RB850Gx2 is a great product! :)
Erich Kaiser North Central Tower er...@northcentraltower.com Office: 630-621-4804 Cell: 630-777-9291 On Mon, Mar 30, 2015 at 7:18 PM, Ken Hohhof <af...@kwisp.com> wrote: > Seems like the RB850Gx2 gets no love? > > *From:* Josh Baird <joshba...@gmail.com> > *Sent:* Monday, March 30, 2015 6:57 PM > *To:* af@afmug.com > *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Mikrotik Pros/Cons and recomendations > > We have a ton of 450G's out in the field at towers for smaller sites. > We also typically use the 450G as a 'managed router' solution for dedicated > business customers. Backhauls go into routed ports, AP's go into a > bridge. When we need more interfaces, we start to look at the 2011 for > small to medium sized sites. We have 1100AHX2's at our larger sites mostly > due to the number of interfaces. We usually don't put switches at sites > although this will probably change as we are considering deploying the > Netonix DC switches at the top-of-tower for some sites. > > We do not use MT for the edge and core of our network. If you do choose > to go with MT in the edge role, I would look into x86, especially if you > are taking full routing tables from your provider(s). As others have said > (and I will echo); if you are used to a L2 switch like HP/Cisco and need to > do much with VLANs, you may want to stick with them. > > Josh > > On Mon, Mar 30, 2015 at 7:45 PM, That One Guy <thatoneguyst...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> Great input guys, I truly appreciate it. >> >> On the RB110 AH, I see "Includes switch to enable Ethernet bypass mode in >> two ports" What is this? Tell me it turns those two ports into a couple if >> the router fails, that would be nice if we opt to fully route our backhauls. >> >> Currently, at the sites we have routers at, we have all the backhauls and >> our battery backup coming into a switch ( had a failed RSTP implementation >> previously, then moved to manual redundant failover), this connects the a >> port on a router, then the interior port of the router connects to a switch >> that houses the site APs. assuming I dont exceed the number of ports in the >> device I can still bridge ports and achieve essentially the same thing, >> freeing up both battery consumption and cost? I like the modular approach >> of three things (APs tend to be the source of lighting taking out the >> internal switch, but leaving the backhauls intact), but it does add >> substantial hurt when lighting strikes in replacement costs, especially at >> small sites. >> >> We have imagestream rebel routers for our two primary, we have never had >> any performance issue or trouble out of them. Without actually going and >> looking at the specs on the two I think I would be safe at this point to >> replace them with the RB110AH, and move them downstream replacing them with >> these CCRs or a third party hardware as we progress to a respectable >> network if there is any impact? >> >> This would be a preferred POP router as well, with the option of smaller >> sites using a smaller (cheaper) unit until the site demanded it. >> >> For the customer, we only provide the air router for cheap wireless, with >> no guarantees on coverage, we set the ESSID based on their name and the key >> based on their MAC, no exceptions, policy is if theyre having problems, we >> shut the wireless off and have them purchase their own AP or wireless >> router and replace ours, seeking in house wireless support from that >> vendor. If we can source the RB951-2N at a comparable price to the air >> router, then with our wireless policy in mind it is a sufficient >> replacement with more potential features including gigabit ethernet? >> >> >> Getting the routed network components under a single interface has a huge >> amount of benefit to me in regard to getting my guys capable of replacing >> me if that came to pass. The current network requires familiarity with too >> many brands and too many interfaces to have an unmotivated second. If I get >> hit by a bus tomorrow, the company could reach out to the community to get >> a handle on the design even without my poorly documented notes. >> >> >> >> >> On Mon, Mar 30, 2015 at 6:06 PM, Gilbert Gutierrez < >> mailing-li...@phoenixinternet.net> wrote: >> >>> I would also suggest getting a WISP consulting company involved if you >>> have questions on what products to use. BGP can be an issue with full >>> routes on a CCR due to the way RouterOS is designed with that processor. >>> x86 processor handles BGP great. With that being said, I have over a >>> Gigabit of traffic flowing over some CCR routers with full routing tables >>> from 2 providers and it works fine (for well over a year). I have a third >>> provider with one of Dennis' x86 machines and it also works great. >>> >>> Gilbert T. Gutierrez, Jr. >>> Operations Manager >>> Phoenix Internet >>> >>> >>> On 3/30/2015 2:51 PM, Dennis Burgess wrote: >>> >>> Steve, >>> >>> >>> >>> I would suggest listening to the people here as well as maybe getting a >>> WISP consulting company to steer you in the right direction . Also the MT >>> vendor should be able to give you all of the recommendations that you need >>> on hardware. . Lots of options, however, you may be able to get off with >>> less expensive routers but that’s depends on what you are doing, and/or >>> what you are planning for. >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> Dennis Burgess, CTO, Link Technologies, Inc. >>> >>> den...@linktechs.net – 314-735-0270 – www.linktechs.net >>> >>> >>> >>> *From:* Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com <af-boun...@afmug.com>] *On >>> Behalf Of *That One Guy >>> *Sent:* Monday, March 30, 2015 2:27 PM >>> *To:* af@afmug.com >>> *Subject:* [AFMUG] Mikrotik Pros/Cons and recomendations >>> >>> >>> >>> After poking around at many different brands, it seems Mikrotik is the >>> right fit for our network and budget. >>> >>> >>> >>> I dont fully understand the licensing tiers >>> >>> >>> >>> Is there a sizing chart on these? >>> >>> >>> >>> Is the interface similar between the router models and the switch >>> models? Are the mikrotik switches comparable to the HP procurve in >>> reliability? >>> >>> >>> >>> It would be the bees knees to see out network more universal as far as >>> management interfaces go, we have three purposes for routers: >>> >>> >>> >>> our upstream routers, which we have 2, will ultimately be running OSPF >>> internally and BGP externally (current thought) 200mbps-1gbps projected >>> need through the next couple of years. >>> >>> >>> >>> Our network/POP routers ranging from 1 customer at a POP to 150 >>> >>> >>> >>> A residential solution comparable to the UBNT AirRouters (1-25mbps rate >>> plans) wifi capable. >>> >>> >>> >>> If the switches have similar interfaces, we would look toward replacing >>> a combination of UBNT toughswitch POE, and a variety of HP procurves from >>> 1810G to 2510G and their other POE models. >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> I note alot of discussion regarding MT ethernet negotiation flakiness, >>> how much of an impact does this present? Right now we have imagestream and >>> fortigate on the network, and have zero issues with that. >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> The decision to go toward mikrotik is primarily based on cost and >>> community support availability within the industry. (this consideration has >>> alot to do with a single point of administrative failure in only having one >>> person, me, training to design, maintain, support, and grow the network, in >>> the event i became absent from the picture) The winbox interface and >>> feature availability within was also a primary consideration for support >>> staff. >>> >>> >>> >>> I would like to her from people entrenched in MT who love/hate it, >>> anybody who turned their back on it, and anybody who moved toward it. >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> >>> If you only see yourself as part of the team but you don't see your team >>> as part of yourself you have already failed as part of the team. >>> >>> >>> >> >> >> -- >> If you only see yourself as part of the team but you don't see your >> team as part of yourself you have already failed as part of the team. >> > >
