Ding. It's not going to be as fast, which is the point that I believe Mike is trying to make.
On Sun, Apr 2, 2017 at 10:53 AM, Josh Reynolds <[email protected]> wrote: > Doesn't matter ; if the hellos are dropped completely it will trigger a > path recalculate. Ideally not as fast as a link drop, but it's better than > running over a shitty path with too little capacity. > > On Apr 2, 2017 9:46 AM, "Josh Baird" <[email protected]> wrote: > > You still have a physical link from the switch<>router which remains up. > > On Sun, Apr 2, 2017 at 10:30 AM, Josh Reynolds <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> So IGP path runs over AirFiber path that is connected to switch. AirFiber >> link fades below a certain level. This forces Ethernet drop to switch. IGP >> path is now broken. IGP path drops hellos, IGP reconverges on alternate >> path. >> >> What am I missing? >> >> On Apr 2, 2017 9:25 AM, "Mike Hammett" <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> That feature doesn't work if there's a switch in the middle. >>> >>> >>> >>> ----- >>> Mike Hammett >>> Intelligent Computing Solutions <http://www.ics-il.com/> >>> <https://www.facebook.com/ICSIL> >>> <https://plus.google.com/+IntelligentComputingSolutionsDeKalb> >>> <https://www.linkedin.com/company/intelligent-computing-solutions> >>> <https://twitter.com/ICSIL> >>> Midwest Internet Exchange <http://www.midwest-ix.com/> >>> <https://www.facebook.com/mdwestix> >>> <https://www.linkedin.com/company/midwest-internet-exchange> >>> <https://twitter.com/mdwestix> >>> The Brothers WISP <http://www.thebrotherswisp.com/> >>> <https://www.facebook.com/thebrotherswisp> >>> >>> >>> <https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCXSdfxQv7SpoRQYNyLwntZg> >>> ------------------------------ >>> *From: *"Josh Reynolds" <[email protected]> >>> *To: *[email protected] >>> *Sent: *Sunday, April 2, 2017 2:41:47 AM >>> *Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] Gigabit ethernet converters? >>> >>> Unless the backhaul is an airfiber, right? Didn't they add a feature to >>> drop Ethernet on disconnect just for this reason, or am I imagining things? >>> >>> On Mar 31, 2017 10:50 AM, "Mike Hammett" <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> A switch in line breaks the capabilities of the backhaul to drop the >>> Ethernet to force the IGP to reconverge immediately. >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> ----- >>> Mike Hammett >>> Intelligent Computing Solutions <http://www.ics-il.com/> >>> <https://www.facebook.com/ICSIL> >>> <https://plus.google.com/+IntelligentComputingSolutionsDeKalb> >>> <https://www.linkedin.com/company/intelligent-computing-solutions> >>> <https://twitter.com/ICSIL> >>> Midwest Internet Exchange <http://www.midwest-ix.com/> >>> <https://www.facebook.com/mdwestix> >>> <https://www.linkedin.com/company/midwest-internet-exchange> >>> <https://twitter.com/mdwestix> >>> The Brothers WISP <http://www.thebrotherswisp.com/> >>> <https://www.facebook.com/thebrotherswisp> >>> >>> >>> <https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCXSdfxQv7SpoRQYNyLwntZg> >>> ------------------------------ >>> *From: *"Paul McCall" <[email protected]> >>> *To: *[email protected] >>> *Sent: *Friday, March 31, 2017 9:38:37 AM >>> >>> *Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] Gigabit ethernet converters? >>> >>> If I had to guess when someone says they don’t want a switch up top, its >>> probably because of a practical consideration. Its why we didn’t put >>> Netonix up there. We wanted simple. The “switch” part of the S16 is non >>> “thing” to us. The VLANs are needed only because BHs are in it and OSPF >>> needs to have an interface to address, etc. >>> >>> >>> >>> Rip apart and S16 and add Sync Forrest ! >>> >>> >>> >>> Paul 😊 >>> >>> >>> >>> *From:* Af [mailto:[email protected]] *On Behalf Of *Forrest >>> Christian (List Account) >>> >>> *Sent:* Friday, March 31, 2017 10:08 AM >>> *To:* af <[email protected]> >>> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Gigabit ethernet converters? >>> >>> >>> >>> What I keep hearing from customers is that they want to run a >>> multistrand cable up the tower and have an all in one box at the top which >>> they terminate the cable into, hook up power to it, and then run short >>> jumpers to their radios. I've heard this from enough different customers >>> that it seems like a common desire. >>> >>> >>> >>> They all seem to want the box to do media conversion and power injection >>> and sync, with remote control and not much more. When quizzed about just >>> doing a switch and an injector up top, they all expressed how this was >>> unacceptable. >>> >>> >>> >>> At this point I'm looking at feasability. I'm not sure if this will >>> ever see the light of day, a lot depends on the amount of R&D required. >>> >>> >>> >>> On Mar 31, 2017 7:07 AM, "Paul McCall" <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> Forrest, >>> >>> >>> >>> For what it is worth, when we went Fiber (MST) up the tower, we run UBNT >>> S16s up there which is simple and working well, and GPS pucks on the ePMP, >>> or Syncbox 12 (or Junior) for devices that need sync. We have a handful of >>> 450s, 25 320s, and a dozen or so 900s where we use the SyncBox. >>> >>> >>> >>> Been very pleased so far with the reliability of the S16 POE. We VLAN >>> APs in one group and BH’s each on their own VLAN, and bring it down the >>> fiber. If we have other devices with fiber, we bring them down on their >>> own fiber (off the same MST). Of course there is core router with fiber >>> inputs only being used (with the exception of the sitemonitor which I may >>> have to buy a media converter for just to isolate the electrical connection >>> into the router. >>> >>> >>> >>> So, as far as anything up top, I would think it would have to be some >>> form of switch, or it would be quite kludgy. >>> >>> >>> >>> Paul >>> >>> >>> >>> *From:* Af [mailto:[email protected]] *On Behalf Of *Forrest >>> Christian (List Account) >>> >>> *Sent:* Thursday, March 30, 2017 8:26 PM >>> *To:* af <[email protected]> >>> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Gigabit ethernet converters? >>> >>> >>> >>> I've torn a couple apart that use a fairly easy to use chipset. But >>> only available in commercial temperature range. >>> >>> >>> >>> Some of the battle here is figuring out the vendors who do this type of >>> stuff. I want to avoid switches since I want this as transparent as >>> possible, but I might end up having to go there. I have another secret >>> weapon in my arsenal but I'm hoping I don't have to go there since that's >>> more software and software takes time. >>> >>> >>> >>> On Mar 30, 2017 2:21 PM, "Chuck McCown" <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> I looked at doing media converters last year. Not trivial. >>> >>> >>> >>> *From:* Forrest Christian (List Account) >>> >>> *Sent:* Thursday, March 30, 2017 2:07 PM >>> >>> *To:* af >>> >>> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Gigabit ethernet converters? >>> >>> >>> >>> Yeah, maybe I should be clearer what I'm looking at. >>> >>> >>> >>> I'm looking at various options to build a tower-top box to simplify the >>> fiber up the tower with syncronized radios at the top.. Think a multiport >>> ubiquiti fiberpoe with sync over power and a gps receiver built in, along >>> with tower-top management. >>> >>> >>> >>> I don't want to include a switch up top - most people want as little as >>> possible up there, and I'd rather keep the whole thing as simple as >>> possible - I'd rather just use a copper-to-sfp chipset, but I haven't found >>> any which I feel comfortable integrating. So I need to tear some more of >>> the units apart to figure out what chipsets are available. >>> >>> >>> >>> -forrest >>> >>> >>> >>> On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 8:12 AM, Adam Moffett <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>> >>> RB260. >>> >>> Haven't had one fail due to cold yet that I know of. That's a switch, >>> so maybe it's more complicated than you're going for. >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> ------ Original Message ------ >>> >>> From: "Forrest Christian (List Account)" <[email protected]> >>> >>> To: "af" <[email protected]> >>> >>> Sent: 3/30/2017 1:45:52 AM >>> >>> Subject: [AFMUG] Gigabit ethernet converters? >>> >>> >>> >>> I want to buy another selection of gigabit copper to sfp converters for >>> reverse engineering purposes. Ideally some which are known to work well >>> and especially any which don't fail in non climate controlled environments. >>> >>> >>> >>> What is everyone using? >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> >>> *Forrest Christian* *CEO, PacketFlux Technologies, Inc.* >>> >>> Tel: 406-449-3345 <(406)%20449-3345> | Address: 3577 Countryside Road, >>> Helena, MT 59602 >>> >>> [email protected] | http://www.packetflux.com >>> >>> <http://www.linkedin.com/in/fwchristian> >>> <http://facebook.com/packetflux> <http://twitter.com/@packetflux> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> > >
