What most people are thinking of when they are thinking of a switch is something that applies to the enterprise and lower markets. The carrier level switches introduce a whole suite of features designed for the provisioning and deployment of services to others. Many times some of those features can be found in enterprise and lower switches, but they're not as well laid out and cohesive as a carrier switch.
----- Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com ----- Original Message ----- From: "Faisal Imtiaz" <[email protected]> To: [email protected] Sent: Saturday, October 13, 2012 8:46:30 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Ubiquiti Radios as routers hehe... A switch is a switch is a switch... and then there are switches with additional functionality built in... The question here is what is this 'other functionality' are we talking about ? Faisal Imtiaz Snappy Internet & Telecom 7266 SW 48 Street Miami, Fl 33155 Tel: 305 663 5518 x 232 Helpdesk: 305 663 5518 option 2 Email: [email protected] On 10/12/2012 10:47 PM, Mike Hammett wrote: > Fred, I don't think most of the people here understand what YOU'RE talking > about. They think a switch is just a switch and they're all the same, but > that's far from the truth. > > > > ----- > Mike Hammett > Intelligent Computing Solutions > http://www.ics-il.com > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Fred Goldstein" <[email protected]> > To: [email protected], "WISPA General List" <[email protected]> > Sent: Friday, October 12, 2012 6:19:49 PM > Subject: Re: [WISPA] Ubiquiti Radios as routers > > At 10/12/2012 07:06 PM, Faisal Imtiaz wrote: >> Being a Technical person, and a visual learner.. I am having trouble >> translating what Fred is trying to do with a Mikrotik, which he thinks >> it cannot do. > Actually, I said that I don't know how to do it, not that it can or > cannot be done. It may be a documentation problem, that they never > wrote down how to do it. > >> We build our Fixed wireless pop's with a Mikrotik Router doing the >> Routing Functions at each pop. >> Each of the Sectors are connected on their own port. >> AP's and CPE's are setup as WDS Bridges. >> >> This allows us to create a routed network..... (clients on each AP are >> bridged) .... >> >> But, if we wanted to, we could also do Vlan's across this type of setup, >> just as easily, especially now since UBNT firmware fully supports vlans... >> >> What am I missing ? > If you're doing routing, how do you also do VLANs? > > The VLAN is at a layer below IP, and (this is a key requirement) the > IP layer must be totally invisible to the box (RouterOS, EdgeOS, > etc.), and it might not even be an IP packet inside that VLAN. If it > is still IP, the address space belongs to the client, not the ISP. > > The Ethernet layer may require some kind of route-determination > protocol. Since it's not a real LAN, STP doesn't really hack it; > perhaps (in RouterOS) HWMP+ can do it. This protocol varies among CE > switches. If it's an edge (CPE) switch, though, it doesn't need to > participate in route-determination. > > >> On 10/12/2012 6:07 PM, Fred Goldstein wrote: >>> At 10/12/2012 05:48 PM, Butch Evans wrote: >>>> On Fri, 2012-10-12 at 10:52 -0400, Fred Goldstein wrote: >>>>> There's a real market gap not quite being filled by our usual WISP >>>>> vendors MT and UBNT. MT has a new CPE router with SFP support. This >>>>> would be great for a regional CE fiber network. Let's say you have a >>>>> building (say, Town Hall) with multiple tenants in it, each with a >>>>> separate IP network (say, Town administration, Police, and School >>>>> Admin). You'd want to be able to drop off one fiber with separate >>>>> VLANs (virtual circuits) for each network, isolating the traffic from >>>>> each other. An MEF switch is cheaper than a real Cisco router but a >>>>> Routerboard is cheaper yet! And it can't route since there are >>>>> multiple independent networks there, each with its own routers and >>>>> firewalls. Nor is bridging appropriate (not isolating). So a >>>>> Carrier Ethernet (MEF) switching option would fill that bill. Of >>>>> course the same software would work with a wireless feed to a >>>>> shared-tenant building, not needing the SFP version. >>>>> >>>>> I suspect the pieces are all there, just not the assembly >>>>> instructions or tools to facilitate it. It involves setting up VLANs >>>>> and queues. >>>> So, what you're saying is that you don't understand HOW to make the >>>> network using MT as a tool? NOTE: This is not the same as "It can't do >>>> ________". It's all in the documentation. You just have to either >>>> figure it out from what is there or ask for help from someone who has. >>> Yes, that's what I'm thinking. They never documented how to put >>> those pieces together, though they might work. And "Switched >>> Ethernet" would be a lovely tab on the side of Winbox and >>> Webfig. I'm from the old school, where the definition of "bug" is >>> "an undocumented feature", and where software was written to conform >>> to the documentation, not the other way around. >>> >>>> It is there and can be done in a number of different ways (bridged OR >>>> switched). Truth be told, I am amazed at what can be done in a small >>>> box like the mikrotik devices. It is a swiss army knife. However, the >>>> other side of this coin is that often, there is a BETTER tool for some >>>> network needs. Much like a swiss army knife, while it is true that it >>>> has a screwdriver built in, a REAL screwdriver is usually better suited. >>>> At the same time, often, you only need the functionality provided by the >>>> built-in screwdriver, but it takes a special knack to make it do the >>>> job. The point being, that while it is certainly possible to make >>>> RouterOS NOT be a router, why would you? If you want a switch, put in a >>>> switch. If you want to save money, just realize that you are trading >>>> something to get it. >>> Find me an MEF switch for only 200% of the price of an equivalent >>> Routerboard! (I suppose the new UBNT EdgeMAX will also fit that >>> test.) Most of the <$1000 Ethernet switches are pure LAN bridges, >>> not MEF 9/14. They use the same frame format but utterly different >>> semantics. Plus a RouterOS box might allow a mix of the two, routing >>> in one network and switching for everyone. >>> >>>> There is very little that you can't do with RouterOS in terms of vlan >>>> behaviors, but there certainly ARE a few limitations. Your needs will >>>> determine which is better. >>> -- >>> Fred Goldstein k1io fgoldstein "at" ionary.com >>> ionary Consulting http://www.ionary.com/ >>> +1 617 795 2701 >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Wireless mailing list >>> [email protected] >>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless >>> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Wireless mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > -- > Fred Goldstein k1io fgoldstein "at" ionary.com > ionary Consulting http://www.ionary.com/ > +1 617 795 2701 > > _______________________________________________ > Wireless mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > _______________________________________________ > Wireless mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > _______________________________________________ Wireless mailing list [email protected] http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless _______________________________________________ Wireless mailing list [email protected] http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
