That is true.  They just added some fields for it.

I feel like Ubnt would add a dual WAN in the GUI if demand was there.

Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373
On May 4, 2016 9:55 PM, "Mathew Howard" <mhoward...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Yeah, I looked at setting it up that way at one point, but something
> didn't look like it was going to work quite the way I wanted it to... but I
> probably spent all of five minutes on it, so it may very well be possible.
> The way ePMP does it is really nice though... and simple.
>
> On Wed, May 4, 2016 at 8:38 PM, Josh Luthman <j...@imaginenetworksllc.com>
> wrote:
>
>> People do it for sure.  I want to say there was an example on the forums
>> or some where...
>>
>> Josh Luthman
>> Office: 937-552-2340
>> Direct: 937-552-2343
>> 1100 Wayne St
>> Suite 1337
>> Troy, OH 45373
>> On May 4, 2016 9:35 PM, "Mathew Howard" <mhoward...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> I have our ePMP's setup to get their public IP via PPPoE, and the radio
>>> also gets a completely separate private management IP via DHCP, which is
>>> the only way you can remotely access the radio, and it doesn't even have to
>>> be in a separate vlan unless you want it to be... and it's one checkbox to
>>> configure it.
>>>
>>> I'm not sure if that can be duplicated on UBNT or not, since I haven't
>>> really tried yet, but at the very least it's a lot more complicated to
>>> configure.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Wed, May 4, 2016 at 7:04 PM, Josh Luthman <
>>> j...@imaginenetworksllc.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> It does...you just need to set it up that way.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Josh Luthman
>>>> Office: 937-552-2340
>>>> Direct: 937-552-2343
>>>> 1100 Wayne St
>>>> Suite 1337
>>>> Troy, OH 45373
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, May 4, 2016 at 7:54 PM, Mathew Howard <mhoward...@gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I really wish Ubiquiti radios had a separate management vlan option
>>>>> (in router mode), like ePMP does...
>>>>>
>>>>> On Wed, May 4, 2016 at 6:10 PM, Josh Reynolds <j...@kyneticwifi.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> I would encourage you to put your CPEs on a management vlan, in
>>>>>> RFC1918 space.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Wed, May 4, 2016 at 6:00 PM, SmarterBroadband
>>>>>> <li...@smarterbroadband.com> wrote:
>>>>>> > Hi Tushar
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > We run all radios in NAT mode.
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > Adam
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Tushar Patel
>>>>>> > Sent: Wednesday, May 04, 2016 3:34 PM
>>>>>> > To: af@afmug.com
>>>>>> > Subject: Re: [AFMUG] UBNT CPE being used for Abusive actions?
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > Radios could be put on private ip so nobody from outside world can
>>>>>> access
>>>>>> > it. That is what we do.
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > Tushar
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > On May 4, 2016, at 5:22 PM, SmarterBroadband <
>>>>>> li...@smarterbroadband.com>
>>>>>> > wrote:
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > I have received a number of emails for ab...@light-gap.net saying
>>>>>> certain of
>>>>>> > our IP address are being used for attacks (see email text below).
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > All IP addresses are in UBNT radios.  We are unable to remote
>>>>>> access any of
>>>>>> > the these radios now.  We see that the radio we are unable to access
>>>>>> > rebooted a couple of days ago.  A number of other radios show they
>>>>>> rebooted
>>>>>> > around the same time (in sequence) on the AP.  We are unable to
>>>>>> remote
>>>>>> > access any of those either. Other radios with longer uptime on the
>>>>>> AP’s are
>>>>>> > fine.
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > We have a tech on route to one of the customer sites.
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > We think the radios are being made into bots.  Anyone seen this or
>>>>>> anything
>>>>>> > like this?  Do the hackers need a username and password to hack a
>>>>>> radio?
>>>>>> > I.E.  Would a change of the password stop the changes being made to
>>>>>> the
>>>>>> > radios?  Any other thoughts, suggestions or ideas?
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > Thanks
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > Adam
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > Email Text below:
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > “This is a semi-automated e-mail from the LG-Mailproxy
>>>>>> authentication
>>>>>> > system, all requests have been approved manually by the
>>>>>> > system-administrators or are obviously unwanted (eg. requests to our
>>>>>> > spamtraps).
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > For further questions or if additional information is needed please
>>>>>> reply to
>>>>>> > this email.
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > The IP xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx has been banned for 48 hours due to
>>>>>> suspicious
>>>>>> > behaviour on our system.
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > This happened already 1 times.
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > It might be be part of a botnet, infected by a trojan/virus or
>>>>>> running
>>>>>> > brute-force attacks.
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > Our affected destination servers: smtp.light-gap.net,
>>>>>> imap.light-gap.net
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > Currently 7 failed/unauthorized logins attempts via SMTP/IMAP with 6
>>>>>> > different usernames and wrong password:
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > 2016-05-04T23:48:40+02:00 with username "
>>>>>> downloads.openscience.or.at"
>>>>>> > (spamtrap account)
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > 2016-05-04T22:47:19+02:00 with username "sp_woq" (spamtrap account)
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > 2016-05-04T14:55:11+02:00 with username "info" (spamtrap account)
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > 2016-05-03T21:24:22+02:00 with username "fips" (spamtrap account)
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > 2016-05-03T20:57:19+02:00 with username "
>>>>>> downloads.openscience.or.at"
>>>>>> > (spamtrap account)
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > 2016-05-03T10:13:59+02:00 with username "d10hw49WpH" (spamtrap
>>>>>> account)
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > 2016-05-03T05:34:43+02:00 with username "12345678" (spamtrap
>>>>>> account)
>>>>>> > Ongoing failed/unauthorized logins attempts will be logged and sent
>>>>>> to you
>>>>>> > every 24h until the IP will be permanently banned from our systems
>>>>>> after 72
>>>>>> > hours.
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > The Light-Gap.net Abuse Team.”
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> >
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>

Reply via email to