You need to use VLANs to pipe each AP back to your router on its own tag.
Then the router can make sure there is no AP to AP traffic.
This is the same as having a router at the tower with each AP on its own router
port.
From: Jan-GAMs
Sent: Saturday, June 19, 2021 9:28 AM
To: af@af.afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] BNG dynamic provisioning Re: strange outage
That's what we been doing for a long time. The ubiquiti switches are
manageable from the UISP. We use a VLAN for management.
On 6/19/21 7:10 AM, Chuck McCown via AF wrote:
UBNT US-8-60W is $109
VLAN tag each AP port. Set up your downlink as a VLAN trunk. Then each AP
will have its own private channel back to your core/edge router.
I am no VLAN expert by any means. There are lots of experts here. But this
is the method I used literally 18 years ago when faced with this same problem.
I used a cisco managed switch that was built for wide temperature conditions.
2900 or 2500 or something like that. Worked like a champ.
Are you sure the ubiquity switch you have at each tower does not support
VLANs?
From: Jan-GAMs
Sent: Saturday, June 19, 2021 6:23 AM
To: af@af.afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] BNG dynamic provisioning Re: strange outage
We have in each tower a ubiquiti switch and one or two APs plus an uplink(to
next tower towards the gateway) and a downlink(away from the gateway). We
don't have that many customers to support a huge investment.
Ok, looks like the advice is to replace the ubiquiti switches with ubiquiti
routers? I haven't seen in router setup any provision for BNG, maybe I'm
missing something. I'd never get management willing to replace a $100 switch
with a $3,000 Cisco router, especially on a network where we wouldn't make that
much ROI in several years (we have a board of directors who keep threatening to
shut us down, they're mostly from last century and barely know how to use a
cell-phone).
Am I wrong in thinking we can configure an Edgerouter X to prevent these
multicast storms we're having in our networks? I'm loathe to use any natting,
can I leave these in bridge-mode and get a solution to the problem?
On 6/18/21 5:24 PM, Mark Radabaugh wrote:
Absolutely! Glad to hear others are doing this - it’s what Amplex has
been doing for years.
I get really tired of the ‘experts’ telling everyone there is only one
‘right’ way to build a network, yet have never heard of this.
Mark
On Jun 18, 2021, at 3:48 PM, Carl Peterson <cpeter...@portnetworks.com>
wrote:
We use the same BNG for all our residential subs in a market. GPON,
Active Ethernet, and Fixed Wireless. Some of the fixed wireless stuff requires
a hack to run the CVLANS through another box to add the second tag but that's
cheap and easy enough. A Netonix 6 mini hanging off a switch can do it with
either 0x88a8 or a second 0x8100 tag. Cambium supports QinQ natively.
On Fri, Jun 18, 2021 at 2:36 PM D. Bernardi <dberna...@zitomedia.net>
wrote:
Thanks. This seems fairly common on GPON
networks as well so you could use this feature
for both GPON and Fixed Wireless on the same BGN.
At 01:59 PM 6/18/2021, you wrote:
>Juniper. We have a MX5 in production and a
>MX204 I'm setting up right now to replace it. Â
>Subscriber management is additional
>licensing. Not sure if just dynamic interface
>creation requires subscriber management
>licensing. I just looked on our production BNG
>and it isn't using subscriber-vlan. Â
>
>subscriber-accounting
>Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â 1Â Â Â Â Â Â 1 Â Â Â Â Â 0Â Â
permanent
>
>Â subscriber-authentication
>Â Â Â Â Â Â 0Â Â Â Â Â Â 1 Â Â Â Â Â 0Â Â permanent
>
>Â subscriber-address-assignment
>Â Â Â Â 1Â Â Â Â Â Â 1 Â Â Â Â Â 0Â Â permanent
>
>Â subscriber-vlan
>Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â 0Â Â Â Â Â
>Â 1 Â Â Â Â Â 0Â Â permanent
>
>Â
><https://www.juniper.net/documentation/en_US/junose15.1/topics/concept/dynamic-interfaces-overview.html>https://www.juniper.net/documentation/en_US/junose15.1/topics/concept/dynamic-interfaces-overview.html
>
>On Fri, Jun 18, 2021 at 12:34 PM D. Bernardi
><<mailto:dberna...@zitomedia.net>dberna...@zitomedia.net> wrote:
>At 12:35 PM 6/18/2021, Carl Peterson wrote:
> >We've gone full circle - Flat to fully routed to
> >MPLS/VPLS over a routed network back to
> >flat. You hit a scaling issue with routed
> >networks as you hit 10G and above, especially if
> >you aren't using Mikrotik or other low cost
> >routing. Real carrier grade switching is a lot
> >lower cost, lower power, and much easier to manage. Â
> >
> >Every customer has their own dedicated circuit
> >(SVLAN.CVLAN). The corresponding interface on
> >the BNG is dynamically created for the
> >subscriber with attributes out of radius. Â
> >Something like this isn't the right answer at
> >100 customers but you should consider it or
> >something like it once you go north of a few k subs. Â
>
>
>What are you using for the BNG and does it
>require an additional license for dynamic interface creation?
>
>
>
>
>--
>AF mailing list
><mailto:AF@af.afmug.com>AF@af.afmug.com
>http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
>
>
>
>--
>
>Carl Peterson
>
>PORT NETWORKS
>
>401 E Pratt St, Ste 2553
>
>Baltimore, MD 21202
>
>(410) 637-3707Â
>--
>AF mailing list
>AF@af.afmug.com
>http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
--
AF mailing list
AF@af.afmug.com
http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
--
Carl Peterson
PORT NETWORKS
401 E Pratt St, Ste 2553
Baltimore, MD 21202
(410) 637-3707
--
AF mailing list
AF@af.afmug.com
http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--
AF mailing list
AF@af.afmug.com
http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--
AF mailing list
AF@af.afmug.com
http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
--
AF mailing list
AF@af.afmug.com
http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
