Lonnie Nunweiler wrote:
> We are building an AP unit for the middle and we figured that BGP was
> for the edge with several outlets where you would typically have a
> larger server.
Darn, I was actually thinking about using iBGP and private ASNs on a
bunch of towers. More reliable than RIP, easier
e, all "servers" are in boxes in the air, on the roof, or
otherwise. BGP needs to be in the regular AP version.
- Original Message -
From: "Lonnie Nunweiler" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "WISPA General List"
Sent: Wednesday, August 23, 2006 11:51 PM
Subject:
:51 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Managing CPE in routed network
> We are building an AP unit for the middle and we figured that BGP was
> for the edge with several outlets where you would typically have a
> larger server.
>
> Lonnie
>
> On 8/23/06, David E. Smith <[EMAIL PROTECT
We are building an AP unit for the middle and we figured that BGP was
for the edge with several outlets where you would typically have a
larger server.
Lonnie
On 8/23/06, David E. Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Lonnie Nunweiler wrote:
> We support RIP, OSPF and OLSR Mesh, with mesh being the
Lonnie Nunweiler wrote:
> We support RIP, OSPF and OLSR Mesh, with mesh being the one we like the
> best.
Verging horribly off-topic for this, but out of curiosity, why did you
remove BGP support from V3?
David Smith
MVN.net
--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
htt
7;s, at least for now, are pretty easy for me to get. I could
> easily justify another /24 to my upstream, but beyond that, it would
> take some pretty convincing data for me to get more. But, once I get
> to that size, I'll be looking at buying my own block(s).
>
>
> - O
etty easy for me to get. I could
> easily justify another /24 to my upstream, but beyond that, it would
> take some pretty convincing data for me to get more. But, once I get
> to that size, I'll be looking at buying my own block(s).
>
>
> - Original Message -
uch appreciated by me (and I'm
sure others). For the record, Matt did respond earlier in the thread
somewhere as well I do believe.
- Original Message -
From: "Lonnie Nunweiler" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "WISPA General List"
Sent: Wednesday, Au
for me to get more. But, once I get to that
size, I'll be looking at buying my own block(s).
- Original Message -----
From: Mac Dearman
To: 'WISPA General List'
Sent: Wednesday, August 23, 2006 9:48 AM
Subject: RE: [WISPA] Managing CPE in routed network
Jason,
I had one
I use MT for my APs so the routing is not a problem. If you have a
router at each tower location you can route to the tower and be bridged
at each tower location.
I looked briefly at Tranzeo for APs but after using MT I wouldn't want
to give up the extra features:
+ True routing
+ BW contro
an
To: 'WISPA General List'
Sent: Wednesday, August 23, 2006 9:48
AM
Subject: RE: [WISPA] Managing CPE in
routed network
Jason,
I had
one of the largest bridged networks ever as I cover 15-18% of the State with
wireless. I can tell you a few things about
I will echo Mac's comments with just a couple of modifications.
I also put 95% of my customers on private IP addresses, and that has worked
wonderfully. I have a separate subnet for every access point, and this has
done a great job of keeping problems isolated and making troubleshooting
much
Jason,
I had one of the largest
bridged networks ever as I cover 15-18% of the State with wireless. I can tell
you a few things about bridging-vs-routing and I aint getting into that, but I
can tell you that I don’t think you will want a totally static routed
network either. That is
al List'
Subject: RE: [WISPA] Managing CPE in routed network
In the end I feel routed is better because you grow, a bridged network
will get loud (lots of overhead traffic).
You manage the CPE in a routed network just as you do now. What maybe
you see is the difference between true routes
07 PM
>To: 'WISPA General List'
>Subject: RE: [WISPA] Managing CPE in routed network
>
>In the end I feel routed is better because you grow, a bridged network
>will get loud (lots of overhead traffic).
>
>
>
>You manage the CPE in a routed network just as you
Jason Hensley wrote:
> I'm really going to need to have a routed network.
You're probably right there. Our legacy bridged network still causes the
occasional weird problem, because of all the MACs flying around three
counties.
> My biggest question is, how do you manage your CPE remotely in a ro
-729-9200
From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jason Hensley
Sent: Tuesday, August 22, 2006
6:23 PM
To: WISPA
General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Managing CPE
in routed network
That is correct on the Tranzeo AP's, but, I'm considering
replacing the
: WISPA General List
Sent: Tuesday, August 22, 2006 6:07
PM
Subject: RE: [WISPA] Managing CPE in
routed network
In the end I feel
routed is better because you grow, a bridged network will get loud (lots of
overhead traffic).
You manage the CPE in
a routed network just
In the end I feel routed is better because
you grow, a bridged network will get loud (lots of overhead traffic).
You manage the CPE in a routed network
just as you do now. What maybe you see is the difference between true routes
and NAT routes. With true routes there is a path to and fr
In my network I assign a private IP to the CPE and a 'similar' IP to the
customer.
For instance if I assign 10.1.1.100 to the customer then I assigned
10.101.1.100 to the CPE. Easy to remember the CPE address given the
customers IP.
Each AP gets it's own class C. I then do 1 to 1 NAT at the
20 matches
Mail list logo
