RE: [WISPA] looking for a device

2006-06-15 Thread Gino A. Villarini
We are kinda stuck in the same dilema

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: Wednesday, June 14, 2006 9:53 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] looking for a device

Yes the answer is not. But the question is one of great interest to me, and 
I'm interested in learning from others experience on the topic.

ON our network our biggest focus right now is to improve the methods to 
shorten time and improve acracy of diagnosing performance issue on a 
network.  We have great tools that help us find problems that other ISPs 
often don;t even realize exist becauyse they have limited their abilty to 
test their network based on how they designed it.  But it takes us way to 
long to conclusivelly come up with a diagnosis because their are so many 
possible places where failures could occurs to contribute to degregation. 
I'm not talking about major failures. I'm talking about reported problems 
like... Intermittent disconnects. Intermittent VOIP quality performance. 
Etc. (I am NOT saying that we have an overly large amount of problems, I'm 
just saying a large numbner of people report problems because networking is 
complicated and end users are under trained.). 95% of the time we can clear 
our name and prove that causes were related to issues off of our network. 
But it can take a lot of tiem to prove it. And if you don;t prove it, how do

you know your network really is operating correctly.  So how does this 
problem apply to this thread?... Well, if I simplify my network, there will 
be fewer things to look at in the diagnosis process.  What simplications can

be made, without compromising performance or abilty to trouble shoot the 
network conclusively?  These questions need to be asked when considering 
routing versus bridged. Do you consider the needs of your prospective 
clients, or your needs to better offer your core services? All things to be 
considered.

Right now we are both 100% routed and 95% VLANed.  It gives us a lot of 
power and security features. But I tell you it is a super management 
headache. I'm looking for ways to simplify. Do I go more towards Layer2 or 
more towards Layer3? Thats a question I'm looking at hard right now.

Tom DeReggi
RapidDSL  Wireless, Inc
IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband


- Original Message - 
From: Paul Hendry [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: 'WISPA General List' wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Wednesday, June 14, 2006 3:14 AM
Subject: RE: [WISPA] looking for a device


 So that's a no then Tom ;)

 Using various bandwidth test tools (such as the one builtin to Mikrotik)
 from/to multiple source/destinations you can generate all sorts of traffic
 profiles. You can decide on the size of the packets, layer 4, direction 
 and
 even bandwidth so I'd say it's very possible to set-up a test environment
 that isn't too far of real world. Anyone else tested?

 -Original Message-
 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
 Behalf Of Tom DeReggi
 Sent: 14 June 2006 03:13
 To: WISPA General List
 Subject: Re: [WISPA] looking for a device

 Anyone compared a routed solution with
 a Mikrotik bridged solution for delay/jitter?

 Good question.  But the problem there is creating a real world test
 environment. Convergence, can be tested  somewhat accurately in low 
 network
 utilization situations. To adequately test Jitter/Delay you really need to
 load the network, as that is when the jitter and sparatic latency happens.

 Tom DeReggi
 RapidDSL  Wireless, Inc
 IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband

 - Original Message - 
 From: Paul Hendry [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 To: 'WISPA General List' wireless@wispa.org
 Sent: Tuesday, June 13, 2006 9:02 AM
 Subject: RE: [WISPA] looking for a device


 The delay in switching a packet at hardware is less than the delay in
 routing a packet at software. This is 1 of the reasons that Cisco created
 the GSR and why an MPLS switched network is fast than a plain routed
 network.

 I'm not too interested in convergence times as we only have very minimal
 outages so RSTP should suffice. How fast a packet can traverse our 
 network
 on the other hand is important so that we can reliably run VoIP and other
 delay/jitter sensitive applications. Anyone compared a routed solution
 with
 a Mikrotik bridged solution for delay/jitter?


 -Original Message-
 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
 Behalf Of Matt Liotta
 Sent: 13 June 2006 13:26
 To: WISPA General List
 Subject: Re: [WISPA] looking for a device

 Paul Hendry wrote:

We too have been looking at moving from routed to a switched Mikrotik for
the core network but the unknown quantity seems to be if there are any
latency or speed issues related to the move. A true switched network is
faster than a routed network as the switching is done at a hardware level
but in Mikrotik I

RE: [WISPA] looking for a device

2006-06-14 Thread Paul Hendry
So that's a no then Tom ;)

Using various bandwidth test tools (such as the one builtin to Mikrotik)
from/to multiple source/destinations you can generate all sorts of traffic
profiles. You can decide on the size of the packets, layer 4, direction and
even bandwidth so I'd say it's very possible to set-up a test environment
that isn't too far of real world. Anyone else tested?

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Tom DeReggi
Sent: 14 June 2006 03:13
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] looking for a device

 Anyone compared a routed solution with
 a Mikrotik bridged solution for delay/jitter?

Good question.  But the problem there is creating a real world test 
environment. Convergence, can be tested  somewhat accurately in low network 
utilization situations. To adequately test Jitter/Delay you really need to 
load the network, as that is when the jitter and sparatic latency happens.

Tom DeReggi
RapidDSL  Wireless, Inc
IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband

- Original Message - 
From: Paul Hendry [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: 'WISPA General List' wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Tuesday, June 13, 2006 9:02 AM
Subject: RE: [WISPA] looking for a device


 The delay in switching a packet at hardware is less than the delay in
 routing a packet at software. This is 1 of the reasons that Cisco created
 the GSR and why an MPLS switched network is fast than a plain routed
 network.

 I'm not too interested in convergence times as we only have very minimal
 outages so RSTP should suffice. How fast a packet can traverse our network
 on the other hand is important so that we can reliably run VoIP and other
 delay/jitter sensitive applications. Anyone compared a routed solution 
 with
 a Mikrotik bridged solution for delay/jitter?


 -Original Message-
 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
 Behalf Of Matt Liotta
 Sent: 13 June 2006 13:26
 To: WISPA General List
 Subject: Re: [WISPA] looking for a device

 Paul Hendry wrote:

We too have been looking at moving from routed to a switched Mikrotik for
the core network but the unknown quantity seems to be if there are any
latency or speed issues related to the move. A true switched network is
faster than a routed network as the switching is done at a hardware level
but in Mikrotik I believe both switching and routed is done in software.
What have you seen?



 Faster in what way? Certainly, a routed network is going to beat a
 switched network in terms of covergence speed.

 -Matt
 -- 
 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: 7.1.394 / Virus Database: 268.8.3/362 - Release Date: 12/06/2006


 -- 
 No virus found in this outgoing message.
 Checked by AVG Free Edition.
 Version: 7.1.394 / Virus Database: 268.8.3/362 - Release Date: 12/06/2006


 -- 
 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/

-- 
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.394 / Virus Database: 268.8.4/363 - Release Date: 13/06/2006
 

-- 
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.394 / Virus Database: 268.8.4/363 - Release Date: 13/06/2006
 

-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/


RE: [WISPA] looking for a device

2006-06-14 Thread Jeff Broadwick
We have Smartbits test gear...great stuff, but the fact is that you really don't
know how something will perform until you put it on real circuits and connect
it up to real gear.  You can get a very good idea, particularly if you know how
to test, but there is always an element of uncertainty.

Jeff 


Jeff Broadwick
ImageStream
800-813-5123 x106
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf
Of Paul Hendry
Sent: Wednesday, June 14, 2006 3:14 AM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: RE: [WISPA] looking for a device

So that's a no then Tom ;)

Using various bandwidth test tools (such as the one builtin to Mikrotik) from/to
multiple source/destinations you can generate all sorts of traffic profiles. You
can decide on the size of the packets, layer 4, direction and even bandwidth so
I'd say it's very possible to set-up a test environment that isn't too far of
real world. Anyone else tested?

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf
Of Tom DeReggi
Sent: 14 June 2006 03:13
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] looking for a device

 Anyone compared a routed solution with a Mikrotik bridged solution for 
 delay/jitter?

Good question.  But the problem there is creating a real world test environment.
Convergence, can be tested  somewhat accurately in low network utilization
situations. To adequately test Jitter/Delay you really need to load the network,
as that is when the jitter and sparatic latency happens.

Tom DeReggi
RapidDSL  Wireless, Inc
IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband

- Original Message -
From: Paul Hendry [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: 'WISPA General List' wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Tuesday, June 13, 2006 9:02 AM
Subject: RE: [WISPA] looking for a device


 The delay in switching a packet at hardware is less than the delay in
 routing a packet at software. This is 1 of the reasons that Cisco created
 the GSR and why an MPLS switched network is fast than a plain routed
 network.

 I'm not too interested in convergence times as we only have very minimal
 outages so RSTP should suffice. How fast a packet can traverse our network
 on the other hand is important so that we can reliably run VoIP and other
 delay/jitter sensitive applications. Anyone compared a routed solution 
 with
 a Mikrotik bridged solution for delay/jitter?


 -Original Message-
 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
 Behalf Of Matt Liotta
 Sent: 13 June 2006 13:26
 To: WISPA General List
 Subject: Re: [WISPA] looking for a device

 Paul Hendry wrote:

We too have been looking at moving from routed to a switched Mikrotik for
the core network but the unknown quantity seems to be if there are any
latency or speed issues related to the move. A true switched network is
faster than a routed network as the switching is done at a hardware level
but in Mikrotik I believe both switching and routed is done in software.
What have you seen?



 Faster in what way? Certainly, a routed network is going to beat a
 switched network in terms of covergence speed.

 -Matt
 -- 
 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: 7.1.394 / Virus Database: 268.8.3/362 - Release Date: 12/06/2006


 -- 
 No virus found in this outgoing message.
 Checked by AVG Free Edition.
 Version: 7.1.394 / Virus Database: 268.8.3/362 - Release Date: 12/06/2006


 -- 
 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/

-- 
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.394 / Virus Database: 268.8.4/363 - Release Date: 13/06/2006
 

-- 
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.394 / Virus Database: 268.8.4/363 - Release Date: 13/06/2006
 

-- 
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] looking for a device

2006-06-14 Thread Matt Liotta

Tom DeReggi wrote:

Answer #1: Thats debatable. Do you not recall year 2000. 26 of the 
largest 29 telecom companies filed for Bankruptcy.
Name brand ment bankrupt.  Even for Cisco! Lets not forget who the 
largest investor was in Cogent, now Cisco's owned network.


Back then folks were building companies with different understandings of 
the market than today; name brand gear had nothing to do with it. 
Certainly, plenty of open source companies didn't make it either.


There is some irony here.  I'm happy with Cogent. I put my confidence 
in Cogent a soley Cisco Name Brand equipment network.  Well for my 
backbone that is. Even though I religious have chosen a proprietary 
modification of Open Source on our local transport network. But 
Cogent's bankruptcy was highly due to not being able to afford their 
own Cisco equipment.  So moral of this story... USe Cisco when someone 
else pays for it, so they go bankrupt and not you.


That isn't the moral of the story; its not even a good story. Cogent was 
recently trading at a new 52-week high until they decided to raise 93 
million on a stock offering. I invested in Cogent when they were trading 
in the low $4s and sold around $10. I am quite happy with my return on 
investment. Would I be able to say that about your company? Don't answer 
that.


Investors look for companies that have a real opportunity to gain 
significant market share due to a competitive advantage. However, these 
same investors want to limit their risk by making sure the company in 
question doesn't risk too much. That means if you are going to be 
different than other telecom companies then pick and choose carefully 
what standards you follow and where you innovate.


Answer #2: Because people that can afford name brand have capitol and 
funding. And logically companies that have adequate capitol and 
funding often do better than companies that do not.  The missing peice 
of this puzzle is How well would a company with equivellent 
funding and capitol do if they chose Open Source instead?  I'd argue 
they'd be a stunning success.  The only difference is that they would 
be more likely to invest more in their employees than in their 
equipment vendors.  Possibly encourage migratation to an employee 
owned company, or where the wealth got spread more evenly between the 
participants.


No serious VC would invest in a telecom company that didn't use name 
brand gear for their network. It doesn't make any sense to do so. All in 
all the gear may be the same, but why take the extra risk. When it comes 
right down to it, name brand gear isn't that much more expensive. You 
should be able to make a business using name brand gear just fine.


I think you missed the boat on this topic. Large companies (well 
funded and capitolized) could do well with Open Source, because they 
are more likely to reach the economic proportion (growth) to spread 
the high cost of maintenance and software development between many 
subscibers. The providers that suffer from Open Source sometimes are 
the smaller ISPs. The reason is they under estimate the time involved 
in Open Source, and do not have enough scale (subscribers or revenue) 
to justify the costs of addative development.


Your last statement is the reason to avoid anything that is not your 
core competency. I have decades of software development experience, but 
we pay software vendors for things like CRM, accounting, case 
management, etc. Just because I could spend the time building software 
that would likely be better and cheaper than what we are using doesn't 
mean I should. My time is better spent building our business. Network 
gear, radio gear, software, etc are all just means to an end. We are in 
the business of selling a service; not building products.


-Matt

--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/


Re: [WISPA] looking for a device

2006-06-14 Thread Lonnie Nunweiler

Sure switched is faster than routed, if you have a 100 mbps cat5 or 1
gbps fibre network.  If you have a radio based network then routing or
switching will be about the same speed.  Our routed performance is
actually slightly higher than our bridged performance.

Lonnie

On 6/13/06, Paul Hendry [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

The delay in switching a packet at hardware is less than the delay in
routing a packet at software. This is 1 of the reasons that Cisco created
the GSR and why an MPLS switched network is fast than a plain routed
network.

I'm not too interested in convergence times as we only have very minimal
outages so RSTP should suffice. How fast a packet can traverse our network
on the other hand is important so that we can reliably run VoIP and other
delay/jitter sensitive applications. Anyone compared a routed solution with
a Mikrotik bridged solution for delay/jitter?


-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Matt Liotta
Sent: 13 June 2006 13:26
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] looking for a device

Paul Hendry wrote:

We too have been looking at moving from routed to a switched Mikrotik for
the core network but the unknown quantity seems to be if there are any
latency or speed issues related to the move. A true switched network is
faster than a routed network as the switching is done at a hardware level
but in Mikrotik I believe both switching and routed is done in software.
What have you seen?



Faster in what way? Certainly, a routed network is going to beat a
switched network in terms of covergence speed.

-Matt
--
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: 7.1.394 / Virus Database: 268.8.3/362 - Release Date: 12/06/2006


--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.394 / Virus Database: 268.8.3/362 - Release Date: 12/06/2006


--
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] looking for a device

2006-06-14 Thread Tom DeReggi
Yes the answer is not. But the question is one of great interest to me, and 
I'm interested in learning from others experience on the topic.


ON our network our biggest focus right now is to improve the methods to 
shorten time and improve acracy of diagnosing performance issue on a 
network.  We have great tools that help us find problems that other ISPs 
often don;t even realize exist becauyse they have limited their abilty to 
test their network based on how they designed it.  But it takes us way to 
long to conclusivelly come up with a diagnosis because their are so many 
possible places where failures could occurs to contribute to degregation. 
I'm not talking about major failures. I'm talking about reported problems 
like... Intermittent disconnects. Intermittent VOIP quality performance. 
Etc. (I am NOT saying that we have an overly large amount of problems, I'm 
just saying a large numbner of people report problems because networking is 
complicated and end users are under trained.). 95% of the time we can clear 
our name and prove that causes were related to issues off of our network. 
But it can take a lot of tiem to prove it. And if you don;t prove it, how do 
you know your network really is operating correctly.  So how does this 
problem apply to this thread?... Well, if I simplify my network, there will 
be fewer things to look at in the diagnosis process.  What simplications can 
be made, without compromising performance or abilty to trouble shoot the 
network conclusively?  These questions need to be asked when considering 
routing versus bridged. Do you consider the needs of your prospective 
clients, or your needs to better offer your core services? All things to be 
considered.


Right now we are both 100% routed and 95% VLANed.  It gives us a lot of 
power and security features. But I tell you it is a super management 
headache. I'm looking for ways to simplify. Do I go more towards Layer2 or 
more towards Layer3? Thats a question I'm looking at hard right now.


Tom DeReggi
RapidDSL  Wireless, Inc
IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband


- Original Message - 
From: Paul Hendry [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To: 'WISPA General List' wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Wednesday, June 14, 2006 3:14 AM
Subject: RE: [WISPA] looking for a device



So that's a no then Tom ;)

Using various bandwidth test tools (such as the one builtin to Mikrotik)
from/to multiple source/destinations you can generate all sorts of traffic
profiles. You can decide on the size of the packets, layer 4, direction 
and

even bandwidth so I'd say it's very possible to set-up a test environment
that isn't too far of real world. Anyone else tested?

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Tom DeReggi
Sent: 14 June 2006 03:13
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] looking for a device


Anyone compared a routed solution with
a Mikrotik bridged solution for delay/jitter?


Good question.  But the problem there is creating a real world test
environment. Convergence, can be tested  somewhat accurately in low 
network

utilization situations. To adequately test Jitter/Delay you really need to
load the network, as that is when the jitter and sparatic latency happens.

Tom DeReggi
RapidDSL  Wireless, Inc
IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband

- Original Message - 
From: Paul Hendry [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To: 'WISPA General List' wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Tuesday, June 13, 2006 9:02 AM
Subject: RE: [WISPA] looking for a device



The delay in switching a packet at hardware is less than the delay in
routing a packet at software. This is 1 of the reasons that Cisco created
the GSR and why an MPLS switched network is fast than a plain routed
network.

I'm not too interested in convergence times as we only have very minimal
outages so RSTP should suffice. How fast a packet can traverse our 
network

on the other hand is important so that we can reliably run VoIP and other
delay/jitter sensitive applications. Anyone compared a routed solution
with
a Mikrotik bridged solution for delay/jitter?


-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Matt Liotta
Sent: 13 June 2006 13:26
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] looking for a device

Paul Hendry wrote:


We too have been looking at moving from routed to a switched Mikrotik for
the core network but the unknown quantity seems to be if there are any
latency or speed issues related to the move. A true switched network is
faster than a routed network as the switching is done at a hardware level
but in Mikrotik I believe both switching and routed is done in software.
What have you seen?




Faster in what way? Certainly, a routed network is going to beat a
switched network in terms of covergence speed.

-Matt
--
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

Re: [WISPA] looking for a device

2006-06-13 Thread Matt Liotta

Charles Wu wrote:


It is worth noting that you lose the benefits of routing protocols when you
bridge your network

 

The above is the number one reason against using VLANs for layer 2 
transport. A second important issue to consider is management. Every 
device from end-to-end where you want to deliver layer 2 transport 
requires configuration if you use VLANs.


Both of the above issues are solved with MPLS. First, MPLS rides on top 
of your layer 3 network giving you all the benefits of routing 
protocols. Second, you only need to configure the edge device on either 
side of a layer 2 virtual circuit. All the devices in-between 
--including protection paths don't require additional configuration for 
each virtual circuit.


-Matt
--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/


RE: [WISPA] looking for a device

2006-06-13 Thread Paul Hendry
We too have been looking at moving from routed to a switched Mikrotik for
the core network but the unknown quantity seems to be if there are any
latency or speed issues related to the move. A true switched network is
faster than a routed network as the switching is done at a hardware level
but in Mikrotik I believe both switching and routed is done in software.
What have you seen?

P.

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of David Sovereen
Sent: 13 June 2006 04:12
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] looking for a device

We just completed converting our network from routed to bridged.  Where each

AP (we run Mikrotik) used to do its own DHCP and PPPoE to customers and 
speak OSPF to the network, the APs (still Mikrotik) now bridge traffic to a 
regional Mikrotik that handles PPPoE and DHCP for that region.  We are using

RSTP.  In this way, people can roam from one tower to another and their DHCP

lease is still good at the next tower.  A region for us to 3 to 4 counties.

We converted our first region about a month ago and finished the last one 
last weekend.  We're very pleased with the results so far.

Dave

- Original Message - 
From: Charles Wu [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: 'WISPA General List' wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Monday, June 12, 2006 9:22 PM
Subject: RE: [WISPA] looking for a device


It is worth noting that you lose the benefits of routing protocols when you
bridge your network

Sure, there's always RSTP... (heh)

Many larger wireless / Wifi based architecture these days seem to be
favoring a layer 3 tunneling / handoff method over a bridged layer 2 network

-Charles

---
CWLab
Technology Architects
http://www.cwlab.com



-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Tom DeReggi
Sent: Monday, June 12, 2006 5:30 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] looking for a device


To clarify

The term I referred to as Double VLAN is not the technically correct name
(thats just what I call it), it is actually called Q in Q as stated by
several in this thread.

One of the reasons this is valuable is for a wholesale network. It basically

allows you to create a single VLAN end to end across your network for a
subscriber or reseller, and still use VLAN for your local needs to operate
your network.

I'll give an example of where I might use VLAN for my network need. I have a

single fiber connection from the basement to the roof.  On the roof I have a

VLAN switch and 6 sector radios. I have a router in the basement.  I could
then seperate data between the different radio traffic by giving a unique
VLAN to the Ethernet port that each sector radio connects to, and route
between them in my basement router.

I'll give an example of where I'd use a VLAN end to end for a reseller.
Reseller has a connection between me and them at one point on my network.
The reseller might provide the backbone and IPs. The client routes the
customers traffic to a specific VLAN when entering my network. I then have
that VLAN configured across my network until reaches the end user's building

router that terminates the VLAN.

Now what happens when the resellers customer (example 2) resides in the
building (example 1)?  Normally two VLANs can't exist simultaneously as teh
switch wouldn;t know which ID to tag data with.  Q in Q VLAN would allow one

VLAN ID to reside in side of another VLAN.  Its the same concept as
tunnelling, except for its not.

Now how does this apply to radios that support Q in Q? Depends. Use your
imagination. The first problem is can the radio pass Q in Q VLAN data?
Second can it tag it? Being able to tag VLAN data at the radio level can be
extremely useful. First off it avoids having to configure a second device
(VLAN switch) that complicates the automation of configurations.  Part of
the Idea is that CLECs and Governement, are all high on Security, and they
do not want to have to coordinate complex IP models between their systems
and the wholesalers, instead they want to be able to send traffic LAyer2 and

seperate traffic so one client does not have the abilty to see the other
client's traffic.  Its sort of an Ethernet way of doing a Private Virtual
Circuit.

The only problem with VLAN is you need to have every component of you
network that passes VLANs to be able to pass large packets so Full MTU can
be delivered to clients. This is one of the limits to Wifi and regular
switches, is many Wifi devices and all non managed switches do not pass
large packets.

Radio like Trango and Alvarion (with Q in Q support) have the abilty to pass

large packets.

The other advantage of VLAN is that when used across a PtMP design and VLAN
support at CPE, it allows doing remote banwdith management based on the
customers circuit ID, and having a way to distinguish and differentiate the
data.

Q in Q, gives the provider flexibilty on how and when they would like to use

RE: [WISPA] looking for a device

2006-06-13 Thread Gino A. Villarini
Interesting, completely opposite of what is commonly preached 

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 David Sovereen
Sent: Monday, June 12, 2006 11:12 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] looking for a device

We just completed converting our network from routed to bridged.  Where each

AP (we run Mikrotik) used to do its own DHCP and PPPoE to customers and 
speak OSPF to the network, the APs (still Mikrotik) now bridge traffic to a 
regional Mikrotik that handles PPPoE and DHCP for that region.  We are using

RSTP.  In this way, people can roam from one tower to another and their DHCP

lease is still good at the next tower.  A region for us to 3 to 4 counties.

We converted our first region about a month ago and finished the last one 
last weekend.  We're very pleased with the results so far.

Dave

- Original Message - 
From: Charles Wu [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: 'WISPA General List' wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Monday, June 12, 2006 9:22 PM
Subject: RE: [WISPA] looking for a device


It is worth noting that you lose the benefits of routing protocols when you
bridge your network

Sure, there's always RSTP... (heh)

Many larger wireless / Wifi based architecture these days seem to be
favoring a layer 3 tunneling / handoff method over a bridged layer 2 network

-Charles

---
CWLab
Technology Architects
http://www.cwlab.com



-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Tom DeReggi
Sent: Monday, June 12, 2006 5:30 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] looking for a device


To clarify

The term I referred to as Double VLAN is not the technically correct name
(thats just what I call it), it is actually called Q in Q as stated by
several in this thread.

One of the reasons this is valuable is for a wholesale network. It basically

allows you to create a single VLAN end to end across your network for a
subscriber or reseller, and still use VLAN for your local needs to operate
your network.

I'll give an example of where I might use VLAN for my network need. I have a

single fiber connection from the basement to the roof.  On the roof I have a

VLAN switch and 6 sector radios. I have a router in the basement.  I could
then seperate data between the different radio traffic by giving a unique
VLAN to the Ethernet port that each sector radio connects to, and route
between them in my basement router.

I'll give an example of where I'd use a VLAN end to end for a reseller.
Reseller has a connection between me and them at one point on my network.
The reseller might provide the backbone and IPs. The client routes the
customers traffic to a specific VLAN when entering my network. I then have
that VLAN configured across my network until reaches the end user's building

router that terminates the VLAN.

Now what happens when the resellers customer (example 2) resides in the
building (example 1)?  Normally two VLANs can't exist simultaneously as teh
switch wouldn;t know which ID to tag data with.  Q in Q VLAN would allow one

VLAN ID to reside in side of another VLAN.  Its the same concept as
tunnelling, except for its not.

Now how does this apply to radios that support Q in Q? Depends. Use your
imagination. The first problem is can the radio pass Q in Q VLAN data?
Second can it tag it? Being able to tag VLAN data at the radio level can be
extremely useful. First off it avoids having to configure a second device
(VLAN switch) that complicates the automation of configurations.  Part of
the Idea is that CLECs and Governement, are all high on Security, and they
do not want to have to coordinate complex IP models between their systems
and the wholesalers, instead they want to be able to send traffic LAyer2 and

seperate traffic so one client does not have the abilty to see the other
client's traffic.  Its sort of an Ethernet way of doing a Private Virtual
Circuit.

The only problem with VLAN is you need to have every component of you
network that passes VLANs to be able to pass large packets so Full MTU can
be delivered to clients. This is one of the limits to Wifi and regular
switches, is many Wifi devices and all non managed switches do not pass
large packets.

Radio like Trango and Alvarion (with Q in Q support) have the abilty to pass

large packets.

The other advantage of VLAN is that when used across a PtMP design and VLAN
support at CPE, it allows doing remote banwdith management based on the
customers circuit ID, and having a way to distinguish and differentiate the
data.

Q in Q, gives the provider flexibilty on how and when they would like to use

VLAN and in multiple ways simultaneously.

Its uncertain how Q in Q will be used for sure, as VLAN does add much
complexity over say a basic bridged design.  Part of the benefit, is that
redundancy

Re: [WISPA] looking for a device

2006-06-13 Thread Matt Liotta

Paul Hendry wrote:


We too have been looking at moving from routed to a switched Mikrotik for
the core network but the unknown quantity seems to be if there are any
latency or speed issues related to the move. A true switched network is
faster than a routed network as the switching is done at a hardware level
but in Mikrotik I believe both switching and routed is done in software.
What have you seen?

 

Faster in what way? Certainly, a routed network is going to beat a 
switched network in terms of covergence speed.


-Matt
--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/


Re: [WISPA] looking for a device

2006-06-13 Thread David Sovereen
Hi Matt,

Actually, our testing and real-world experience shows that convergence is
faster in bridged RSTP network than it is in a routed OSPF network.

We ran OSPF on our wireless network, and still do on our wired network.
With default settings of a hello interval of 10 seconds and a dead router
interval of 40 seconds, recovery from an outage and need to re-route, as you
would expect, takes just over 40 seconds.  We run with quicker settings on
our network: a hello interval of 2 and a dead router interval of 12.  As
would be expected, recovery from an outage and need to re-route takes just
over 12 seconds.

Contrast that with our RSTP bridged network, where we broke a backhaul and
forced traffic to route around the outage.  The new route was 5 tower hops
longer than the primary route, and it took about 6 seconds for traffic to
move around the outage.

I haven't done tests using STP, only RSTP, and my understanding is that STP
is significantly slower.  In that case, you may be right.  Also, if you are
running a routing protocol other than OSPF, especially something that has
fast-reroute capabilities, you very well might do better with it than with
RSTP.  But in Mikrotik, OSPF and RSTP are your main options when discussing
dynamic routing versus dynamic bridging, and RSTP really does converge
quicker.

Dave

989-837-3790 x 151
989-837-3780 fax

[EMAIL PROTECTED]
www.mercury.net

129 Ashman St, Midland, MI  48640
- Original Message - 
From: Matt Liotta [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Tuesday, June 13, 2006 8:25 AM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] looking for a device


 Paul Hendry wrote:

 We too have been looking at moving from routed to a switched Mikrotik for
 the core network but the unknown quantity seems to be if there are any
 latency or speed issues related to the move. A true switched network is
 faster than a routed network as the switching is done at a hardware level
 but in Mikrotik I believe both switching and routed is done in software.
 What have you seen?
 
 
 
 Faster in what way? Certainly, a routed network is going to beat a
 switched network in terms of covergence speed.

 -Matt
 -- 
 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] looking for a device

2006-06-13 Thread Paul Hendry
The delay in switching a packet at hardware is less than the delay in
routing a packet at software. This is 1 of the reasons that Cisco created
the GSR and why an MPLS switched network is fast than a plain routed
network.

I'm not too interested in convergence times as we only have very minimal
outages so RSTP should suffice. How fast a packet can traverse our network
on the other hand is important so that we can reliably run VoIP and other
delay/jitter sensitive applications. Anyone compared a routed solution with
a Mikrotik bridged solution for delay/jitter?


-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Matt Liotta
Sent: 13 June 2006 13:26
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] looking for a device

Paul Hendry wrote:

We too have been looking at moving from routed to a switched Mikrotik for
the core network but the unknown quantity seems to be if there are any
latency or speed issues related to the move. A true switched network is
faster than a routed network as the switching is done at a hardware level
but in Mikrotik I believe both switching and routed is done in software.
What have you seen?

  

Faster in what way? Certainly, a routed network is going to beat a 
switched network in terms of covergence speed.

-Matt
-- 
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: 7.1.394 / Virus Database: 268.8.3/362 - Release Date: 12/06/2006
 

-- 
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.394 / Virus Database: 268.8.3/362 - Release Date: 12/06/2006
 

-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/


Re: [WISPA] looking for a device

2006-06-13 Thread David Sovereen
Hi Paul,

Regardless of whether you run routed or switched, the speed is about the
same.  Unlike a hardware switch that has special processors to handle
traffic at wire speeds, a 10GB/s backplane, etc, Mikrotik runs on
off-the-shelf PC hardware.  The processing power needed to get a packet from
port A to port B is about the same regardless of whether you route or
switch.

We haven't seen much of a performance difference between the two.  A link
that was 3 ms before seems to be 3 ms now.  A multi-hop link that was 6 ms
before seems to be about 6 ms now.

For us, the advantages were:

1.  Centralized customer management.  All DHCP and PPPoE handled at a single
point.  To make changes, we have only one place to visit.

2.  Ability to roam.  We run the same SSID on all towers and sectors.  Now
when people roam from one tower to another, their session will follow them
seamlessly.

3.  Reduced CPU and memory consumption on the Mikrotiks on towers.  NAT
(connection tracking) and PPPoE are especially CPU and memory intensive.
With each AP doing these functions, some of our busy towers were getting
pegged at 100% CPU -- not a good thing.  Those same towers are now averaging
25% CPU and never seem to go above 60% CPU.

4.  Get rid of Mikrotik's buggy OSPF.  We love OSPF and use it extensively
on our network.  But Mikrotik's OSPF implementation has been buggy since day
1 of RouterOS 2.9.  We found that OSPF worked reliably under RouterOS 2.8,
but under 2.9, we've seen boxes that have all neighbors and no routes, one
neighbor (itself) and no routes, no neighbors at all, reset continuously
(exstart/init sequence), etc.

Everyone's situation is different, but for us, it was definitely the right
decision to make.

Regards,

Dave

989-837-3790 x 151
989-837-3780 fax

[EMAIL PROTECTED]
www.mercury.net

129 Ashman St, Midland, MI  48640
- Original Message - 
From: Paul Hendry [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: 'WISPA General List' wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Tuesday, June 13, 2006 8:03 AM
Subject: RE: [WISPA] looking for a device


 We too have been looking at moving from routed to a switched Mikrotik for
 the core network but the unknown quantity seems to be if there are any
 latency or speed issues related to the move. A true switched network is
 faster than a routed network as the switching is done at a hardware level
 but in Mikrotik I believe both switching and routed is done in software.
 What have you seen?

 P.

 -Original Message-
 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
 Behalf Of David Sovereen
 Sent: 13 June 2006 04:12
 To: WISPA General List
 Subject: Re: [WISPA] looking for a device

 We just completed converting our network from routed to bridged.  Where
each

 AP (we run Mikrotik) used to do its own DHCP and PPPoE to customers and
 speak OSPF to the network, the APs (still Mikrotik) now bridge traffic to
a
 regional Mikrotik that handles PPPoE and DHCP for that region.  We are
using

 RSTP.  In this way, people can roam from one tower to another and their
DHCP

 lease is still good at the next tower.  A region for us to 3 to 4
counties.

 We converted our first region about a month ago and finished the last one
 last weekend.  We're very pleased with the results so far.

 Dave

 - Original Message - 
 From: Charles Wu [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 To: 'WISPA General List' wireless@wispa.org
 Sent: Monday, June 12, 2006 9:22 PM
 Subject: RE: [WISPA] looking for a device


 It is worth noting that you lose the benefits of routing protocols when
you
 bridge your network

 Sure, there's always RSTP... (heh)

 Many larger wireless / Wifi based architecture these days seem to be
 favoring a layer 3 tunneling / handoff method over a bridged layer 2
network

 -Charles

 ---
 CWLab
 Technology Architects
 http://www.cwlab.com



 -Original Message-
 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
 Behalf Of Tom DeReggi
 Sent: Monday, June 12, 2006 5:30 PM
 To: WISPA General List
 Subject: Re: [WISPA] looking for a device


 To clarify

 The term I referred to as Double VLAN is not the technically correct
name
 (thats just what I call it), it is actually called Q in Q as stated by
 several in this thread.

 One of the reasons this is valuable is for a wholesale network. It
basically

 allows you to create a single VLAN end to end across your network for a
 subscriber or reseller, and still use VLAN for your local needs to operate
 your network.

 I'll give an example of where I might use VLAN for my network need. I have
a

 single fiber connection from the basement to the roof.  On the roof I have
a

 VLAN switch and 6 sector radios. I have a router in the basement.  I could
 then seperate data between the different radio traffic by giving a unique
 VLAN to the Ethernet port that each sector radio connects to, and route
 between them in my basement router.

 I'll give an example of where I'd use a VLAN end to end for a reseller.
 Reseller has

Re: [WISPA] looking for a device

2006-06-13 Thread Tom DeReggi

favoring a layer 3 tunneling / handoff method


Care to elaborate on those methods.

Tom DeReggi
RapidDSL  Wireless, Inc
IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband


- Original Message - 
From: Charles Wu [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To: 'WISPA General List' wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Monday, June 12, 2006 9:22 PM
Subject: RE: [WISPA] looking for a device


It is worth noting that you lose the benefits of routing protocols when you
bridge your network

Sure, there's always RSTP... (heh)

Many larger wireless / Wifi based architecture these days seem to be
favoring a layer 3 tunneling / handoff method over a bridged layer 2 network

-Charles

---
CWLab
Technology Architects
http://www.cwlab.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] looking for a device

2006-06-13 Thread Tom DeReggi

Matt,

You brought up an excellent point regarding management gains with MPLS.
In many cases, I'd argue MPLS the preferable choice. But MPLS is not always 
a viable choice, that VLAN can deliver viably.
What I mean by that is... There is not yet a complete/stable/tried-and-true 
MPLS Open Source product on the market. (they exist but not recently updated 
or supported). Many providers have used Open Source to their advantage. 
Selecting MPLS may also mean migrating to a new foundation behind one's 
network. From Open Source to Name Brand.  I'm not saying thats a bad thing. 
I'm just saying it might be more than a provider wants to do to accomplish 
their goals.  VLAN allows an ISP to just drop it in. The trade off is a 
management headache.  These comments are meant as a very generalized 
comment, there are obvious many exceptions to the view..


Tom DeReggi
RapidDSL  Wireless, Inc
IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband


- Original Message - 
From: Matt Liotta [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Tuesday, June 13, 2006 7:58 AM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] looking for a device



Charles Wu wrote:

It is worth noting that you lose the benefits of routing protocols when 
you

bridge your network


The above is the number one reason against using VLANs for layer 2 
transport. A second important issue to consider is management. Every 
device from end-to-end where you want to deliver layer 2 transport 
requires configuration if you use VLANs.


Both of the above issues are solved with MPLS. First, MPLS rides on top of 
your layer 3 network giving you all the benefits of routing protocols. 
Second, you only need to configure the edge device on either side of a 
layer 2 virtual circuit. All the devices in-between --including protection 
paths don't require additional configuration for each virtual circuit.


-Matt
--
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] looking for a device

2006-06-13 Thread Tom DeReggi
How is it that companies who build their  network with expensive name brand 
gear often are more successful?


Answer #1: Thats debatable. Do you not recall year 2000. 26 of the largest 
29 telecom companies filed for Bankruptcy.
Name brand ment bankrupt.  Even for Cisco! Lets not forget who the largest 
investor was in Cogent, now Cisco's owned network.
There is some irony here.  I'm happy with Cogent. I put my confidence in 
Cogent a soley Cisco Name Brand equipment network.  Well for my backbone 
that is. Even though I religious have chosen a proprietary modification of 
Open Source on our local transport network. But Cogent's bankruptcy was 
highly due to not being able to afford their own Cisco equipment.  So moral 
of this story... USe Cisco when someone else pays for it, so they go 
bankrupt and not you.


Answer #2: Because people that can afford name brand have capitol and 
funding. And logically companies that have adequate capitol and funding 
often do better than companies that do not.  The missing peice of this 
puzzle is How well would a company with equivellent funding and capitol 
do if they chose Open Source instead?  I'd argue they'd be a stunning 
success.  The only difference is that they would be more likely to invest 
more in their employees than in their equipment vendors.  Possibly encourage 
migratation to an employee owned company, or where the wealth got spread 
more evenly between the participants.


I think you missed the boat on this topic. Large companies (well funded and 
capitolized) could do well with Open Source, because they are more likely to 
reach the economic proportion (growth) to spread the high cost of 
maintenance and software development between many subscibers. The providers 
that suffer from Open Source sometimes are the smaller ISPs. The reason is 
they under estimate the time involved in Open Source, and do not have enough 
scale (subscribers or revenue) to justify the costs of addative development.


Tom DeReggi
RapidDSL  Wireless, Inc
IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband


- Original Message - 
From: Matt Liotta [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Tuesday, June 13, 2006 9:21 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] looking for a device


I disagree that many providers have used open source to their  advantage. 
Certainly, many providers have used open source to save  money over 
competitors, but have they beaten those competitors using  their open 
source advantage? I'd suggest most have just squabbled  whatever cost 
advantage they had with open source due to errors in  their model 
elsewhere. How is it that companies who build their  network with expensive 
name brand gear often are more successful?


-Matt

On Jun 13, 2006, at 9:02 PM, Tom DeReggi wrote:


Matt,

You brought up an excellent point regarding management gains with  MPLS.
In many cases, I'd argue MPLS the preferable choice. But MPLS is  not 
always a viable choice, that VLAN can deliver viably.
What I mean by that is... There is not yet a complete/stable/tried- 
and-true MPLS Open Source product on the market. (they exist but  not 
recently updated or supported). Many providers have used Open  Source to 
their advantage. Selecting MPLS may also mean migrating  to a new 
foundation behind one's network. From Open Source to Name  Brand.  I'm 
not saying thats a bad thing. I'm just saying it might  be more than a 
provider wants to do to accomplish their goals.   VLAN allows an ISP to 
just drop it in. The trade off is a  management headache.  These comments 
are meant as a very  generalized comment, there are obvious many 
exceptions to the view..


Tom DeReggi
RapidDSL  Wireless, Inc
IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband


- Original Message - From: Matt Liotta [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Tuesday, June 13, 2006 7:58 AM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] looking for a device



Charles Wu wrote:

It is worth noting that you lose the benefits of routing  protocols 
when you

bridge your network


The above is the number one reason against using VLANs for layer 2 
transport. A second important issue to consider is management.  Every 
device from end-to-end where you want to deliver layer 2  transport 
requires configuration if you use VLANs.


Both of the above issues are solved with MPLS. First, MPLS rides  on top 
of your layer 3 network giving you all the benefits of  routing 
protocols. Second, you only need to configure the edge  device on either 
side of a layer 2 virtual circuit. All the  devices 
in-between --including protection paths don't require  additional 
configuration for each virtual circuit.


-Matt
--
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

Re: [WISPA] looking for a device

2006-06-13 Thread Tom DeReggi

Anyone compared a routed solution with
a Mikrotik bridged solution for delay/jitter?


Good question.  But the problem there is creating a real world test 
environment. Convergence, can be tested  somewhat accurately in low network 
utilization situations. To adequately test Jitter/Delay you really need to 
load the network, as that is when the jitter and sparatic latency happens.


Tom DeReggi
RapidDSL  Wireless, Inc
IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband

- Original Message - 
From: Paul Hendry [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To: 'WISPA General List' wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Tuesday, June 13, 2006 9:02 AM
Subject: RE: [WISPA] looking for a device



The delay in switching a packet at hardware is less than the delay in
routing a packet at software. This is 1 of the reasons that Cisco created
the GSR and why an MPLS switched network is fast than a plain routed
network.

I'm not too interested in convergence times as we only have very minimal
outages so RSTP should suffice. How fast a packet can traverse our network
on the other hand is important so that we can reliably run VoIP and other
delay/jitter sensitive applications. Anyone compared a routed solution 
with

a Mikrotik bridged solution for delay/jitter?


-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Matt Liotta
Sent: 13 June 2006 13:26
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] looking for a device

Paul Hendry wrote:


We too have been looking at moving from routed to a switched Mikrotik for
the core network but the unknown quantity seems to be if there are any
latency or speed issues related to the move. A true switched network is
faster than a routed network as the switching is done at a hardware level
but in Mikrotik I believe both switching and routed is done in software.
What have you seen?




Faster in what way? Certainly, a routed network is going to beat a
switched network in terms of covergence speed.

-Matt
--
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: 7.1.394 / Virus Database: 268.8.3/362 - Release Date: 12/06/2006


--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.394 / Virus Database: 268.8.3/362 - Release Date: 12/06/2006


--
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] looking for a device

2006-06-12 Thread Jeffrey Thomas
AirmatrixOS is not starOS and does offer vlans. Its its own web based OS.

You can order their stuff with starOS, but that's really only specific
custoemrs that order it anymore.

-

Jeff



On 6/8/06 10:03 PM, Tom DeReggi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 Airmatrix does VLAN but its uses StarOS, so it does VLAN the wrong way for
 some one trying to sell to carriers.
 If you sell to a carrier, they are going towant to be delivered a minimum of
 1500 MTU. StarOS can't do that with VLAN.
 However, if you didn;t need VLAN, Defacto does give EXCELLENT support.  And
 they ship ONTIME.  They aren't the cheapest, but they give the value you are
 looking for.
 
 Mikrotik is the preferred solution if you need to do VLAN. Wisp-Router also
 offers support.
 He's been in business now for atleast 10 years.  He may charge you by the
 minute, but not at a rate any higher than Cisco would charge you.
 
 Tom DeReggi
 RapidDSL  Wireless, Inc
 IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband
 
 
 - Original Message -
 From: Matt Liotta [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
 Sent: Thursday, June 08, 2006 2:00 PM
 Subject: Re: [WISPA] looking for a device
 
 
 I could be missing the product you are suggesting, but the only dual radio
 products I can find our base station products. I not looking for a base
 station, I am looking for something client facing. Further, I see no
 mention of VLAN support.
 
 -Matt
 
 jeffrey thomas wrote:
 
 Airmatrix can do that.
 
 www.defactowireless.com
 
 
 On Thu, 08 Jun 2006 13:17:30 -0400, Matt Liotta [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 said:
 
 I am looking for a device with the following requirements:
 
 * Can backhaul at 11Mbps operating in the 5.2Ghz band
 * Can support VLANs
 * Can assign a VLAN to one Ethernet port
 * Powered by PoE (the standard is not required)
 * Can act as a 2.4Ghz Wi-Fi access point assigned to a different VLAN
 than the Ethernet port
 * Everything in a single outdoor enclosure
 
 Any ideas?
 
 -Matt
 -- 
 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] looking for a device

2006-06-12 Thread Jeffrey Thomas
Lets say you are using vlans to not only segment traffic, but priortize
traffic as well. So a double tagged vlan, would give you the ability to
create  A vlan for segmentation and a VLAN within that vlan for
priortization, for additional segmentation as well.


I could be wrong though.

-

Jeff


On 6/9/06 7:50 AM, Butch Evans [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 On Fri, 9 Jun 2006, John Scrivner wrote:
 
 Can you or someone explain what double VLAN is? I have never heard of such a
 thing. How can it be used to help us?
 
 Not having read the entire thread, I'm assuming the term double
 VLAN refers to the ability to create a VLAN (or many) that each
 have VLANs inside them.  There are some places where this may be
 needed, but it can get to be an extremely complex network.


-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/


Re: [WISPA] looking for a device

2006-06-12 Thread Tom DeReggi

To clarify

The term I referred to as Double VLAN is not the technically correct name 
(thats just what I call it), it is actually called Q in Q as stated by 
several in this thread.


One of the reasons this is valuable is for a wholesale network. It basically 
allows you to create a single VLAN end to end across your network for a 
subscriber or reseller, and still use VLAN for your local needs to operate 
your network.


I'll give an example of where I might use VLAN for my network need. I have a 
single fiber connection from the basement to the roof.  On the roof I have a 
VLAN switch and 6 sector radios. I have a router in the basement.  I could 
then seperate data between the different radio traffic by giving a unique 
VLAN to the Ethernet port that each sector radio connects to, and route 
between them in my basement router.


I'll give an example of where I'd use a VLAN end to end for a reseller. 
Reseller has a connection between me and them at one point on my network. 
The reseller might provide the backbone and IPs. The client routes the 
customers traffic to a specific VLAN when entering my network. I then have 
that VLAN configured across my network until reaches the end user's building 
router that terminates the VLAN.


Now what happens when the resellers customer (example 2) resides in the 
building (example 1)?  Normally two VLANs can't exist simultaneously as teh 
switch wouldn;t know which ID to tag data with.  Q in Q VLAN would allow one 
VLAN ID to reside in side of another VLAN.  Its the same concept as 
tunnelling, except for its not.


Now how does this apply to radios that support Q in Q? Depends. Use your 
imagination. The first problem is can the radio pass Q in Q VLAN data? 
Second can it tag it? Being able to tag VLAN data at the radio level can be 
extremely useful. First off it avoids having to configure a second device 
(VLAN switch) that complicates the automation of configurations.  Part of 
the Idea is that CLECs and Governement, are all high on Security, and they 
do not want to have to coordinate complex IP models between their systems 
and the wholesalers, instead they want to be able to send traffic LAyer2 and 
seperate traffic so one client does not have the abilty to see the other 
client's traffic.  Its sort of an Ethernet way of doing a Private Virtual 
Circuit.


The only problem with VLAN is you need to have every component of you 
network that passes VLANs to be able to pass large packets so Full MTU can 
be delivered to clients. This is one of the limits to Wifi and regular 
switches, is many Wifi devices and all non managed switches do not pass 
large packets.


Radio like Trango and Alvarion (with Q in Q support) have the abilty to pass 
large packets.


The other advantage of VLAN is that when used across a PtMP design and VLAN 
support at CPE, it allows doing remote banwdith management based on the 
customers circuit ID, and having a way to distinguish and differentiate the 
data.


Q in Q, gives the provider flexibilty on how and when they would like to use 
VLAN and in multiple ways simultaneously.


Its uncertain how Q in Q will be used for sure, as VLAN does add much 
complexity over say a basic bridged design.  Part of the benefit, is that 
redundancy is not always supported in an ideal way when VLAN is used. By 
allowing a VLAN end to end encapsulated in the other packets, it potentially 
could allow avoiding the pitfalls that limit redundancy by having the end 
locations (the reseller and the client) the one tagging  the VLAN and 
knowing that that VLAN info survives any other VLAN tagging that may happen 
on the network, or for that matter abilty for that data to route across 
paths that are not technically that VLAN assignment on the other layer.  I'm 
not explaining this clearly, but that is the gist of it.


The end result is, if a provider's whole network supports Q in Q, it allows 
them to compete with other fiber Metro-E services.


Many believe that the design of the future for Metro deployments is to run 
MPLS at the edge devices, and then Q in Q VLAN inside the Metro Ethernet 
rings.  The key ideas here is abilty to creaetequivelent of virtual circuits 
of Ethernet.


Tom DeReggi
RapidDSL  Wireless, Inc
IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband


- Original Message - 
From: Charles Wu [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To: 'WISPA General List' wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Friday, June 09, 2006 11:33 AM
Subject: RE: [WISPA] looking for a device


I think Jon is asking about the double VLAN -- or a q in q
implementation
It's extremely useful for creating virtual bridged customer networks

-Charles

---
CWLab
Technology Architects
http://www.cwlab.com



-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Rick Harnish
Sent: Friday, June 09, 2006 9:10 AM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: RE: [WISPA] looking for a device


Virtual LAN.  Imagine segregating segments of your

Re: [WISPA] looking for a device

2006-06-12 Thread Tom DeReggi
Q in Q, means that the provider does not need to remove his VLAN tags. The 
customer's VLAN tags can survive teh VLAN tags that the provider adds.
Customer has VLAN 10.  Provider tags VLAN20 on top, crosses network as 
VLAN20 data, Provider untags VLAN20 data, packet delivered to customer on 
VLAN10 (as customer tagged it originally).


An example of where its useful is... What if a customer has multiple 
locations in a Wide Area PtMP topology, and wants the data seperated? What 
if the Customer is another term for a wholesaler's reseller ISP? It gives 
the customer/reseller the abilty to segment with VLANs, without respect to 
what the provider may need to do with VLAN themselves.


This example is a little different than My last post, as noth VLAN taggers 
may have their VLAN IDs pass multiple network segments. But the poitn is, it 
doesn;t matter how dual VLANs are used, the flexibilty is there for a 
Provider to take advantage of however they feel fit.


Tom DeReggi
RapidDSL  Wireless, Inc
IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband


- Original Message - 
From: Eric Rogers [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Friday, June 09, 2006 12:51 PM
Subject: RE: [WISPA] looking for a device


It is also referred as 802.1q tagging... If it supports multiple layers,
you can have a customer VLAN tags within your network VLAN tags.  Just
need your equipment that takes off your tags before it gets to the
customer.

ATT uses the Cisco 3750 switches to do it at the customer's premises.
Then the customer can have VLAN 10 at one location and VLAN 10 at
another, and it is completely transparent to the end user.

If that made sense.

Eric

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Charles Wu
Sent: Friday, June 09, 2006 11:34 AM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: RE: [WISPA] looking for a device

Google (or Cisco) is your friend

http://www.cisco.com/en/US/products/sw/iosswrel/ps5207/products_feature_
guid
e09186a00801f0f4a.html

-Charles

---
CWLab
Technology Architects
http://www.cwlab.com



-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of John Scrivner
Sent: Friday, June 09, 2006 8:39 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] looking for a device


Can you or someone explain what double VLAN is? I have never heard of
such a thing. How can it be used to help us?
Thanks,
Scriv



Yo may want to look at Alvarion. Alvarion does support VLAN. new
Firmware4 supports double VLAN also.
Alvarion used to have one model that was designed to have a second
integrated radio into it.
I can't remember if it was a 900/2.4 combo, or a 5.8/2.4 combo.


--
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/ 


--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/


Re: [WISPA] looking for a device

2006-06-12 Thread Tom DeReggi
MPLS is atricky thing to define as MPLS has many components and features, 
depending on what features you want.
The biggest benefit of MPLS is it is a labeling system.  Each packet gets 
labeled with a class, and that class can include many variables 
(destination, source, packet type/port, customer name, a few others, etc). 
This label is integrated into the packet and follows it.  What you do with 
that label data depends. MPLS also includes components for distributing 
instruvtion on how to handle the various classes to its neighbors and 
routers across the network, as well how to have that labeling survive 
differnt network types (ATM, EThernet, Sonet). MPLS also has a VPN 
tunnelling feature, most advantageous because its abilty to survive 
dissimilar networks.


Many Believe Q in Q is a replacement for MPLS for local Metro Ethernet 
networks. VLANs are different in the sense that each packet may be tagged 
with a VLAN ID, but it also requires manual configuration of every switch 
that it crosses. So you physically map out the VLANs path via the Switch 
configuration.  Or atleast, at what point the VLAN Switch stripps the tag 
and retags it. But this is defined per ethernet port across your network.


One of the benefits of VLAN, is that it is widely supported by many many 
many in place devices. And there are just a few simple bits changed in the 
header of each packet at Layer 2. So it is VERY fast. ZERO degregation to 
delivery of packet thats getting tagged and untagged.  You can now buy 
Layer2 managed (VLAN) 100 mbps 24 pot switches for $160. (SMC).


MPLS is more involved because you now have to have more expensive routers 
and MPLS enabled devices. Its a big redesign to add MPLS. One of the reasons 
people only use it at the edge where it is most appropriate to use for large 
providers. A MPLS does nothing unless there is a router configured with a 
decission process on what to do with specific class packets. Its not just 
about the circuit ID. MPLS can forward it to a priority queue for example to 
control QOS.


But what one learns is that Ethernet is also starting to get QOS features 
added, without MPLS required, and there are many third party solutions like 
Diff Serv that can be integrated with VLAns to get addequate results for one 
network design to deliver QOS.


Mikrotik EoIP, not exactly sure.  I know it has significantly more over head 
on the packet than VLAN, wasting bandwidth. BUt I'd like to learn more about 
what EoIP is.


I think the most valuable technology of the three for WISPs depends on which 
ones get implemented into radios. We gain ease and power, when the features 
are added to the radios.  One of the things that gives MPLS a disadvantage 
is that there is not a good reliable open source version of it yet. VLAN is 
solid on OPEN source.  You want a technology that works on your routers and 
your radios both.  MPLS is more complex and needs more processing power and 
code than just VLAN so less likely to be added to radio firmwares.


I am no way dismissing MPLS, I'm just saying committing to MPLS may mean 
commiting to name brand routers and such.  MPLS is more powerful and ideal 
in many ways, but if you do not require all the features you can accomplish 
many of the things using alternate solutions that can be delivered today.


Tom DeReggi
RapidDSL  Wireless, Inc
IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband


- Original Message - 
From: John Scrivner [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Friday, June 09, 2006 3:06 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] looking for a device


Thanks to all for the double VLAN explanation. That makes perfect sense to 
me now.


Can anyone describe any functional and/or technical differences between 
VLANs and say MPLS or Mikrotik's EoIP? It sounds to me like all three are 
functional equivalents of each other. Please correct me if this is an 
incorrect assumption. I have Googled it so spare me the obvious. I want to 
hear your thoughts.

Thanks,
Scriv


Eric Rogers wrote:


It is also referred as 802.1q tagging... If it supports multiple layers,
you can have a customer VLAN tags within your network VLAN tags.  Just
need your equipment that takes off your tags before it gets to the
customer.

ATT uses the Cisco 3750 switches to do it at the customer's premises.
Then the customer can have VLAN 10 at one location and VLAN 10 at
another, and it is completely transparent to the end user.

If that made sense.

Eric

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Charles Wu
Sent: Friday, June 09, 2006 11:34 AM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: RE: [WISPA] looking for a device

Google (or Cisco) is your friend

http://www.cisco.com/en/US/products/sw/iosswrel/ps5207/products_feature_
guid
e09186a00801f0f4a.html

-Charles

---
CWLab
Technology Architects
http://www.cwlab.com


-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL

Re: [WISPA] looking for a device

2006-06-12 Thread Tom DeReggi
Is the AirMAtrix stuff you are specifying, are you referring to their MESH 
implemetation, or is that also different?


Tom DeReggi
RapidDSL  Wireless, Inc
IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband


- Original Message - 
From: Jeffrey Thomas [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Monday, June 12, 2006 3:02 AM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] looking for a device



AirmatrixOS is not starOS and does offer vlans. Its its own web based OS.

You can order their stuff with starOS, but that's really only specific
custoemrs that order it anymore.

-

Jeff



On 6/8/06 10:03 PM, Tom DeReggi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

Airmatrix does VLAN but its uses StarOS, so it does VLAN the wrong way 
for

some one trying to sell to carriers.
If you sell to a carrier, they are going towant to be delivered a minimum 
of

1500 MTU. StarOS can't do that with VLAN.
However, if you didn;t need VLAN, Defacto does give EXCELLENT support. 
And
they ship ONTIME.  They aren't the cheapest, but they give the value you 
are

looking for.

Mikrotik is the preferred solution if you need to do VLAN. Wisp-Router 
also

offers support.
He's been in business now for atleast 10 years.  He may charge you by the
minute, but not at a rate any higher than Cisco would charge you.

Tom DeReggi
RapidDSL  Wireless, Inc
IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband


- Original Message -
From: Matt Liotta [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Thursday, June 08, 2006 2:00 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] looking for a device


I could be missing the product you are suggesting, but the only dual 
radio

products I can find our base station products. I not looking for a base
station, I am looking for something client facing. Further, I see no
mention of VLAN support.

-Matt

jeffrey thomas wrote:


Airmatrix can do that.

www.defactowireless.com


On Thu, 08 Jun 2006 13:17:30 -0400, Matt Liotta [EMAIL PROTECTED]
said:


I am looking for a device with the following requirements:

* Can backhaul at 11Mbps operating in the 5.2Ghz band
* Can support VLANs
* Can assign a VLAN to one Ethernet port
* Powered by PoE (the standard is not required)
* Can act as a 2.4Ghz Wi-Fi access point assigned to a different VLAN
than the Ethernet port
* Everything in a single outdoor enclosure

Any ideas?

-Matt
--
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/ 


--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/


Re: [WISPA] looking for a device

2006-06-12 Thread Tom DeReggi

Jeff,

Yes that is yet another clever way to use Q in Q VLANs.

Tom DeReggi
RapidDSL  Wireless, Inc
IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband


- Original Message - 
From: Jeffrey Thomas [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Monday, June 12, 2006 3:06 AM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] looking for a device



Lets say you are using vlans to not only segment traffic, but priortize
traffic as well. So a double tagged vlan, would give you the ability to
create  A vlan for segmentation and a VLAN within that vlan for
priortization, for additional segmentation as well.


I could be wrong though.

-

Jeff


On 6/9/06 7:50 AM, Butch Evans [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:


On Fri, 9 Jun 2006, John Scrivner wrote:

Can you or someone explain what double VLAN is? I have never heard of 
such a

thing. How can it be used to help us?


Not having read the entire thread, I'm assuming the term double
VLAN refers to the ability to create a VLAN (or many) that each
have VLANs inside them.  There are some places where this may be
needed, but it can get to be an extremely complex network.



--
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] looking for a device

2006-06-12 Thread Charles Wu
It is worth noting that you lose the benefits of routing protocols when you
bridge your network

Sure, there's always RSTP... (heh)

Many larger wireless / Wifi based architecture these days seem to be
favoring a layer 3 tunneling / handoff method over a bridged layer 2 network

-Charles

---
CWLab
Technology Architects
http://www.cwlab.com 



-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Tom DeReggi
Sent: Monday, June 12, 2006 5:30 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] looking for a device


To clarify

The term I referred to as Double VLAN is not the technically correct name 
(thats just what I call it), it is actually called Q in Q as stated by 
several in this thread.

One of the reasons this is valuable is for a wholesale network. It basically

allows you to create a single VLAN end to end across your network for a 
subscriber or reseller, and still use VLAN for your local needs to operate 
your network.

I'll give an example of where I might use VLAN for my network need. I have a

single fiber connection from the basement to the roof.  On the roof I have a

VLAN switch and 6 sector radios. I have a router in the basement.  I could 
then seperate data between the different radio traffic by giving a unique 
VLAN to the Ethernet port that each sector radio connects to, and route 
between them in my basement router.

I'll give an example of where I'd use a VLAN end to end for a reseller. 
Reseller has a connection between me and them at one point on my network. 
The reseller might provide the backbone and IPs. The client routes the 
customers traffic to a specific VLAN when entering my network. I then have 
that VLAN configured across my network until reaches the end user's building

router that terminates the VLAN.

Now what happens when the resellers customer (example 2) resides in the 
building (example 1)?  Normally two VLANs can't exist simultaneously as teh 
switch wouldn;t know which ID to tag data with.  Q in Q VLAN would allow one

VLAN ID to reside in side of another VLAN.  Its the same concept as 
tunnelling, except for its not.

Now how does this apply to radios that support Q in Q? Depends. Use your 
imagination. The first problem is can the radio pass Q in Q VLAN data? 
Second can it tag it? Being able to tag VLAN data at the radio level can be 
extremely useful. First off it avoids having to configure a second device 
(VLAN switch) that complicates the automation of configurations.  Part of 
the Idea is that CLECs and Governement, are all high on Security, and they 
do not want to have to coordinate complex IP models between their systems 
and the wholesalers, instead they want to be able to send traffic LAyer2 and

seperate traffic so one client does not have the abilty to see the other 
client's traffic.  Its sort of an Ethernet way of doing a Private Virtual 
Circuit.

The only problem with VLAN is you need to have every component of you 
network that passes VLANs to be able to pass large packets so Full MTU can 
be delivered to clients. This is one of the limits to Wifi and regular 
switches, is many Wifi devices and all non managed switches do not pass 
large packets.

Radio like Trango and Alvarion (with Q in Q support) have the abilty to pass

large packets.

The other advantage of VLAN is that when used across a PtMP design and VLAN 
support at CPE, it allows doing remote banwdith management based on the 
customers circuit ID, and having a way to distinguish and differentiate the 
data.

Q in Q, gives the provider flexibilty on how and when they would like to use

VLAN and in multiple ways simultaneously.

Its uncertain how Q in Q will be used for sure, as VLAN does add much 
complexity over say a basic bridged design.  Part of the benefit, is that 
redundancy is not always supported in an ideal way when VLAN is used. By 
allowing a VLAN end to end encapsulated in the other packets, it potentially

could allow avoiding the pitfalls that limit redundancy by having the end 
locations (the reseller and the client) the one tagging  the VLAN and 
knowing that that VLAN info survives any other VLAN tagging that may happen 
on the network, or for that matter abilty for that data to route across 
paths that are not technically that VLAN assignment on the other layer.  I'm

not explaining this clearly, but that is the gist of it.

The end result is, if a provider's whole network supports Q in Q, it allows 
them to compete with other fiber Metro-E services.

Many believe that the design of the future for Metro deployments is to run 
MPLS at the edge devices, and then Q in Q VLAN inside the Metro Ethernet 
rings.  The key ideas here is abilty to creaetequivelent of virtual circuits

of Ethernet.

Tom DeReggi
RapidDSL  Wireless, Inc
IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband


- Original Message - 
From: Charles Wu [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: 'WISPA General List' wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Friday, June

RE: [WISPA] looking for a device

2006-06-12 Thread Charles Wu
snip
Q in Q, means that the provider does not need to remove his VLAN tags. The 
customer's VLAN tags can survive teh VLAN tags that the provider adds.
Customer has VLAN 10.  Provider tags VLAN20 on top, crosses network as 
VLAN20 data, Provider untags VLAN20 data, packet delivered to customer on 
VLAN10 (as customer tagged it originally).
/snip

A better example of the benefits of QnQ is customer / provider VLAN tagging
conflicts
For example

Say the customer wants to pass VLAN#2 between 2 remote offices going through
your network -- problem is, VLAN#2 happens to be your management VLAN -- so
if you want to bridge the VLAN across your network, it won't work correctly
unless someone (either you or the customer) gives up the VLAN#2 tag.  QnQ
solves this issue by encapsalating the customer VLAN (in this case, #2) in
some arbitrarily assigned VLAN tag on the provider network

That said, it seems like tunneling would be an easier solution...e.g L2TP or
if you're a Mikrotik fan, EoIP

-Charles

---
CWLab
Technology Architects
http://www.cwlab.com 



-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Tom DeReggi
Sent: Monday, June 12, 2006 5:36 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] looking for a device




An example of where its useful is... What if a customer has multiple 
locations in a Wide Area PtMP topology, and wants the data seperated? What 
if the Customer is another term for a wholesaler's reseller ISP? It gives 
the customer/reseller the abilty to segment with VLANs, without respect to 
what the provider may need to do with VLAN themselves.

This example is a little different than My last post, as noth VLAN taggers 
may have their VLAN IDs pass multiple network segments. But the poitn is, it

doesn;t matter how dual VLANs are used, the flexibilty is there for a 
Provider to take advantage of however they feel fit.

Tom DeReggi
RapidDSL  Wireless, Inc
IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband


- Original Message - 
From: Eric Rogers [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Friday, June 09, 2006 12:51 PM
Subject: RE: [WISPA] looking for a device


It is also referred as 802.1q tagging... If it supports multiple layers, you
can have a customer VLAN tags within your network VLAN tags.  Just need your
equipment that takes off your tags before it gets to the customer.

ATT uses the Cisco 3750 switches to do it at the customer's premises. Then
the customer can have VLAN 10 at one location and VLAN 10 at another, and it
is completely transparent to the end user.

If that made sense.

Eric

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Charles Wu
Sent: Friday, June 09, 2006 11:34 AM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: RE: [WISPA] looking for a device

Google (or Cisco) is your friend

http://www.cisco.com/en/US/products/sw/iosswrel/ps5207/products_feature_
guid
e09186a00801f0f4a.html

-Charles

---
CWLab
Technology Architects
http://www.cwlab.com



-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of John Scrivner
Sent: Friday, June 09, 2006 8:39 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] looking for a device


Can you or someone explain what double VLAN is? I have never heard of such a
thing. How can it be used to help us? Thanks, Scriv


 Yo may want to look at Alvarion. Alvarion does support VLAN. new 
 Firmware4 supports double VLAN also. Alvarion used to have one model 
 that was designed to have a second integrated radio into it.
 I can't remember if it was a 900/2.4 combo, or a 5.8/2.4 combo.

-- 
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/ 

-- 
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] looking for a device

2006-06-12 Thread David Sovereen
We just completed converting our network from routed to bridged.  Where each 
AP (we run Mikrotik) used to do its own DHCP and PPPoE to customers and 
speak OSPF to the network, the APs (still Mikrotik) now bridge traffic to a 
regional Mikrotik that handles PPPoE and DHCP for that region.  We are using 
RSTP.  In this way, people can roam from one tower to another and their DHCP 
lease is still good at the next tower.  A region for us to 3 to 4 counties.


We converted our first region about a month ago and finished the last one 
last weekend.  We're very pleased with the results so far.


Dave

- Original Message - 
From: Charles Wu [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To: 'WISPA General List' wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Monday, June 12, 2006 9:22 PM
Subject: RE: [WISPA] looking for a device


It is worth noting that you lose the benefits of routing protocols when you
bridge your network

Sure, there's always RSTP... (heh)

Many larger wireless / Wifi based architecture these days seem to be
favoring a layer 3 tunneling / handoff method over a bridged layer 2 network

-Charles

---
CWLab
Technology Architects
http://www.cwlab.com



-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Tom DeReggi
Sent: Monday, June 12, 2006 5:30 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] looking for a device


To clarify

The term I referred to as Double VLAN is not the technically correct name
(thats just what I call it), it is actually called Q in Q as stated by
several in this thread.

One of the reasons this is valuable is for a wholesale network. It basically

allows you to create a single VLAN end to end across your network for a
subscriber or reseller, and still use VLAN for your local needs to operate
your network.

I'll give an example of where I might use VLAN for my network need. I have a

single fiber connection from the basement to the roof.  On the roof I have a

VLAN switch and 6 sector radios. I have a router in the basement.  I could
then seperate data between the different radio traffic by giving a unique
VLAN to the Ethernet port that each sector radio connects to, and route
between them in my basement router.

I'll give an example of where I'd use a VLAN end to end for a reseller.
Reseller has a connection between me and them at one point on my network.
The reseller might provide the backbone and IPs. The client routes the
customers traffic to a specific VLAN when entering my network. I then have
that VLAN configured across my network until reaches the end user's building

router that terminates the VLAN.

Now what happens when the resellers customer (example 2) resides in the
building (example 1)?  Normally two VLANs can't exist simultaneously as teh
switch wouldn;t know which ID to tag data with.  Q in Q VLAN would allow one

VLAN ID to reside in side of another VLAN.  Its the same concept as
tunnelling, except for its not.

Now how does this apply to radios that support Q in Q? Depends. Use your
imagination. The first problem is can the radio pass Q in Q VLAN data?
Second can it tag it? Being able to tag VLAN data at the radio level can be
extremely useful. First off it avoids having to configure a second device
(VLAN switch) that complicates the automation of configurations.  Part of
the Idea is that CLECs and Governement, are all high on Security, and they
do not want to have to coordinate complex IP models between their systems
and the wholesalers, instead they want to be able to send traffic LAyer2 and

seperate traffic so one client does not have the abilty to see the other
client's traffic.  Its sort of an Ethernet way of doing a Private Virtual
Circuit.

The only problem with VLAN is you need to have every component of you
network that passes VLANs to be able to pass large packets so Full MTU can
be delivered to clients. This is one of the limits to Wifi and regular
switches, is many Wifi devices and all non managed switches do not pass
large packets.

Radio like Trango and Alvarion (with Q in Q support) have the abilty to pass

large packets.

The other advantage of VLAN is that when used across a PtMP design and VLAN
support at CPE, it allows doing remote banwdith management based on the
customers circuit ID, and having a way to distinguish and differentiate the
data.

Q in Q, gives the provider flexibilty on how and when they would like to use

VLAN and in multiple ways simultaneously.

Its uncertain how Q in Q will be used for sure, as VLAN does add much
complexity over say a basic bridged design.  Part of the benefit, is that
redundancy is not always supported in an ideal way when VLAN is used. By
allowing a VLAN end to end encapsulated in the other packets, it potentially

could allow avoiding the pitfalls that limit redundancy by having the end
locations (the reseller and the client) the one tagging  the VLAN and
knowing that that VLAN info survives any other VLAN tagging that may happen
on the network

RE: layer 2 transport (was Re: [WISPA] looking for a device)

2006-06-10 Thread Paul Hendry
VLAN's aren't implemented using (R)STP. (R)STP is just used to prevent
layer2 loops where as VLAN's are used to separate traffic at layer 2 into
separate broadcast domains.

VLAN's are layer 2 so you need a flat network to implement them which means
there are scalability issues. Because they are layer 2 it means the traffic
is switched instead of routed which is normally quicker as a switched
network is normally done in hardware (ASICs).

EoIP will create a layer 2 topology over a routed network which means you
can implement a flat vlan network across the public internet if you wanted
however it adds overhead to each packet as the traffic is tunneled which
effects the available bandwidth. It is also slower than VLAN's as it's not
true layer2.

MPLS is designed to switch traffic quickly through the use of a label or
shim instead of routing based on IP address. It offers speed, scalability
and functionality and has built-in support for multicast, QoS, VPN's, many
routing protocols such as BGP and OSPF.

Each have there place but it depends on the application and scale of the
project.

Cheers,

P.

www.skyline-networks.com



-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Matt Liotta
Sent: 09 June 2006 21:18
To: WISPA General List
Subject: layer 2 transport (was Re: [WISPA] looking for a device)

John Scrivner wrote:

 Can anyone describe any functional and/or technical differences 
 between VLANs and say MPLS or Mikrotik's EoIP? It sounds to me like 
 all three are functional equivalents of each other. Please correct me 
 if this is an incorrect assumption. I have Googled it so spare me the 
 obvious. I want to hear your thoughts.
 Thanks,
 Scriv

VLANs are implemented using (R)STP and they were generally described 
earlier. (R)STP is a broadcast protocol that allows multiple layer 2 
devices to among other things be connected redundantly without causing 
loops. Thus, you can create a rather large and complex network where 
individual layer 2 networks share infrastructure, but are separated from 
each other. This is used by some carriers to sell layer 2 transport, 
which is basically a single VLAN that is trunked across the network.

VLANs are not an ideal way to deal with layer 2 transport for several 
reasons. First, STP is very slow to deal with link state changes. Worse, 
STP networks get slower the larger they are. RSTP fixes some of these 
issues with STP, but convergence time is still too slow for most 
applications. Next, VLANs must be properly configured across the all 
devices that might be involved in the circuits delivery. Failure to 
properly configure the VLANs can result in your entire network failing 
as the links are saturated with (R)STP broadcasts. Finally, there is a 
finite limit on the number of VLANs you can have on any given Ethernet 
network.

MPLS can provide layer 2 transport just like VLANs, but without all the 
above problems. However, MPLS is not limited to layer 2 transport. MPLS 
allows for transport of many protocols from Ethernet to ATM to IP. 
Further, MPLS TE allows for enforcement of SLAs in regards to latency, 
jitter, and QoS. Most interestingly though, MPLS rides on top of an IP 
network allowing all the benefits of a redundant IP network including 
sub-second convergence.

-Matt
-- 
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: 7.1.394 / Virus Database: 268.8.3/359 - Release Date: 08/06/2006
 

-- 
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.394 / Virus Database: 268.8.3/360 - Release Date: 09/06/2006
 

-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/


Re: [WISPA] looking for a device

2006-06-09 Thread John Scrivner
Can you or someone explain what double VLAN is? I have never heard of 
such a thing. How can it be used to help us?

Thanks,
Scriv



Yo may want to look at Alvarion. Alvarion does support VLAN. new 
Firmware4 supports double VLAN also.
Alvarion used to have one model that was designed to have a second 
integrated radio into it.

I can't remember if it was a 900/2.4 combo, or a 5.8/2.4 combo.


--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/


RE: [WISPA] looking for a device

2006-06-09 Thread Rick Harnish
Virtual LAN.  Imagine segregating segments of your network across a backhaul
pipe so that they flow together but don't actually see each other.  Managed
switches have the ability to create VLANs per port.  Think of it as a merger
between routing and switching.  Its a pipe or several inside a pipe.  Tried
to be simple here, I'm sure someone else can give you a more technical
description.

Rick Harnish
President
OnlyInternet Broadband  Wireless, Inc.
260-827-2482 Office
260-307-4000 Cell
260-918-4340 VoIP
www.oibw.net
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 
  
 


-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of John Scrivner
Sent: Friday, June 09, 2006 9:39 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] looking for a device

Can you or someone explain what double VLAN is? I have never heard of 
such a thing. How can it be used to help us?
Thanks,
Scriv


 Yo may want to look at Alvarion. Alvarion does support VLAN. new 
 Firmware4 supports double VLAN also.
 Alvarion used to have one model that was designed to have a second 
 integrated radio into it.
 I can't remember if it was a 900/2.4 combo, or a 5.8/2.4 combo.

-- 
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] looking for a device

2006-06-09 Thread John Scrivner
I understand VLAN. I have just never heard of double VLAN before. 
Thanks for the well written explanation of VLAN though. You did a nice job!

:-)
Scriv


Rick Harnish wrote:


Virtual LAN.  Imagine segregating segments of your network across a backhaul
pipe so that they flow together but don't actually see each other.  Managed
switches have the ability to create VLANs per port.  Think of it as a merger
between routing and switching.  Its a pipe or several inside a pipe.  Tried
to be simple here, I'm sure someone else can give you a more technical
description.

Rick Harnish
President
OnlyInternet Broadband  Wireless, Inc.
260-827-2482 Office
260-307-4000 Cell
260-918-4340 VoIP
www.oibw.net
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

 




-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of John Scrivner
Sent: Friday, June 09, 2006 9:39 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] looking for a device

Can you or someone explain what double VLAN is? I have never heard of 
such a thing. How can it be used to help us?

Thanks,
Scriv

 

Yo may want to look at Alvarion. Alvarion does support VLAN. new 
Firmware4 supports double VLAN also.
Alvarion used to have one model that was designed to have a second 
integrated radio into it.

I can't remember if it was a 900/2.4 combo, or a 5.8/2.4 combo.

   


--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/


Re: [WISPA] looking for a device

2006-06-09 Thread Matt Liotta

QinQ?

-Matt

John Scrivner wrote:

Can you or someone explain what double VLAN is? I have never heard of 
such a thing. How can it be used to help us?

Thanks,
Scriv



Yo may want to look at Alvarion. Alvarion does support VLAN. new 
Firmware4 supports double VLAN also.
Alvarion used to have one model that was designed to have a second 
integrated radio into it.

I can't remember if it was a 900/2.4 combo, or a 5.8/2.4 combo.



--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/


Re: [WISPA] looking for a device

2006-06-09 Thread Carl A Jeptha
that sounds nice, now what price are we looking at and how small and 
what temp range??
I would be ver happy if I could reach all of my microcells 
remotely and contain each one from affecting any of the others with it's 
problems.


You have a Good Day now,


Carl A Jeptha
http://www.airnet.ca
office 905 349-2084
Emergency only Pager 905 377-6900
skype cajeptha



Rick Harnish wrote:

Virtual LAN.  Imagine segregating segments of your network across a backhaul
pipe so that they flow together but don't actually see each other.  Managed
switches have the ability to create VLANs per port.  Think of it as a merger
between routing and switching.  Its a pipe or several inside a pipe.  Tried
to be simple here, I'm sure someone else can give you a more technical
description.

Rick Harnish
President
OnlyInternet Broadband  Wireless, Inc.
260-827-2482 Office
260-307-4000 Cell
260-918-4340 VoIP
www.oibw.net
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 
  
 



-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of John Scrivner
Sent: Friday, June 09, 2006 9:39 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] looking for a device

Can you or someone explain what double VLAN is? I have never heard of 
such a thing. How can it be used to help us?

Thanks,
Scriv

  
Yo may want to look at Alvarion. Alvarion does support VLAN. new 
Firmware4 supports double VLAN also.
Alvarion used to have one model that was designed to have a second 
integrated radio into it.

I can't remember if it was a 900/2.4 combo, or a 5.8/2.4 combo.



--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/


RE: [WISPA] looking for a device

2006-06-09 Thread Charles Wu
I think Jon is asking about the double VLAN -- or a q in q
implementation
It's extremely useful for creating virtual bridged customer networks

-Charles

---
CWLab
Technology Architects
http://www.cwlab.com 



-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Rick Harnish
Sent: Friday, June 09, 2006 9:10 AM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: RE: [WISPA] looking for a device


Virtual LAN.  Imagine segregating segments of your network across a backhaul
pipe so that they flow together but don't actually see each other.  Managed
switches have the ability to create VLANs per port.  Think of it as a merger
between routing and switching.  Its a pipe or several inside a pipe.  Tried
to be simple here, I'm sure someone else can give you a more technical
description.

Rick Harnish
President
OnlyInternet Broadband  Wireless, Inc.
260-827-2482 Office
260-307-4000 Cell
260-918-4340 VoIP
www.oibw.net
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 
  
 


-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of John Scrivner
Sent: Friday, June 09, 2006 9:39 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] looking for a device

Can you or someone explain what double VLAN is? I have never heard of 
such a thing. How can it be used to help us?
Thanks,
Scriv


 Yo may want to look at Alvarion. Alvarion does support VLAN. new
 Firmware4 supports double VLAN also.
 Alvarion used to have one model that was designed to have a second 
 integrated radio into it.
 I can't remember if it was a 900/2.4 combo, or a 5.8/2.4 combo.

-- 
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] looking for a device

2006-06-09 Thread Charles Wu
Google (or Cisco) is your friend

http://www.cisco.com/en/US/products/sw/iosswrel/ps5207/products_feature_guid
e09186a00801f0f4a.html

-Charles

---
CWLab
Technology Architects
http://www.cwlab.com 



-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of John Scrivner
Sent: Friday, June 09, 2006 8:39 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] looking for a device


Can you or someone explain what double VLAN is? I have never heard of 
such a thing. How can it be used to help us?
Thanks,
Scriv


 Yo may want to look at Alvarion. Alvarion does support VLAN. new
 Firmware4 supports double VLAN also.
 Alvarion used to have one model that was designed to have a second 
 integrated radio into it.
 I can't remember if it was a 900/2.4 combo, or a 5.8/2.4 combo.

-- 
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] looking for a device

2006-06-09 Thread Eric Rogers
It is also referred as 802.1q tagging... If it supports multiple layers,
you can have a customer VLAN tags within your network VLAN tags.  Just
need your equipment that takes off your tags before it gets to the
customer.

ATT uses the Cisco 3750 switches to do it at the customer's premises.
Then the customer can have VLAN 10 at one location and VLAN 10 at
another, and it is completely transparent to the end user.

If that made sense.

Eric

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Charles Wu
Sent: Friday, June 09, 2006 11:34 AM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: RE: [WISPA] looking for a device

Google (or Cisco) is your friend

http://www.cisco.com/en/US/products/sw/iosswrel/ps5207/products_feature_
guid
e09186a00801f0f4a.html

-Charles

---
CWLab
Technology Architects
http://www.cwlab.com 



-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of John Scrivner
Sent: Friday, June 09, 2006 8:39 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] looking for a device


Can you or someone explain what double VLAN is? I have never heard of 
such a thing. How can it be used to help us?
Thanks,
Scriv


 Yo may want to look at Alvarion. Alvarion does support VLAN. new
 Firmware4 supports double VLAN also.
 Alvarion used to have one model that was designed to have a second 
 integrated radio into it.
 I can't remember if it was a 900/2.4 combo, or a 5.8/2.4 combo.

-- 
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] looking for a device

2006-06-09 Thread Brad Belton
MikroTik supports this, correct?

Best,

Brad

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Eric Rogers
Sent: Friday, June 09, 2006 11:52 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: RE: [WISPA] looking for a device

It is also referred as 802.1q tagging... If it supports multiple layers,
you can have a customer VLAN tags within your network VLAN tags.  Just
need your equipment that takes off your tags before it gets to the
customer.

ATT uses the Cisco 3750 switches to do it at the customer's premises.
Then the customer can have VLAN 10 at one location and VLAN 10 at
another, and it is completely transparent to the end user.

If that made sense.

Eric

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Charles Wu
Sent: Friday, June 09, 2006 11:34 AM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: RE: [WISPA] looking for a device

Google (or Cisco) is your friend

http://www.cisco.com/en/US/products/sw/iosswrel/ps5207/products_feature_
guid
e09186a00801f0f4a.html

-Charles

---
CWLab
Technology Architects
http://www.cwlab.com 



-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of John Scrivner
Sent: Friday, June 09, 2006 8:39 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] looking for a device


Can you or someone explain what double VLAN is? I have never heard of 
such a thing. How can it be used to help us?
Thanks,
Scriv


 Yo may want to look at Alvarion. Alvarion does support VLAN. new
 Firmware4 supports double VLAN also.
 Alvarion used to have one model that was designed to have a second 
 integrated radio into it.
 I can't remember if it was a 900/2.4 combo, or a 5.8/2.4 combo.

-- 
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/

-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/


Re: [WISPA] looking for a device

2006-06-09 Thread John Scrivner
Thanks to all for the double VLAN explanation. That makes perfect sense 
to me now.


Can anyone describe any functional and/or technical differences between 
VLANs and say MPLS or Mikrotik's EoIP? It sounds to me like all three 
are functional equivalents of each other. Please correct me if this is 
an incorrect assumption. I have Googled it so spare me the obvious. I 
want to hear your thoughts.

Thanks,
Scriv


Eric Rogers wrote:


It is also referred as 802.1q tagging... If it supports multiple layers,
you can have a customer VLAN tags within your network VLAN tags.  Just
need your equipment that takes off your tags before it gets to the
customer.

ATT uses the Cisco 3750 switches to do it at the customer's premises.
Then the customer can have VLAN 10 at one location and VLAN 10 at
another, and it is completely transparent to the end user.

If that made sense.

Eric

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Charles Wu
Sent: Friday, June 09, 2006 11:34 AM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: RE: [WISPA] looking for a device

Google (or Cisco) is your friend

http://www.cisco.com/en/US/products/sw/iosswrel/ps5207/products_feature_
guid
e09186a00801f0f4a.html

-Charles

---
CWLab
Technology Architects
http://www.cwlab.com 




-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of John Scrivner
Sent: Friday, June 09, 2006 8:39 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] looking for a device


Can you or someone explain what double VLAN is? I have never heard of 
such a thing. How can it be used to help us?

Thanks,
Scriv

 


Yo may want to look at Alvarion. Alvarion does support VLAN. new
Firmware4 supports double VLAN also.
Alvarion used to have one model that was designed to have a second 
integrated radio into it.

I can't remember if it was a 900/2.4 combo, or a 5.8/2.4 combo.

   


--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/


Re: [WISPA] looking for a device

2006-06-09 Thread David E. Smith
John Scrivner wrote:

 Can anyone describe any functional and/or technical differences between
 VLANs and say MPLS or Mikrotik's EoIP? It sounds to me like all three
 are functional equivalents of each other. Please correct me if this is
 an incorrect assumption. I have Googled it so spare me the obvious. I
 want to hear your thoughts.

Quick dummified and (probably) wrong synopsis:

VLANs generally will only work on the same network segment, and the VLAN
tags would have to be recreated if you cross a router. Think of it as a
way to turn one big switch into several little switches, and a fancy way
to interconnect different switches.

MPLS circumvents the segment boundary limits, but every router along the
way has to support it.

EOIP basically creates a VPN-like tunnel between two points.

They're all conceptually related, in that they're different ways to try
to make two remote locations transparently appear to be part of the same
network domain, but they solve different problems in different ways.

David Smith
MVN.net
-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/


layer 2 transport (was Re: [WISPA] looking for a device)

2006-06-09 Thread Matt Liotta

John Scrivner wrote:

Can anyone describe any functional and/or technical differences 
between VLANs and say MPLS or Mikrotik's EoIP? It sounds to me like 
all three are functional equivalents of each other. Please correct me 
if this is an incorrect assumption. I have Googled it so spare me the 
obvious. I want to hear your thoughts.

Thanks,
Scriv

VLANs are implemented using (R)STP and they were generally described 
earlier. (R)STP is a broadcast protocol that allows multiple layer 2 
devices to among other things be connected redundantly without causing 
loops. Thus, you can create a rather large and complex network where 
individual layer 2 networks share infrastructure, but are separated from 
each other. This is used by some carriers to sell layer 2 transport, 
which is basically a single VLAN that is trunked across the network.


VLANs are not an ideal way to deal with layer 2 transport for several 
reasons. First, STP is very slow to deal with link state changes. Worse, 
STP networks get slower the larger they are. RSTP fixes some of these 
issues with STP, but convergence time is still too slow for most 
applications. Next, VLANs must be properly configured across the all 
devices that might be involved in the circuits delivery. Failure to 
properly configure the VLANs can result in your entire network failing 
as the links are saturated with (R)STP broadcasts. Finally, there is a 
finite limit on the number of VLANs you can have on any given Ethernet 
network.


MPLS can provide layer 2 transport just like VLANs, but without all the 
above problems. However, MPLS is not limited to layer 2 transport. MPLS 
allows for transport of many protocols from Ethernet to ATM to IP. 
Further, MPLS TE allows for enforcement of SLAs in regards to latency, 
jitter, and QoS. Most interestingly though, MPLS rides on top of an IP 
network allowing all the benefits of a redundant IP network including 
sub-second convergence.


-Matt
--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/


[WISPA] looking for a device

2006-06-08 Thread Matt Liotta

I am looking for a device with the following requirements:

* Can backhaul at 11Mbps operating in the 5.2Ghz band
* Can support VLANs
* Can assign a VLAN to one Ethernet port
* Powered by PoE (the standard is not required)
* Can act as a 2.4Ghz Wi-Fi access point assigned to a different VLAN 
than the Ethernet port

* Everything in a single outdoor enclosure

Any ideas?

-Matt
--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/


Re: [WISPA] looking for a device

2006-06-08 Thread Sam Tetherow
Mikrotik on a routerboard 532 should do the trick although I haven't 
messed with the VLAN stuff.
I am not a StarOS user, but I would bet that a StarOS setup on either a 
WRAP or WAR board would work

as well.

   Sam Tetherow
   Sandhills Wireless

Matt Liotta wrote:


I am looking for a device with the following requirements:

* Can backhaul at 11Mbps operating in the 5.2Ghz band
* Can support VLANs
* Can assign a VLAN to one Ethernet port
* Powered by PoE (the standard is not required)
* Can act as a 2.4Ghz Wi-Fi access point assigned to a different VLAN 
than the Ethernet port

* Everything in a single outdoor enclosure

Any ideas?

-Matt



--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/


RE: [WISPA] looking for a device

2006-06-08 Thread Rick Smith

uhh, mikrotik w/SR2, SR5, 5 gig antenna for backhaul and 2.4 omni on the
other... 

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Matt Liotta
Sent: Thursday, June 08, 2006 1:18 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: [WISPA] looking for a device

I am looking for a device with the following requirements:

* Can backhaul at 11Mbps operating in the 5.2Ghz band
* Can support VLANs
* Can assign a VLAN to one Ethernet port
* Powered by PoE (the standard is not required)
* Can act as a 2.4Ghz Wi-Fi access point assigned to a different VLAN
than the Ethernet port
* Everything in a single outdoor enclosure

Any ideas?

-Matt
--
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] looking for a device

2006-06-08 Thread Matt Liotta
I am looking for a device I can buy that does all of this out of the 
box. I don't want to build my own since I need 30-40 of them in the next 
30 days.


-Matt

Sam Tetherow wrote:

Mikrotik on a routerboard 532 should do the trick although I haven't 
messed with the VLAN stuff.
I am not a StarOS user, but I would bet that a StarOS setup on either 
a WRAP or WAR board would work

as well.

   Sam Tetherow
   Sandhills Wireless

Matt Liotta wrote:


I am looking for a device with the following requirements:

* Can backhaul at 11Mbps operating in the 5.2Ghz band
* Can support VLANs
* Can assign a VLAN to one Ethernet port
* Powered by PoE (the standard is not required)
* Can act as a 2.4Ghz Wi-Fi access point assigned to a different VLAN 
than the Ethernet port

* Everything in a single outdoor enclosure

Any ideas?

-Matt






--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/


Re: [WISPA] looking for a device

2006-06-08 Thread Sam Tetherow
If you order it all from wisp-router they will assemble it for your so 
you would get a die-cast case with the RB mounted the radios and 
pigtails installed.  All you would need to do is set up the software end 
of things, which could be done with a script once you have the initial 
setup done.  One thing to note, I have not ordered 5Ghz pigtails from 
wisp-router in quite sometime, but the last time I did order them, their 
quality was questionable.


I would bet if you went the WRAP/StarOS route wisp-router would do the 
same.  No idea on other vendors or the WAR boards as I have never 
ordered them.


   Sam Tetherow
   Sandhills Wireless

Matt Liotta wrote:

I am looking for a device I can buy that does all of this out of the 
box. I don't want to build my own since I need 30-40 of them in the 
next 30 days.


-Matt

Sam Tetherow wrote:

Mikrotik on a routerboard 532 should do the trick although I haven't 
messed with the VLAN stuff.
I am not a StarOS user, but I would bet that a StarOS setup on either 
a WRAP or WAR board would work

as well.

   Sam Tetherow
   Sandhills Wireless

Matt Liotta wrote:


I am looking for a device with the following requirements:

* Can backhaul at 11Mbps operating in the 5.2Ghz band
* Can support VLANs
* Can assign a VLAN to one Ethernet port
* Powered by PoE (the standard is not required)
* Can act as a 2.4Ghz Wi-Fi access point assigned to a different 
VLAN than the Ethernet port

* Everything in a single outdoor enclosure

Any ideas?

-Matt









--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/


Re: [WISPA] looking for a device

2006-06-08 Thread jeffrey thomas
Airmatrix can do that.

www.defactowireless.com


On Thu, 08 Jun 2006 13:17:30 -0400, Matt Liotta [EMAIL PROTECTED]
said:
 I am looking for a device with the following requirements:
 
 * Can backhaul at 11Mbps operating in the 5.2Ghz band
 * Can support VLANs
 * Can assign a VLAN to one Ethernet port
 * Powered by PoE (the standard is not required)
 * Can act as a 2.4Ghz Wi-Fi access point assigned to a different VLAN 
 than the Ethernet port
 * Everything in a single outdoor enclosure
 
 Any ideas?
 
 -Matt
 -- 
 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] looking for a device

2006-06-08 Thread Matt Liotta
I understand you are suggesting I wouldn't have to psychically build the 
devices, but that isn't what I am worried about. I want an off-the-shelf 
product that is supported by a vendor. That includes it being pre-built, 
software installed, and support available.


-Matt

Sam Tetherow wrote:

If you order it all from wisp-router they will assemble it for your so 
you would get a die-cast case with the RB mounted the radios and 
pigtails installed.  All you would need to do is set up the software 
end of things, which could be done with a script once you have the 
initial setup done.  One thing to note, I have not ordered 5Ghz 
pigtails from wisp-router in quite sometime, but the last time I did 
order them, their quality was questionable.


I would bet if you went the WRAP/StarOS route wisp-router would do the 
same.  No idea on other vendors or the WAR boards as I have never 
ordered them.


   Sam Tetherow
   Sandhills Wireless

Matt Liotta wrote:

I am looking for a device I can buy that does all of this out of the 
box. I don't want to build my own since I need 30-40 of them in the 
next 30 days.


-Matt

Sam Tetherow wrote:

Mikrotik on a routerboard 532 should do the trick although I haven't 
messed with the VLAN stuff.
I am not a StarOS user, but I would bet that a StarOS setup on 
either a WRAP or WAR board would work

as well.

   Sam Tetherow
   Sandhills Wireless

Matt Liotta wrote:


I am looking for a device with the following requirements:

* Can backhaul at 11Mbps operating in the 5.2Ghz band
* Can support VLANs
* Can assign a VLAN to one Ethernet port
* Powered by PoE (the standard is not required)
* Can act as a 2.4Ghz Wi-Fi access point assigned to a different 
VLAN than the Ethernet port

* Everything in a single outdoor enclosure

Any ideas?

-Matt












--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/


Re: [WISPA] looking for a device

2006-06-08 Thread jeffrey thomas
Fyi everyone, wrap boards have been discontinued


On Thu, 08 Jun 2006 12:45:00 -0500, Sam Tetherow [EMAIL PROTECTED]
said:
 If you order it all from wisp-router they will assemble it for your so 
 you would get a die-cast case with the RB mounted the radios and 
 pigtails installed.  All you would need to do is set up the software end 
 of things, which could be done with a script once you have the initial 
 setup done.  One thing to note, I have not ordered 5Ghz pigtails from 
 wisp-router in quite sometime, but the last time I did order them, their 
 quality was questionable.
 
 I would bet if you went the WRAP/StarOS route wisp-router would do the 
 same.  No idea on other vendors or the WAR boards as I have never 
 ordered them.
 
 Sam Tetherow
 Sandhills Wireless
 
 Matt Liotta wrote:
 
  I am looking for a device I can buy that does all of this out of the 
  box. I don't want to build my own since I need 30-40 of them in the 
  next 30 days.
 
  -Matt
 
  Sam Tetherow wrote:
 
  Mikrotik on a routerboard 532 should do the trick although I haven't 
  messed with the VLAN stuff.
  I am not a StarOS user, but I would bet that a StarOS setup on either 
  a WRAP or WAR board would work
  as well.
 
 Sam Tetherow
 Sandhills Wireless
 
  Matt Liotta wrote:
 
  I am looking for a device with the following requirements:
 
  * Can backhaul at 11Mbps operating in the 5.2Ghz band
  * Can support VLANs
  * Can assign a VLAN to one Ethernet port
  * Powered by PoE (the standard is not required)
  * Can act as a 2.4Ghz Wi-Fi access point assigned to a different 
  VLAN than the Ethernet port
  * Everything in a single outdoor enclosure
 
  Any ideas?
 
  -Matt
 
 
 
 
 
 
 -- 
 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] looking for a device

2006-06-08 Thread Matt Liotta
I could be missing the product you are suggesting, but the only dual 
radio products I can find our base station products. I not looking for a 
base station, I am looking for something client facing. Further, I see 
no mention of VLAN support.


-Matt

jeffrey thomas wrote:


Airmatrix can do that.

www.defactowireless.com


On Thu, 08 Jun 2006 13:17:30 -0400, Matt Liotta [EMAIL PROTECTED]
said:
 


I am looking for a device with the following requirements:

* Can backhaul at 11Mbps operating in the 5.2Ghz band
* Can support VLANs
* Can assign a VLAN to one Ethernet port
* Powered by PoE (the standard is not required)
* Can act as a 2.4Ghz Wi-Fi access point assigned to a different VLAN 
than the Ethernet port

* Everything in a single outdoor enclosure

Any ideas?

-Matt
--
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] looking for a device

2006-06-08 Thread George Rogato

Lonnie sells his war in a rootenna waiting to go.
Support is offered via the online forums.

George

Matt Liotta wrote:
I understand you are suggesting I wouldn't have to psychically build the 
devices, but that isn't what I am worried about. I want an off-the-shelf 
product that is supported by a vendor. That includes it being pre-built, 
software installed, and support available.


-Matt

Sam Tetherow wrote:

If you order it all from wisp-router they will assemble it for your so 
you would get a die-cast case with the RB mounted the radios and 
pigtails installed.  All you would need to do is set up the software 
end of things, which could be done with a script once you have the 
initial setup done.  One thing to note, I have not ordered 5Ghz 
pigtails from wisp-router in quite sometime, but the last time I did 
order them, their quality was questionable.


I would bet if you went the WRAP/StarOS route wisp-router would do the 
same.  No idea on other vendors or the WAR boards as I have never 
ordered them.


   Sam Tetherow
   Sandhills Wireless

Matt Liotta wrote:

I am looking for a device I can buy that does all of this out of the 
box. I don't want to build my own since I need 30-40 of them in the 
next 30 days.


-Matt

Sam Tetherow wrote:

Mikrotik on a routerboard 532 should do the trick although I haven't 
messed with the VLAN stuff.
I am not a StarOS user, but I would bet that a StarOS setup on 
either a WRAP or WAR board would work

as well.

   Sam Tetherow
   Sandhills Wireless

Matt Liotta wrote:


I am looking for a device with the following requirements:

* Can backhaul at 11Mbps operating in the 5.2Ghz band
* Can support VLANs
* Can assign a VLAN to one Ethernet port
* Powered by PoE (the standard is not required)
* Can act as a 2.4Ghz Wi-Fi access point assigned to a different 
VLAN than the Ethernet port

* Everything in a single outdoor enclosure

Any ideas?

-Matt















--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/


Re: [WISPA] looking for a device

2006-06-08 Thread George Rogato
I have to take that back. I'm not so sure they are already assembled and 
ready to go.

They might fall under some assembly required

Maybe Lonnie can tell us.

George

George Rogato wrote:

Lonnie sells his war in a rootenna waiting to go.
Support is offered via the online forums.

George

Matt Liotta wrote:
I understand you are suggesting I wouldn't have to psychically build 
the devices, but that isn't what I am worried about. I want an 
off-the-shelf product that is supported by a vendor. That includes it 
being pre-built, software installed, and support available.


-Matt

Sam Tetherow wrote:

If you order it all from wisp-router they will assemble it for your 
so you would get a die-cast case with the RB mounted the radios and 
pigtails installed.  All you would need to do is set up the software 
end of things, which could be done with a script once you have the 
initial setup done.  One thing to note, I have not ordered 5Ghz 
pigtails from wisp-router in quite sometime, but the last time I did 
order them, their quality was questionable.


I would bet if you went the WRAP/StarOS route wisp-router would do 
the same.  No idea on other vendors or the WAR boards as I have never 
ordered them.


   Sam Tetherow
   Sandhills Wireless

Matt Liotta wrote:

I am looking for a device I can buy that does all of this out of the 
box. I don't want to build my own since I need 30-40 of them in the 
next 30 days.


-Matt

Sam Tetherow wrote:

Mikrotik on a routerboard 532 should do the trick although I 
haven't messed with the VLAN stuff.
I am not a StarOS user, but I would bet that a StarOS setup on 
either a WRAP or WAR board would work

as well.

   Sam Tetherow
   Sandhills Wireless

Matt Liotta wrote:


I am looking for a device with the following requirements:

* Can backhaul at 11Mbps operating in the 5.2Ghz band
* Can support VLANs
* Can assign a VLAN to one Ethernet port
* Powered by PoE (the standard is not required)
* Can act as a 2.4Ghz Wi-Fi access point assigned to a different 
VLAN than the Ethernet port

* Everything in a single outdoor enclosure

Any ideas?

-Matt


















--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/


Re: [WISPA] looking for a device

2006-06-08 Thread Matt Liotta
I would expect the devices to cost somewhere between $300 and $600 each. 
As far as support goes, I would expect it to be similar to other low 
cost radio vendors like Trango, etc.


-Matt

Sam Tetherow wrote:


What are you willing to pay and what are your support requirements?

   Sam Tetherow
   Sandhills Wireless

Matt Liotta wrote:

I understand you are suggesting I wouldn't have to psychically build 
the devices, but that isn't what I am worried about. I want an 
off-the-shelf product that is supported by a vendor. That includes it 
being pre-built, software installed, and support available.


-Matt

Sam Tetherow wrote:

If you order it all from wisp-router they will assemble it for your 
so you would get a die-cast case with the RB mounted the radios and 
pigtails installed.  All you would need to do is set up the software 
end of things, which could be done with a script once you have the 
initial setup done.  One thing to note, I have not ordered 5Ghz 
pigtails from wisp-router in quite sometime, but the last time I did 
order them, their quality was questionable.


I would bet if you went the WRAP/StarOS route wisp-router would do 
the same.  No idea on other vendors or the WAR boards as I have 
never ordered them.


   Sam Tetherow
   Sandhills Wireless

Matt Liotta wrote:

I am looking for a device I can buy that does all of this out of 
the box. I don't want to build my own since I need 30-40 of them in 
the next 30 days.


-Matt

Sam Tetherow wrote:

Mikrotik on a routerboard 532 should do the trick although I 
haven't messed with the VLAN stuff.
I am not a StarOS user, but I would bet that a StarOS setup on 
either a WRAP or WAR board would work

as well.

   Sam Tetherow
   Sandhills Wireless

Matt Liotta wrote:


I am looking for a device with the following requirements:

* Can backhaul at 11Mbps operating in the 5.2Ghz band
* Can support VLANs
* Can assign a VLAN to one Ethernet port
* Powered by PoE (the standard is not required)
* Can act as a 2.4Ghz Wi-Fi access point assigned to a different 
VLAN than the Ethernet port

* Everything in a single outdoor enclosure

Any ideas?

-Matt


















--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/


Re: [WISPA] looking for a device

2006-06-08 Thread KyWiFi LLC
Discontinued by Wisp-Router.com or all vendors? There's no
mention of this on http://www.pcengines.ch Where did you hear
this? I recall hearing that the chipset used on the current WRAP
platform has been discontinued but to my knowledge, there is a
replacement chipset available which will be used on future batches
of WRAP boards.


Shannon D. Denniston, Co-Founder
KyWiFi, LLC - Mt. Sterling, Kentucky
Your Hometown Broadband Provider
http://www.KyWiFi.com
Call Us Today: 859.274.4033
===
$39.99 DSL High Speed Internet
$14.99 Home Phone Service
- No Phone Line Required for DSL
- FREE Activation  Equipment
- Affordable Upfront Pricing
- Locally Owned  Operated
- We Also Service Most Rural Areas
===


- Original Message - 
From: jeffrey thomas [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org; WISPA General List 
wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Thursday, June 08, 2006 1:55 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] looking for a device


Fyi everyone, wrap boards have been discontinued


On Thu, 08 Jun 2006 12:45:00 -0500, Sam Tetherow [EMAIL PROTECTED]
said:
 If you order it all from wisp-router they will assemble it for your so 
 you would get a die-cast case with the RB mounted the radios and 
 pigtails installed.  All you would need to do is set up the software end 
 of things, which could be done with a script once you have the initial 
 setup done.  One thing to note, I have not ordered 5Ghz pigtails from 
 wisp-router in quite sometime, but the last time I did order them, their 
 quality was questionable.
 
 I would bet if you went the WRAP/StarOS route wisp-router would do the 
 same.  No idea on other vendors or the WAR boards as I have never 
 ordered them.
 
 Sam Tetherow
 Sandhills Wireless
 
 Matt Liotta wrote:
 
  I am looking for a device I can buy that does all of this out of the 
  box. I don't want to build my own since I need 30-40 of them in the 
  next 30 days.
 
  -Matt
 
  Sam Tetherow wrote:
 
  Mikrotik on a routerboard 532 should do the trick although I haven't 
  messed with the VLAN stuff.
  I am not a StarOS user, but I would bet that a StarOS setup on either 
  a WRAP or WAR board would work
  as well.
 
 Sam Tetherow
 Sandhills Wireless
 
  Matt Liotta wrote:
 
  I am looking for a device with the following requirements:
 
  * Can backhaul at 11Mbps operating in the 5.2Ghz band
  * Can support VLANs
  * Can assign a VLAN to one Ethernet port
  * Powered by PoE (the standard is not required)
  * Can act as a 2.4Ghz Wi-Fi access point assigned to a different 
  VLAN than the Ethernet port
  * Everything in a single outdoor enclosure
 
  Any ideas?
 
  -Matt
 
 
 
 
 
 
 -- 
 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] looking for a device

2006-06-08 Thread Jory Privett
SkyPilot ahs a product like this  but not at for those prices.  Their 
dualband extender  has a 2.4 b/g access point with a 5.8 mesh backhaul 
system.

Jory Privett
WCCS

- Original Message - 
From: Matt Liotta [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Thursday, June 08, 2006 1:28 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] looking for a device


I would expect the devices to cost somewhere between $300 and $600 each.
As far as support goes, I would expect it to be similar to other low
cost radio vendors like Trango, etc.

-Matt

Sam Tetherow wrote:

 What are you willing to pay and what are your support requirements?

Sam Tetherow
Sandhills Wireless

 Matt Liotta wrote:

 I understand you are suggesting I wouldn't have to psychically build
 the devices, but that isn't what I am worried about. I want an
 off-the-shelf product that is supported by a vendor. That includes it
 being pre-built, software installed, and support available.

 -Matt

 Sam Tetherow wrote:

 If you order it all from wisp-router they will assemble it for your
 so you would get a die-cast case with the RB mounted the radios and
 pigtails installed.  All you would need to do is set up the software
 end of things, which could be done with a script once you have the
 initial setup done.  One thing to note, I have not ordered 5Ghz
 pigtails from wisp-router in quite sometime, but the last time I did
 order them, their quality was questionable.

 I would bet if you went the WRAP/StarOS route wisp-router would do
 the same.  No idea on other vendors or the WAR boards as I have
 never ordered them.

Sam Tetherow
Sandhills Wireless

 Matt Liotta wrote:

 I am looking for a device I can buy that does all of this out of
 the box. I don't want to build my own since I need 30-40 of them in
 the next 30 days.

 -Matt

 Sam Tetherow wrote:

 Mikrotik on a routerboard 532 should do the trick although I
 haven't messed with the VLAN stuff.
 I am not a StarOS user, but I would bet that a StarOS setup on
 either a WRAP or WAR board would work
 as well.

Sam Tetherow
Sandhills Wireless

 Matt Liotta wrote:

 I am looking for a device with the following requirements:

 * Can backhaul at 11Mbps operating in the 5.2Ghz band
 * Can support VLANs
 * Can assign a VLAN to one Ethernet port
 * Powered by PoE (the standard is not required)
 * Can act as a 2.4Ghz Wi-Fi access point assigned to a different
 VLAN than the Ethernet port
 * Everything in a single outdoor enclosure

 Any ideas?

 -Matt












-- 
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] looking for a device

2006-06-08 Thread Charles Wu
Hi Matt,

To throw in a dose of realism -- even if you roll your own Mikrotik solution
- it will most likely cost you more than the $300-600 / unit budget that you
have (and you get ZERO support =)

Example

RB532A: $185
SR5: $105
SR2: $105

All that is is a board and 2 radio cards -- then you still need to add in
pigtails / poe / enclosures / stand-offs / antennas / PITA factor / etc

Then you got to figure out how to make it work =)

For a complete, supported w/ manuals/etc, FCC CERTIFIED system -- you will
probably be in the $1k+ / unit ballpark (or $3k+ if you go Strix, Tropos,
Firetide, Skypilot, etc)

-Charles

---
CWLab
Technology Architects
http://www.cwlab.com 



-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Matt Liotta
Sent: Thursday, June 08, 2006 1:28 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] looking for a device


I would expect the devices to cost somewhere between $300 and $600 each. 
As far as support goes, I would expect it to be similar to other low 
cost radio vendors like Trango, etc.

-Matt

Sam Tetherow wrote:

 What are you willing to pay and what are your support requirements?

Sam Tetherow
Sandhills Wireless

 Matt Liotta wrote:

 I understand you are suggesting I wouldn't have to psychically build
 the devices, but that isn't what I am worried about. I want an 
 off-the-shelf product that is supported by a vendor. That includes it 
 being pre-built, software installed, and support available.

 -Matt

 Sam Tetherow wrote:

 If you order it all from wisp-router they will assemble it for your
 so you would get a die-cast case with the RB mounted the radios and 
 pigtails installed.  All you would need to do is set up the software 
 end of things, which could be done with a script once you have the 
 initial setup done.  One thing to note, I have not ordered 5Ghz 
 pigtails from wisp-router in quite sometime, but the last time I did 
 order them, their quality was questionable.

 I would bet if you went the WRAP/StarOS route wisp-router would do
 the same.  No idea on other vendors or the WAR boards as I have 
 never ordered them.

Sam Tetherow
Sandhills Wireless

 Matt Liotta wrote:

 I am looking for a device I can buy that does all of this out of
 the box. I don't want to build my own since I need 30-40 of them in 
 the next 30 days.

 -Matt

 Sam Tetherow wrote:

 Mikrotik on a routerboard 532 should do the trick although I
 haven't messed with the VLAN stuff.
 I am not a StarOS user, but I would bet that a StarOS setup on 
 either a WRAP or WAR board would work
 as well.

Sam Tetherow
Sandhills Wireless

 Matt Liotta wrote:

 I am looking for a device with the following requirements:

 * Can backhaul at 11Mbps operating in the 5.2Ghz band
 * Can support VLANs
 * Can assign a VLAN to one Ethernet port
 * Powered by PoE (the standard is not required)
 * Can act as a 2.4Ghz Wi-Fi access point assigned to a different
 VLAN than the Ethernet port
 * Everything in a single outdoor enclosure

 Any ideas?

 -Matt












-- 
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] looking for a device

2006-06-08 Thread Lonnie Nunweiler

Some assembly required.  We do not put the antenna pieces together
since the user would have to take them apart to attach the cat5.

Lonnie

On 6/8/06, George Rogato [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

I have to take that back. I'm not so sure they are already assembled and
ready to go.
They might fall under some assembly required

Maybe Lonnie can tell us.

George

George Rogato wrote:
 Lonnie sells his war in a rootenna waiting to go.
 Support is offered via the online forums.

 George

 Matt Liotta wrote:
 I understand you are suggesting I wouldn't have to psychically build
 the devices, but that isn't what I am worried about. I want an
 off-the-shelf product that is supported by a vendor. That includes it
 being pre-built, software installed, and support available.

 -Matt

 Sam Tetherow wrote:

 If you order it all from wisp-router they will assemble it for your
 so you would get a die-cast case with the RB mounted the radios and
 pigtails installed.  All you would need to do is set up the software
 end of things, which could be done with a script once you have the
 initial setup done.  One thing to note, I have not ordered 5Ghz
 pigtails from wisp-router in quite sometime, but the last time I did
 order them, their quality was questionable.

 I would bet if you went the WRAP/StarOS route wisp-router would do
 the same.  No idea on other vendors or the WAR boards as I have never
 ordered them.

Sam Tetherow
Sandhills Wireless

 Matt Liotta wrote:

 I am looking for a device I can buy that does all of this out of the
 box. I don't want to build my own since I need 30-40 of them in the
 next 30 days.

 -Matt

 Sam Tetherow wrote:

 Mikrotik on a routerboard 532 should do the trick although I
 haven't messed with the VLAN stuff.
 I am not a StarOS user, but I would bet that a StarOS setup on
 either a WRAP or WAR board would work
 as well.

Sam Tetherow
Sandhills Wireless

 Matt Liotta wrote:

 I am looking for a device with the following requirements:

 * Can backhaul at 11Mbps operating in the 5.2Ghz band
 * Can support VLANs
 * Can assign a VLAN to one Ethernet port
 * Powered by PoE (the standard is not required)
 * Can act as a 2.4Ghz Wi-Fi access point assigned to a different
 VLAN than the Ethernet port
 * Everything in a single outdoor enclosure

 Any ideas?

 -Matt












--
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] looking for a device

2006-06-08 Thread Matt Liotta
I don't think i am unrealistic. We built a platform from off-the-shelf 
parts that meets our requirements for under $500. How well that will 
work outside of our lab coupled with the time it took to build tells us 
we want nothing to do with building our own. I am aware of what mesh 
products companies like Tropos offer since we deploy Tropos networks 
ourselves. However, they don't meet our requirements in some cases and 
in other cases are overkill for what we need.


Ultimately, I willing to pay more than $600 for the unit if it makes 
sense. I just threw out what I was looking to pay.


-Matt

Charles Wu wrote:


Hi Matt,

To throw in a dose of realism -- even if you roll your own Mikrotik solution
- it will most likely cost you more than the $300-600 / unit budget that you
have (and you get ZERO support =)

Example

RB532A: $185
SR5: $105
SR2: $105

All that is is a board and 2 radio cards -- then you still need to add in
pigtails / poe / enclosures / stand-offs / antennas / PITA factor / etc

Then you got to figure out how to make it work =)

For a complete, supported w/ manuals/etc, FCC CERTIFIED system -- you will
probably be in the $1k+ / unit ballpark (or $3k+ if you go Strix, Tropos,
Firetide, Skypilot, etc)

-Charles

---
CWLab
Technology Architects
http://www.cwlab.com 




-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Matt Liotta
Sent: Thursday, June 08, 2006 1:28 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] looking for a device


I would expect the devices to cost somewhere between $300 and $600 each. 
As far as support goes, I would expect it to be similar to other low 
cost radio vendors like Trango, etc.


-Matt

Sam Tetherow wrote:

 


What are you willing to pay and what are your support requirements?

  Sam Tetherow
  Sandhills Wireless

Matt Liotta wrote:

   


I understand you are suggesting I wouldn't have to psychically build
the devices, but that isn't what I am worried about. I want an 
off-the-shelf product that is supported by a vendor. That includes it 
being pre-built, software installed, and support available.


-Matt

Sam Tetherow wrote:

 


If you order it all from wisp-router they will assemble it for your
so you would get a die-cast case with the RB mounted the radios and 
pigtails installed.  All you would need to do is set up the software 
end of things, which could be done with a script once you have the 
initial setup done.  One thing to note, I have not ordered 5Ghz 
pigtails from wisp-router in quite sometime, but the last time I did 
order them, their quality was questionable.


I would bet if you went the WRAP/StarOS route wisp-router would do
the same.  No idea on other vendors or the WAR boards as I have 
never ordered them.


  Sam Tetherow
  Sandhills Wireless

Matt Liotta wrote:

   


I am looking for a device I can buy that does all of this out of
the box. I don't want to build my own since I need 30-40 of them in 
the next 30 days.


-Matt

Sam Tetherow wrote:

 


Mikrotik on a routerboard 532 should do the trick although I
haven't messed with the VLAN stuff.
I am not a StarOS user, but I would bet that a StarOS setup on 
either a WRAP or WAR board would work

as well.

  Sam Tetherow
  Sandhills Wireless

Matt Liotta wrote:

   


I am looking for a device with the following requirements:

* Can backhaul at 11Mbps operating in the 5.2Ghz band
* Can support VLANs
* Can assign a VLAN to one Ethernet port
* Powered by PoE (the standard is not required)
* Can act as a 2.4Ghz Wi-Fi access point assigned to a different
VLAN than the Ethernet port
* Everything in a single outdoor enclosure

Any ideas?

-Matt
 







   



 



--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/


Re: [WISPA] looking for a device

2006-06-08 Thread jeffrey thomas
Matt,

The airmatrix flex can do what you require, i think list on them is
around 350 or so but that price is coming down to around 250.00. An
additional card shouldnt be too much more per side.

-

Jeff

On Thu, 08 Jun 2006 15:19:35 -0400, Matt Liotta [EMAIL PROTECTED]
said:
 I don't think i am unrealistic. We built a platform from off-the-shelf 
 parts that meets our requirements for under $500. How well that will 
 work outside of our lab coupled with the time it took to build tells us 
 we want nothing to do with building our own. I am aware of what mesh 
 products companies like Tropos offer since we deploy Tropos networks 
 ourselves. However, they don't meet our requirements in some cases and 
 in other cases are overkill for what we need.
 
 Ultimately, I willing to pay more than $600 for the unit if it makes 
 sense. I just threw out what I was looking to pay.
 
 -Matt
 
 Charles Wu wrote:
 
 Hi Matt,
 
 To throw in a dose of realism -- even if you roll your own Mikrotik solution
 - it will most likely cost you more than the $300-600 / unit budget that you
 have (and you get ZERO support =)
 
 Example
 
 RB532A: $185
 SR5: $105
 SR2: $105
 
 All that is is a board and 2 radio cards -- then you still need to add in
 pigtails / poe / enclosures / stand-offs / antennas / PITA factor / etc
 
 Then you got to figure out how to make it work =)
 
 For a complete, supported w/ manuals/etc, FCC CERTIFIED system -- you will
 probably be in the $1k+ / unit ballpark (or $3k+ if you go Strix, Tropos,
 Firetide, Skypilot, etc)
 
 -Charles
 
 ---
 CWLab
 Technology Architects
 http://www.cwlab.com 
 
 
 
 -Original Message-
 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
 Behalf Of Matt Liotta
 Sent: Thursday, June 08, 2006 1:28 PM
 To: WISPA General List
 Subject: Re: [WISPA] looking for a device
 
 
 I would expect the devices to cost somewhere between $300 and $600 each. 
 As far as support goes, I would expect it to be similar to other low 
 cost radio vendors like Trango, etc.
 
 -Matt
 
 Sam Tetherow wrote:
 
   
 
 What are you willing to pay and what are your support requirements?
 
Sam Tetherow
Sandhills Wireless
 
 Matt Liotta wrote:
 
 
 
 I understand you are suggesting I wouldn't have to psychically build
 the devices, but that isn't what I am worried about. I want an 
 off-the-shelf product that is supported by a vendor. That includes it 
 being pre-built, software installed, and support available.
 
 -Matt
 
 Sam Tetherow wrote:
 
   
 
 If you order it all from wisp-router they will assemble it for your
 so you would get a die-cast case with the RB mounted the radios and 
 pigtails installed.  All you would need to do is set up the software 
 end of things, which could be done with a script once you have the 
 initial setup done.  One thing to note, I have not ordered 5Ghz 
 pigtails from wisp-router in quite sometime, but the last time I did 
 order them, their quality was questionable.
 
 I would bet if you went the WRAP/StarOS route wisp-router would do
 the same.  No idea on other vendors or the WAR boards as I have 
 never ordered them.
 
Sam Tetherow
Sandhills Wireless
 
 Matt Liotta wrote:
 
 
 
 I am looking for a device I can buy that does all of this out of
 the box. I don't want to build my own since I need 30-40 of them in 
 the next 30 days.
 
 -Matt
 
 Sam Tetherow wrote:
 
   
 
 Mikrotik on a routerboard 532 should do the trick although I
 haven't messed with the VLAN stuff.
 I am not a StarOS user, but I would bet that a StarOS setup on 
 either a WRAP or WAR board would work
 as well.
 
Sam Tetherow
Sandhills Wireless
 
 Matt Liotta wrote:
 
 
 
 I am looking for a device with the following requirements:
 
 * Can backhaul at 11Mbps operating in the 5.2Ghz band
 * Can support VLANs
 * Can assign a VLAN to one Ethernet port
 * Powered by PoE (the standard is not required)
 * Can act as a 2.4Ghz Wi-Fi access point assigned to a different
 VLAN than the Ethernet port
 * Everything in a single outdoor enclosure
 
 Any ideas?
 
 -Matt
   
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
   
 
 
 -- 
 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] looking for a device

2006-06-08 Thread jeffrey thomas
my understanding is that the whole board is being disconinued. We were
notified of this ( as in pcengines is no longer taking orders ) about 2
weeks ago. I would need to clarify this with david peterson but I am
pretty sure that is the case.

-
Jeff

On Thu, 8 Jun 2006 14:46:09 -0400, KyWiFi LLC
[EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
 Discontinued by Wisp-Router.com or all vendors? There's no
 mention of this on http://www.pcengines.ch Where did you hear
 this? I recall hearing that the chipset used on the current WRAP
 platform has been discontinued but to my knowledge, there is a
 replacement chipset available which will be used on future batches
 of WRAP boards.
 
 
 Shannon D. Denniston, Co-Founder
 KyWiFi, LLC - Mt. Sterling, Kentucky
 Your Hometown Broadband Provider
 http://www.KyWiFi.com
 Call Us Today: 859.274.4033
 ===
 $39.99 DSL High Speed Internet
 $14.99 Home Phone Service
 - No Phone Line Required for DSL
 - FREE Activation  Equipment
 - Affordable Upfront Pricing
 - Locally Owned  Operated
 - We Also Service Most Rural Areas
 ===
 
 
 - Original Message - 
 From: jeffrey thomas [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org; WISPA General List
 wireless@wispa.org
 Sent: Thursday, June 08, 2006 1:55 PM
 Subject: Re: [WISPA] looking for a device
 
 
 Fyi everyone, wrap boards have been discontinued
 
 
 On Thu, 08 Jun 2006 12:45:00 -0500, Sam Tetherow [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 said:
  If you order it all from wisp-router they will assemble it for your so 
  you would get a die-cast case with the RB mounted the radios and 
  pigtails installed.  All you would need to do is set up the software end 
  of things, which could be done with a script once you have the initial 
  setup done.  One thing to note, I have not ordered 5Ghz pigtails from 
  wisp-router in quite sometime, but the last time I did order them, their 
  quality was questionable.
  
  I would bet if you went the WRAP/StarOS route wisp-router would do the 
  same.  No idea on other vendors or the WAR boards as I have never 
  ordered them.
  
  Sam Tetherow
  Sandhills Wireless
  
  Matt Liotta wrote:
  
   I am looking for a device I can buy that does all of this out of the 
   box. I don't want to build my own since I need 30-40 of them in the 
   next 30 days.
  
   -Matt
  
   Sam Tetherow wrote:
  
   Mikrotik on a routerboard 532 should do the trick although I haven't 
   messed with the VLAN stuff.
   I am not a StarOS user, but I would bet that a StarOS setup on either 
   a WRAP or WAR board would work
   as well.
  
  Sam Tetherow
  Sandhills Wireless
  
   Matt Liotta wrote:
  
   I am looking for a device with the following requirements:
  
   * Can backhaul at 11Mbps operating in the 5.2Ghz band
   * Can support VLANs
   * Can assign a VLAN to one Ethernet port
   * Powered by PoE (the standard is not required)
   * Can act as a 2.4Ghz Wi-Fi access point assigned to a different 
   VLAN than the Ethernet port
   * Everything in a single outdoor enclosure
  
   Any ideas?
  
   -Matt
  
  
  
  
  
  
  -- 
  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/
-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/


RE: [WISPA] looking for a device

2006-06-08 Thread Charles Wu
snip
I don't think i am unrealistic. We built a platform from off-the-shelf 
parts that meets our requirements for under $500. How well that will 
work outside of our lab coupled with the time it took to build tells us 
we want nothing to do with building our own. 
/snip

EXACTLY

The bits and pieces will definitely fit in your budget (in this case, $500),
but keep in mind, integration, development, support etc adds a lot to the
top line

Remember, most manufacturers are selling products at 40-60% gross margin

-Charles

---
CWLab
Technology Architects
http://www.cwlab.com 



-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Matt Liotta
Sent: Thursday, June 08, 2006 2:20 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] looking for a device




-Matt

Charles Wu wrote:

Hi Matt,

To throw in a dose of realism -- even if you roll your own Mikrotik 
solution
- it will most likely cost you more than the $300-600 / unit budget that
you
have (and you get ZERO support =)

Example

RB532A: $185
SR5: $105
SR2: $105

All that is is a board and 2 radio cards -- then you still need to add 
in pigtails / poe / enclosures / stand-offs / antennas / PITA factor / 
etc

Then you got to figure out how to make it work =)

For a complete, supported w/ manuals/etc, FCC CERTIFIED system -- you 
will probably be in the $1k+ / unit ballpark (or $3k+ if you go Strix, 
Tropos, Firetide, Skypilot, etc)

-Charles

---
CWLab
Technology Architects
http://www.cwlab.com



-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On 
Behalf Of Matt Liotta
Sent: Thursday, June 08, 2006 1:28 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] looking for a device


I would expect the devices to cost somewhere between $300 and $600 
each.
As far as support goes, I would expect it to be similar to other low 
cost radio vendors like Trango, etc.

-Matt

Sam Tetherow wrote:

  

What are you willing to pay and what are your support requirements?

   Sam Tetherow
   Sandhills Wireless

Matt Liotta wrote:



I understand you are suggesting I wouldn't have to psychically build 
the devices, but that isn't what I am worried about. I want an 
off-the-shelf product that is supported by a vendor. That includes it 
being pre-built, software installed, and support available.

-Matt

Sam Tetherow wrote:

  

If you order it all from wisp-router they will assemble it for your 
so you would get a die-cast case with the RB mounted the radios and 
pigtails installed.  All you would need to do is set up the software 
end of things, which could be done with a script once you have the 
initial setup done.  One thing to note, I have not ordered 5Ghz 
pigtails from wisp-router in quite sometime, but the last time I did 
order them, their quality was questionable.

I would bet if you went the WRAP/StarOS route wisp-router would do 
the same.  No idea on other vendors or the WAR boards as I have 
never ordered them.

   Sam Tetherow
   Sandhills Wireless

Matt Liotta wrote:



I am looking for a device I can buy that does all of this out of 
the box. I don't want to build my own since I need 30-40 of them in 
the next 30 days.

-Matt

Sam Tetherow wrote:

  

Mikrotik on a routerboard 532 should do the trick although I 
haven't messed with the VLAN stuff. I am not a StarOS user, but I 
would bet that a StarOS setup on either a WRAP or WAR board would 
work as well.

   Sam Tetherow
   Sandhills Wireless

Matt Liotta wrote:



I am looking for a device with the following requirements:

* Can backhaul at 11Mbps operating in the 5.2Ghz band
* Can support VLANs
* Can assign a VLAN to one Ethernet port
* Powered by PoE (the standard is not required)
* Can act as a 2.4Ghz Wi-Fi access point assigned to a different 
VLAN than the Ethernet port
* Everything in a single outdoor enclosure

Any ideas?

-Matt
  









  


-- 
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] looking for a device

2006-06-08 Thread Matt Liotta

Charles Wu wrote:


The bits and pieces will definitely fit in your budget (in this case, $500),
but keep in mind, integration, development, support etc adds a lot to the
top line

Remember, most manufacturers are selling products at 40-60% gross margin

 

Well sure, but if a manufacturer can't build a product in volume for 
significantly less than I can one-off than the manufacturer might be in 
the wrong business. If you take 25% off the $500 for cost savings and 
then mark it up 60% for margin you come out with $600. ;)


-Matt
--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/


RE: [WISPA] looking for a device

2006-06-08 Thread danlist
I don't think there is much out there unfortunately


But YOU CAN BUY FROM MIKROTIK direct, prebuilt units

www.mikrotik.com

click on prices/products


Dan Metcalf
Wireless Broadband Systems
www.wbisp.com
781-566-2053 ext 6201
1-888-wbsystem (888) 927-9783
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
support: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 

 -Original Message-
 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf
 Of Matt Liotta
 Sent: Thursday, June 08, 2006 1:54 PM
 To: WISPA General List
 Subject: Re: [WISPA] looking for a device
 
 I understand you are suggesting I wouldn't have to psychically build the
 devices, but that isn't what I am worried about. I want an off-the-shelf
 product that is supported by a vendor. That includes it being pre-built,
 software installed, and support available.
 
 -Matt
 
 Sam Tetherow wrote:
 
  If you order it all from wisp-router they will assemble it for your so
  you would get a die-cast case with the RB mounted the radios and
  pigtails installed.  All you would need to do is set up the software
  end of things, which could be done with a script once you have the
  initial setup done.  One thing to note, I have not ordered 5Ghz
  pigtails from wisp-router in quite sometime, but the last time I did
  order them, their quality was questionable.
 
  I would bet if you went the WRAP/StarOS route wisp-router would do the
  same.  No idea on other vendors or the WAR boards as I have never
  ordered them.
 
 Sam Tetherow
 Sandhills Wireless
 
  Matt Liotta wrote:
 
  I am looking for a device I can buy that does all of this out of the
  box. I don't want to build my own since I need 30-40 of them in the
  next 30 days.
 
  -Matt
 
  Sam Tetherow wrote:
 
  Mikrotik on a routerboard 532 should do the trick although I haven't
  messed with the VLAN stuff.
  I am not a StarOS user, but I would bet that a StarOS setup on
  either a WRAP or WAR board would work
  as well.
 
 Sam Tetherow
 Sandhills Wireless
 
  Matt Liotta wrote:
 
  I am looking for a device with the following requirements:
 
  * Can backhaul at 11Mbps operating in the 5.2Ghz band
  * Can support VLANs
  * Can assign a VLAN to one Ethernet port
  * Powered by PoE (the standard is not required)
  * Can act as a 2.4Ghz Wi-Fi access point assigned to a different
  VLAN than the Ethernet port
  * Everything in a single outdoor enclosure
 
  Any ideas?
 
  -Matt
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 --
 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: 7.1.394 / Virus Database: 268.8.3/358 - Release Date: 06/07/2006
 

-- 
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.394 / Virus Database: 268.8.3/358 - Release Date: 06/07/2006
 

-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/


Re: [WISPA] looking for a device

2006-06-08 Thread Mark Koskenmaki
Not all WRAP boards are discontinued.

233 Mhz versions will continue production for some time yet.


North East Oregon Fastnet, LLC 509-593-4061
personal correspondence to:  mark at neofast dot net
sales inquiries to:  purchasing at neofast dot net
Fast Internet, NO WIRES!

-
- Original Message - 
From: jeffrey thomas [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org; WISPA General List
wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Thursday, June 08, 2006 10:55 AM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] looking for a device


 Fyi everyone, wrap boards have been discontinued



-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/


Re: [WISPA] looking for a device

2006-06-08 Thread jeffrey thomas
according to pascal in an email today, he has one more shipment coming
of 233mhz boards
in july then thats it folks...

-

Jeff

On Thu, 8 Jun 2006 17:54:48 -0700, Mark Koskenmaki [EMAIL PROTECTED]
said:
 Not all WRAP boards are discontinued.
 
 233 Mhz versions will continue production for some time yet.
 
 
 North East Oregon Fastnet, LLC 509-593-4061
 personal correspondence to:  mark at neofast dot net
 sales inquiries to:  purchasing at neofast dot net
 Fast Internet, NO WIRES!
 
 -
 - Original Message - 
 From: jeffrey thomas [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org; WISPA General List
 wireless@wispa.org
 Sent: Thursday, June 08, 2006 10:55 AM
 Subject: Re: [WISPA] looking for a device
 
 
  Fyi everyone, wrap boards have been discontinued
 
 
 
 -- 
 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] looking for a device

2006-06-08 Thread Tom DeReggi

Sounds like Mikrotik to me.  We do that all the time.

Take note, to get standard bridge features across an 802.11 client, it 
requires WDS. Mikrotik allows for large packets so that VLANs can be 
configured over WDS.
The configuration is a bit encumbersome at first, but we got it down to a 
pretty good configuration now. There are a couple rules to follow to get the 
configuration to work right. We no longer use VLAN switches for small 
buildings anymore, we use Mikrotik VLAN instead.


How far you can backhaul, is going to be an antenna selection issue. 
Remember with a 32 dbi dish and -2 db power, its legal to get about 7 miles 
with good fade margin. (can pull off 11 with little fade margin)


Tom DeReggi
RapidDSL  Wireless, Inc
IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband


- Original Message - 
From: Matt Liotta [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Thursday, June 08, 2006 1:17 PM
Subject: [WISPA] looking for a device



I am looking for a device with the following requirements:

* Can backhaul at 11Mbps operating in the 5.2Ghz band
* Can support VLANs
* Can assign a VLAN to one Ethernet port
* Powered by PoE (the standard is not required)
* Can act as a 2.4Ghz Wi-Fi access point assigned to a different VLAN than 
the Ethernet port

* Everything in a single outdoor enclosure

Any ideas?

-Matt
--
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] looking for a device

2006-06-08 Thread Tom DeReggi

NOte,

Star OS handles VLAN correctly as far as automatically reducing MTU size. 
But that can be a problem for ISPs that want to deliver full 1500 MTU to the 
end user as standard.  MIkrotik does not have that limitation.


Tom DeReggi
RapidDSL  Wireless, Inc
IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband


- Original Message - 
From: Sam Tetherow [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Thursday, June 08, 2006 1:22 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] looking for a device


Mikrotik on a routerboard 532 should do the trick although I haven't 
messed with the VLAN stuff.
I am not a StarOS user, but I would bet that a StarOS setup on either a 
WRAP or WAR board would work

as well.

   Sam Tetherow
   Sandhills Wireless

Matt Liotta wrote:


I am looking for a device with the following requirements:

* Can backhaul at 11Mbps operating in the 5.2Ghz band
* Can support VLANs
* Can assign a VLAN to one Ethernet port
* Powered by PoE (the standard is not required)
* Can act as a 2.4Ghz Wi-Fi access point assigned to a different VLAN 
than the Ethernet port

* Everything in a single outdoor enclosure

Any ideas?

-Matt



--
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] looking for a device

2006-06-08 Thread Tom DeReggi

There are people that build them for you.
MIkrotik sells pre-made systems.
WISP-Router I thought also did, but not possitive.

Tom DeReggi
RapidDSL  Wireless, Inc
IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband


- Original Message - 
From: Matt Liotta [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Thursday, June 08, 2006 1:33 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] looking for a device


I am looking for a device I can buy that does all of this out of the 
box. I don't want to build my own since I need 30-40 of them in the next 
30 days.


-Matt

Sam Tetherow wrote:

Mikrotik on a routerboard 532 should do the trick although I haven't 
messed with the VLAN stuff.
I am not a StarOS user, but I would bet that a StarOS setup on either 
a WRAP or WAR board would work

as well.

   Sam Tetherow
   Sandhills Wireless

Matt Liotta wrote:


I am looking for a device with the following requirements:

* Can backhaul at 11Mbps operating in the 5.2Ghz band
* Can support VLANs
* Can assign a VLAN to one Ethernet port
* Powered by PoE (the standard is not required)
* Can act as a 2.4Ghz Wi-Fi access point assigned to a different VLAN 
than the Ethernet port

* Everything in a single outdoor enclosure

Any ideas?

-Matt






--
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] looking for a device

2006-06-08 Thread Tom DeReggi
Airmatrix does VLAN but its uses StarOS, so it does VLAN the wrong way for 
some one trying to sell to carriers.
If you sell to a carrier, they are going towant to be delivered a minimum of 
1500 MTU. StarOS can't do that with VLAN.
However, if you didn;t need VLAN, Defacto does give EXCELLENT support.  And 
they ship ONTIME.  They aren't the cheapest, but they give the value you are 
looking for.


Mikrotik is the preferred solution if you need to do VLAN. Wisp-Router also 
offers support.
He's been in business now for atleast 10 years.  He may charge you by the 
minute, but not at a rate any higher than Cisco would charge you.


Tom DeReggi
RapidDSL  Wireless, Inc
IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband


- Original Message - 
From: Matt Liotta [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Thursday, June 08, 2006 2:00 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] looking for a device


I could be missing the product you are suggesting, but the only dual radio 
products I can find our base station products. I not looking for a base 
station, I am looking for something client facing. Further, I see no 
mention of VLAN support.


-Matt

jeffrey thomas wrote:


Airmatrix can do that.

www.defactowireless.com


On Thu, 08 Jun 2006 13:17:30 -0400, Matt Liotta [EMAIL PROTECTED]
said:


I am looking for a device with the following requirements:

* Can backhaul at 11Mbps operating in the 5.2Ghz band
* Can support VLANs
* Can assign a VLAN to one Ethernet port
* Powered by PoE (the standard is not required)
* Can act as a 2.4Ghz Wi-Fi access point assigned to a different VLAN 
than the Ethernet port

* Everything in a single outdoor enclosure

Any ideas?

-Matt
--
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] looking for a device

2006-06-08 Thread Tom DeReggi

Charles,

Although your advise does bringrealism to the debate
I think you are leaving out VLAN requirement in your view.
Mikrotik, gives the VLAN functuionality that is needed. That is worth money.
Mikrotik gives the flexibilty of dual radio configs.

I'm not even sure the expensive name brand mesh units you quoted support 
VLAN. Do they?


Yo may want to look at Alvarion. Alvarion does support VLAN. new Firmware4 
supports double VLAN also.
Alvarion used to have one model that was designed to have a second 
integrated radio into it.

I can't remember if it was a 900/2.4 combo, or a 5.8/2.4 combo.

From a support perspective you can't get any better than Alvarion.

But the price was much higher, in the $2000 range I thought.

Tom DeReggi
RapidDSL  Wireless, Inc
IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband


- Original Message - 
From: Charles Wu [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To: 'WISPA General List' wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Thursday, June 08, 2006 3:06 PM
Subject: RE: [WISPA] looking for a device


Hi Matt,

To throw in a dose of realism -- even if you roll your own Mikrotik solution
- it will most likely cost you more than the $300-600 / unit budget that you
have (and you get ZERO support =)

Example

RB532A: $185
SR5: $105
SR2: $105

All that is is a board and 2 radio cards -- then you still need to add in
pigtails / poe / enclosures / stand-offs / antennas / PITA factor / etc

Then you got to figure out how to make it work =)

For a complete, supported w/ manuals/etc, FCC CERTIFIED system -- you will
probably be in the $1k+ / unit ballpark (or $3k+ if you go Strix, Tropos,
Firetide, Skypilot, etc)

-Charles

---
CWLab
Technology Architects
http://www.cwlab.com



-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Matt Liotta
Sent: Thursday, June 08, 2006 1:28 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] looking for a device


I would expect the devices to cost somewhere between $300 and $600 each.
As far as support goes, I would expect it to be similar to other low
cost radio vendors like Trango, etc.

-Matt

Sam Tetherow wrote:


What are you willing to pay and what are your support requirements?

   Sam Tetherow
   Sandhills Wireless

Matt Liotta wrote:


I understand you are suggesting I wouldn't have to psychically build
the devices, but that isn't what I am worried about. I want an
off-the-shelf product that is supported by a vendor. That includes it
being pre-built, software installed, and support available.

-Matt

Sam Tetherow wrote:


If you order it all from wisp-router they will assemble it for your
so you would get a die-cast case with the RB mounted the radios and
pigtails installed.  All you would need to do is set up the software
end of things, which could be done with a script once you have the
initial setup done.  One thing to note, I have not ordered 5Ghz
pigtails from wisp-router in quite sometime, but the last time I did
order them, their quality was questionable.

I would bet if you went the WRAP/StarOS route wisp-router would do
the same.  No idea on other vendors or the WAR boards as I have
never ordered them.

   Sam Tetherow
   Sandhills Wireless

Matt Liotta wrote:


I am looking for a device I can buy that does all of this out of
the box. I don't want to build my own since I need 30-40 of them in
the next 30 days.

-Matt

Sam Tetherow wrote:


Mikrotik on a routerboard 532 should do the trick although I
haven't messed with the VLAN stuff.
I am not a StarOS user, but I would bet that a StarOS setup on
either a WRAP or WAR board would work
as well.

   Sam Tetherow
   Sandhills Wireless

Matt Liotta wrote:


I am looking for a device with the following requirements:

* Can backhaul at 11Mbps operating in the 5.2Ghz band
* Can support VLANs
* Can assign a VLAN to one Ethernet port
* Powered by PoE (the standard is not required)
* Can act as a 2.4Ghz Wi-Fi access point assigned to a different
VLAN than the Ethernet port
* Everything in a single outdoor enclosure

Any ideas?

-Matt


















--
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] looking for a device

2006-06-08 Thread JohnnyO
Get with Jim Patient as well - www.jeffcosoho.com   He can build them
for you more then likely at a savings to WISP-Router could.

Jim makes some great ready to go products and he's a super nice guy :)

JohnnyO

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Tom DeReggi
Sent: Thursday, June 08, 2006 11:59 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] looking for a device


There are people that build them for you.
MIkrotik sells pre-made systems.
WISP-Router I thought also did, but not possitive.

Tom DeReggi
RapidDSL  Wireless, Inc
IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband


- Original Message - 
From: Matt Liotta [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Thursday, June 08, 2006 1:33 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] looking for a device


I am looking for a device I can buy that does all of this out of the
 box. I don't want to build my own since I need 30-40 of them in the
next 
 30 days.
 
 -Matt
 
 Sam Tetherow wrote:
 
 Mikrotik on a routerboard 532 should do the trick although I haven't
 messed with the VLAN stuff.
 I am not a StarOS user, but I would bet that a StarOS setup on either

 a WRAP or WAR board would work
 as well.

Sam Tetherow
Sandhills Wireless

 Matt Liotta wrote:

 I am looking for a device with the following requirements:

 * Can backhaul at 11Mbps operating in the 5.2Ghz band
 * Can support VLANs
 * Can assign a VLAN to one Ethernet port
 * Powered by PoE (the standard is not required)
 * Can act as a 2.4Ghz Wi-Fi access point assigned to a different 
 VLAN
 than the Ethernet port
 * Everything in a single outdoor enclosure

 Any ideas?

 -Matt



 
 --
 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/