a vendor to hijack threads to promote his own stuff ? The thread was about the Routerboard 532As and Mikrotik. This is my opinion and I will post my opinions. I guess you think it's ok for you to practice DICTATORSHIP ? I was not interested in reading posts labled Routerboard 532 and Star-OS crap. If I were interested in Star-OS crap instead of Mikrotik, then I would look for posts labled Star-OS ! Maybe you should put more time into managing the posts and subject lines of the threads. I do have an opinion and am a paying member. Which vendors are you talking about ? Which WISPs ? Don't throw out bullcrap unless you're willing to provide the proof. I banter/kid/joke with the Canadians and have for several years and will continue to do so. I have slammed vendors on Part-15s lists and also Judd's list who have proved to me to be substandard in customer service or product quality, but I can't recall the last time I slammed a vendor on WISPA. JohnnyO -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of George Rogato Sent: Thursday, August 17, 2006 12:50 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Routerboard 532 and NStreme2 *Lonnie is famous for hijacking threads to promote his products. We shouldn't punish him for it because after all, he is canadian ! :)~ JohnnyO Johnny.. Where do you come from that you think it is ok to practice Bigotry. On this list, it is not ok to be a bigot. We have had numerous people complain about your slams. Some are vendors who have said they will not contribute financially and others were wisps who will not subscribe to a list that your on. I am going to ask the board to consider removing your posting privileges. George -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Routerboard 532 and NStreme2
Thank you Matt. I am glad you took this one. I would have said the exact same things you did if I was that good with words. I absolutely agree with everything you said here. :-) Scriv Matt Larsen - Lists wrote: Calm down kids!! First of all to JohnnyO - you need to spend a lot more time practicing some self-control. Instead of digging into Lonnie, why not just make a request to change the name of the thread. FWIW, Lonnie did NOT hijack this thread - others who were testing WAR boards out brought up their experiences with it and testing and Lonnie responded. That is entirely appropriate. There would not be a response like George's if you didn't have a history of pissing people off on this and other lists. What George said is true - there are companies and other WISPs that won't subscribe to a list of you are on it. I'm not going to go into details here, but you are welcome to hit me up offlist if you want a breakdown. Also it is not George's responsibility to manage posts and subject lines, so it is not fair to dig into him about list management. Second, to George. I appreciate your desire to maintain decorum on the lists, but I think it would have been more appropriate to respond to JohnnyO offlist. I don't think this was a situation of bigotry, just a slightly misunderstood bit of joking around between a couple of people who are a little bit sensitive toward ribbing coming from each other. Not a big deal at all. Finally, to everyone... I am very happy to see that we have built up a nice community on the WISPA lists, and I hope we continue to build that sense of community. I am all for a little bit of spice and it is good to see some legitimate, real world experience and testing get exchanged between the members. Of all the lists I'm on, this is now the most useful one to me by FAR, and that is not something that happened overnight. It has taken some time and unfortunately we do still have to try to put people in their place when things get a little too out of hand, but overall I think that we have done a very good job of maintaining the balance between total control and anarchy. Peace out, Matt Larsen [EMAIL PROTECTED] JohnnyO wrote: George - can you tell me if calling me a bigot is a slam ? IF it is, then you fall under the same category. I guess it's ok for a vendor to hijack threads to promote his own stuff ? The thread was about the Routerboard 532As and Mikrotik. This is my opinion and I will post my opinions. I guess you think it's ok for you to practice DICTATORSHIP ? I was not interested in reading posts labled Routerboard 532 and Star-OS crap. If I were interested in Star-OS crap instead of Mikrotik, then I would look for posts labled Star-OS ! Maybe you should put more time into managing the posts and subject lines of the threads. I do have an opinion and am a paying member. Which vendors are you talking about ? Which WISPs ? Don't throw out bullcrap unless you're willing to provide the proof. I banter/kid/joke with the Canadians and have for several years and will continue to do so. I have slammed vendors on Part-15s lists and also Judd's list who have proved to me to be substandard in customer service or product quality, but I can't recall the last time I slammed a vendor on WISPA. JohnnyO -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of George Rogato Sent: Thursday, August 17, 2006 12:50 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Routerboard 532 and NStreme2 *Lonnie is famous for hijacking threads to promote his products. We shouldn't punish him for it because after all, he is canadian ! :)~ JohnnyO Johnny.. Where do you come from that you think it is ok to practice Bigotry. On this list, it is not ok to be a bigot. We have had numerous people complain about your slams. Some are vendors who have said they will not contribute financially and others were wisps who will not subscribe to a list that your on. I am going to ask the board to consider removing your posting privileges. George -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
RE: [WISPA] Routerboard 532 and NStreme2 [THREAD CLOSED]
Better late than never! This Thread is closed. Start a new thread if you want to discuss either platforms further and keep it civil. Offline discussions with the various parties of this thread have taken place and concerns have been voiced. Rick Harnish President Supernova Technologies, Inc. 260-827-2482 Founding Member of WISPA -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of John Scrivner Sent: Thursday, August 17, 2006 3:46 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Routerboard 532 and NStreme2 Thank you Matt. I am glad you took this one. I would have said the exact same things you did if I was that good with words. I absolutely agree with everything you said here. :-) Scriv Matt Larsen - Lists wrote: Calm down kids!! First of all to JohnnyO - you need to spend a lot more time practicing some self-control. Instead of digging into Lonnie, why not just make a request to change the name of the thread. FWIW, Lonnie did NOT hijack this thread - others who were testing WAR boards out brought up their experiences with it and testing and Lonnie responded. That is entirely appropriate. There would not be a response like George's if you didn't have a history of pissing people off on this and other lists. What George said is true - there are companies and other WISPs that won't subscribe to a list of you are on it. I'm not going to go into details here, but you are welcome to hit me up offlist if you want a breakdown. Also it is not George's responsibility to manage posts and subject lines, so it is not fair to dig into him about list management. Second, to George. I appreciate your desire to maintain decorum on the lists, but I think it would have been more appropriate to respond to JohnnyO offlist. I don't think this was a situation of bigotry, just a slightly misunderstood bit of joking around between a couple of people who are a little bit sensitive toward ribbing coming from each other. Not a big deal at all. Finally, to everyone... I am very happy to see that we have built up a nice community on the WISPA lists, and I hope we continue to build that sense of community. I am all for a little bit of spice and it is good to see some legitimate, real world experience and testing get exchanged between the members. Of all the lists I'm on, this is now the most useful one to me by FAR, and that is not something that happened overnight. It has taken some time and unfortunately we do still have to try to put people in their place when things get a little too out of hand, but overall I think that we have done a very good job of maintaining the balance between total control and anarchy. Peace out, Matt Larsen [EMAIL PROTECTED] JohnnyO wrote: George - can you tell me if calling me a bigot is a slam ? IF it is, then you fall under the same category. I guess it's ok for a vendor to hijack threads to promote his own stuff ? The thread was about the Routerboard 532As and Mikrotik. This is my opinion and I will post my opinions. I guess you think it's ok for you to practice DICTATORSHIP ? I was not interested in reading posts labled Routerboard 532 and Star-OS crap. If I were interested in Star-OS crap instead of Mikrotik, then I would look for posts labled Star-OS ! Maybe you should put more time into managing the posts and subject lines of the threads. I do have an opinion and am a paying member. Which vendors are you talking about ? Which WISPs ? Don't throw out bullcrap unless you're willing to provide the proof. I banter/kid/joke with the Canadians and have for several years and will continue to do so. I have slammed vendors on Part-15s lists and also Judd's list who have proved to me to be substandard in customer service or product quality, but I can't recall the last time I slammed a vendor on WISPA. JohnnyO -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of George Rogato Sent: Thursday, August 17, 2006 12:50 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Routerboard 532 and NStreme2 *Lonnie is famous for hijacking threads to promote his products. We shouldn't punish him for it because after all, he is canadian ! :)~ JohnnyO Johnny.. Where do you come from that you think it is ok to practice Bigotry. On this list, it is not ok to be a bigot. We have had numerous people complain about your slams. Some are vendors who have said they will not contribute financially and others were wisps who will not subscribe to a list that your on. I am going to ask the board to consider removing your posting privileges. George -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http
Re: [WISPA] Routerboard 532 and NStreme2
Lonnie, When you get that feature solved / added, please let me know, or make a public announcement. If you let me know, I'll do a bunch of talk for you persoanlly, to promote the feature. Thanks. Tom DeReggi RapidDSL Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - From: Lonnie Nunweiler [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Monday, August 14, 2006 8:37 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Routerboard 532 and NStreme2 It will just be easier to support an insane MTU size so that people can go and do whatever they want. I can imagine people doing some vlan in vlan and then running the whole works over a tunnel, and each one adds tags and headers to the actual 1500 byte payload. Lonnie On 8/14/06, Tom DeReggi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Lonnie, I just wrote to you off list, before seeing your onlist response. V3 has support for a fully transparent client bridge when it talks to an appropriately configured V3 AP system. That is good news! License Fee after 1 year. The policy you explained, is fair and reasonable. We are currently working on a custom MTU size interface for every device to be able to handle whatever you want for MTU size. Great. To be more clear... Its easy for people (like me) to get confused between IP versus Ethernet headers. In our VLAN applications, its the Ethernet packet that needs to be supported above 1500bytes (for addition of VLAN to Ethernet header), we'd rarely ever need to increase IP packet MTU above 1500 MTU. (although I see applications for IPSEC if larger MTU allowed or possibly for passing MPLS). Tom DeReggi RapidDSL Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband -- Lonnie Nunweiler Valemount Networks Corporation http://www.star-os.com/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Routerboard 532 and NStreme2
Gino, That is exciting news getting the Full 35 mbps on the WAR/STAR board. I guess it shows that the 533Mhz processor is the key to speed. The price is right to. The only thing is, we need to be able to pass full 1500 MTU for our backhauls, and we use VLAN. The older WRAP/STAROS shrinks MTU size to support VLAN. This prevented its use for our backhauls. The newer StarOS V3 software, doesn't support the larger packets yet, does it? ---802.1d bridging for ethernet and wireless ap, and layer-3 proxy arp bridging for wireless clients. That sounded like interesting feature on V3 software. WRAP V3 $70 /year. I hope that means one year of updates, and not that it expires at the end of the year and stops passing traffic. Do you know for sure? How is the availabilty regularly on the WAR boards? Has anyone tried flashing Mikrotik on a WAR board? Tom DeReggi RapidDSL Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - From: Gino A. Villarini To: 'WISPA General List' Sent: Saturday, August 12, 2006 2:17 PM Subject: RE: [WISPA] Routerboard 532 and NStreme2 Well Tom, We are in the same situation as you, testing backhaul replacements. Our Network backhauls are made of : Spectras , Gemini, Trango Atlas, Motorola BH units and Proxim MP11a. So we started looking for a 802.11a based unit, config channels of 5,10,20 and 40 mhz, support for bridging and basic stuff needed for backhauls no fancy stuff. The are some products available like the Trango Atlas, Solectek among others but we decided to test Mikrotik RB500 units, we saw the same results as you did, not very amazed. But, last week I decided to test out StarOS WAR plataform. and let me tell you: 6 mile link with 533 mhz WAR Board with 1 CM9 card each on both sides 23 db flat panel ( -66 on both ends ) One End connected to a Mikrotik 2.8 ghz Router , my laptop at the other end. WAR board set on bridge mode, connection tracking disabled. First of all, latency : 1- 64 byte ping from my laptop to the Mikrotik router : 1ms 2- 1500 byte ping from my laptop to the Mikrotik router : 2 - 3 ms Nice, thoughput : 20 mhz channel: TCP : 35 Mbps UDP: 28 Mbps ( weird, usually is the opposite ) 40 mhz channel: TCP : 45 Mbps UDP: 72 Mbps For Paul: 20 mhz chanel UDP test with 100 byte packets : 5 Mbps 40 mhz chanel UDP test with 100 byte packets : 6 Mbps Pretty darn exiting results! I just need to iron out a vlan issue with Lonnie.. and I would make this units our defacto Back hauls Gino A. Villarini [EMAIL PROTECTED] Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp. tel 787.273.4143 fax 787.273.4145 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Tom DeReggi Sent: Friday, August 11, 2006 8:18 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: [WISPA] Routerboard 532 and NStreme2 Task: Test Max Speed doable using Mikrotik NStreme 2 (two MPCI cards in one board). test environment... AMD 3Ghz Laptop wired - Mikrotik 532 w/ CM9 - Mikrotik 532 w/CM9 - wired to HP PIII-800Mhz Laptop. Connected in a lab environment, zero noise. Mikrotik OS ver 2.9.28 Test software 1: IPerf TCP running on both Laptops. Test software 2: Mikrotik Bandwidth test running on Mikrotiks. Test Method 1 (running test to/from Laptops): used about 80% CPU power on Mikrotik board to pass the traffic. Test Method 2 (running to.from MIkrotik): used about 100% CPU power on Mikrotik. However, interesting enough, the results of the speed tests, whichever method used, were just about identical, give or take 1 mbps. The results of tests were Maximum speed transferable in one direction 20Mhz channel: 16.6 mbps. Maximum speed transferable in both direction simultaneously (adding together the values) 20.8 mbps (13.8 mbps and 7 mbps in the other). Maximum speed transferable in one direction 10 mhz channel: 15.8 mbps. Maximum speed transferable in both directions 10 Mhz channel: 19 mbps (10.4 mbps and 9 mbps) Maximum speed transferable in one direction Turbo Mode speed: 18 mbps Maximum speed transferable in both direction simultaneously Turbo Mode (adding together the values): 22mbps. Note: Turbo mode tested in two configurations, (A) the lowest 5.8G channel send and highest 5.8G channel for receive, and (B) 5.8Ghz to send and 5.3Ghz receive. Note: All 5.8Ghz test results were at 54 mbps speed modulation, and setting it to slower speed/modulation lowered the test speed results. Note: Test performed with RSSI somewhere between -60 and -68, without antennas, but w/ high quality pigtails w/Bulk head N, Pointing N connectors to each other. Note: Re-tried tests with antennas used, to increase RSSI (-50 to -60 db), but it did not improve results. Note: All tests done when in NStreme2 mode, using two cards on each end. Note: Both boards mounted in Mikrotik Plastic Large Case (sweet cases) and using 18V (.8amp) via POE. One thing that was really odd... Mikrotik has a value for TX rssi and RX rssi. The TX
Re: [WISPA] Routerboard 532 and NStreme2
Well Tom It stil wont pass vlans as we would like, Lonnie is currently working on this. I hope this getsfixed soon. The units have a great price and I have a great antenna enclosure for them. Gino- From: Tom DeReggi[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 8/14/06 5:10:06 PM To: WISPA General Listwireless@wispa.org Subject: Re: [WISPA] Routerboard 532 and NStreme2 Gino, That is exciting news getting the Full 35 mbps on the WAR/STAR board. I guess it shows that the 533Mhz processor is the key to speed. The price is right to. The only thing is, we need to be able to pass full 1500 MTU for our backhauls, and we use VLAN. The older WRAP/STAROS shrinks MTU size to support VLAN. This prevented its use for our backhauls. The newer StarOS V3 software, doesn't support the larger packets yet, does it? ---802.1d bridging for ethernet and wireless ap, and layer-3 proxy arp bridging for wireless clients. That sounded like interesting feature on V3 software. WRAP V3 $70 /year. I hope that means one year of updates, and not that it expires at the end of the year and stops passing traffic. Do you know for sure? How is the availabilty regularly on the WAR boards? Has anyone tried flashing Mikrotik on a WAR board? [Message truncated. Tap Edit-Mark for Download to get remaining portion.] -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Routerboard 532 and NStreme2
Tom, can you confirm if your test RB532's had connection tracking disabled Yes, connection tracking was disabled. and cpu set at 330MHz? Most likely No. I do not know how to set that, so it is set at default. Does this overclock the board? Or some other purpose? There is a company in the UK that mass produces outdoor grade Mikrotik solutions with 1GHz x86 CPU's so that the CPU is no longer the bottle neck. We are in the process of tested a few off the shelf x86 boards in outdoor enclosures using 56byte random TCP data in both directions at the same time on a single CM9 in turbo mode and have been able to get 37-38Mbps in both directions (about 75Mbps aggregate) which seems to be better than most other more expensive options. These results don't change if we then use larger packets of 1500bytes. I made contact with them as well. They have some exciting products. But they are pricey compared to the self made systems. Meaning they are charging for the value of the faster solution, not by the cost to make it. Concern buying from them is not as much cost, as availabilty, buying only from one source that is out of country. However, we are still keeping them in mind. Tom DeReggi Cheers, P. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lonnie Nunweiler Sent: 12 August 2006 06:48 To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Routerboard 532 and NStreme2 If you are interested, here is the real world test results from my house to the office through a middle repeater, so it involves 4 Atheros radios and three of our WAR4 533 MHz systems. The middle repeater has 4 radios, two of which are used in this test. The end points are x86 servers, (a 600 MHz P3 and a 2.4 GHz P4 both running new V3 x86PC) so the test shows available throughput and does not load the radios with the speed test software. Our own speed test shows a bit higher but is in the right ballpark and also uses tcp. Lonnie war-platform ~ traceroute 10.10.250.254 traceroute to 10.10.250.254 (10.10.250.254), 30 hops max, 40 byte packets 1 192.168.250.10 (192.168.250.10) 1.017 ms 0.593 ms 0.536 ms 2 10.10.48.254 (10.10.48.254) 1.426 ms 1.519 ms 1.242 ms 3 10.10.226.254 (10.10.226.254) 2.176 ms 2.467 ms 2.256 ms 4 10.10.250.254 (10.10.250.254) 3.058 ms 2.852 ms 2.545 ms war-platform ~ iperf -c 10.10.250.254 Client connecting to 10.10.250.254, TCP port 5001 TCP window size: 16.0 KByte (default) [ 8] local 192.168.250.1 port 4716 connected with 10.10.250.254 port 5001 [ 8] 0.0-10.0 sec 61.6 MBytes 51.6 Mbits/sec war-platform ~ iperf -c 10.10.250.254 -d Server listening on TCP port 5001 TCP window size: 85.3 KByte (default) Client connecting to 10.10.250.254, TCP port 5001 TCP window size: 16.0 KByte (default) [ 10] local 192.168.250.1 port 4717 connected with 10.10.250.254 port 5001 [ 9] local 192.168.250.1 port 5001 connected with 10.10.250.254 port 1340 [ 10] 0.0-10.0 sec 25.9 MBytes 21.7 Mbits/sec [ 9] 0.0-10.0 sec 42.6 MBytes 35.6 Mbits/sec war-platform ~ war-platform ~ starutil 10.10.250.254 he1pm3 -rx rx rate: 5598 KB/sec (Press Ctrl-C to exit) war-platform ~ Next week I will upgrade our server 100 km away to V3 for x86PC and report the results for the following system that goes through 4 repeaters (radio in and radio out mid point) and a unit at each end, so 10 radios are involved. The remote server does not have iperf but I have shown the results of our own speedtest which the first test shows is pretty close to what iperf will show. war-platform ~ traceroute 10.10.29.1 traceroute to 10.10.29.1 (10.10.29.1), 30 hops max, 40 byte packets 1 192.168.250.10 (192.168.250.10) 1.031 ms 0.683 ms 0.548 ms 2 10.10.48.254 (10.10.48.254) 1.701 ms 1.253 ms 1.895 ms 3 10.10.227.254 (10.10.227.254) 2.737 ms 2.982 ms 2.267 ms 4 10.10.12.4 (10.10.12.4) 3.649 ms 2.653 ms 2.51 ms 5 10.10.47.253 (10.10.47.253) 4.644 ms 3.539 ms 3.661 ms 6 10.10.51.254 (10.10.51.254) 5.651 ms 4.832 ms 5.519 ms 7 10.14.99.254 (10.14.99.254) 7.248 ms 5.907 ms 5.803 ms 8 10.10.29.1 (10.10.29.1) 7.314 ms 6.75 ms 5.856 ms war-platform ~ war-platform ~ starutil 10.10.29.1 password -rx rx rate: 2306 KB/sec (Press Ctrl-C to exit) war-platform ~ On 8/11/06, Tom DeReggi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Task: Test Max Speed doable using Mikrotik NStreme 2 (two MPCI cards in one board). test environment... AMD 3Ghz Laptop wired - Mikrotik 532 w/ CM9 - Mikrotik 532 w/CM9 - wired to HP PIII-800Mhz Laptop. Connected in a lab environment, zero noise. Mikrotik OS ver 2.9.28 Test software 1
Re: [WISPA] Routerboard 532 and NStreme2
Tom, We are currently working on a custom MTU size interface for every device to be able to handle whatever you want for MTU size. We no longer include proxy arp support in V3. It was fine for the customer end but too many people misused it for a middle bridge and that gave nothing but trouble. V3 has support for a fully transparent client bridge when it talks to an appropriately configured V3 AP system. The license fee allows 1 year of free updates at which time it will require a $10 fee for another year. The license will never expire, just the ability to update the firmware. If you buy a WAR board the license is included in the board price and the update privilege never expires. The expiry is just for x86 firmware. I can handle orders under 3,000 pieces from stock and any quantity you wish on a 6 to 8 week pre-order basis. Lonnie On 8/14/06, Tom DeReggi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Gino, That is exciting news getting the Full 35 mbps on the WAR/STAR board. I guess it shows that the 533Mhz processor is the key to speed. The price is right to. The only thing is, we need to be able to pass full 1500 MTU for our backhauls, and we use VLAN. The older WRAP/STAROS shrinks MTU size to support VLAN. This prevented its use for our backhauls. The newer StarOS V3 software, doesn't support the larger packets yet, does it? ---802.1d bridging for ethernet and wireless ap, and layer-3 proxy arp bridging for wireless clients. That sounded like interesting feature on V3 software. WRAP V3 $70 /year. I hope that means one year of updates, and not that it expires at the end of the year and stops passing traffic. Do you know for sure? How is the availabilty regularly on the WAR boards? Has anyone tried flashing Mikrotik on a WAR board? Tom DeReggi RapidDSL Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - From: Gino A. Villarini To: 'WISPA General List' Sent: Saturday, August 12, 2006 2:17 PM Subject: RE: [WISPA] Routerboard 532 and NStreme2 Well Tom, We are in the same situation as you, testing backhaul replacements. Our Network backhauls are made of : Spectras , Gemini, Trango Atlas, Motorola BH units and Proxim MP11a. So we started looking for a 802.11a based unit, config channels of 5,10,20 and 40 mhz, support for bridging and basic stuff needed for backhauls no fancy stuff. The are some products available like the Trango Atlas, Solectek among others but we decided to test Mikrotik RB500 units, we saw the same results as you did, not very amazed. But, last week I decided to test out StarOS WAR plataform. and let me tell you: 6 mile link with 533 mhz WAR Board with 1 CM9 card each on both sides 23 db flat panel ( -66 on both ends ) One End connected to a Mikrotik 2.8 ghz Router , my laptop at the other end. WAR board set on bridge mode, connection tracking disabled. First of all, latency : 1- 64 byte ping from my laptop to the Mikrotik router : 1ms 2- 1500 byte ping from my laptop to the Mikrotik router : 2 - 3 ms Nice, thoughput : 20 mhz channel: TCP : 35 Mbps UDP: 28 Mbps ( weird, usually is the opposite ) 40 mhz channel: TCP : 45 Mbps UDP: 72 Mbps For Paul: 20 mhz chanel UDP test with 100 byte packets : 5 Mbps 40 mhz chanel UDP test with 100 byte packets : 6 Mbps Pretty darn exiting results! I just need to iron out a vlan issue with Lonnie.. and I would make this units our defacto Back hauls Gino A. Villarini [EMAIL PROTECTED] Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp. tel 787.273.4143 fax 787.273.4145 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Tom DeReggi Sent: Friday, August 11, 2006 8:18 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: [WISPA] Routerboard 532 and NStreme2 Task: Test Max Speed doable using Mikrotik NStreme 2 (two MPCI cards in one board). test environment... AMD 3Ghz Laptop wired - Mikrotik 532 w/ CM9 - Mikrotik 532 w/CM9 - wired to HP PIII-800Mhz Laptop. Connected in a lab environment, zero noise. Mikrotik OS ver 2.9.28 Test software 1: IPerf TCP running on both Laptops. Test software 2: Mikrotik Bandwidth test running on Mikrotiks. Test Method 1 (running test to/from Laptops): used about 80% CPU power on Mikrotik board to pass the traffic. Test Method 2 (running to.from MIkrotik): used about 100% CPU power on Mikrotik. However, interesting enough, the results of the speed tests, whichever method used, were just about identical, give or take 1 mbps. The results of tests were Maximum speed transferable in one direction 20Mhz channel: 16.6 mbps. Maximum speed transferable in both direction simultaneously (adding together the values) 20.8 mbps (13.8 mbps and 7 mbps in the other). Maximum speed transferable in one direction 10 mhz channel: 15.8 mbps. Maximum speed transferable in both directions 10 Mhz channel: 19 mbps (10.4 mbps and 9 mbps) Maximum speed transferable in one direction Turbo Mode speed: 18 mbps Maximum speed transferable in both direction simultaneously Turbo Mode (adding together
Re: [WISPA] Routerboard 532 and NStreme2
Lonnie, I just wrote to you off list, before seeing your onlist response. V3 has support for a fully transparent client bridge when it talks to an appropriately configured V3 AP system. That is good news! License Fee after 1 year. The policy you explained, is fair and reasonable. We are currently working on a custom MTU size interface for every device to be able to handle whatever you want for MTU size. Great. To be more clear... Its easy for people (like me) to get confused between IP versus Ethernet headers. In our VLAN applications, its the Ethernet packet that needs to be supported above 1500bytes (for addition of VLAN to Ethernet header), we'd rarely ever need to increase IP packet MTU above 1500 MTU. (although I see applications for IPSEC if larger MTU allowed or possibly for passing MPLS). Tom DeReggi RapidDSL Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - From: Lonnie Nunweiler [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Monday, August 14, 2006 6:31 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Routerboard 532 and NStreme2 Tom, We are currently working on a custom MTU size interface for every device to be able to handle whatever you want for MTU size. We no longer include proxy arp support in V3. It was fine for the customer end but too many people misused it for a middle bridge and that gave nothing but trouble. V3 has support for a fully transparent client bridge when it talks to an appropriately configured V3 AP system. The license fee allows 1 year of free updates at which time it will require a $10 fee for another year. The license will never expire, just the ability to update the firmware. If you buy a WAR board the license is included in the board price and the update privilege never expires. The expiry is just for x86 firmware. I can handle orders under 3,000 pieces from stock and any quantity you wish on a 6 to 8 week pre-order basis. Lonnie On 8/14/06, Tom DeReggi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Gino, That is exciting news getting the Full 35 mbps on the WAR/STAR board. I guess it shows that the 533Mhz processor is the key to speed. The price is right to. The only thing is, we need to be able to pass full 1500 MTU for our backhauls, and we use VLAN. The older WRAP/STAROS shrinks MTU size to support VLAN. This prevented its use for our backhauls. The newer StarOS V3 software, doesn't support the larger packets yet, does it? ---802.1d bridging for ethernet and wireless ap, and layer-3 proxy arp bridging for wireless clients. That sounded like interesting feature on V3 software. WRAP V3 $70 /year. I hope that means one year of updates, and not that it expires at the end of the year and stops passing traffic. Do you know for sure? How is the availabilty regularly on the WAR boards? Has anyone tried flashing Mikrotik on a WAR board? Tom DeReggi RapidDSL Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - From: Gino A. Villarini To: 'WISPA General List' Sent: Saturday, August 12, 2006 2:17 PM Subject: RE: [WISPA] Routerboard 532 and NStreme2 Well Tom, We are in the same situation as you, testing backhaul replacements. Our Network backhauls are made of : Spectras , Gemini, Trango Atlas, Motorola BH units and Proxim MP11a. So we started looking for a 802.11a based unit, config channels of 5,10,20 and 40 mhz, support for bridging and basic stuff needed for backhauls no fancy stuff. The are some products available like the Trango Atlas, Solectek among others but we decided to test Mikrotik RB500 units, we saw the same results as you did, not very amazed. But, last week I decided to test out StarOS WAR plataform. and let me tell you: 6 mile link with 533 mhz WAR Board with 1 CM9 card each on both sides 23 db flat panel ( -66 on both ends ) One End connected to a Mikrotik 2.8 ghz Router , my laptop at the other end. WAR board set on bridge mode, connection tracking disabled. First of all, latency : 1- 64 byte ping from my laptop to the Mikrotik router : 1ms 2- 1500 byte ping from my laptop to the Mikrotik router : 2 - 3 ms Nice, thoughput : 20 mhz channel: TCP : 35 Mbps UDP: 28 Mbps ( weird, usually is the opposite ) 40 mhz channel: TCP : 45 Mbps UDP: 72 Mbps For Paul: 20 mhz chanel UDP test with 100 byte packets : 5 Mbps 40 mhz chanel UDP test with 100 byte packets : 6 Mbps Pretty darn exiting results! I just need to iron out a vlan issue with Lonnie.. and I would make this units our defacto Back hauls Gino A. Villarini [EMAIL PROTECTED] Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp. tel 787.273.4143 fax 787.273.4145 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Tom DeReggi Sent: Friday, August 11, 2006 8:18 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: [WISPA] Routerboard 532 and NStreme2 Task: Test Max Speed doable using Mikrotik NStreme 2 (two MPCI cards in one board). test environment... AMD 3Ghz Laptop wired - Mikrotik 532 w/ CM9
Re: [WISPA] Routerboard 532 and NStreme2
It will just be easier to support an insane MTU size so that people can go and do whatever they want. I can imagine people doing some vlan in vlan and then running the whole works over a tunnel, and each one adds tags and headers to the actual 1500 byte payload. Lonnie On 8/14/06, Tom DeReggi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Lonnie, I just wrote to you off list, before seeing your onlist response. V3 has support for a fully transparent client bridge when it talks to an appropriately configured V3 AP system. That is good news! License Fee after 1 year. The policy you explained, is fair and reasonable. We are currently working on a custom MTU size interface for every device to be able to handle whatever you want for MTU size. Great. To be more clear... Its easy for people (like me) to get confused between IP versus Ethernet headers. In our VLAN applications, its the Ethernet packet that needs to be supported above 1500bytes (for addition of VLAN to Ethernet header), we'd rarely ever need to increase IP packet MTU above 1500 MTU. (although I see applications for IPSEC if larger MTU allowed or possibly for passing MPLS). Tom DeReggi RapidDSL Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband -- Lonnie Nunweiler Valemount Networks Corporation http://www.star-os.com/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Routerboard 532 and NStreme2
On 8/14/06, Lonnie Nunweiler [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Tom, We are currently working on a custom MTU size interface for every device to be able to handle whatever you want for MTU size. We no longer include proxy arp support in V3. It was fine for the customer end but too many people misused it for a middle bridge and that gave nothing but trouble. V3 has support for a fully transparent client bridge when it talks to an appropriately configured V3 AP system. Lonnie, We've been using staros for a while and just began using the WAR boards recently but I didn't realize this behaviour had changed. We put the WAR boards between two Cisco routers and we had to use VDS to get true bridging working between them. If there's another way to do it I'd like to know so to reduce the overhead of VDS. What exactly is a an appropriately configured V3 AP? We've always just bridged the ethernet to the wpci on both sides of the link. -Eric -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
RE: [WISPA] Routerboard 532 and NStreme2
So.. Lonnie, got a timeframe for this ? thanks Gino A. Villarini [EMAIL PROTECTED] Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp. tel 787.273.4143 fax 787.273.4145 -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lonnie Nunweiler Sent: Monday, August 14, 2006 8:38 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Routerboard 532 and NStreme2 It will just be easier to support an insane MTU size so that people can go and do whatever they want. I can imagine people doing some vlan in vlan and then running the whole works over a tunnel, and each one adds tags and headers to the actual 1500 byte payload. Lonnie On 8/14/06, Tom DeReggi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Lonnie, I just wrote to you off list, before seeing your onlist response. V3 has support for a fully transparent client bridge when it talks to an appropriately configured V3 AP system. That is good news! License Fee after 1 year. The policy you explained, is fair and reasonable. We are currently working on a custom MTU size interface for every device to be able to handle whatever you want for MTU size. Great. To be more clear... Its easy for people (like me) to get confused between IP versus Ethernet headers. In our VLAN applications, its the Ethernet packet that needs to be supported above 1500bytes (for addition of VLAN to Ethernet header), we'd rarely ever need to increase IP packet MTU above 1500 MTU. (although I see applications for IPSEC if larger MTU allowed or possibly for passing MPLS). Tom DeReggi RapidDSL Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband -- Lonnie Nunweiler Valemount Networks Corporation http://www.star-os.com/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Routerboard 532 and NStreme2
It's work in progress. I have found can't estimate software development timelines very well and people get upset when I am wrong, so I quit making predictions a long time ago. What I can say is we are actively working on it and it will happen as soon as we can. Also I can say to take the past as a predictor that it will happen. Lonnie On 8/14/06, Gino A. Villarini [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: So.. Lonnie, got a timeframe for this ? thanks Gino A. Villarini [EMAIL PROTECTED] Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp. tel 787.273.4143 fax 787.273.4145 -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lonnie Nunweiler Sent: Monday, August 14, 2006 8:38 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Routerboard 532 and NStreme2 It will just be easier to support an insane MTU size so that people can go and do whatever they want. I can imagine people doing some vlan in vlan and then running the whole works over a tunnel, and each one adds tags and headers to the actual 1500 byte payload. Lonnie On 8/14/06, Tom DeReggi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Lonnie, I just wrote to you off list, before seeing your onlist response. V3 has support for a fully transparent client bridge when it talks to an appropriately configured V3 AP system. That is good news! License Fee after 1 year. The policy you explained, is fair and reasonable. We are currently working on a custom MTU size interface for every device to be able to handle whatever you want for MTU size. Great. To be more clear... Its easy for people (like me) to get confused between IP versus Ethernet headers. In our VLAN applications, its the Ethernet packet that needs to be supported above 1500bytes (for addition of VLAN to Ethernet header), we'd rarely ever need to increase IP packet MTU above 1500 MTU. (although I see applications for IPSEC if larger MTU allowed or possibly for passing MPLS). Tom DeReggi RapidDSL Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband -- Lonnie Nunweiler Valemount Networks Corporation http://www.star-os.com/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- Lonnie Nunweiler Valemount Networks Corporation http://www.star-os.com/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
RE: [WISPA] Routerboard 532 and NStreme2
Hi Gino, Thanks for the results. As expected, small packets seriously damages the available throughput. Do you know if it also hammers the throughput on your other backhaul links where you use the Spectra or Atlas? I know a few people have asked Lonnie to incorporate some form of packet aggregator into StarOS and I even believe one person has offered a possible solution but no sign of a response which is a shame as the WAR platform is a very promising piece of kit. Cheers, P. From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Gino A. Villarini Sent: 12 August 2006 19:17 To: 'WISPA General List' Subject: RE: [WISPA] Routerboard 532 and NStreme2 Well Tom, We are in the same situation as you, testing backhaul replacements. Our Network backhauls are made of : Spectras , Gemini, Trango Atlas, Motorola BH units and Proxim MP11a. So we started looking for a 802.11a based unit, config channels of 5,10,20 and 40 mhz, support for bridging and basic stuff needed for backhauls no fancy stuff. The are some products available like the Trango Atlas, Solectek among others but we decided to test Mikrotik RB500 units, we saw the same results as you did, not very amazed. But, last week I decided to test out StarOS WAR plataform and let me tell you: 6 mile link with 533 mhz WAR Board with 1 CM9 card each on both sides 23 db flat panel ( -66 on both ends ) One End connected to a Mikrotik 2.8 ghz Router , my laptop at the other end WAR board set on bridge mode, connection tracking disabled. First of all, latency : 1- 64 byte ping from my laptop to the Mikrotik router : 1ms 2- 1500 byte ping from my laptop to the Mikrotik router : 2 3 ms Nice, thoughput : 20 mhz channel: TCP : 35 Mbps UDP: 28 Mbps ( weird, usually is the opposite ) 40 mhz channel: TCP : 45 Mbps UDP: 72 Mbps For Paul: 20 mhz chanel UDP test with 100 byte packets : 5 Mbps 40 mhz chanel UDP test with 100 byte packets : 6 Mbps Pretty darn exiting results! I just need to iron out a vlan issue with Lonnie.. and I would make this units our defacto Back hauls Gino A. Villarini [EMAIL PROTECTED] Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp. tel 787.273.4143 fax 787.273.4145 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Tom DeReggi Sent: Friday, August 11, 2006 8:18 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: [WISPA] Routerboard 532 and NStreme2 Task: Test Max Speed doable using Mikrotik NStreme 2 (two MPCI cards in one board). test environment... AMD 3Ghz Laptop wired - Mikrotik 532 w/ CM9 - Mikrotik 532 w/CM9 - wired to HP PIII-800Mhz Laptop. Connected in a lab environment, zero noise. Mikrotik OS ver 2.9.28 Test software 1: IPerf TCP running on both Laptops. Test software 2: Mikrotik Bandwidth test running on Mikrotiks. TestMethod 1 (running test to/fromLaptops): used about 80% CPU power on Mikrotik board to pass the traffic. Test Method 2 (running to.from MIkrotik): used about 100% CPU power on Mikrotik. However, interesting enough, the results of the speed tests, whichever method used, were just about identical, give or take 1 mbps. The results of tests were Maximum speed transferable in one direction 20Mhz channel: 16.6 mbps. Maximum speed transferable in both direction simultaneously (addingtogether the values) 20.8 mbps (13.8 mbps and 7 mbps in the other). Maximum speed transferable in one direction 10 mhz channel: 15.8 mbps. Maximum speed transferable in both directions 10 Mhz channel: 19 mbps (10.4 mbps and 9 mbps) Maximum speed transferable in one direction Turbo Mode speed: 18 mbps Maximum speed transferable in both directionsimultaneously Turbo Mode (addingtogether the values): 22mbps. Note: Turbo mode tested in two configurations, (A) the lowest 5.8G channel send and highest 5.8G channel for receive, and(B) 5.8Ghz to send and 5.3Ghz receive. Note: All 5.8Ghz test resultswere at54 mbps speed modulation, and setting it to slower speed/modulation lowered the test speed results. Note: Test performed with RSSI somewhere between -60 and-68, without antennas, but w/ high quality pigtails w/Bulk head N, Pointing N connectors to each other. Note:Re-tried tests with antennas used, to increase RSSI (-50 to -60 db), but itdid not improve results. Note: All tests done when in NStreme2 mode, using twocards on each end. Note: Both boards mounted in Mikrotik Plastic Large Case (sweet cases) and using 18V (.8amp) via POE. One thing that was really odd...Mikrotik has a value for TX rssi and RXrssi. The TXrssi was the exact RX rssi acheivedat the otehr radio in all cases in any slot, in any configuration. However,the CM9 inthe TOP Slot of the532board consistently showed an average of 10 db worse TX RSSI. (sometimes around -75 db). Swapping TX CM9s did not help. TX from
RE: [WISPA] Routerboard 532 and NStreme2
Hi Lonnie, Would be great to see your test results using smaller packet sizes of 100bytes which seems to be around the average packet size for the majority of the traffic on my network. This test always seems to have a massive impact on the available throughput and is currently the reason why we use StarOS for high speed dedicated private lines but Mikrotik w/nstreme for anything shared. Tom, can you confirm if your test RB532's had connection tracking disabled and cpu set at 330MHz? It has been said a few times that N/Streme2 uses too much CPU for the RB532 however I have seen much better results than your tests show using N/Streme and a single CM9. There is a company in the UK that mass produces outdoor grade Mikrotik solutions with 1GHz x86 CPU's so that the CPU is no longer the bottle neck. We are in the process of tested a few off the shelf x86 boards in outdoor enclosures using 56byte random TCP data in both directions at the same time on a single CM9 in turbo mode and have been able to get 37-38Mbps in both directions (about 75Mbps aggregate) which seems to be better than most other more expensive options. These results don't change if we then use larger packets of 1500bytes. Cheers, P. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lonnie Nunweiler Sent: 12 August 2006 06:48 To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Routerboard 532 and NStreme2 If you are interested, here is the real world test results from my house to the office through a middle repeater, so it involves 4 Atheros radios and three of our WAR4 533 MHz systems. The middle repeater has 4 radios, two of which are used in this test. The end points are x86 servers, (a 600 MHz P3 and a 2.4 GHz P4 both running new V3 x86PC) so the test shows available throughput and does not load the radios with the speed test software. Our own speed test shows a bit higher but is in the right ballpark and also uses tcp. Lonnie war-platform ~ traceroute 10.10.250.254 traceroute to 10.10.250.254 (10.10.250.254), 30 hops max, 40 byte packets 1 192.168.250.10 (192.168.250.10) 1.017 ms 0.593 ms 0.536 ms 2 10.10.48.254 (10.10.48.254) 1.426 ms 1.519 ms 1.242 ms 3 10.10.226.254 (10.10.226.254) 2.176 ms 2.467 ms 2.256 ms 4 10.10.250.254 (10.10.250.254) 3.058 ms 2.852 ms 2.545 ms war-platform ~ iperf -c 10.10.250.254 Client connecting to 10.10.250.254, TCP port 5001 TCP window size: 16.0 KByte (default) [ 8] local 192.168.250.1 port 4716 connected with 10.10.250.254 port 5001 [ 8] 0.0-10.0 sec 61.6 MBytes 51.6 Mbits/sec war-platform ~ iperf -c 10.10.250.254 -d Server listening on TCP port 5001 TCP window size: 85.3 KByte (default) Client connecting to 10.10.250.254, TCP port 5001 TCP window size: 16.0 KByte (default) [ 10] local 192.168.250.1 port 4717 connected with 10.10.250.254 port 5001 [ 9] local 192.168.250.1 port 5001 connected with 10.10.250.254 port 1340 [ 10] 0.0-10.0 sec 25.9 MBytes 21.7 Mbits/sec [ 9] 0.0-10.0 sec 42.6 MBytes 35.6 Mbits/sec war-platform ~ war-platform ~ starutil 10.10.250.254 he1pm3 -rx rx rate: 5598 KB/sec (Press Ctrl-C to exit) war-platform ~ Next week I will upgrade our server 100 km away to V3 for x86PC and report the results for the following system that goes through 4 repeaters (radio in and radio out mid point) and a unit at each end, so 10 radios are involved. The remote server does not have iperf but I have shown the results of our own speedtest which the first test shows is pretty close to what iperf will show. war-platform ~ traceroute 10.10.29.1 traceroute to 10.10.29.1 (10.10.29.1), 30 hops max, 40 byte packets 1 192.168.250.10 (192.168.250.10) 1.031 ms 0.683 ms 0.548 ms 2 10.10.48.254 (10.10.48.254) 1.701 ms 1.253 ms 1.895 ms 3 10.10.227.254 (10.10.227.254) 2.737 ms 2.982 ms 2.267 ms 4 10.10.12.4 (10.10.12.4) 3.649 ms 2.653 ms 2.51 ms 5 10.10.47.253 (10.10.47.253) 4.644 ms 3.539 ms 3.661 ms 6 10.10.51.254 (10.10.51.254) 5.651 ms 4.832 ms 5.519 ms 7 10.14.99.254 (10.14.99.254) 7.248 ms 5.907 ms 5.803 ms 8 10.10.29.1 (10.10.29.1) 7.314 ms 6.75 ms 5.856 ms war-platform ~ war-platform ~ starutil 10.10.29.1 password -rx rx rate: 2306 KB/sec (Press Ctrl-C to exit) war-platform ~ On 8/11/06, Tom DeReggi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Task: Test Max Speed doable using Mikrotik NStreme 2 (two MPCI cards in one board). test environment... AMD 3Ghz Laptop wired - Mikrotik 532 w/ CM9 - Mikrotik 532 w/CM9 - wired to HP PIII-800Mhz Laptop. Connected in a lab environment, zero noise. Mikrotik OS ver 2.9.28 Test software 1
RE: [WISPA] Routerboard 532 and NStreme2
Well Tom, We are in the same situation as you, testing backhaul replacements. Our Network backhauls are made of : Spectras , Gemini, Trango Atlas, Motorola BH units and Proxim MP11a. So we started looking for a 802.11a based unit, config channels of 5,10,20 and 40 mhz, support for bridging and basic stuff needed for backhauls no fancy stuff. The are some products available like the Trango Atlas, Solectek among others but we decided to test Mikrotik RB500 units, we saw the same results as you did, not very amazed. But, last week I decided to test out StarOS WAR plataform and let me tell you: 6 mile link with 533 mhz WAR Board with 1 CM9 card each on both sides 23 db flat panel ( -66 on both ends ) One End connected to a Mikrotik 2.8 ghz Router , my laptop at the other end WAR board set on bridge mode, connection tracking disabled. First of all, latency : 1- 64 byte ping from my laptop to the Mikrotik router : 1ms 2- 1500 byte ping from my laptop to the Mikrotik router : 2 3 ms Nice, thoughput : 20 mhz channel: TCP : 35 Mbps UDP: 28 Mbps ( weird, usually is the opposite ) 40 mhz channel: TCP : 45 Mbps UDP: 72 Mbps For Paul: 20 mhz chanel UDP test with 100 byte packets : 5 Mbps 40 mhz chanel UDP test with 100 byte packets : 6 Mbps Pretty darn exiting results! I just need to iron out a vlan issue with Lonnie.. and I would make this units our defacto Back hauls Gino A. Villarini [EMAIL PROTECTED] Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp. tel 787.273.4143 fax 787.273.4145 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Tom DeReggi Sent: Friday, August 11, 2006 8:18 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: [WISPA] Routerboard 532 and NStreme2 Task: Test Max Speed doable using Mikrotik NStreme 2 (two MPCI cards in one board). test environment... AMD 3Ghz Laptop wired - Mikrotik 532 w/ CM9 - Mikrotik 532 w/CM9 - wired to HP PIII-800Mhz Laptop. Connected in a lab environment, zero noise. Mikrotik OS ver 2.9.28 Test software 1: IPerf TCP running on both Laptops. Test software 2: Mikrotik Bandwidth test running on Mikrotiks. TestMethod 1 (running test to/fromLaptops): used about 80% CPU power on Mikrotik board to pass the traffic. Test Method 2 (running to.from MIkrotik): used about 100% CPU power on Mikrotik. However, interesting enough, the results of the speed tests, whichever method used, were just about identical, give or take 1 mbps. The results of tests were Maximum speed transferable in one direction 20Mhz channel: 16.6 mbps. Maximum speed transferable in both direction simultaneously (addingtogether the values) 20.8 mbps (13.8 mbps and 7 mbps in the other). Maximum speed transferable in one direction 10 mhz channel: 15.8 mbps. Maximum speed transferable in both directions 10 Mhz channel: 19 mbps (10.4 mbps and 9 mbps) Maximum speed transferable in one direction Turbo Mode speed: 18 mbps Maximum speed transferable in both directionsimultaneously Turbo Mode (addingtogether the values): 22mbps. Note: Turbo mode tested in two configurations, (A) the lowest 5.8G channel send and highest 5.8G channel for receive, and(B) 5.8Ghz to send and 5.3Ghz receive. Note: All 5.8Ghz test resultswere at54 mbps speed modulation, and setting it to slower speed/modulation lowered the test speed results. Note: Test performed with RSSI somewhere between -60 and-68, without antennas, but w/ high quality pigtails w/Bulk head N, Pointing N connectors to each other. Note:Re-tried tests with antennas used, to increase RSSI (-50 to -60 db), but itdid not improve results. Note: All tests done when in NStreme2 mode, using twocards on each end. Note: Both boards mounted in Mikrotik Plastic Large Case (sweet cases) and using 18V (.8amp) via POE. One thing that was really odd...Mikrotik has a value for TX rssi and RXrssi. The TXrssi was the exact RX rssi acheivedat the otehr radio in all cases in any slot, in any configuration. However,the CM9 inthe TOP Slot of the532board consistently showed an average of 10 db worse TX RSSI. (sometimes around -75 db). Swapping TX CM9s did not help. TX from the top slot oneither of the Mikrotik CPEs showed the same results.The only way I was able to make the TX rssis the same on both CPEs simultaneously was to set the BOTTOM port/CM9 on each Mikrotik to be the TX radio. This indicated that the 532 board possibly might have a powerproblem to the top slot. In this configuration, at 54mbps, RSSI was about -65TX and RX on bothCPEs. My conclusion of this experimentwas that the ideal configuration for a MIkrotik 532 board is with10Mhz channels in NStreme2 mode. Because Spectrum efficiency is maximized, Interference avoidance maximized, Cost low, and very little aggregate speed benefitacheived by using the larger channel sizes
RE: [WISPA] Routerboard 532 and NStreme2
Title: Message 20 mhz channel: TCP : 35 Mbps UDP: 28 Mbps ( weird, usually is the opposite ) Gino, Keep in mind -- if you check the Atheros "advanced feature" checkbox -- you are turning on "super-a/g" functionality Going back to your testing methodology (which you haven't elaborated on), the Lempel Ziv compression within super-a/g could be the reason why you're getting "screwy" TCP vs. UDP results -Charles ---WiNOG Wireless RoadshowsComing to a City Near Youhttp://www.winog.com -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
RE: [WISPA] Routerboard 532 and NStreme2
Title: Message Charles: For test we are using the Mikrotik BW test tool client on the PC, and the built in the Router.. I completely understand your point, but why on 40 mhz channel size, its 45 mbps TCP and 72 mbps UDP ? Gino A. Villarini [EMAIL PROTECTED] Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp. tel 787.273.4143 fax 787.273.4145 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Charles Wu Sent: Saturday, August 12, 2006 3:22 PM To: 'WISPA General List' Subject: RE: [WISPA] Routerboard 532 and NStreme2 20 mhz channel: TCP : 35 Mbps UDP: 28 Mbps ( weird, usually is the opposite ) Gino, Keep in mind -- if you check the Atheros advanced feature checkbox -- you are turning on super-a/g functionality Going back to your testing methodology (which you haven't elaborated on), the Lempel Ziv compression within super-a/g could be the reason why you're getting screwy TCP vs. UDP results -Charles --- WiNOG Wireless Roadshows Coming to a City Near You http://www.winog.com -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
[WISPA] Routerboard 532 and NStreme2
Task: Test Max Speed doable using Mikrotik NStreme 2 (two MPCI cards in one board). test environment... AMD 3Ghz Laptop wired - Mikrotik 532 w/ CM9 - Mikrotik 532 w/CM9 - wired to HP PIII-800Mhz Laptop. Connected in a lab environment, zero noise. Mikrotik OS ver 2.9.28 Test software 1: IPerf TCP running on both Laptops. Test software 2: Mikrotik Bandwidth test running on Mikrotiks. TestMethod 1 (running test to/fromLaptops): used about 80% CPU power on Mikrotik board to pass the traffic. Test Method 2 (running to.from MIkrotik): used about 100% CPU power on Mikrotik. However, interesting enough, the results of the speed tests, whichever method used, were just about identical, give or take 1 mbps. The results of tests were Maximum speed transferable in one direction 20Mhz channel: 16.6 mbps. Maximum speed transferable in both direction simultaneously (addingtogether the values) 20.8 mbps (13.8 mbps and 7 mbps in the other). Maximum speed transferable in one direction 10 mhz channel: 15.8 mbps. Maximum speed transferable in both directions 10 Mhz channel: 19 mbps (10.4 mbps and 9 mbps) Maximum speed transferable in one direction Turbo Mode speed: 18 mbps Maximum speed transferable in both directionsimultaneously Turbo Mode (addingtogether the values): 22mbps. Note: Turbo mode tested in two configurations, (A) the lowest 5.8G channel send and highest 5.8G channel for receive, and(B) 5.8Ghz to send and 5.3Ghz receive. Note: All 5.8Ghz test resultswere at54 mbps speed modulation, and setting it to slower speed/modulation lowered the test speed results. Note: Test performed with RSSI somewhere between -60 and-68, without antennas, but w/ high quality pigtails w/Bulk head N, Pointing N connectors to each other. Note:Re-tried tests with antennas used, to increase RSSI (-50 to -60 db), but itdid not improve results. Note: All tests done when in NStreme2 mode, using twocards on each end. Note: Both boards mounted in Mikrotik Plastic Large Case (sweet cases) and using 18V (.8amp) via POE. One thing that was really odd...Mikrotik has a value for TX rssi and RXrssi. The TXrssi was the exact RX rssi acheivedat the otehr radio in all cases in any slot, in any configuration. However,the CM9 inthe TOP Slot of the532board consistently showed an average of 10 db worse TX RSSI. (sometimes around -75 db). Swapping TX CM9s did not help. TX from the top slot oneither of the Mikrotik CPEs showed the same results.The only way I was able to make the TX rssis the same on both CPEs simultaneously was to set the BOTTOM port/CM9 on each Mikrotik to be the TX radio. This indicated that the 532 board possibly might have a powerproblem to the top slot. In this configuration, at 54mbps, RSSI was about -65TX and RX on bothCPEs. My conclusion of this experimentwas that the ideal configuration for a MIkrotik 532 board is with10Mhz channels in NStreme2 mode. Because Spectrum efficiency is maximized, Interference avoidance maximized, Cost low, and very little aggregate speed benefitacheived by using the larger channel sizes. My second conclusion was that the 532 router board is inadequate, based on processor bottlenecks, to acheive higher speeds than 20 mbps aggregate throughput.(LAB test is best case scenario!) Andif using 20Mhz channels or higher, I don't see the point of using Nstreme2, as 1 CM9 in straight 802.11a mode on a 532 boardhas been tested to be able to passabout 14 mbps aggregate. Mikrotik's website claims that 35 mbps aggregate can be acheived with Celeron 700Mhz CPU PCs. Although that is a grand accomplishment at very low cost, there are significantdisadvantages of that configuration in real world deployments. Such as wheredo you put the PC in a shared Tenant building, so it is close enough to the roof, so the COAX to antennais not going to loose valuable db, or where power is gotten from, or how is it going to be rebooted by a customer if the power input is not from customer's suite?I'm sure there are many places that Full Size PCs could be appropriate to use, but its not going to be realistic for us, until there is a 700Mhz Celeron able to be POE fedand mounted in an outdoor style CPE box. What this has done is brought to my attentionthe value of products like Alvarion BH40/BH100s and Trango Atlas PtPs, that can be taken for granted. In single radio designs,BH40s usually can push 24 mbps with old 3.0 firmware, BH100 reported by some in the greater than 40mbps ranges, and Trango Atlas PTP easilly pushes 36 mbps in most deployments, using the same tests thatI used above. So Mikrotik 532s are not a replacement for my Trango backhauls yet! However, on a positive note, I liked the Mikrotik Full Size CPE case, costing only $45, allowing extra room for cable splicing boxes (to split POE to other radios fed off the Mikrotik's 2nd and 3rd ports) plenty of places to tie down pigtails, and easy plastic to drill/make holes for (non-circle) Bulk
Re: [WISPA] Routerboard 532 and NStreme2
If you are interested, here is the real world test results from my house to the office through a middle repeater, so it involves 4 Atheros radios and three of our WAR4 533 MHz systems. The middle repeater has 4 radios, two of which are used in this test. The end points are x86 servers, (a 600 MHz P3 and a 2.4 GHz P4 both running new V3 x86PC) so the test shows available throughput and does not load the radios with the speed test software. Our own speed test shows a bit higher but is in the right ballpark and also uses tcp. Lonnie war-platform ~ traceroute 10.10.250.254 traceroute to 10.10.250.254 (10.10.250.254), 30 hops max, 40 byte packets 1 192.168.250.10 (192.168.250.10) 1.017 ms 0.593 ms 0.536 ms 2 10.10.48.254 (10.10.48.254) 1.426 ms 1.519 ms 1.242 ms 3 10.10.226.254 (10.10.226.254) 2.176 ms 2.467 ms 2.256 ms 4 10.10.250.254 (10.10.250.254) 3.058 ms 2.852 ms 2.545 ms war-platform ~ iperf -c 10.10.250.254 Client connecting to 10.10.250.254, TCP port 5001 TCP window size: 16.0 KByte (default) [ 8] local 192.168.250.1 port 4716 connected with 10.10.250.254 port 5001 [ 8] 0.0-10.0 sec 61.6 MBytes 51.6 Mbits/sec war-platform ~ iperf -c 10.10.250.254 -d Server listening on TCP port 5001 TCP window size: 85.3 KByte (default) Client connecting to 10.10.250.254, TCP port 5001 TCP window size: 16.0 KByte (default) [ 10] local 192.168.250.1 port 4717 connected with 10.10.250.254 port 5001 [ 9] local 192.168.250.1 port 5001 connected with 10.10.250.254 port 1340 [ 10] 0.0-10.0 sec 25.9 MBytes 21.7 Mbits/sec [ 9] 0.0-10.0 sec 42.6 MBytes 35.6 Mbits/sec war-platform ~ war-platform ~ starutil 10.10.250.254 he1pm3 -rx rx rate: 5598 KB/sec (Press Ctrl-C to exit) war-platform ~ Next week I will upgrade our server 100 km away to V3 for x86PC and report the results for the following system that goes through 4 repeaters (radio in and radio out mid point) and a unit at each end, so 10 radios are involved. The remote server does not have iperf but I have shown the results of our own speedtest which the first test shows is pretty close to what iperf will show. war-platform ~ traceroute 10.10.29.1 traceroute to 10.10.29.1 (10.10.29.1), 30 hops max, 40 byte packets 1 192.168.250.10 (192.168.250.10) 1.031 ms 0.683 ms 0.548 ms 2 10.10.48.254 (10.10.48.254) 1.701 ms 1.253 ms 1.895 ms 3 10.10.227.254 (10.10.227.254) 2.737 ms 2.982 ms 2.267 ms 4 10.10.12.4 (10.10.12.4) 3.649 ms 2.653 ms 2.51 ms 5 10.10.47.253 (10.10.47.253) 4.644 ms 3.539 ms 3.661 ms 6 10.10.51.254 (10.10.51.254) 5.651 ms 4.832 ms 5.519 ms 7 10.14.99.254 (10.14.99.254) 7.248 ms 5.907 ms 5.803 ms 8 10.10.29.1 (10.10.29.1) 7.314 ms 6.75 ms 5.856 ms war-platform ~ war-platform ~ starutil 10.10.29.1 password -rx rx rate: 2306 KB/sec (Press Ctrl-C to exit) war-platform ~ On 8/11/06, Tom DeReggi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Task: Test Max Speed doable using Mikrotik NStreme 2 (two MPCI cards in one board). test environment... AMD 3Ghz Laptop wired - Mikrotik 532 w/ CM9 - Mikrotik 532 w/CM9 - wired to HP PIII-800Mhz Laptop. Connected in a lab environment, zero noise. Mikrotik OS ver 2.9.28 Test software 1: IPerf TCP running on both Laptops. Test software 2: Mikrotik Bandwidth test running on Mikrotiks. Test Method 1 (running test to/from Laptops): used about 80% CPU power on Mikrotik board to pass the traffic. Test Method 2 (running to.from MIkrotik): used about 100% CPU power on Mikrotik. However, interesting enough, the results of the speed tests, whichever method used, were just about identical, give or take 1 mbps. The results of tests were Maximum speed transferable in one direction 20Mhz channel: 16.6 mbps. Maximum speed transferable in both direction simultaneously (adding together the values) 20.8 mbps (13.8 mbps and 7 mbps in the other). Maximum speed transferable in one direction 10 mhz channel: 15.8 mbps. Maximum speed transferable in both directions 10 Mhz channel: 19 mbps (10.4 mbps and 9 mbps) Maximum speed transferable in one direction Turbo Mode speed: 18 mbps Maximum speed transferable in both direction simultaneously Turbo Mode (adding together the values): 22mbps. Note: Turbo mode tested in two configurations, (A) the lowest 5.8G channel send and highest 5.8G channel for receive, and (B) 5.8Ghz to send and 5.3Ghz receive. Note: All 5.8Ghz test results were at 54 mbps speed modulation, and setting it to slower speed/modulation lowered the test speed results. Note: Test performed with RSSI somewhere between -60 and -68, without antennas, but w/ high quality pigtails w/Bulk head N, Pointing N
