Ah, ok. He should use his words and say that then :P
On Sun, Apr 2, 2017 at 10:14 AM, Mike Hammett <[email protected]> wrote: > Right, it isn't immediate.. and that's the whole point of Ethernet > drop... immediate IGP reconvergence. > > > ----- > 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 Baird" <[email protected]> > *To: *[email protected] > *Sent: *Sunday, April 2, 2017 10:02:48 AM > *Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] Gigabit ethernet converters? > > 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> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >> >> > >
