Lol... startac is my phone, newton is my ipad.... Gino A. Villarini [email protected] Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp. 787.273.4143 -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Jeff Broadwick - Lists Sent: Saturday, October 13, 2012 12:28 PM To: [email protected]; WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Ubiquiti Radios as routers
I do...it used to say his Motorola Startac... Sent from my iPhone On Oct 13, 2012, at 12:12 PM, Faisal Imtiaz <[email protected]> wrote: > ...now for a little bit of a distraction... > >>>>>>>> Sent from a Apple Newton > > Every time I see the above tag line on Gino's email... I cannot help but > crack a smile... > > now how many folks know what an Apple Newton was ? > > > > > 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 10/13/2012 11:33 AM, Gino Villarini wrote: >> It can be done with Mk and Canopy, both support qinq >> >> Sent from a Apple Newton >> >> >> On Oct 13, 2012, at 11:29 AM, "Tim Densmore" >> <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> Hi Fred, >>> >>> I think a lot of the confusion here comes from the fact that you're >>> using generic terms like "switching" and "VLAN" to describe complex >>> Metro-E/Carrier-E scenarios. Standard VLANs break up broadcast >>> domains, but they don't create virtual circuits or provide total >>> isolation - this is one of the reasons I initially asked what you were >>> describing. >>> Metro-e q-in-q with stag/ctag UNIs and EVCs behave much differently >>> than standard packet switched ethernet "dot1q" VLANs in that regard. >>> I'd reference the different metro-e IEEE standards if I were smart >>> enough to keep them all in my head or unlazy enough to look them up. >>> >>> Tons of info available at metroethernetforum.org for folks who are >>> trying to figure out what I'm talking about. >>> >>> I'd be extremely impressed to learn that you could do a decent >>> metro-e roll-out with ubnt and mt. In the WISP world, I'd expect >>> single-tagged dot1q VLANs to be enough to differentiate customer >>> traffic, even in large-ish MPOP scenarios. How many POPs generally >>> hang off a single network segment before hitting a router? >>> >>> Thanks for the interesting discussion! >>> >>> TD >>> >>> On 10/12/2012 10:14 PM, Fred Goldstein wrote: >>>> I'm not sure we're talking about the same thing. It is allowing >>>> only the VLAN to go from A to B, while nothing else goes to A or B, >>>> and the VLAN is invisible to everyone else. Which is really >>>> virtual circuit behavior; VLAN is the legacy name of the VC ID. >>>> >>>> In CE switching, then, the VLAN receives no broadcasts from anyone >>>> else on the switch or network, and sends no broadcasts outside. >>>> What goes onto that mapped port, or onto a VLAN pre-tagged to go to >>>> that port, is totally and completely invisible to all other users. >>>> So it's secure enough for public safety use on a shared PMD. This >>>> is different from a bridge, where broadcasts go everywhere. One >>>> type of MEF service (EP-LAN) does actually emulate a LAN with >2 >>>> ports and broadcasts among them, but the more common EPL and EVPL >>>> would not know a broadcast frame from anything else, since they >>>> just pass the MAC addresses transparently. >>> _______________________________________________ >>> 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 _______________________________________________ Wireless mailing list [email protected] http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
