At 10/15/2010 07:45 AM, MikeH wrote: > I think it feels like you're walking into the wolves' den because >everyone else has such excellent experiences with Mikrotik routing. I >can assure you that it's not the load alone that's making Mikrotik flake >out. > >I'm not going to pretend I know your network size or capacity >requirements, but Travis runs a network with thousands of users and >hundreds of megabits in use at any one time. Brad's network has just as >much capacity if not more than Travis.
Merely curious at this stage... WHICH model MikroTiks are misbehaving? If it is a CPU speed or memory issue, it could vary based on which generation or specific model of Routerboard is in use. I'm leery of LAN-style "bridging". I don't know if it's the case in your network, but traditional LAN bridges let everyone hear everyone else's broadcasts. I much prefer Layer 2 "switching". This isn't the same as routing, since it passes IP transparently, but it isolates users from one another and uses VLAN tags rather than MAC addresses. I have a hunch (and may be *all wet*; this is NOT based on actual knowledge, as I am not a coder and couldn't decipher a driver if you laid it out on a silver platter in front of me) that bridging, with MAC addresses, uses certain hardware features that are bypassed in switching, where it might do more in software. This would have been a bad idea 20 years ago when CPUs were slow and RAM was expensive... Maybe turning on VLAN tagging could help. Just guessing! -- Fred Goldstein k1io fgoldstein "at" ionary.com ionary Consulting http://www.ionary.com/ +1 617 795 2701 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 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/
