Sorry bro..... hit the delete key.
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 10/19/2012 6:54 PM, Zach Mann wrote:
Wish we could unsubscribe from certain, never ending threads.
On Oct 19, 2012 5:52 PM, "Faisal Imtiaz" <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
i will respectfully disagree......WISP Industry is rather a broad
Term... How one provider (WISP or otherwise) sets up their Service
DMARC / Delivery of the Service is totally dependent on the WISP
and to
Whom they are delivering the Service to.
If you are saying what you are saying in the context of a Residential
Service Provider, there is plenty of proven options on how to define
that handoff...
If you are talking about Business service providers then the
answer can
be very different.
While this conversation is very interesting, I am thinking about how
this applies to us.... We are not delivering Residential Service, and
for businesses we do an Ethernet Hand-off, sometimes it is
directly off
the UBNT Radio, other times we install a Mikrotik Router as the Dmarc.
Doing this gives us the the ultimate flexibility to mix and match
service for the Customer, even in cases where they are wanting to have
L2 Transport and not internet access.. We use EoIP tunnels to
accomplish
that for them.
While it is nice to have an automated system, but keep in mind that
automated system and Flexibility are polar opposites. In my Opinion
WISP's are specialty providers, and as such have to offer
Flexibility...
In case of Residential Service ... There are existing documented
ways of
creating a Walled Garden, and letting the users Register, Cable
Industry
uses this approach for authenticating the Modems and matching them
to a
Subscriber Account..
However, I believe that what Fred is talking about is not
something that
applies fully to Residential Service.... (Remember all Resi
BroadBand is
classified as best effort, and there is a good reason for it...)
While I can understand Fred asking about CE (Carrier Ethernet) showing
up in WISP's networks, I am still puzzled as to the need of CE in
Radios
or Routers... Mikrotiks are routers, and very flexible tools.... There
is nothing stopping anyone today to deploy these in combination
with CE
switches...
The question of the day then becomes, is the problem the WISP's face,
have to do with the equipment they are using (not having these
functionality), or is the problem the WISP, building their network
in a
Layered approach so that the Common Denominators (of
functionality) can
be used as a mass provisioning tool....
I personally think that most WISP's want their Radios / devices to do
everything in the world for them, and do it extremely well, and do it
for a very in-expensive cost. which of course is not reality.
Customer Provisioning and Customer management are 'Systems' and not a
device or protocol.... AT&T / Comcast / Verizon, have the CPE mfg.
write special firmware for them to auto provision the devices, WISP's
can accomplish the same or similar using a Systems approach.
Faisal Imtiaz
Snappy Internet & Telecom
7266 SW 48 Street
Miami, Fl 33155
Tel: 305 663 5518 x 232 <tel:305%20663%205518%20x%20232>
Helpdesk: 305 663 5518 <tel:305%20663%205518> option 2 Email:
[email protected]
On 10/19/2012 4:50 PM, Mike Hammett wrote:
> What we're (well, I am anyway) saying is that the way the WISP
industry does it... is sub-optimal. The customer should be able
to supply whatever device they want, be handed up to a configured
maximum number of public IP addresses (specified per account), but
the CPE has managed all account authorization. The customer should
still be permitted to pass 1500 byte packets. The customer
shouldn't have any configuration on their behalf. You know... how
cable does it.
>
>
>
> -----
> Mike Hammett
> Intelligent Computing Solutions
> http://www.ics-il.com
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "LTI - Dennis Burgess" <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>>
> To: "WISPA General List" <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>>
> Sent: Friday, October 19, 2012 1:48:58 PM
> Subject: Re: [WISPA] Ubiquiti Radios as routers
>
>
> don't know why you would let the customer equipment auth. our
network all auth is done at the CPE that we control.
>
>
> On Fri, Oct 19, 2012 at 12:55 PM, Simon Westlake <
[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > wrote:
>
>
> Mike,
>
> I completely agree and I think it is a goal the WISP industry
needs to
> work towards - the provisioning of CPE is still a nightmare in
> comparison to DOCSIS. PPPoE is not a good solution, IMO - it's
arguably
> better than nothing but you shouldn't have to rely on the customer
> supplied equipment being configured correctly to just auth to the
> network - that's the job of the ISP CPE.
>
> It's not even that hard of a problem to solve in the grand
scheme of things.
>
>
>
> On 10/13/2012 8:55 AM, Mike Hammett wrote:
>> Well yes it is, but I believe the cable industry has it setup
the best. It's easy for the end user to BYOD and the ISP remains
hand-off. The WISP industry makes it difficult to do so. Currently
everything I do is NATed at the CPE, but I'd like to make that
optional, not a requirement. Obviously for enterprise\wholesale
level connections I do something different, but there's too many
hands involved to do that for residential at this time.
>>
>>
>>
>> -----
>> Mike Hammett
>> Intelligent Computing Solutions
>> http://www.ics-il.com
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "Faisal Imtiaz" < [email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]> >
>> To: "WISPA General List" < [email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]> >
>> Sent: Saturday, October 13, 2012 8:51:50 AM
>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] Ubiquiti Radios as routers
>>
>> While this is your opinion, others have a different opinion...
>> For what is it worth, It would be nice to have Radius
attributes for
>> provisioning the radio..It currently shows it to be on their
todo list.
>> As for your other item, I believe DHCP relay is built into the new
>> firmware .
>>
>> As far as NAT is concerned, it has it's place.
>>
>> Regards.
>>
>> Faisal Imtiaz
>> Snappy Internet & Telecom
>> 7266 SW 48 Street
>> Miami, Fl 33155
>> Tel: 305 663 5518 x 232 <tel:305%20663%205518%20x%20232>
>> Helpdesk: 305 663 5518 <tel:305%20663%205518> option 2 Email:
[email protected]
>>
>> On 10/12/2012 10:50 PM, Mike Hammett wrote:
>>> I want to see the removal of doing anything other than DHCP to
the client's device. The CPE radio pulls it's rate-shaping
information from RADIUS and allows any number of DHCP clients on a
per-CPE basis to pull a public IP.
>>>
>>> An ISP doing NAT is just silly.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> -----
>>> Mike Hammett
>>> Intelligent Computing Solutions
>>> http://www.ics-il.com
>>>
>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>> From: "Scott Reed" < [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> >
>>> To: "WISPA General List" < [email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]> >
>>> Sent: Friday, October 12, 2012 8:16:43 PM
>>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] Ubiquiti Radios as routers
>>>
>>>
>>> NAT at the at a couple of towers, but not at the CPE.
>>>
>>>
>>> On 10/11/2012 6:52 PM, Sam Tetherow wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Not sure I under stand the no-NAT, so every device on the
other side of the CPE has it's own public IP?
>>>
>>> On 10/11/2012 4:53 PM, Scott Reed wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> We run MT, not UBNT, CPE, but it doesn't matter what brand it
is. We run them in as routers, but do not NAT. Same benefits
others mentioned for routing, just one fewer NAT. Never have a
problem with it this way and can't see any good reason to NAT there.
>>>
>>>
>>> On 10/11/2012 3:46 PM, Arthur Stephens wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> We currently use Ubiquiti radios in bridge mode and assign a
ip address to the customers router.
>>> He have heard other wisp are using the Ubiquiti radio as a router.
>>> Would like feed back why one would do this when it appears
customers would be double natted when they hook up their routers?
>>> Or does it not matter from the customer experience?
>>>
>>>
>>> Thanks
>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Wireless mailing list
>> [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>> _______________________________________________
>> Wireless mailing list
>> [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
_______________________________________________
Wireless mailing list
[email protected] <mailto:[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
