Kind of a funny read, made me think of this Cox discussion. As usual, even when you pay for unlimited, it's not really, and if you piss off a random top-talker metric, you get smacked. Actually get what you pay for? Nah.
https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2020/06/cox-slows-internet-speeds-in-entire-neighborhoods-to-punish-any-heavy-users/ I don't buy the FUD about the "downgrade the whole neighborhood", unless the neighborhood is just overused/saturated as it is, in which case Cox needs to fix it with a node split per normal direction. They won't police/shape a whole neighborhood like that, rather they'd just decommission or lower the bandwidth on the offenders modem usually, ala this guy. May be a bit different if an actual Cox fiber/pon site, , but these seem still rare like hens teeth, and only was deployed as buzz during Google Fiber threatening them. Cox doing fiber to the home I think died with Google Fiber. -mb On Thu, May 14, 2020 at 9:32 AM Michael Butash <mich...@butash.net> wrote: > I'll agree with the CL being saturated comment - pretty sure it doesn't > matter whether DSL or Fiber, their peering and aggregation is the same per > region, and really it's where they converge that is the problem, which is > where said saturation occurs. CL just *feels* saturated in use, where I > didn't get that with Cox. Everything loads a little slower, you can just > sort of tell after using long enough. Cox would periodically too, but they > tended to already be working on a fix by the time I'd hit up someone I knew > there to complain. CL I have no such faith in. > > I'm paying almost half my Cox bill with CL however, and no random overage > charges, so I'm willing to live with it honestly, and it's never been *that > bad*. If I download something, it downloads quickly, be it http or > torrents. Just random viewing of pages in quick succession, ala scanning > news just always seems a bit slow to start. That usually feels like > buffers are blown out somewhere inline. > > -mb > > > On Wed, May 13, 2020 at 8:34 PM Thomas Scott via PLUG-discuss < > plug-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org> wrote: > >> They are welcome to, but node splits are a 6 month minimum last I checked >> 😁 - granted we're getting faster with how many we're doing. In the next 5 >> years, most cable operators will implement some sort of aggressive node >> splitting to keep up with demand. Current employer not excluded. >> >> I've had CLink on fiber - they're upstream nodes are a little more >> saturated, but they do peer locally in the valley. Current employer does >> have peering with FAANG and a couple other heavy hitters in the valley (not >> any proprietary information here, any trace route from the valley to those >> sites will show it terminating in 2 or 3 hops), but if I recall correctly >> 70% of CLink traffic hits their DCs in Phoenix. Granted it's all best >> effort past that, but if you don't have a heavily saturated node, you'll do >> all right. GPON fiber is GPON fiber, regardless of Service Provider. It's >> just a question of how many other subscribers are on your PON port and how >> big the upstream links are. >> >> - Thomas Scott | mr.thomas.sc...@gmail.com <mr.thomas.sc...@gmail.com> >> >> >> On Tue, May 12, 2020 at 4:04 PM Stephen Partington via PLUG-discuss < >> plug-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org> wrote: >> >>> This last bit is interesting. I have Cox Fiber (no data cap for >>> Gigablast fiber yet) and Century Link just announced a competing service in >>> my area. For about half the cost. For the same Gigabit Fiber (or 940mbps as >>> they are calling it). >>> >>> Anyone with any experience with them on residential fiber? >>> >>> On Tue, May 12, 2020 at 5:59 AM Michael Butash via PLUG-discuss < >>> plug-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org> wrote: >>> >>>> So Cox subs can reach out to you when we're having saturation issues? >>>> :) >>>> >>>> Having been around for the beginnings of cable modem tech at @home >>>> networks in the 90's dealing with almost every big MSO (Cox, Comcast, ATT, >>>> Intermedia, etc), I like to talk about the tech as a bit proud where it's >>>> gone. I liked Cox as one of the last decent hold-outs for things like >>>> keeping Usenet around longer than they should, not killing customers for >>>> mpaa/riaa abuse complaints, and keeping data caps off when the industry was >>>> moving in that direction, so I think they're better than the rest, but >>>> eventually they hopped on the money train with data caps too. And now >>>> they're paying for their pro-pirate stance as well with lawsuits >>>> against them winning >>>> <https://www.billboard.com/articles/business/legal-and-management/8546842/cox-1-billion-piracy-lawsuit-labels-publishers>, >>>> probably using that extra cap revenue to pay the trolls. >>>> >>>> Would I go back? Not as long as they have data caps, and someone else >>>> around me doesn't, but yes - much better network. I don't like random >>>> overages in my bill, I get that enough with power. If I thought the covid >>>> restrictions to remove caps would hold, I'd probably switch back now, but >>>> I'm sure they'll find a reason to reimplement them asap as that's lost >>>> revenue on your rsu's. >>>> >>>> It's always good to hear from other docsis speakers, welcome back! >>>> >>>> -mb >>>> >>>> >>>> On Mon, May 11, 2020 at 6:54 PM Thomas Scott <mr.thomas.sc...@gmail.com> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Day job is for a certain ISP HQ in Atlanta that supplies internet for >>>>> a lot of the valley - I work in Network Operations first in Phoenix and >>>>> now >>>>> in Atlanta, and was surprised to see so much of what I talk about everyday >>>>> in PLUG! >>>>> >>>>> CLink trying to play FTTN as FTTH, nothing new there. I live in a >>>>> neighborhood outside of Atlanta that had some AT&T brownfield development >>>>> for FTTH, and I've had no regrets (300 up 300 down!) Cox is moving towards >>>>> "10G" with DOCSIS 4.0 and they are getting fiber closer to the home with >>>>> their node splits. If you find that you all off a sudden have an extra hop >>>>> in your path, that might be the seen you've been on one of those nodes >>>>> that >>>>> have been lit and split. The amount of bandwidth going up and down will go >>>>> up dramatically. >>>>> >>>>> @Michael - yeah I don't think the caps are going anywhere, the >>>>> industry as a whole (driven by big red) has moved that direction, but I >>>>> think you'll see speeds and caps rise as N+0 goes to full duplex DOCSIS. I >>>>> do know they've been relaxed with the COVID-19 FCC initiatives, but how >>>>> long that lasts, I'm not sure. >>>>> >>>>> @Mac - the cox supplied modems are almost all going to "Panoramic >>>>> Wi-Fi" and the number of holes found in DOCSIS devices is... disturbing to >>>>> say the least. It was designed to be operated on a shared RF medium, and >>>>> like other "trusting" protocols (i.e. BGP) has a lot of issues. The more >>>>> virtualized it becomes, I think we'll see more of those go away - the >>>>> smaller the broadcast domains, and the smaller the first upstream router, >>>>> the better those will be able to be maintained and automated. Looking at >>>>> the road maps, it will be interesting what comes next. >>>>> >>>>> - Thomas Scott | mr.thomas.sc...@gmail.com >>>>> <mr.thomas.sc...@gmail.com> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Wed, May 6, 2020 at 3:54 PM Michael Butash via PLUG-discuss < >>>>> plug-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Oddly enough, the model number of your router stuck in my head, the >>>>>> C3000Z, and I realized I used the same thing, but for my 150mbps dsl >>>>>> modem. You sure you have actual gig fiber? They tend to misrepresent >>>>>> their actual products in sales. Ask me how I know. >>>>>> >>>>>> <tldr> >>>>>> >>>>>> I say this because I called CL before going to them, and asked if I >>>>>> could get fiber in the network. They said yes. Hmm, I knew damn well >>>>>> they >>>>>> did not, as no one wants to build fiber into old peoria neighborhoods >>>>>> such >>>>>> as mine. After some conversation and calling him out, he explained that >>>>>> "oh, it's a gigabit network", just not fiber to your house. I could get >>>>>> dual-band DSL, which means 75mbps x2, for a total of 150mbps, delivered >>>>>> by >>>>>> a gigabit network! I sort of facepalmed, but ordered it anyways as it >>>>>> was >>>>>> significantly more than I had with cox (80mbps at the time I think), >>>>>> significantly cheaper, and no bandwidth cap. >>>>>> >>>>>> If there is anything other than fiber directly in your modem, I'd >>>>>> call bullocks, but FTTH is a myth to me. >>>>>> >>>>>> Crappier service, but I'll take the (usually) cheap and fast. It is >>>>>> most certainly not gigabit fiber to my house, even though that's what >>>>>> they >>>>>> tried to sell me I was getting. Only new house/community builds get >>>>>> fiber, >>>>>> and if even that. Cox did the same to compete with Google fiber, and as >>>>>> soon as Google Fiber died, so did Cox ever mentioning fiber again. Truth >>>>>> is Cox doesn't need it, shielded coax can deliver soon 10g over it just >>>>>> fine with new modulation schemas and docsis improvements. Centurylink's >>>>>> 100 year old 2-8 wire infrastructure cannot, all they can do is build new >>>>>> with fiber, but they probably won't being decrepit. >>>>>> >>>>>> I hear friends of mine mention they have fiber, and wonder just if >>>>>> they really do. This is why Google Fiber folded, it was unrealistic >>>>>> unless >>>>>> a net-new community build. Google fiber retrofits were a disaster >>>>>> <https://gizmodo.com/when-google-fiber-abandons-your-city-as-a-failed-experi-1833244198> >>>>>> . >>>>>> >>>>>> Fun-fact: Oddly enough the guy that built Google Fiber, Milo Medin, >>>>>> is the same guy that started @Home Networks back in late 90's for Cable >>>>>> Modem services, and pioneered current industry standards in use today >>>>>> globally to deliver cable internet. The last-mile regional MSO providers >>>>>> snuffed him/company back then, took it over themselves, and then they >>>>>> snuffed him out again as he tried the same incursion with Google Fiber, >>>>>> and >>>>>> realized it just cost too damn much to compete. Cable Monopolies, >>>>>> flawless >>>>>> victory. >>>>>> >>>>>> Next I expect he'll team up with Elon or Bezos to try again via >>>>>> terrestrial. >>>>>> >>>>>> -mb >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On Wed, May 6, 2020 at 10:32 AM Michael Butash <mich...@butash.net> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> I tend to find the CL network a bit wonky, having moved to DSL from >>>>>>> Cox (damn bandwidth caps). I find the general performance is worse than >>>>>>> cox, where I suspect they simply don't manage the bandwidth and are far >>>>>>> too >>>>>>> oversubscribed as it feels like the internet buffers at times, >>>>>>> literally. >>>>>>> Cox would occasionally get that way too, and it was easy to see in an >>>>>>> ongoing MTR when their peering in LA would get slammed and latency would >>>>>>> jump (not to mention I know the guys that manage that bandwidth, telling >>>>>>> them often got it fixed). Oddly Using MTR with CL, they filter icmp/udp >>>>>>> specifically that seems to hide responses to track well. Go figure, >>>>>>> truth >>>>>>> hurts, so hide it. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Having worked for service providers numerous times over the years, >>>>>>> working in and building them, routers are always an issue in a metro >>>>>>> city >>>>>>> or even interstate networks. No two platforms are ever the same, >>>>>>> whether >>>>>>> buying all Cisco, Juniper, Nokia, or any combo of all and more, which as >>>>>>> you said, many do. Hardest part is usually capacity planning, >>>>>>> particularly >>>>>>> with something like covid, every isp took a kick in the groin at the >>>>>>> same >>>>>>> time to augment their networks, suddenly by some magnitude, when >>>>>>> everyone >>>>>>> else in the world is doing the same. Slowness in networking can often >>>>>>> be >>>>>>> attributed to those not having enough capacity, though they'll never >>>>>>> admit >>>>>>> it. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I'm on the 150mbps dsl, and a speed test can provide that for sure, >>>>>>> but general usage, which I use a lot of tabs and apps, tends to bring >>>>>>> things to a crawl often. I'd even go back to cox if they got rid of the >>>>>>> bandwidth cap. CL might as well be government, and they're run by >>>>>>> unions, >>>>>>> so nothing happens fast, including capacity augments. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Re: mac limits, having been around Cox both as a customer and >>>>>>> network engineer working there early 2000's, the mac security was more >>>>>>> about limiting the amount of hosts behind a modem that could be allowed >>>>>>> to >>>>>>> a single mac and IP address. Back Circa 1998 I had my first Cox modem, >>>>>>> and there were no routers, you just got yourself a phat 10baset switch >>>>>>> from >>>>>>> computer city and connected up your family on public ip addresses, each >>>>>>> with their own mac and ip's. With no limits or filters that led to >>>>>>> security issues (hey, I see my neighbor's c drive shared!), Cox and >>>>>>> others >>>>>>> then pushed people to then buy a router, which by then around 2002, you >>>>>>> could buy a cheap wrt54g linksys. The advent of docsis also allowed to >>>>>>> both filter and restrict the macs by default, also let them reduce to >>>>>>> now >>>>>>> 1:1 IP to User ratio, which was good for ip management, the abuse >>>>>>> departments, and fbi warrants from legal. You used to be able to buy >>>>>>> another ip, they'd push a new docsis config with mac-alowed=2, but not >>>>>>> anymore. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Same reasons they're just building in the router functions now, it >>>>>>> ensures they can offer some basic customer security, plus lets them run >>>>>>> whatever spyware in their embedded router os they want. Better off >>>>>>> buying >>>>>>> your own standalone modem and router combo, one you ideally trust. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -mb >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Tue, May 5, 2020 at 10:07 PM Donald Mac McCarthy via PLUG-discuss >>>>>>> <plug-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Putting a CL modem into a bridge mode where it only handles the >>>>>>>> PPPoE connection is simply checking a radial select button and hitting >>>>>>>> apply. If your firewall supports PPoE, even better, as you no longer >>>>>>>> need >>>>>>>> their Modem and router in the mix. But, that is just my experience, >>>>>>>> and it >>>>>>>> is limited. I have a CL fiber to the door drop, and they gave me a >>>>>>>> Zyxel >>>>>>>> C3000Z device for connection. I promptly ripped it out and allowed >>>>>>>> pfSense >>>>>>>> to maintain the PPPoE connection. I had to call support for packet >>>>>>>> loss one >>>>>>>> time, and they refused to help me. So goes it rolling your own I guess. >>>>>>>> Turns out a day later we had a several hour outage due to one of the >>>>>>>> multiplexing cards used to distribute the 40Gb/s core fiber to the GPON >>>>>>>> devices failed. Seems like that was a likely culprit for some of the >>>>>>>> packet >>>>>>>> loss the previous day. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Having just gotten off a call in which the Senior Director of >>>>>>>> Security Architecture and Engineering (a friend of mine from Atlanta) >>>>>>>> for >>>>>>>> Cox was a participant, before he hung up I asked him about the typical >>>>>>>> Cox >>>>>>>> supplied modems. Very, very few of them are purely bridge devices - >>>>>>>> especially with the push to "Panoramic WiFi". A member of CentryLink >>>>>>>> who >>>>>>>> was also on the call (ISP InfoSec sharing/working group) mentioned how >>>>>>>> painful it was to support the number of company issued >>>>>>>> modems/gateway/router models there are for different infrastructure and >>>>>>>> connections - let alone ones that customers buy and bring to the party. >>>>>>>> BTW, the MAC address thing is because they do actually use a MAC >>>>>>>> locking >>>>>>>> like feature for security. Apparently it is bad for the network if you >>>>>>>> just >>>>>>>> go plug your modem in at several houses in the neighborhood due to the >>>>>>>> way >>>>>>>> DOCSIS works. I still have to dig into that and ask some more >>>>>>>> questions on >>>>>>>> that one. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> There was a collective groan among the engineers when another ISP >>>>>>>> spoke up about the number of critical flaws they find in their DOCIS >>>>>>>> devices each year. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> With the amount of consolidation which has happened in the past 20 >>>>>>>> years in the broadband market, the landscape is riddled with legacy >>>>>>>> bits >>>>>>>> and pieces of this provider and that provider somehow being coerced >>>>>>>> into >>>>>>>> working together to accomplish passing traffic. One of the ISPs >>>>>>>> mentioned >>>>>>>> they had no less than 350 different models of core switching equipment >>>>>>>> made >>>>>>>> by more than a dozen manufacturers in their network. They have a team >>>>>>>> of 40 >>>>>>>> (really 5 teams of 8) that simply monitor and ensure that the OSPF >>>>>>>> functions properly among the various models and brands to make sure >>>>>>>> that >>>>>>>> the network properly heals/manages congestion. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Anyway, just throwing it out so that people can see and understand >>>>>>>> the picture at a higher level. The final comment on the call was from >>>>>>>> an >>>>>>>> engineer at a midwestern rural provider and one that I am sure many of >>>>>>>> us >>>>>>>> can relate to. She said she spends all day pulling her hair out trying >>>>>>>> to >>>>>>>> keep the network functioning at the highest of levels. The first words >>>>>>>> out >>>>>>>> of her kids' mouths when she gets home are "Mom, the WiFi seems slow >>>>>>>> today." >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I talked with Alexander this afternoon, and it looks like he has a >>>>>>>> functioning network again. The APs were reluctant to give up their old >>>>>>>> configuration, so a factory reset and new DHCP leases seem to have >>>>>>>> done the >>>>>>>> trick. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Hopefully this sheds a bit of light on something for a few people. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Mac >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Michael Butash via PLUG-discuss wrote on 5/4/20 4:59 PM: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Ideally when you plug into a cable modem, it comes up, and passes >>>>>>>> your ethernet to the cmts in a bridge, lets one mac address dhcp/arp, >>>>>>>> and >>>>>>>> things work. It learns that one ip/mac, and disallows any other mac. >>>>>>>> No >>>>>>>> security, nat, nothing, just real dumb dhcp + default routing with a >>>>>>>> public >>>>>>>> ip. Routers/firewalls try to NAT you, thus double NAT if using a >>>>>>>> router >>>>>>>> behind it. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> CL sells you a dsl modem/router that does your local security >>>>>>>> whether you want it or not, full router/nat/firewall, and probably >>>>>>>> spyware. Making it a modem is possible, but takes work, and your >>>>>>>> firewall >>>>>>>> has to support PPPoE (not all can/do). Last time I touched a combo Cox >>>>>>>> router/modem, I didn't see any way to do so. I told them to buy a real >>>>>>>> modem, and that worked with their belkin/cisco/linksys/netgear they >>>>>>>> had. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> If your "modem" mentions wifi, it's a router/firewall, not a >>>>>>>> modem. Not all are clear about this, as they dumb it down for >>>>>>>> consumers, >>>>>>>> but an important point. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> -mb >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Mon, May 4, 2020 at 1:53 PM Stephen Partington via PLUG-discuss < >>>>>>>> plug-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> I Owned a Nighthawk Router/Modem combo, The way that Netgear >>>>>>>>> handled that is that the modem was hard-wired to a bridge on the >>>>>>>>> router >>>>>>>>> side. and technically you could see it as a separate device in the >>>>>>>>> router >>>>>>>>> configs if you rooted around enough. but the modem side was just a >>>>>>>>> modem. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On Mon, May 4, 2020 at 11:03 AM Michael Butash via PLUG-discuss < >>>>>>>>> plug-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org> wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Cox modems *are* bridges first and foremost typically, unless you >>>>>>>>>> get a bundled router/modem, which is only what CenturyLink sells. >>>>>>>>>> If you >>>>>>>>>> got a "router/modem" combo, just buy a modem-only device for a dumb >>>>>>>>>> bridge >>>>>>>>>> and simple ethernet for a public ip. I recommend staying with an >>>>>>>>>> arris >>>>>>>>>> cable modem, originally motorola, they basically developed cable >>>>>>>>>> modem >>>>>>>>>> docsis, and are always the best. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> I moved from Cox to CL when Cox started adding a usage cap, and >>>>>>>>>> that was new to me to get my Fortinet firewall online with CL and >>>>>>>>>> their DSL >>>>>>>>>> doing PPPOE. I've seen the router/cable modem combo boxes later, >>>>>>>>>> but never >>>>>>>>>> owned one as I always have my own router/firewall. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> -mb >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> On Mon, May 4, 2020 at 8:36 AM Donald Mac McCarthy < >>>>>>>>>> m...@oscontext.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Will Cox allow for a bridge/virtual bridge mode? Xfinity does, >>>>>>>>>>> which allows you to put in a firewall, and use the modem only as a >>>>>>>>>>> gateway, >>>>>>>>>>> therefore preventing a double NAT situation. Never lived in a Cox >>>>>>>>>>> area >>>>>>>>>>> before, and currently ride CL fiber. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Mac >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Michael Butash via PLUG-discuss wrote on 5/3/20 2:00 PM: >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Cox modems will learn and allow only 1 mac at a time (unless >>>>>>>>>>> business is set to allow more, but not on residential). If >>>>>>>>>>> switching out >>>>>>>>>>> firewalls, I 99% of time reboot the modem first and foremost. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> -mb >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> On Sun, May 3, 2020 at 12:08 PM Snyder, Alexander J via >>>>>>>>>>> PLUG-discuss <plug-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> I got it working. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> I assigned the SFP+ port as my LAN and assigned it the >>>>>>>>>>>> 10.x.x.x/16 network. Then I had to call COX and list the WAN Mac >>>>>>>>>>>> address >>>>>>>>>>>> with them. Upon doing so I was able to reach external sites, and >>>>>>>>>>>> all >>>>>>>>>>>> downstream devices started coming alive! >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks for all the suggestions and help! >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>>>>>>>> Alexander >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Sent from my Galaxy S10+ >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> On Sun, May 3, 2020, 03:14 Herminio Hernandez, Jr. via >>>>>>>>>>>> PLUG-discuss <plug-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Can you login to the FW via the LAN interface? Can you ping >>>>>>>>>>>>> the FW LAN interface? Check the routing and NAT policy on the FW. >>>>>>>>>>>>> All >>>>>>>>>>>>> outbound traffic should NAT to the FW WAN interface and there >>>>>>>>>>>>> should be a >>>>>>>>>>>>> default (0.0.0.0/0) route to the internet. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, May 2, 2020 at 7:27 PM Seabass via PLUG-discuss < >>>>>>>>>>>>> plug-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm with Mac, I think it is not the firewall, but if you have >>>>>>>>>>>>>> the ability to plug it into a display with a keyboard, you can >>>>>>>>>>>>>> use that for >>>>>>>>>>>>>> configuration and modify a different device at the same time. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Makes it easier to troubleshoot by giving you the ability to >>>>>>>>>>>>>> configure your pfSense ports at the same time. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Message: 2 >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Date: Sat, 2 May 2020 09:04:35 -0700 >>>>>>>>>>>>>> From: Donald Mac McCarthy <m...@oscontext.com> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> To: "Snyder, Alexander J via PLUG-discuss" >>>>>>>>>>>>>> <plug-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Subject: Re: pfSense + Ubiquity >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Message-ID: < >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 18adfa38-3e72-7b0a-e31a-1ddf175d7...@oscontext.com> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> I can help - but I am unavailable to do so until tomorrow. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Make sure there are not any thing other than default VLANs on >>>>>>>>>>>>>> the >>>>>>>>>>>>>> interfaces to start with. Ubiquiti is famous for not havinght >>>>>>>>>>>>>> eSFP+ >>>>>>>>>>>>>> ports active in the default configuration, and I believe the >>>>>>>>>>>>>> switch has >>>>>>>>>>>>>> all the ports to shutdown on default config as well. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> I think it is the switch not passing traffic through - no the >>>>>>>>>>>>>> firewall. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mac >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Snyder, Alexander J via PLUG-discuss wrote on 5/2/20 8:53 AM: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > Does anyone out there have experience with pfSence and >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Ubiquity switches? >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > I have zero with either but that didn't stop me from buying >>>>>>>>>>>>>> both .... >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > how hard could it be?! LOL. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > I bought a Negate XG-1537-1U. I bought a Unifi Pro 24 PoE >>>>>>>>>>>>>> switch. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > I can configure the FW immediately after >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > firstboot/restore-default-configs, but only if i set the >>>>>>>>>>>>>> LAN interface >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > to be the cable that goes directly to my laptop. That's >>>>>>>>>>>>>> great, but >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > that does shit for the downstream switch. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > I have a 10GB SFP+ Port that I want to configure as the >>>>>>>>>>>>>> downstream >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > port to ubiquity, but any configuration other than >>>>>>>>>>>>>> mentioned above >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > fails .... and I'm now on my 12th "Reset To Factory >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Defaults" ... any >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > help on this would be greatly appreciated! >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > Thanks, >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > Alexander >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > Sent from my Galaxy S10+ >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > --------------------------------------------------- >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > https://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Donald "Mac" McCarthy >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Director, Field Operations >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Open Source Context >>>>>>>>>>>>>> +1.602.584.4445 >>>>>>>>>>>>>> m...@oscontext.com >>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://oscontext.com >>>>>>>>>>>>>> -------------- next part -------------- >>>>>>>>>>>>>> An HTML attachment was scrubbed... >>>>>>>>>>>>>> URL: < >>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://lists.phxlinux.org/pipermail/plug-discuss/attachments/20200502/aeab14b4/attachment-0001.html >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> ------------------------------ >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Subject: Digest Footer >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>>>>>>>>> PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org >>>>>>>>>>>>>> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> ------------------------------ >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> End of PLUG-discuss Digest, Vol 179, Issue 2 >>>>>>>>>>>>>> ******************************************** >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> --------------------------------------------------- >>>>>>>>>>>>>> PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org >>>>>>>>>>>>>> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> --------------------------------------------------- >>>>>>>>>>>>> PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org >>>>>>>>>>>>> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings: >>>>>>>>>>>>> https://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> --------------------------------------------------- >>>>>>>>>>>> PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org >>>>>>>>>>>> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings: >>>>>>>>>>>> https://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> --------------------------------------------------- >>>>>>>>>>> PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org >>>>>>>>>>> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail >>>>>>>>>>> settings:https://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>>> Donald "Mac" McCarthy >>>>>>>>>>> Director, Field Operations >>>>>>>>>>> Open Source Context >>>>>>>>>>> +1.602.584.4445 >>>>>>>>>>> m...@oscontext.com >>>>>>>>>>> https://oscontext.com >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> --------------------------------------------------- >>>>>>>>>> PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org >>>>>>>>>> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings: >>>>>>>>>> https://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>> A mouse trap, placed on top of your alarm clock, will prevent you >>>>>>>>> from rolling over and going back to sleep after you hit the snooze >>>>>>>>> button. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Stephen >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> --------------------------------------------------- >>>>>>>>> PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org >>>>>>>>> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings: >>>>>>>>> https://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> --------------------------------------------------- >>>>>>>> PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org >>>>>>>> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail >>>>>>>> settings:https://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>> Donald "Mac" McCarthy >>>>>>>> Director, Field Operations >>>>>>>> Open Source Context >>>>>>>> +1.602.584.4445 >>>>>>>> m...@oscontext.com >>>>>>>> https://oscontext.com >>>>>>>> --------------------------------------------------- >>>>>>>> PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org >>>>>>>> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings: >>>>>>>> https://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss >>>>>>> >>>>>>> --------------------------------------------------- >>>>>> PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org >>>>>> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings: >>>>>> https://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss >>>>> >>>>> --------------------------------------------------- >>>> PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org >>>> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings: >>>> https://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> A mouse trap, placed on top of your alarm clock, will prevent you from >>> rolling over and going back to sleep after you hit the snooze button. >>> >>> Stephen >>> >>> --------------------------------------------------- >>> PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org >>> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings: >>> https://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss >> >> --------------------------------------------------- >> PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org >> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings: >> https://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss > >
--------------------------------------------------- PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings: https://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss