Quick question along the lines of this topic and that of Vlans, etc.: does anyone here implement FlexLinks (from Cisco) to interconnect PoPs with multiple links between them? I was just looking into that as opposed to/in comparison with rapid spanning tree. Any experience/opinions?
Thanks in advance. On 4/14/2010 01:46, Matt Larsen - Lists wrote: > When to route? From the very start!!! > > If you take the time to learn the basics of OSPF, implement NAT and/or > use private IPs for the links between systems and use a logical design > for your subnets it is relatively easy to route. Understanding the > basics of OSPF is really key, because static routing gets too > complicated after the first few nodes and OSPF will handle it all much > easier. OSPF also makes it possible to build automatic failover into > the network. I have several "rings" in my network that automatically > re-route in different directions when there are outages and I can easily > set preference for traffic to flow in different directions based on > backhaul capacity, latency and other factors. > > Bridging is a disaster waiting to happen. Every day that you run a > bridged network is a day closer to the eventual disaster. > > Matt Larsen > vistabeam.com > > > On 4/13/2010 11:37 PM, Jeromie Reeves wrote: > >> Yes if you route at the CPE then the backhauls can bridge and your >> (mostly) good (this is how i do it) >> What you need to worry about here is clients who plug in their routers >> backwards and things like that. >> It helps if you do not have client routers (routing/dhcp in the CPE, >> switch inside) >> >> >> On Tue, Apr 13, 2010 at 10:25 PM, Mark Dueck<[email protected]> wrote: >> >> >>> Question: If you have all client computers behind a router, then you are >>> mostly protected from broadcasting and the need for routing is not that >>> high, right? >>> >>> I have a small network and I'm starting to do some routing between >>> longer backhaul links, and between cities. So far, I don't know if I've >>> seen a difference yet. >>> >>> On 04/13/2010 10:08 PM, Marlon K. Schafer wrote: >>> >>> >>>> We're up to about 400 subs on one half of the network. We're about to >>>> start >>>> routing. We'll know in a few months if it helps or not. >>>> marlon >>>> >>>> ----- Original Message ----- >>>> From: "Greg Ihnen"<[email protected]> >>>> To: "WISPA General List"<[email protected]> >>>> Sent: Saturday, April 10, 2010 9:02 AM >>>> Subject: [WISPA] When to route? >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>> OK, I know: "friends don't let friends bridge networks". But at what if >>>>> the networks are small? >>>>> >>>>> The reason I ask is I'm wondering if I'd have anything to gain by setting >>>>> up static routing (now that the new UBNT beta added this to the gui). >>>>> >>>>> What I have is a satellite internet modem going to an MT box. The MT box >>>>> is wired to an 802.11g AP/wired switch (which has wireless clients). Also >>>>> wired to that switch are two backhauls with clients at the far ends. One >>>>> backhaul is a pair of PS2's (the one closest to the switch is WDS Station >>>>> and the far end is WDS AP with clients). The other backhaul is a pair of >>>>> NS5M's running Airmax (obviously no clients) and wired to the far NS5M is >>>>> a Bullet 2M running as 802.11b/g/n AP with clients. All the hardware is in >>>>> the 192.168.7.x/24 range as are most of the clients, though I give some >>>>> clients addresses in the 192.168.0.x/24 range to keep them isolated from >>>>> the hardware and other clients. The MT box doesn't allow traffic between >>>>> the 192.168.7.x and the 192.168.0.x net. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> ---PS2~~~~~~~PS2 >>>>> with clients (192.168.0.x) >>>>> / >>>>> Sat modem---MT box---switch/ap with clients 192.168.7.x >>>>> \ >>>>> >>>>> ----NS5M~~~~~NS5M----Bullet2M >>>>> with clients 192.168.7.x >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> I'm assuming now traffic for all clients transit all segments of the >>>>> network i.e. traffic for a client wirelessly connected to the Bullet2M is >>>>> also transiting the segment of the network comprised of the PS2's. Is that >>>>> right or does the gear (in this case the switch joining the different >>>>> segments of the network learn who's where and route the traffic >>>>> accordingly? I'm assuming not. So if I made it so the clients on each AP >>>>> were in a different subnet and static routed then traffic would only >>>>> travel the pertinent network segment? >>>>> >>>>> Greg >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>> WISPA Wants You! Join today! >>>>> http://signup.wispa.org/ >>>>> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>> >>>>> WISPA Wireless List: [email protected] >>>>> >>>>> Subscribe/Unsubscribe: >>>>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless >>>>> >>>>> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>> WISPA Wants You! Join today! >>>> http://signup.wispa.org/ >>>> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>> >>>> WISPA Wireless List: [email protected] >>>> >>>> Subscribe/Unsubscribe: >>>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless >>>> >>>> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> WISPA Wants You! Join today! >>> http://signup.wispa.org/ >>> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> >>> WISPA Wireless List: [email protected] >>> >>> Subscribe/Unsubscribe: >>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless >>> >>> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ >>> >>> >>> >> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- >> WISPA Wants You! Join today! >> http://signup.wispa.org/ >> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- >> >> WISPA Wireless List: [email protected] >> >> Subscribe/Unsubscribe: >> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless >> >> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ >> >> >> > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > WISPA Wants You! Join today! > http://signup.wispa.org/ > -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > WISPA Wireless List: [email protected] > > Subscribe/Unsubscribe: > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > > Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ > -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- WISPA Wireless List: [email protected] Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
