We are currently working on a custom MTU size interface for every
device to be able to handle whatever you want for MTU size.

We no longer include proxy arp support in V3.  It was fine for the
customer end but too many people misused it for a middle bridge and
that gave nothing but trouble.  V3 has support for a fully transparent
client bridge when it talks to an appropriately configured V3 AP

The license fee allows 1 year of free updates at which time it will
require a $10 fee for another year.  The license will never expire,
just the ability to update the firmware.  If you buy a WAR board the
license is included in the board price and the update privilege never
expires.  The expiry is just for x86 firmware.

I can handle orders under 3,000 pieces from stock and any quantity you
wish on a 6 to 8 week pre-order basis.


On 8/14/06, Tom DeReggi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

That is exciting news getting the Full 35 mbps on the WAR/STAR board.  I
guess it shows that the 533Mhz processor is the key to speed. The price is
right to.

The only thing is, we need to be able to pass full 1500 MTU for our
backhauls, and we use VLAN. The older WRAP/STAROS shrinks MTU size to
support VLAN. This prevented its use for our backhauls.  The newer StarOS V3
software, doesn't support the larger packets yet, does it?

---802.1d bridging for ethernet and wireless ap, and layer-3 proxy arp
bridging for wireless clients.

That sounded like interesting feature on V3 software.

----WRAP V3 $70 /year.

I hope that means one year of updates, and not that it "expires" at the end
of the year and stops passing traffic. Do you know for sure?

How is the availabilty regularly on the WAR boards?

Has anyone tried flashing Mikrotik on a WAR board?

Tom DeReggi
RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc
IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband

----- Original Message -----
From: Gino A. Villarini
To: 'WISPA General List'
Sent: Saturday, August 12, 2006 2:17 PM
Subject: RE: [WISPA] Routerboard 532 and NStreme2

Well Tom,

We are in the same situation as you, testing backhaul replacements.  Our
Network backhauls are made of : Spectras , Gemini, Trango Atlas, Motorola BH
units and Proxim MP11a.  So we started looking for a 802.11a based unit,
config channels of 5,10,20 and 40 mhz, support for bridging and basic stuff
needed for backhauls no fancy stuff.  The are some products available like
the Trango Atlas, Solectek among others but we decided to test Mikrotik
RB500 units, we saw the same results as you did, not very amazed. But, last
week I decided to test out StarOS WAR plataform. and let me tell you:

6 mile link with 533 mhz WAR Board with 1 CM9 card each on both sides 23 db
flat panel ( -66 on both ends ) One End connected to a Mikrotik 2.8 ghz
Router , my laptop at the other end. WAR board set on bridge mode,
connection tracking disabled.

First of all, latency :

1-       64 byte ping from my laptop to the Mikrotik router : 1ms
2-       1500 byte ping from my laptop to the Mikrotik router : 2 - 3 ms

Nice, thoughput :

20 mhz channel:

TCP : 35 Mbps
UDP: 28 Mbps ( weird, usually is the opposite )

40 mhz channel:

TCP : 45 Mbps
UDP: 72 Mbps

For Paul:

20 mhz chanel UDP test with 100 byte packets : 5 Mbps
40 mhz chanel UDP test with 100 byte packets : 6 Mbps

Pretty darn exiting results! I just need to iron out a vlan issue with
Lonnie.. and I would make this units our defacto Back hauls

Gino A. Villarini
Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp.
tel  787.273.4143   fax   787.273.4145

Behalf Of Tom DeReggi
Sent: Friday, August 11, 2006 8:18 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: [WISPA] Routerboard 532 and NStreme2

Task: Test Max Speed doable using Mikrotik NStreme 2 (two MPCI cards in one

test environment...

AMD 3Ghz Laptop wired -> Mikrotik 532 w/ CM9 -> Mikrotik 532 w/CM9 -> wired
to HP PIII-800Mhz Laptop.
Connected in a lab environment, zero noise.

Mikrotik OS ver 2.9.28

Test software 1: IPerf TCP running on both Laptops.
Test software 2: Mikrotik Bandwidth test running on Mikrotiks.

Test Method 1 (running test to/from Laptops): used about 80% CPU power on
Mikrotik board to pass the traffic.

Test Method 2 (running to.from MIkrotik): used about 100% CPU power on

However, interesting enough, the results of the speed tests, whichever
method used, were just about identical, give or take 1 mbps.

The results of tests were....

Maximum speed transferable in one direction 20Mhz channel: 16.6 mbps.
Maximum speed transferable in both direction simultaneously (adding together
the values) 20.8 mbps (13.8 mbps and 7 mbps in the other).
Maximum speed transferable in one direction 10 mhz channel: 15.8 mbps.
Maximum speed transferable in both directions 10 Mhz channel: 19 mbps (10.4
mbps and 9 mbps)
Maximum speed transferable in one direction Turbo Mode speed: 18 mbps
Maximum speed transferable in both direction simultaneously Turbo Mode
(adding together the values): 22mbps.

Note: Turbo mode tested in two configurations, (A) the lowest 5.8G channel
send and highest 5.8G channel for receive, and (B) 5.8Ghz to send and 5.3Ghz
Note: All 5.8Ghz test results were at 54 mbps speed modulation, and setting
it to slower speed/modulation lowered the test speed results.
Note: Test performed with RSSI somewhere between -60 and -68, without
antennas, but w/ high quality pigtails w/Bulk head N, Pointing N connectors
to each other.
Note: Re-tried tests with antennas used, to increase RSSI (-50 to -60 db),
but it did not improve results.
Note: All tests done when in NStreme2 mode, using two cards on each end.
Note: Both boards mounted in Mikrotik Plastic Large Case (sweet cases) and
using 18V (.8amp) via POE.

One thing that was really odd...  Mikrotik has a value for TX rssi and RX
rssi. The TX rssi was the exact RX rssi acheived at the otehr radio in all
cases in any slot, in any configuration.
However, the CM9 in the TOP Slot of the 532 board consistently showed an
average of 10 db worse TX RSSI. (sometimes around -75 db).  Swapping TX CM9s
did not help. TX from the top slot on either of the Mikrotik CPEs showed the
same results.  The only way I was able to make the TX rssis the same on both
CPEs simultaneously was to set the BOTTOM port/CM9 on each Mikrotik to be
the TX radio.  This indicated that the 532 board possibly might have a power
problem to the top slot.  In this configuration, at 54mbps, RSSI was
about -65 TX and RX on both CPEs.

My conclusion of this experiment was that the ideal configuration for a
MIkrotik 532 board is with 10Mhz channels in NStreme2 mode.
Because Spectrum efficiency is maximized, Interference avoidance maximized,
Cost low, and very little aggregate speed benefit acheived by using the
larger channel sizes.

My second conclusion was that the 532 router board is inadequate, based on
processor bottlenecks, to acheive higher speeds than 20 mbps aggregate
throughput. (LAB test is best case scenario!)
And if using 20Mhz channels or higher, I don't see the point of using
Nstreme2, as 1 CM9 in straight 802.11a mode on a 532 board has been tested
to be able to pass about 14 mbps aggregate.

Mikrotik's website claims that 35 mbps aggregate can be acheived with
Celeron 700Mhz CPU PCs. Although that is a grand accomplishment at very low
cost, there are significant disadvantages of that configuration in real
world deployments. Such as where do you put the PC in a shared Tenant
building, so it is close enough to the roof, so the COAX to antenna is not
going to loose valuable db, or where power is gotten from, or how is it
going to be rebooted by a customer if the power input is not from customer's
suite? I'm sure there are many places that Full Size PCs could be
appropriate to use, but its not going to be realistic for us, until there is
a 700Mhz Celeron able to be POE fed and mounted in an outdoor style CPE box.

What this has done is brought to my attention the value of products like
Alvarion BH40/BH100s and Trango Atlas PtPs, that can be taken for granted.
In single radio designs, BH40s usually can push 24 mbps with old 3.0
firmware, BH100 reported by some in the greater than 40mbps ranges, and
Trango Atlas PTP easilly pushes 36 mbps in most deployments, using the same
tests that I used above.  So Mikrotik 532s are not a replacement for my
Trango backhauls yet!

However, on a positive note, I liked the Mikrotik Full Size CPE case,
costing only $45, allowing extra room for cable splicing boxes (to split POE
to other radios fed off the Mikrotik's 2nd and 3rd ports) plenty of places
to tie down pigtails, and easy plastic to drill/make holes for (non-circle)
Bulk N-connectors that will not pivote when moving.  I also need to think
hard that the Nstreme2 -10Mhz channel configuraton might become the standard
backhaul configuration to replace slower 10mbps backhauls, doubling capacity
in the same amount of spectrum as previous options.

Feedback from others desired.

Tom DeReggi
RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc
IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband

----- Original Message -----
From: Travis Johnson
To: WISPA General List
Sent: Friday, August 11, 2006 9:23 AM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] RouterBoard 532s


I never received an email from their support group, John Tully or anyone
else about this issue. My guess (after a month of no responses) is they were
not aware of the issue and are now trying to fix it. It still surprises me
they have not publicly said anything.


Eric Rogers wrote:
Does anyone know if there is a resolution on this issue?  If you browse
Mikrotik's site, the thread has been removed.


-----Original Message-----
Behalf Of Sam Tetherow
Sent: Thursday, July 13, 2006 6:18 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] RouterBoard 532s

Here is a thread from the MT forums on it.

Sam Tetherow
Sandhills Wireless

Mac Dearman wrote:

Where did you get that info from Travis? Links, source...etc?

Mac Dearman



*On Behalf Of *Travis Johnson
*Sent:* Thursday, July 13, 2006 3:58 PM
*To:* WISPA General List
*Subject:* Re: [WISPA] RouterBoard 532s

Maybe they pulled them off production due to the NOISE they are
blowing all over the 50-450Mhz spectrum. :(


Kelly Shaw wrote:

Anyone know of a source with RouterBoard 532s in stock?

I normally can get them from WispRouter but they won't respond to my
phone calls about them...

Kelly Shaw

Pure Internet <>

__________ NOD32 1.1657 (20060713) Information __________

This message was checked by NOD32 antivirus system.


WISPA Wireless List:



WISPA Wireless List:



WISPA Wireless List:



Lonnie Nunweiler
Valemount Networks Corporation
WISPA Wireless List:



Reply via email to