Re: [AFMUG] ToughSwitch 8 PRO

[Brett A Mansfield]

You can also find them on eBay. It's a little higher prices, but they are in 
stock.

Thank you,
Brett A Mansfield
Silver Lake Internet, LLC

> On Aug 8, 2015, at 9:06 PM, Jeremy  wrote:
> 
> Awesome.  I just ordered two 12 port direct from Netonix.  Hopefully I'll get 
> them soon.
> 
>> On Sat, Aug 8, 2015 at 8:22 PM, Cassidy B. Larson  wrote:
>> The first run of DCs have shipped. We got a couple we’re deploying next 
>> week.  The next run will be in a week or two I think.
>> 
>> 
>>> On Aug 8, 2015, at 8:17 PM, Jeremy  wrote:
>>> 
>>> Well I am on their list and I wasn't notified.  I'd love to pre-order.
>>> 
>>> On Sat, Aug 8, 2015 at 6:30 PM, Mike Hammett  wrote:
 There is in no way shape or form a fable that Netonix is producing great 
 switches for WISPs. The DC version has taken longer than expected, but 
 that  doesn't mean that the Netonix switch is fabled. They announced 
 pre-orders a couple weeks ago.
 
 
 -
 Mike Hammett
 Intelligent Computing Solutions
 http://www.ics-il.com
 
 From: "Jeremy" 
 To: af@afmug.com
 Sent: Saturday, August 8, 2015 6:42:33 PM
 Subject: Re: [AFMUG] ToughSwitch 8 PRO
 
 Still waiting for this fabled Netonix switch.  I need a DC version.  
 Please tell me where I can find this mystical creature.
 
> On Sat, Aug 8, 2015 at 4:21 PM, Gino Villarini  
> wrote:
> Netonix for the win!
> 
> 
>> On Friday, August 7, 2015, Brett A Mansfield 
>>  wrote:
>> I have a few of these laying around. I removed them after I realized 
>> they don't like a mix of 100Mb and Gigabit. I really want to use them 
>> though rather than let them collect dust.
>> 
>> Does anyone have a setup where these are working for them? Or are they 
>> just a lost cause?
>> 
>> Thank you,
>> Brett A Mansfield
>> Silver Lake Internet, LLC
> 

Re: [AFMUG] ToughSwitch 8 PRO

[Brett A Mansfield]

I think Netonix is way over priced, and it's not yet proven. Still, I just 
ordered a couple and I'm excited to give them a test run. I'm also interested 
to see what they have coming for the tower switch advertised on their website.

Thank you,
Brett A Mansfield
Silver Lake Internet, LLC

> On Aug 8, 2015, at 4:21 PM, Gino Villarini  wrote:
> 
> Netonix for the win!
> 
>> On Friday, August 7, 2015, Brett A Mansfield  
>> wrote:
>> I have a few of these laying around. I removed them after I realized they 
>> don't like a mix of 100Mb and Gigabit. I really want to use them though 
>> rather than let them collect dust.
>> 
>> Does anyone have a setup where these are working for them? Or are they just 
>> a lost cause?
>> 
>> Thank you,
>> Brett A Mansfield
>> Silver Lake Internet, LLC

Re: [AFMUG] Is anyone here doing ePTP at all?

[Mathew Howard]

Next to the ethernet port, if I remember correctly. You can also do the
power on/off sequence like Josh said.

On Sat, Aug 8, 2015 at 11:45 PM, Rory Conaway 
wrote:

> Where is the reset button.
>
>
>
> *From:* Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] *On Behalf Of *Mathew Howard
> *Sent:* Saturday, August 8, 2015 7:58 PM
> *To:* af
> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Is anyone here doing ePTP at all?
>
>
>
> Pretty sure it would be the same... poke the reset button.
>
>
>
> On Sat, Aug 8, 2015 at 9:55 PM, Mike Hammett  wrote:
>
> Would it be any different than any other radio mode?
>
>
>
> -
> Mike Hammett
> Intelligent Computing Solutions
> http://www.ics-il.com
>
>
> --
>
> *From: *"Rory Conaway" 
> *To: *af@afmug.com
> *Sent: *Saturday, August 8, 2015 8:47:26 PM
>
>
> *Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] Is anyone here doing ePTP at all?
>
> How do you do a hard reset on the ePTP?
>
>
>
> Rory
>
>
>
> *From:* Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] *On Behalf Of *Josh Luthman
> *Sent:* Saturday, August 8, 2015 6:26 PM
> *To:* af@afmug.com
> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Is anyone here doing ePTP at all?
>
>
>
> Synced, yes.  Eptp no sync 2ms.
>
> Josh Luthman
> Office: 937-552-2340
> Direct: 937-552-2343
> 1100 Wayne St
> Suite 1337
> Troy, OH 45373
>
> On Aug 8, 2015 8:36 PM, "Mike Hammett"  wrote:
>
> I hadn't realized that ePTP mode didn't have any up\down ratios set. I
> just checked my radios and sure enough...
>
> So the best we're going to get out of ePMP synced backhauls is...  ~7.5ms?
>
>
>
> -
> Mike Hammett
> Intelligent Computing Solutions
> http://www.ics-il.com
>
>
> --
>
> *From: *"Dan Sullivan" 
> *To: *af@afmug.com
> *Sent: *Saturday, August 8, 2015 1:52:13 PM
> *Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] Is anyone here doing ePTP at all?
>
> 2.5 msec frame allows for sync and improves PTP latency as compared to 5
> msec frame.
>
>
>
> ePTP cannot be synced as communication is driven based on dynamic data
> from each link.
>
>
> Dan Sullivan
>
> ePMP Software Manager
>
>
>
> *From:* Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] *On Behalf Of *Mathew Howard
> *Sent:* Saturday, August 08, 2015 10:11 AM
> *To:* af
> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Is anyone here doing ePTP at all?
>
>
>
> Yep, I'm pretty sure it doesn't use fixed frames in ePTP mode... trying to
> sync that sounds like it'd end up like airmax sync.
>
> 2.5ms frames make sync a lot more useful for ptp though.
>
>
>
> On Sat, Aug 8, 2015 at 7:06 AM, Josh Luthman 
> wrote:
>
> But that depends on frame timing which would leave you at the current tdd
> ptp (5ms today, 2.5ms after 2.5).  I'd love to see the 2ms latency be
> synced but I don't see how that would be doable.
>
> Josh Luthman
> Office: 937-552-2340
> Direct: 937-552-2343
> 1100 Wayne St
> Suite 1337
> Troy, OH 45373
>
> On Aug 8, 2015 7:54 AM, "Mike Hammett"  wrote:
>
> No, I mean exactly what I said ePTP sync.
>
> There's no reason that I'm aware of that the ePTP up\down cycles couldn't
> be synced. The regular sync has to deal with potentially dozens of clients.
> The ePTP just has to deal with one.
>
>
>
> -
> Mike Hammett
> Intelligent Computing Solutions
> http://www.ics-il.com
>
>
> --
>
> *From: *"Josh Luthman" 
> *To: *af@afmug.com
> *Sent: *Saturday, August 8, 2015 6:48:14 AM
> *Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] Is anyone here doing ePTP at all?
>
> Eptp sync doesn't sound possible.  That's what the tdd ptp is for.  Do you
> mean the 2.5ms timing?
>
> Josh Luthman
> Office: 937-552-2340
> Direct: 937-552-2343
> 1100 Wayne St
> Suite 1337
> Troy, OH 45373
>
> On Aug 8, 2015 7:47 AM, "Mike Hammett"  wrote:
>
> Though*  Early in the morning...
>
>
>
> -
> Mike Hammett
> Intelligent Computing Solutions
> http://www.ics-il.com
>
>
> --
>
> *From: *"Mike Hammett" 
> *To: *af@afmug.com
> *Sent: *Saturday, August 8, 2015 6:45:55 AM
> *Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] Is anyone here doing ePTP at all?
>
> Is it, thought?  ;-)
>
>
> FWIW, I have some ePTP up (eagerly awaiting ePTP sync!) and no issues that
> I'm aware of.
>
>
>
> -
> Mike Hammett
> Intelligent Computing Solutions
> http://www.ics-il.com
>
>
> --
>
> *From: *"Josh Luthman" 
> *To: *af@afmug.com
> *Sent: *Friday, August 7, 2015 4:41:45 PM
> *Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] Is anyone here doing ePTP at all?
>
> How long has it been up?  According to Cambium I'm the only one that's
> been experiencing a bug and it's all over the place.  They've got a fix for
> it but it's just so weird that I'm the only one with the problem =/
>
>
>
>
> Josh Luthman
> Office: 937-552-2340
> Direct: 937-552-2343
> 1100 Wayne St
> Suite 1337
> Troy, OH 45373
>
>
>
> On Fri, Aug 7, 2015 at 5:32 PM, Mathew Howard 
> wrote:
>
> Yep, I just replaced a pair of NanoBridges with Force 110's doing ePTP a
> couple days ago and we have at least one other.
>
>
>
> On Fri, Aug 7, 2015 at 4:07 PM, Josh Luthman 
> wrote:
>
> Anyone at all?
>
>
>
> Josh Luthman
> Office: 937-552-2340
> Direct: 937-5

Re: [AFMUG] Is anyone here doing ePTP at all?

[Rory Conaway]

Where is the reset button.

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Mathew Howard
Sent: Saturday, August 8, 2015 7:58 PM
To: af
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Is anyone here doing ePTP at all?

Pretty sure it would be the same... poke the reset button.

On Sat, Aug 8, 2015 at 9:55 PM, Mike Hammett 
mailto:af...@ics-il.net>> wrote:
Would it be any different than any other radio mode?


-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
http://www.ics-il.com


From: "Rory Conaway" mailto:r...@triadwireless.net>>
To: af@afmug.com
Sent: Saturday, August 8, 2015 8:47:26 PM

Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Is anyone here doing ePTP at all?
How do you do a hard reset on the ePTP?

Rory

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf 
Of Josh Luthman
Sent: Saturday, August 8, 2015 6:26 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Is anyone here doing ePTP at all?


Synced, yes.  Eptp no sync 2ms.

Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373
On Aug 8, 2015 8:36 PM, "Mike Hammett" 
mailto:af...@ics-il.net>> wrote:
I hadn't realized that ePTP mode didn't have any up\down ratios set. I just 
checked my radios and sure enough...

So the best we're going to get out of ePMP synced backhauls is...  ~7.5ms?


-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
http://www.ics-il.com


From: "Dan Sullivan" 
mailto:daniel.sulli...@cambiumnetworks.com>>
To: af@afmug.com
Sent: Saturday, August 8, 2015 1:52:13 PM
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Is anyone here doing ePTP at all?
2.5 msec frame allows for sync and improves PTP latency as compared to 5 msec 
frame.

ePTP cannot be synced as communication is driven based on dynamic data from 
each link.

Dan Sullivan
ePMP Software Manager

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf 
Of Mathew Howard
Sent: Saturday, August 08, 2015 10:11 AM
To: af
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Is anyone here doing ePTP at all?

Yep, I'm pretty sure it doesn't use fixed frames in ePTP mode... trying to sync 
that sounds like it'd end up like airmax sync.
2.5ms frames make sync a lot more useful for ptp though.

On Sat, Aug 8, 2015 at 7:06 AM, Josh Luthman 
mailto:j...@imaginenetworksllc.com>> wrote:

But that depends on frame timing which would leave you at the current tdd ptp 
(5ms today, 2.5ms after 2.5).  I'd love to see the 2ms latency be synced but I 
don't see how that would be doable.

Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373
On Aug 8, 2015 7:54 AM, "Mike Hammett" 
mailto:af...@ics-il.net>> wrote:
No, I mean exactly what I said ePTP sync.

There's no reason that I'm aware of that the ePTP up\down cycles couldn't be 
synced. The regular sync has to deal with potentially dozens of clients. The 
ePTP just has to deal with one.


-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
http://www.ics-il.com


From: "Josh Luthman" 
mailto:j...@imaginenetworksllc.com>>
To: af@afmug.com
Sent: Saturday, August 8, 2015 6:48:14 AM
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Is anyone here doing ePTP at all?

Eptp sync doesn't sound possible.  That's what the tdd ptp is for.  Do you mean 
the 2.5ms timing?

Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373
On Aug 8, 2015 7:47 AM, "Mike Hammett" 
mailto:af...@ics-il.net>> wrote:
Though*  Early in the morning...


-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
http://www.ics-il.com


From: "Mike Hammett" mailto:af...@ics-il.net>>
To: af@afmug.com
Sent: Saturday, August 8, 2015 6:45:55 AM
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Is anyone here doing ePTP at all?
Is it, thought?  ;-)


FWIW, I have some ePTP up (eagerly awaiting ePTP sync!) and no issues that I'm 
aware of.


-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
http://www.ics-il.com


From: "Josh Luthman" 
mailto:j...@imaginenetworksllc.com>>
To: af@afmug.com
Sent: Friday, August 7, 2015 4:41:45 PM
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Is anyone here doing ePTP at all?
How long has it been up?  According to Cambium I'm the only one that's been 
experiencing a bug and it's all over the place.  They've got a fix for it but 
it's just so weird that I'm the only one with the problem =/


Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373

On Fri, Aug 7, 2015 at 5:32 PM, Mathew Howard 
mailto:mhoward...@gmail.com>> wrote:
Yep, I just replaced a pair of NanoBridges with Force 110's doing ePTP a couple 
days ago and we have at least one other.

On Fri, Aug 7, 2015 at 4:07 PM, Josh Luthman 
mailto:j...@imaginenetworksllc.com>> wrote:
Anyone at all?

Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373

Re: [AFMUG] OT: Here's proof that Apple fanboys actually adore Android

[Josh Luthman]

Bluetooth keyboard.  I've been keeping an eye out for one to leave in my
car.

I love the portability but you're right - everything else blows.

Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373
On Aug 9, 2015 12:02 AM, "Mike Hammett"  wrote:

> Hard to bring my desktop to the top of a tower.  ;-)
>
> I've got a 6" screen on my phone, so it is among the largest. I actually
> have a higher resolution on my phone than my PC (1440 x 2560), but it is
> much tougher to use.
>
> I do prefer to use my laptop when it is convenient to do so.
>
> That said none of my PCs will tell me what sector and what signal strength
> my phone is running at.  ;-)
>
>
>
> -
> Mike Hammett
> Intelligent Computing Solutions
> http://www.ics-il.com
>
> --
> *From: *"Ken Hohhof" 
> *To: *af@afmug.com
> *Sent: *Saturday, August 8, 2015 10:55:59 PM
> *Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] OT: Here's proof that Apple fanboys actually
> adoreAndroid
>
> Whether iOS or Android, I don’t see why people love their phones so much.
> Yes, they are little and portable, but everything else about them sucks
> compared to a computer.  The processors are slow, the screens are small,
> the keyboards suck, the sound sucks, multitasking sucks, you have fat
> fingers instead of a precise mouse, drawing is like using an
> Etch-a-Sketch.  And people love them!
>
>
> *From:* Mike Hammett 
> *Sent:* Saturday, August 08, 2015 10:39 PM
> *To:* af@afmug.com
> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] OT: Here's proof that Apple fanboys actually adore
> Android
>
> A stock price directly influenced by hype. Apple's bubble will pop. I love
> it when RF geeks find out how little you can actually do on an iPhone
> compared to Android.
>
>
>
> -
> Mike Hammett
> Intelligent Computing Solutions
> http://www.ics-il.com
>
> --
> *From: *"Bill Prince" 
> *To: *af@afmug.com
> *Sent: *Wednesday, August 5, 2015 6:38:51 PM
> *Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] OT: Here's proof that Apple fanboys actually adore
> Android
>
> On 8/5/2015 3:42 PM, Travis Johnson wrote:
> > Say what you want... Apple is still the largest company in the
> > world... still... this discussion has been going on for 5+ years
> > now... and Apple is making more money than they can spend... and
> > Samsung is losing more money every quarter. :)
> Largest based on stock price. That's a moving target. Apple will rot
> someday.
>
> > All the phone manufacturers love Android because it's free. Ask any of
> > them if they would actually pay for it and see what response you get. LOL
> Apple gives theirs away too, but you have to buy an Apple phone to use
> it. No thanks. I don't like the tiny box you have to live inside in
> order to use it.
>
> > Just like everyone is jumping on Windows 10... because it's a free
> > upgrade.
> And Apple gives theirs away too for the most part.
>
> meh
>
> bp
> 
>
>
>
>

Re: [AFMUG] OT: Here's proof that Apple fanboys actually adore Android

[Mike Hammett]

and yet computers are cheaper than phones. 




- 
Mike Hammett 
Intelligent Computing Solutions 
http://www.ics-il.com 

- Original Message -

From: "Bill Prince"  
To: af@afmug.com 
Sent: Saturday, August 8, 2015 11:06:23 PM 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] OT: Here's proof that Apple fanboys actually adore Android 

But people in 3rd world countries can't afford real computers. Sometimes, a 
cell (smart) phone is all they have. 

Why we do it here is another story... 

bp
 
On 8/8/2015 8:55 PM, Ken Hohhof wrote: 





Whether iOS or Android, I don’t see why people love their phones so much. Yes, 
they are little and portable, but everything else about them sucks compared to 
a computer. The processors are slow, the screens are small, the keyboards suck, 
the sound sucks, multitasking sucks, you have fat fingers instead of a precise 
mouse, drawing is like using an Etch-a-Sketch. And people love them! 





From: Mike Hammett 
Sent: Saturday, August 08, 2015 10:39 PM 
To: af@afmug.com 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] OT: Here's proof that Apple fanboys actually adore Android 


A stock price directly influenced by hype. Apple's bubble will pop. I love it 
when RF geeks find out how little you can actually do on an iPhone compared to 
Android. 




- 
Mike Hammett 
Intelligent Computing Solutions 
http://www.ics-il.com 

- Original Message -

From: "Bill Prince"  
To: af@afmug.com 
Sent: Wednesday, August 5, 2015 6:38:51 PM 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] OT: Here's proof that Apple fanboys actually adore Android 

On 8/5/2015 3:42 PM, Travis Johnson wrote: 
> Say what you want... Apple is still the largest company in the 
> world... still... this discussion has been going on for 5+ years 
> now... and Apple is making more money than they can spend... and 
> Samsung is losing more money every quarter. :) 
Largest based on stock price. That's a moving target. Apple will rot 
someday. 

> All the phone manufacturers love Android because it's free. Ask any of 
> them if they would actually pay for it and see what response you get. LOL 
Apple gives theirs away too, but you have to buy an Apple phone to use 
it. No thanks. I don't like the tiny box you have to live inside in 
order to use it. 

> Just like everyone is jumping on Windows 10... because it's a free 
> upgrade. 
And Apple gives theirs away too for the most part. 

meh 

bp 
 

Re: [AFMUG] OT: Here's proof that Apple fanboys actually adore Android

[Bill Prince]

But people in 3rd world countries can't afford real computers. 
Sometimes, a cell (smart) phone is all they have.


Why we do it here is another story...

bp


On 8/8/2015 8:55 PM, Ken Hohhof wrote:
Whether iOS or Android, I don’t see why people love their phones so 
much.  Yes, they are little and portable, but everything else about 
them sucks compared to a computer. The processors are slow, the 
screens are small, the keyboards suck, the sound sucks, multitasking 
sucks, you have fat fingers instead of a precise mouse, drawing is 
like using an Etch-a-Sketch.  And people love them!

*From:* Mike Hammett 
*Sent:* Saturday, August 08, 2015 10:39 PM
*To:* af@afmug.com 
*Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] OT: Here's proof that Apple fanboys actually 
adore Android
A stock price directly influenced by hype. Apple's bubble will pop. I 
love it when RF geeks find out how little you can actually do on an 
iPhone compared to Android.




-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
http://www.ics-il.com


*From: *"Bill Prince" 
*To: *af@afmug.com
*Sent: *Wednesday, August 5, 2015 6:38:51 PM
*Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] OT: Here's proof that Apple fanboys actually 
adore Android


On 8/5/2015 3:42 PM, Travis Johnson wrote:
> Say what you want... Apple is still the largest company in the
> world... still... this discussion has been going on for 5+ years
> now... and Apple is making more money than they can spend... and
> Samsung is losing more money every quarter. :)
Largest based on stock price. That's a moving target. Apple will rot
someday.

> All the phone manufacturers love Android because it's free. Ask any of
> them if they would actually pay for it and see what response you 
get. LOL

Apple gives theirs away too, but you have to buy an Apple phone to use
it. No thanks. I don't like the tiny box you have to live inside in
order to use it.

> Just like everyone is jumping on Windows 10... because it's a free
> upgrade.
And Apple gives theirs away too for the most part.

meh

bp

Re: [AFMUG] OT: Here's proof that Apple fanboys actually adore Android

[Mike Hammett]

Hard to bring my desktop to the top of a tower. ;-) 

I've got a 6" screen on my phone, so it is among the largest. I actually have a 
higher resolution on my phone than my PC ( 1440 x 2560), but it is much tougher 
to use. 

I do prefer to use my laptop when it is convenient to do so. 

That said none of my PCs will tell me what sector and what signal strength my 
phone is running at. ;-) 




- 
Mike Hammett 
Intelligent Computing Solutions 
http://www.ics-il.com 

- Original Message -

From: "Ken Hohhof"  
To: af@afmug.com 
Sent: Saturday, August 8, 2015 10:55:59 PM 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] OT: Here's proof that Apple fanboys actually adore Android 




Whether iOS or Android, I don’t see why people love their phones so much. Yes, 
they are little and portable, but everything else about them sucks compared to 
a computer. The processors are slow, the screens are small, the keyboards suck, 
the sound sucks, multitasking sucks, you have fat fingers instead of a precise 
mouse, drawing is like using an Etch-a-Sketch. And people love them! 





From: Mike Hammett 
Sent: Saturday, August 08, 2015 10:39 PM 
To: af@afmug.com 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] OT: Here's proof that Apple fanboys actually adore Android 


A stock price directly influenced by hype. Apple's bubble will pop. I love it 
when RF geeks find out how little you can actually do on an iPhone compared to 
Android. 




- 
Mike Hammett 
Intelligent Computing Solutions 
http://www.ics-il.com 

- Original Message -

From: "Bill Prince"  
To: af@afmug.com 
Sent: Wednesday, August 5, 2015 6:38:51 PM 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] OT: Here's proof that Apple fanboys actually adore Android 

On 8/5/2015 3:42 PM, Travis Johnson wrote: 
> Say what you want... Apple is still the largest company in the 
> world... still... this discussion has been going on for 5+ years 
> now... and Apple is making more money than they can spend... and 
> Samsung is losing more money every quarter. :) 
Largest based on stock price. That's a moving target. Apple will rot 
someday. 

> All the phone manufacturers love Android because it's free. Ask any of 
> them if they would actually pay for it and see what response you get. LOL 
Apple gives theirs away too, but you have to buy an Apple phone to use 
it. No thanks. I don't like the tiny box you have to live inside in 
order to use it. 

> Just like everyone is jumping on Windows 10... because it's a free 
> upgrade. 
And Apple gives theirs away too for the most part. 

meh 

bp 
 

Re: [AFMUG] OT: Here's proof that Apple fanboys actually adore Android

[Ken Hohhof]

Whether iOS or Android, I don’t see why people love their phones so much.  Yes, 
they are little and portable, but everything else about them sucks compared to 
a computer.  The processors are slow, the screens are small, the keyboards 
suck, the sound sucks, multitasking sucks, you have fat fingers instead of a 
precise mouse, drawing is like using an Etch-a-Sketch.  And people love them!


From: Mike Hammett 
Sent: Saturday, August 08, 2015 10:39 PM
To: af@afmug.com 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] OT: Here's proof that Apple fanboys actually adore Android

A stock price directly influenced by hype. Apple's bubble will pop. I love it 
when RF geeks find out how little you can actually do on an iPhone compared to 
Android.




-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
http://www.ics-il.com





From: "Bill Prince" 
To: af@afmug.com
Sent: Wednesday, August 5, 2015 6:38:51 PM
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] OT: Here's proof that Apple fanboys actually adore Android

On 8/5/2015 3:42 PM, Travis Johnson wrote:
> Say what you want... Apple is still the largest company in the 
> world... still... this discussion has been going on for 5+ years 
> now... and Apple is making more money than they can spend... and 
> Samsung is losing more money every quarter. :)
Largest based on stock price. That's a moving target. Apple will rot 
someday.

> All the phone manufacturers love Android because it's free. Ask any of 
> them if they would actually pay for it and see what response you get. LOL
Apple gives theirs away too, but you have to buy an Apple phone to use 
it. No thanks. I don't like the tiny box you have to live inside in 
order to use it.

> Just like everyone is jumping on Windows 10... because it's a free 
> upgrade. 
And Apple gives theirs away too for the most part.

meh

bp

Re: [AFMUG] Routed vs bridge with a twist

[Sterling Jacobson]

Yeah that makes sense.

I guess I was getting overly complicated where if you split the entire network 
in two and one site from each side had something less than a /24 you would have 
to abandon one site entirely to switch BGP at the edge.

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Mike Hammett
Sent: Saturday, August 8, 2015 9:34 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Routed vs bridge with a twist

You lost me here...  why the /24 per site? Just do whatever you were going to 
do anyway out of your /(whatever greater than 24). This wouldn't affect your 
EGP at all.

Unless you're trying to save the IPs from tower to each edge. I'd rather use 
IPs than haul traffic to one edge, then back to another if that one failed or 
otherwise had a worse route.

VPLS back to iBGP nodes throughout the network? Then you could cut down to only 
needing two.


-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
http://www.ics-il.com


From: "Sterling Jacobson" mailto:sterl...@avative.net>>
To: af@afmug.com
Sent: Saturday, August 8, 2015 10:22:24 PM
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Routed vs bridge with a twist
I didn’t want to have customers switch public IP on fail.

So that would require at least a /24 per site for BGP failover at the edge, if 
it has to BGP through a different route.

Or, I guess, just set up multiple BGP edges but make sure they have at least 
one other path into the network (or more).

So if a leg goes down, it’s just a re-path calc.

And if a provider goes down it’s a BGP switch for that IP domain.

And can still source multiple providers with full redundancy at a /24 or larger 
domain.



From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Mike Hammett
Sent: Saturday, August 8, 2015 6:40 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Routed vs bridge with a twist

Head-ends and NOC all geographically diverse, so then each tower potentially 
has three public /30s instead of one for however many neighboring towers. 
Decisions...

It should improve latency and possibly re-route times.  *shrugs*


-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
http://www.ics-il.com


From: "Sterling Jacobson" mailto:sterl...@avative.net>>
To: af@afmug.com
Sent: Saturday, August 8, 2015 10:44:06 AM
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Routed vs bridge with a twist
That’s what I’m struggling with too.

Multiple potential head ends that are geographically diverse on the network.



From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Mike Hammett
Sent: Saturday, August 8, 2015 6:11 AM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Routed vs bridge with a twist

Agreed. Currently I'm all routed, but am looking to move to VPLS for those 
beyond router-router L2 segments. I don't think I'll actually be saving any 
address space as it isn't as simple as everything goes to the head-end because 
there are multiple "head-ends".


-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
http://www.ics-il.com


From: "Shayne Lebrun" mailto:sleb...@muskoka.com>>
To: af@afmug.com
Sent: Friday, August 7, 2015 3:24:07 PM
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Routed vs bridge with a twist
I advocate keeping everything routed, and using MPLS/VPLS to move L2 where they 
need to go, when required.


From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Glen Waldrop
Sent: Friday, August 7, 2015 3:09 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Routed vs bridge with a twist

You guys have given me some light reading to do based on my question above.

Sounds like the consensus is a few mid sized L2 rather than one large L2 for 
backhauls? Or stick with a subnet per link as I have now?


- Original Message -
From: Shayne Lebrun
To: af@afmug.com
Sent: Friday, August 07, 2015 1:52 PM
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Routed vs bridge with a twist

That’s the basics.  On a Mikrotik:
Create a bridge with no ports.  Call it ‘Loopback’.  Assign a /32 to it, and 
advertise via OSPF.
Set your OSPF instance router ID to this IP.
MPLS->MPLS, under LDP Settings, select Enabled, use the Loopback IP as the LSR 
ID and Transport Address.  Add the interface under LDP Interface and MPLS 
Interface.

Now, MTU is the big sticking point.  On MPLS Interface, I use 1586, which gives 
plenty of room for full 1500 byte packets plus VLANs, MPLS labels, VPLS labels, 
and so on.  But all equipment needs to support that MTU; backhauls, routers, 
everything.  So no 493 family Mikrotiks.  No Canopy FSK or 430 backhauls.  
Ubiquiti, depends.  And so on.

Once you have an MPLS network, you can create VPLS tunnels just like EoIP 
tunnels, only there’ll be no fragmenting and way WAY less encapsulation 
overhead.

RSVP, I think is what Mikrotik calls ‘Traffic Engineering.’  Tell it how much 
bandwidth you have on each interface, and you can avoid the situation where you 
h

Re: [AFMUG] OT: Here's proof that Apple fanboys actually adore Android

[Mike Hammett]

A stock price directly influenced by hype. Apple's bubble will pop. I love it 
when RF geeks find out how little you can actually do on an iPhone compared to 
Android. 




- 
Mike Hammett 
Intelligent Computing Solutions 
http://www.ics-il.com 

- Original Message -

From: "Bill Prince"  
To: af@afmug.com 
Sent: Wednesday, August 5, 2015 6:38:51 PM 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] OT: Here's proof that Apple fanboys actually adore Android 

On 8/5/2015 3:42 PM, Travis Johnson wrote: 
> Say what you want... Apple is still the largest company in the 
> world... still... this discussion has been going on for 5+ years 
> now... and Apple is making more money than they can spend... and 
> Samsung is losing more money every quarter. :) 
Largest based on stock price. That's a moving target. Apple will rot 
someday. 

> All the phone manufacturers love Android because it's free. Ask any of 
> them if they would actually pay for it and see what response you get. LOL 
Apple gives theirs away too, but you have to buy an Apple phone to use 
it. No thanks. I don't like the tiny box you have to live inside in 
order to use it. 

> Just like everyone is jumping on Windows 10... because it's a free 
> upgrade. 
And Apple gives theirs away too for the most part. 

meh 

bp 
 

Re: [AFMUG] Routed vs bridge with a twist

[Mike Hammett]

You lost me here... why the /24 per site? Just do whatever you were going to do 
anyway out of your /(whatever greater than 24). This wouldn't affect your EGP 
at all. 

Unless you're trying to save the IPs from tower to each edge. I'd rather use 
IPs than haul traffic to one edge, then back to another if that one failed or 
otherwise had a worse route. 

VPLS back to iBGP nodes throughout the network? Then you could cut down to only 
needing two. 




- 
Mike Hammett 
Intelligent Computing Solutions 
http://www.ics-il.com 

- Original Message -

From: "Sterling Jacobson"  
To: af@afmug.com 
Sent: Saturday, August 8, 2015 10:22:24 PM 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Routed vs bridge with a twist 



I didn’t want to have customers switch public IP on fail. 

So that would require at least a /24 per site for BGP failover at the edge, if 
it has to BGP through a different route. 

Or, I guess, just set up multiple BGP edges but make sure they have at least 
one other path into the network (or more). 

So if a leg goes down, it’s just a re-path calc. 

And if a provider goes down it’s a BGP switch for that IP domain. 

And can still source multiple providers with full redundancy at a /24 or larger 
domain. 





From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Mike Hammett 
Sent: Saturday, August 8, 2015 6:40 PM 
To: af@afmug.com 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Routed vs bridge with a twist 


Head-ends and NOC all geographically diverse, so then each tower potentially 
has three public /30s instead of one for however many neighboring towers. 
Decisions... 

It should improve latency and possibly re-route times. *shrugs* 



- 
Mike Hammett 
Intelligent Computing Solutions 
http://www.ics-il.com 

- Original Message -


From: "Sterling Jacobson" < sterl...@avative.net > 
To: af@afmug.com 
Sent: Saturday, August 8, 2015 10:44:06 AM 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Routed vs bridge with a twist 
That’s what I’m struggling with too. 

Multiple potential head ends that are geographically diverse on the network. 





From: Af [ mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com ] On Behalf Of Mike Hammett 
Sent: Saturday, August 8, 2015 6:11 AM 
To: af@afmug.com 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Routed vs bridge with a twist 


Agreed. Currently I'm all routed, but am looking to move to VPLS for those 
beyond router-router L2 segments. I don't think I'll actually be saving any 
address space as it isn't as simple as everything goes to the head-end because 
there are multiple "head-ends". 



- 
Mike Hammett 
Intelligent Computing Solutions 
http://www.ics-il.com 




From: "Shayne Lebrun" < sleb...@muskoka.com > 
To: af@afmug.com 
Sent: Friday, August 7, 2015 3:24:07 PM 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Routed vs bridge with a twist 
I advocate keeping everything routed, and using MPLS/VPLS to move L2 where they 
need to go, when required. 




From: Af [ mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com ] On Behalf Of Glen Waldrop 
Sent: Friday, August 7, 2015 3:09 PM 
To: af@afmug.com 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Routed vs bridge with a twist 


You guys have given me some light reading to do based on my question above. 

Sounds like the consensus is a few mid sized L2 rather than one large L2 for 
backhauls? Or stick with a subnet per link as I have now? 







- Original Message - 

From: Shayne Lebrun 

To: af@afmug.com 

Sent: Friday, August 07, 2015 1:52 PM 

Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Routed vs bridge with a twist 


That’s the basics. On a Mikrotik: 
Create a bridge with no ports. Call it ‘Loopback’. Assign a /32 to it, and 
advertise via OSPF. 
Set your OSPF instance router ID to this IP. 
MPLS->MPLS, under LDP Settings, select Enabled, use the Loopback IP as the LSR 
ID and Transport Address. Add the interface under LDP Interface and MPLS 
Interface. 

Now, MTU is the big sticking point. On MPLS Interface, I use 1586, which gives 
plenty of room for full 1500 byte packets plus VLANs, MPLS labels, VPLS labels, 
and so on. But all equipment needs to support that MTU; backhauls, routers, 
everything. So no 493 family Mikrotiks. No Canopy FSK or 430 backhauls. 
Ubiquiti, depends. And so on. 

Once you have an MPLS network, you can create VPLS tunnels just like EoIP 
tunnels, only there’ll be no fragmenting and way WAY less encapsulation 
overhead. 

RSVP, I think is what Mikrotik calls ‘Traffic Engineering.’ Tell it how much 
bandwidth you have on each interface, and you can avoid the situation where you 
have router a->b->c->d and router a->d means the first path is idle as long as 
the second path is up. 

I’ll reiterate, though, MTU will be the sticking point. 

Mikrotik’s wiki has some great write-ups on all this. 



From: Af [ mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com ] On Behalf Of Paul Stewart 
Sent: Friday, August 7, 2015 2:40 PM 
To: af@afmug.com 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Routed vs bridge with a twist 

If you have even a couple of routers (ideally with switches off of each), you 
can simulate some pretty cool stuff… then add a third router into the mix and 
it’s even more fun. 

MPLS i

Re: [AFMUG] Another neighborhood on fiber, sexy sexy!

[Sterling Jacobson]

Interesting, I didn’t know that.

Makes sense that it’s possible, just completely non overlapping frequency space 
I guess.

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Chuck Hogg
Sent: Saturday, August 8, 2015 9:18 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Another neighborhood on fiber, sexy sexy!

You can also run 10G GPON and regular GPON on the same fiber as well.  Sorry 
for the multiple messages.

Regards,
Chuck

On Sat, Aug 8, 2015 at 11:16 PM, Chuck Hogg 
mailto:ch...@shelbybb.com>> wrote:
ZTE's OLT 10G modules were not that bad, I just don't remember the ONT's being 
readily available.

Regards,
Chuck

On Sat, Aug 8, 2015 at 11:03 PM, Sterling Jacobson 
mailto:sterl...@avative.net>> wrote:
At what cost, and 10Gig synchronous?

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf 
Of Gino Villarini
Sent: Saturday, August 8, 2015 4:18 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Another neighborhood on fiber, sexy sexy!

You can do 10gpon

On Saturday, August 8, 2015, Sterling Jacobson 
mailto:sterl...@avative.net>> wrote:
Good suggestions, thanks!

GPON vs active is interesting, but I really wanted to be able to up the ante 
when necessary.
I wasn’t sure with GPON how high I could go.

But with active I am doing a “true” gigabit per customer, limited only by 
upstream switch port density.
The Dell switches have no problem doing multiple 1Gig streams and have 10Gig 
backplane between them on stacking and multiple 10Gig SFP+ ports for upstream.

It’s all data center stuff, so there is no lack of horsepower in this setup.

I do have a couple of Force10 units that I use for higher density projects 
right now such that I can supply the Force10 with 160Gbps backbone and service 
48 10Gig ports to 48 individual CSR switches at 8 1Gig ports each.

Not sure GPON can do that.

I also am planning on 2Gig end user plans soon.



From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Chuck Hogg
Sent: Saturday, August 8, 2015 8:19 AM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Another neighborhood on fiber, sexy sexy!

I've been using ZTE lately, and testing Alphion when it comes in.  We have a 
Dasan deployment, ZTE deployment, and soon Alphion on our next one.  Each one 
has it's own issues.  The ZTE I imported direct from China, so my cost per port 
is super cheap.  I got 32 ONT's and a OLT from ZTE and we are at <$5k.  The OLT 
is capable of 8 PON ports per card, for a total of 1024 customers.  Based on 
the ONT pricing as well, we could serve 1,024 customers for something like 
$65/sub all in with optics including the customer ONT.  Can't beat that with AE 
and MikroTik, even with the 260GS.

Regards,
Chuck

On Fri, Aug 7, 2015 at 11:04 PM, Mike Hammett 
mailto:af...@ics-il.net>> wrote:
Waiting for you to figure out a GPON company you like long term so we all can 
steal it.  ;-)


-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
http://www.ics-il.com


From: "Chuck Hogg" mailto:ch...@shelbybb.com>>
To: af@afmug.com
Sent: Friday, August 7, 2015 5:10:32 PM
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Another neighborhood on fiber, sexy sexy!
GPON does all that in one nice switch ;)  Actually happy for residential that 
we made the switch.

Regards,
Chuck

On Fri, Aug 7, 2015 at 5:37 PM, Sterling Jacobson 
mailto:sterl...@avative.net>> wrote:
I guess the list doesn't like 2MB file attachments, lol!



-Original Message-
From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Sterling Jacobson
Sent: Friday, August 7, 2015 3:35 PM
To: 'af@afmug.com' mailto:af@afmug.com>>
Subject: [AFMUG] Another neighborhood on fiber, sexy sexy!

This time I used a super dense 4U LC fiber panel that can connect up to 576.

I've got about 370 of it loaded with fiber, about a third of that will be 
connected here.

It requires the thinner mil cable which is the only PITA about this setup 
really.

It's using 24 port 1U fiber switches, but I'm still looking for a good Planet 
rep to get the 48 port 1U density.
I could upgrade to those and fill out the entire 12U switch space to match the 
576 panel capacity.
Not going to have 100 percent take rate I'm sure, but it's nice to know I can 
get the density in one cabinet.

Re: [AFMUG] Routed vs bridge with a twist

[Sterling Jacobson]

I didn’t want to have customers switch public IP on fail.

So that would require at least a /24 per site for BGP failover at the edge, if 
it has to BGP through a different route.

Or, I guess, just set up multiple BGP edges but make sure they have at least 
one other path into the network (or more).

So if a leg goes down, it’s just a re-path calc.

And if a provider goes down it’s a BGP switch for that IP domain.

And can still source multiple providers with full redundancy at a /24 or larger 
domain.



From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Mike Hammett
Sent: Saturday, August 8, 2015 6:40 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Routed vs bridge with a twist

Head-ends and NOC all geographically diverse, so then each tower potentially 
has three public /30s instead of one for however many neighboring towers. 
Decisions...

It should improve latency and possibly re-route times.  *shrugs*


-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
http://www.ics-il.com


From: "Sterling Jacobson" mailto:sterl...@avative.net>>
To: af@afmug.com
Sent: Saturday, August 8, 2015 10:44:06 AM
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Routed vs bridge with a twist
That’s what I’m struggling with too.

Multiple potential head ends that are geographically diverse on the network.



From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Mike Hammett
Sent: Saturday, August 8, 2015 6:11 AM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Routed vs bridge with a twist

Agreed. Currently I'm all routed, but am looking to move to VPLS for those 
beyond router-router L2 segments. I don't think I'll actually be saving any 
address space as it isn't as simple as everything goes to the head-end because 
there are multiple "head-ends".


-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
http://www.ics-il.com


From: "Shayne Lebrun" mailto:sleb...@muskoka.com>>
To: af@afmug.com
Sent: Friday, August 7, 2015 3:24:07 PM
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Routed vs bridge with a twist
I advocate keeping everything routed, and using MPLS/VPLS to move L2 where they 
need to go, when required.


From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Glen Waldrop
Sent: Friday, August 7, 2015 3:09 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Routed vs bridge with a twist

You guys have given me some light reading to do based on my question above.

Sounds like the consensus is a few mid sized L2 rather than one large L2 for 
backhauls? Or stick with a subnet per link as I have now?


- Original Message -
From: Shayne Lebrun
To: af@afmug.com
Sent: Friday, August 07, 2015 1:52 PM
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Routed vs bridge with a twist

That’s the basics.  On a Mikrotik:
Create a bridge with no ports.  Call it ‘Loopback’.  Assign a /32 to it, and 
advertise via OSPF.
Set your OSPF instance router ID to this IP.
MPLS->MPLS, under LDP Settings, select Enabled, use the Loopback IP as the LSR 
ID and Transport Address.  Add the interface under LDP Interface and MPLS 
Interface.

Now, MTU is the big sticking point.  On MPLS Interface, I use 1586, which gives 
plenty of room for full 1500 byte packets plus VLANs, MPLS labels, VPLS labels, 
and so on.  But all equipment needs to support that MTU; backhauls, routers, 
everything.  So no 493 family Mikrotiks.  No Canopy FSK or 430 backhauls.  
Ubiquiti, depends.  And so on.

Once you have an MPLS network, you can create VPLS tunnels just like EoIP 
tunnels, only there’ll be no fragmenting and way WAY less encapsulation 
overhead.

RSVP, I think is what Mikrotik calls ‘Traffic Engineering.’  Tell it how much 
bandwidth you have on each interface, and you can avoid the situation where you 
have router a->b->c->d and router a->d means the first path is idle as long as 
the second path is up.

I’ll reiterate, though, MTU will be the sticking point.

Mikrotik’s wiki has some great write-ups on all this.

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Paul Stewart
Sent: Friday, August 7, 2015 2:40 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Routed vs bridge with a twist

If you have even a couple of routers (ideally with switches off of each), you 
can simulate some pretty cool stuff… then add a third router into the mix and 
it’s even more fun.

MPLS isn’t something you just learn right away – it’s something that takes time 
to learn and run through in a lab setting ideally … there’s a lot of 
complexities that you can use if you want to … or there are simpler approaches….

Very very high level…. (not Microtik specific – I don’t know Microtik very well)

Enable loopback interfaces on all routers (which often is already setup)
Enable OSPF between the routers (pretty typical)
Enable RSVP on the interfaces facing one another (this will be new)
Enable MPLS “protocol” on the interfaces facing one another (this will be new)
Configure iBGP

Re: [AFMUG] Another neighborhood on fiber, sexy sexy!

[Chuck Hogg]

You can also run 10G GPON and regular GPON on the same fiber as well.
Sorry for the multiple messages.

Regards,
Chuck

On Sat, Aug 8, 2015 at 11:16 PM, Chuck Hogg  wrote:

> ZTE's OLT 10G modules were not that bad, I just don't remember the ONT's
> being readily available.
>
> Regards,
> Chuck
>
> On Sat, Aug 8, 2015 at 11:03 PM, Sterling Jacobson 
> wrote:
>
>> At what cost, and 10Gig synchronous?
>>
>>
>>
>> *From:* Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] *On Behalf Of *Gino Villarini
>> *Sent:* Saturday, August 8, 2015 4:18 PM
>> *To:* af@afmug.com
>> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Another neighborhood on fiber, sexy sexy!
>>
>>
>>
>> You can do 10gpon
>>
>> On Saturday, August 8, 2015, Sterling Jacobson 
>> wrote:
>>
>> Good suggestions, thanks!
>>
>>
>>
>> GPON vs active is interesting, but I really wanted to be able to up the
>> ante when necessary.
>>
>> I wasn’t sure with GPON how high I could go.
>>
>>
>>
>> But with active I am doing a “true” gigabit per customer, limited only by
>> upstream switch port density.
>>
>> The Dell switches have no problem doing multiple 1Gig streams and have
>> 10Gig backplane between them on stacking and multiple 10Gig SFP+ ports for
>> upstream.
>>
>>
>>
>> It’s all data center stuff, so there is no lack of horsepower in this
>> setup.
>>
>>
>>
>> I do have a couple of Force10 units that I use for higher density
>> projects right now such that I can supply the Force10 with 160Gbps backbone
>> and service 48 10Gig ports to 48 individual CSR switches at 8 1Gig ports
>> each.
>>
>>
>>
>> Not sure GPON can do that.
>>
>>
>>
>> I also am planning on 2Gig end user plans soon.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> *From:* Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] *On Behalf Of *Chuck Hogg
>> *Sent:* Saturday, August 8, 2015 8:19 AM
>> *To:* af@afmug.com
>> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Another neighborhood on fiber, sexy sexy!
>>
>>
>>
>> I've been using ZTE lately, and testing Alphion when it comes in.  We
>> have a Dasan deployment, ZTE deployment, and soon Alphion on our next one.
>> Each one has it's own issues.  The ZTE I imported direct from China, so my
>> cost per port is super cheap.  I got 32 ONT's and a OLT from ZTE and we are
>> at <$5k.  The OLT is capable of 8 PON ports per card, for a total of 1024
>> customers.  Based on the ONT pricing as well, we could serve 1,024
>> customers for something like $65/sub all in with optics including the
>> customer ONT.  Can't beat that with AE and MikroTik, even with the 260GS.
>>
>>
>> Regards,
>> Chuck
>>
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Aug 7, 2015 at 11:04 PM, Mike Hammett  wrote:
>>
>> Waiting for you to figure out a GPON company you like long term so we all
>> can steal it.  ;-)
>>
>>
>>
>> -
>> Mike Hammett
>> Intelligent Computing Solutions
>> http://www.ics-il.com
>>
>>
>> --
>>
>> *From: *"Chuck Hogg" 
>> *To: *af@afmug.com
>> *Sent: *Friday, August 7, 2015 5:10:32 PM
>> *Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] Another neighborhood on fiber, sexy sexy!
>>
>> GPON does all that in one nice switch ;)  Actually happy for residential
>> that we made the switch.
>>
>>
>> Regards,
>> Chuck
>>
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Aug 7, 2015 at 5:37 PM, Sterling Jacobson 
>> wrote:
>>
>> I guess the list doesn't like 2MB file attachments, lol!
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Sterling Jacobson
>> Sent: Friday, August 7, 2015 3:35 PM
>> To: 'af@afmug.com' 
>> Subject: [AFMUG] Another neighborhood on fiber, sexy sexy!
>>
>> This time I used a super dense 4U LC fiber panel that can connect up to
>> 576.
>>
>> I've got about 370 of it loaded with fiber, about a third of that will be
>> connected here.
>>
>> It requires the thinner mil cable which is the only PITA about this setup
>> really.
>>
>> It's using 24 port 1U fiber switches, but I'm still looking for a good
>> Planet rep to get the 48 port 1U density.
>> I could upgrade to those and fill out the entire 12U switch space to
>> match the 576 panel capacity.
>> Not going to have 100 percent take rate I'm sure, but it's nice to know I
>> can get the density in one cabinet.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>

Re: [AFMUG] Another neighborhood on fiber, sexy sexy!

[Chuck Hogg]

ZTE's OLT 10G modules were not that bad, I just don't remember the ONT's
being readily available.

Regards,
Chuck

On Sat, Aug 8, 2015 at 11:03 PM, Sterling Jacobson 
wrote:

> At what cost, and 10Gig synchronous?
>
>
>
> *From:* Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] *On Behalf Of *Gino Villarini
> *Sent:* Saturday, August 8, 2015 4:18 PM
> *To:* af@afmug.com
> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Another neighborhood on fiber, sexy sexy!
>
>
>
> You can do 10gpon
>
> On Saturday, August 8, 2015, Sterling Jacobson 
> wrote:
>
> Good suggestions, thanks!
>
>
>
> GPON vs active is interesting, but I really wanted to be able to up the
> ante when necessary.
>
> I wasn’t sure with GPON how high I could go.
>
>
>
> But with active I am doing a “true” gigabit per customer, limited only by
> upstream switch port density.
>
> The Dell switches have no problem doing multiple 1Gig streams and have
> 10Gig backplane between them on stacking and multiple 10Gig SFP+ ports for
> upstream.
>
>
>
> It’s all data center stuff, so there is no lack of horsepower in this
> setup.
>
>
>
> I do have a couple of Force10 units that I use for higher density projects
> right now such that I can supply the Force10 with 160Gbps backbone and
> service 48 10Gig ports to 48 individual CSR switches at 8 1Gig ports each.
>
>
>
> Not sure GPON can do that.
>
>
>
> I also am planning on 2Gig end user plans soon.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] *On Behalf Of *Chuck Hogg
> *Sent:* Saturday, August 8, 2015 8:19 AM
> *To:* af@afmug.com
> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Another neighborhood on fiber, sexy sexy!
>
>
>
> I've been using ZTE lately, and testing Alphion when it comes in.  We have
> a Dasan deployment, ZTE deployment, and soon Alphion on our next one.  Each
> one has it's own issues.  The ZTE I imported direct from China, so my cost
> per port is super cheap.  I got 32 ONT's and a OLT from ZTE and we are at
> <$5k.  The OLT is capable of 8 PON ports per card, for a total of 1024
> customers.  Based on the ONT pricing as well, we could serve 1,024
> customers for something like $65/sub all in with optics including the
> customer ONT.  Can't beat that with AE and MikroTik, even with the 260GS.
>
>
> Regards,
> Chuck
>
>
>
> On Fri, Aug 7, 2015 at 11:04 PM, Mike Hammett  wrote:
>
> Waiting for you to figure out a GPON company you like long term so we all
> can steal it.  ;-)
>
>
>
> -
> Mike Hammett
> Intelligent Computing Solutions
> http://www.ics-il.com
>
>
> --
>
> *From: *"Chuck Hogg" 
> *To: *af@afmug.com
> *Sent: *Friday, August 7, 2015 5:10:32 PM
> *Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] Another neighborhood on fiber, sexy sexy!
>
> GPON does all that in one nice switch ;)  Actually happy for residential
> that we made the switch.
>
>
> Regards,
> Chuck
>
>
>
> On Fri, Aug 7, 2015 at 5:37 PM, Sterling Jacobson 
> wrote:
>
> I guess the list doesn't like 2MB file attachments, lol!
>
>
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Sterling Jacobson
> Sent: Friday, August 7, 2015 3:35 PM
> To: 'af@afmug.com' 
> Subject: [AFMUG] Another neighborhood on fiber, sexy sexy!
>
> This time I used a super dense 4U LC fiber panel that can connect up to
> 576.
>
> I've got about 370 of it loaded with fiber, about a third of that will be
> connected here.
>
> It requires the thinner mil cable which is the only PITA about this setup
> really.
>
> It's using 24 port 1U fiber switches, but I'm still looking for a good
> Planet rep to get the 48 port 1U density.
> I could upgrade to those and fill out the entire 12U switch space to match
> the 576 panel capacity.
> Not going to have 100 percent take rate I'm sure, but it's nice to know I
> can get the density in one cabinet.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

Re: [AFMUG] ToughSwitch 8 PRO

[Jeremy]

Awesome.  I just ordered two 12 port direct from Netonix.  Hopefully I'll
get them soon.

On Sat, Aug 8, 2015 at 8:22 PM, Cassidy B. Larson  wrote:

> The first run of DCs have shipped. We got a couple we’re deploying next
> week.  The next run will be in a week or two I think.
>
>
> On Aug 8, 2015, at 8:17 PM, Jeremy  wrote:
>
> Well I am on their list and I wasn't notified.  I'd love to pre-order.
>
> On Sat, Aug 8, 2015 at 6:30 PM, Mike Hammett  wrote:
>
>> There is in no way shape or form a fable that Netonix is producing great
>> switches for WISPs. The DC version has taken longer than expected, but
>> that  doesn't mean that the Netonix switch is fabled. They announced
>> pre-orders a couple weeks ago.
>>
>>
>> -
>> Mike Hammett
>> Intelligent Computing Solutions
>> http://www.ics-il.com
>>
>> --
>> *From: *"Jeremy" 
>> *To: *af@afmug.com
>> *Sent: *Saturday, August 8, 2015 6:42:33 PM
>> *Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] ToughSwitch 8 PRO
>>
>> Still waiting for this fabled Netonix switch.  I need a DC version.
>> Please tell me where I can find this mystical creature.
>>
>> On Sat, Aug 8, 2015 at 4:21 PM, Gino Villarini 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Netonix for the win!
>>>
>>>
>>> On Friday, August 7, 2015, Brett A Mansfield <
>>> li...@silverlakeinternet.com> wrote:
>>>
 I have a few of these laying around. I removed them after I realized
 they don't like a mix of 100Mb and Gigabit. I really want to use them
 though rather than let them collect dust.

 Does anyone have a setup where these are working for them? Or are they
 just a lost cause?

 Thank you,
 Brett A Mansfield
 Silver Lake Internet, LLC

>>>
>>
>>
>
>

Re: [AFMUG] Another neighborhood on fiber, sexy sexy!

[Sterling Jacobson]

At what cost, and 10Gig synchronous?

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Gino Villarini
Sent: Saturday, August 8, 2015 4:18 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Another neighborhood on fiber, sexy sexy!

You can do 10gpon

On Saturday, August 8, 2015, Sterling Jacobson 
mailto:sterl...@avative.net>> wrote:
Good suggestions, thanks!

GPON vs active is interesting, but I really wanted to be able to up the ante 
when necessary.
I wasn’t sure with GPON how high I could go.

But with active I am doing a “true” gigabit per customer, limited only by 
upstream switch port density.
The Dell switches have no problem doing multiple 1Gig streams and have 10Gig 
backplane between them on stacking and multiple 10Gig SFP+ ports for upstream.

It’s all data center stuff, so there is no lack of horsepower in this setup.

I do have a couple of Force10 units that I use for higher density projects 
right now such that I can supply the Force10 with 160Gbps backbone and service 
48 10Gig ports to 48 individual CSR switches at 8 1Gig ports each.

Not sure GPON can do that.

I also am planning on 2Gig end user plans soon.



From: Af 
[mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com]
 On Behalf Of Chuck Hogg
Sent: Saturday, August 8, 2015 8:19 AM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Another neighborhood on fiber, sexy sexy!

I've been using ZTE lately, and testing Alphion when it comes in.  We have a 
Dasan deployment, ZTE deployment, and soon Alphion on our next one.  Each one 
has it's own issues.  The ZTE I imported direct from China, so my cost per port 
is super cheap.  I got 32 ONT's and a OLT from ZTE and we are at <$5k.  The OLT 
is capable of 8 PON ports per card, for a total of 1024 customers.  Based on 
the ONT pricing as well, we could serve 1,024 customers for something like 
$65/sub all in with optics including the customer ONT.  Can't beat that with AE 
and MikroTik, even with the 260GS.

Regards,
Chuck

On Fri, Aug 7, 2015 at 11:04 PM, Mike Hammett 
> wrote:
Waiting for you to figure out a GPON company you like long term so we all can 
steal it.  ;-)


-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
http://www.ics-il.com


From: "Chuck Hogg" 
>
To: af@afmug.com
Sent: Friday, August 7, 2015 5:10:32 PM
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Another neighborhood on fiber, sexy sexy!
GPON does all that in one nice switch ;)  Actually happy for residential that 
we made the switch.

Regards,
Chuck

On Fri, Aug 7, 2015 at 5:37 PM, Sterling Jacobson 
> 
wrote:
I guess the list doesn't like 2MB file attachments, lol!



-Original Message-
From: Af 
[mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com]
 On Behalf Of Sterling Jacobson
Sent: Friday, August 7, 2015 3:35 PM
To: 'af@afmug.com' 
>
Subject: [AFMUG] Another neighborhood on fiber, sexy sexy!

This time I used a super dense 4U LC fiber panel that can connect up to 576.

I've got about 370 of it loaded with fiber, about a third of that will be 
connected here.

It requires the thinner mil cable which is the only PITA about this setup 
really.

It's using 24 port 1U fiber switches, but I'm still looking for a good Planet 
rep to get the 48 port 1U density.
I could upgrade to those and fill out the entire 12U switch space to match the 
576 panel capacity.
Not going to have 100 percent take rate I'm sure, but it's nice to know I can 
get the density in one cabinet.

Re: [AFMUG] Is anyone here doing ePTP at all?

[Josh Luthman]

Power cycle it like 6 times.  3 second on, 3 second off times 6?

Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373
On Aug 8, 2015 10:58 PM, "Mathew Howard"  wrote:

> Pretty sure it would be the same... poke the reset button.
>
> On Sat, Aug 8, 2015 at 9:55 PM, Mike Hammett  wrote:
>
>> Would it be any different than any other radio mode?
>>
>>
>>
>> -
>> Mike Hammett
>> Intelligent Computing Solutions
>> http://www.ics-il.com
>>
>> --
>> *From: *"Rory Conaway" 
>> *To: *af@afmug.com
>> *Sent: *Saturday, August 8, 2015 8:47:26 PM
>>
>> *Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] Is anyone here doing ePTP at all?
>>
>> How do you do a hard reset on the ePTP?
>>
>>
>>
>> Rory
>>
>>
>>
>> *From:* Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] *On Behalf Of *Josh Luthman
>> *Sent:* Saturday, August 8, 2015 6:26 PM
>> *To:* af@afmug.com
>> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Is anyone here doing ePTP at all?
>>
>>
>>
>> Synced, yes.  Eptp no sync 2ms.
>>
>> Josh Luthman
>> Office: 937-552-2340
>> Direct: 937-552-2343
>> 1100 Wayne St
>> Suite 1337
>> Troy, OH 45373
>>
>> On Aug 8, 2015 8:36 PM, "Mike Hammett"  wrote:
>>
>> I hadn't realized that ePTP mode didn't have any up\down ratios set. I
>> just checked my radios and sure enough...
>>
>> So the best we're going to get out of ePMP synced backhauls is...  ~7.5ms?
>>
>>
>>
>> -
>> Mike Hammett
>> Intelligent Computing Solutions
>> http://www.ics-il.com
>>
>>
>> --
>>
>> *From: *"Dan Sullivan" 
>> *To: *af@afmug.com
>> *Sent: *Saturday, August 8, 2015 1:52:13 PM
>> *Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] Is anyone here doing ePTP at all?
>>
>> 2.5 msec frame allows for sync and improves PTP latency as compared to 5
>> msec frame.
>>
>>
>>
>> ePTP cannot be synced as communication is driven based on dynamic data
>> from each link.
>>
>>
>> Dan Sullivan
>>
>> ePMP Software Manager
>>
>>
>>
>> *From:* Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] *On Behalf Of *Mathew Howard
>> *Sent:* Saturday, August 08, 2015 10:11 AM
>> *To:* af
>> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Is anyone here doing ePTP at all?
>>
>>
>>
>> Yep, I'm pretty sure it doesn't use fixed frames in ePTP mode... trying
>> to sync that sounds like it'd end up like airmax sync.
>>
>> 2.5ms frames make sync a lot more useful for ptp though.
>>
>>
>>
>> On Sat, Aug 8, 2015 at 7:06 AM, Josh Luthman 
>> wrote:
>>
>> But that depends on frame timing which would leave you at the current tdd
>> ptp (5ms today, 2.5ms after 2.5).  I'd love to see the 2ms latency be
>> synced but I don't see how that would be doable.
>>
>> Josh Luthman
>> Office: 937-552-2340
>> Direct: 937-552-2343
>> 1100 Wayne St
>> Suite 1337
>> Troy, OH 45373
>>
>> On Aug 8, 2015 7:54 AM, "Mike Hammett"  wrote:
>>
>> No, I mean exactly what I said ePTP sync.
>>
>> There's no reason that I'm aware of that the ePTP up\down cycles couldn't
>> be synced. The regular sync has to deal with potentially dozens of clients.
>> The ePTP just has to deal with one.
>>
>>
>>
>> -
>> Mike Hammett
>> Intelligent Computing Solutions
>> http://www.ics-il.com
>>
>>
>> --
>>
>> *From: *"Josh Luthman" 
>> *To: *af@afmug.com
>> *Sent: *Saturday, August 8, 2015 6:48:14 AM
>> *Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] Is anyone here doing ePTP at all?
>>
>> Eptp sync doesn't sound possible.  That's what the tdd ptp is for.  Do
>> you mean the 2.5ms timing?
>>
>> Josh Luthman
>> Office: 937-552-2340
>> Direct: 937-552-2343
>> 1100 Wayne St
>> Suite 1337
>> Troy, OH 45373
>>
>> On Aug 8, 2015 7:47 AM, "Mike Hammett"  wrote:
>>
>> Though*  Early in the morning...
>>
>>
>>
>> -
>> Mike Hammett
>> Intelligent Computing Solutions
>> http://www.ics-il.com
>>
>>
>> --
>>
>> *From: *"Mike Hammett" 
>> *To: *af@afmug.com
>> *Sent: *Saturday, August 8, 2015 6:45:55 AM
>> *Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] Is anyone here doing ePTP at all?
>>
>> Is it, thought?  ;-)
>>
>>
>> FWIW, I have some ePTP up (eagerly awaiting ePTP sync!) and no issues
>> that I'm aware of.
>>
>>
>>
>> -
>> Mike Hammett
>> Intelligent Computing Solutions
>> http://www.ics-il.com
>>
>>
>> --
>>
>> *From: *"Josh Luthman" 
>> *To: *af@afmug.com
>> *Sent: *Friday, August 7, 2015 4:41:45 PM
>> *Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] Is anyone here doing ePTP at all?
>>
>> How long has it been up?  According to Cambium I'm the only one that's
>> been experiencing a bug and it's all over the place.  They've got a fix for
>> it but it's just so weird that I'm the only one with the problem =/
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Josh Luthman
>> Office: 937-552-2340
>> Direct: 937-552-2343
>> 1100 Wayne St
>> Suite 1337
>> Troy, OH 45373
>>
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Aug 7, 2015 at 5:32 PM, Mathew Howard 
>> wrote:
>>
>> Yep, I just replaced a pair of NanoBridges with Force 110's doing ePTP a
>> couple days ago and we have at least one other.
>>
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Aug 7, 2015 at 4:07 PM, Josh Luthman 
>> wrote:
>>
>> Anyone at all?
>>
>>
>>
>> Josh Luthman
>> Office: 937-552-

Re: [AFMUG] Routed vs bridge with a twist

[Mike Hammett]

MPLS does require OSPF to function. 

However, to use VPLS tunnels from my tower to my edge, I still have three 
destinations for every tower, edge 1, edge 2 and NOC (without jumping back and 
forth) for my IGP to choose amongst. 




- 
Mike Hammett 
Intelligent Computing Solutions 
http://www.ics-il.com 

- Original Message -

From: "Jason McKemie"  
To: af@afmug.com 
Sent: Saturday, August 8, 2015 9:57:47 PM 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Routed vs bridge with a twist 

I'm pretty ignorant on MPLS, but doesn't it work without OSPF? Or is a routing 
protocol necessary for it to function correctly? 

On Saturday, August 8, 2015, Mike Hammett < af...@ics-il.net > wrote: 




Head-ends and NOC all geographically diverse, so then each tower potentially 
has three public /30s instead of one for however many neighboring towers. 
Decisions... 

It should improve latency and possibly re-route times. *shrugs* 




- 
Mike Hammett 
Intelligent Computing Solutions 
http://www.ics-il.com 



From: "Sterling Jacobson" < sterl...@avative.net > 
To: af@afmug.com 
Sent: Saturday, August 8, 2015 10:44:06 AM 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Routed vs bridge with a twist 



That’s what I’m struggling with too. 

Multiple potential head ends that are geographically diverse on the network. 





From: Af [mailto: af-boun...@afmug.com ] On Behalf Of Mike Hammett 
Sent: Saturday, August 8, 2015 6:11 AM 
To: af@afmug.com 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Routed vs bridge with a twist 


Agreed. Currently I'm all routed, but am looking to move to VPLS for those 
beyond router-router L2 segments. I don't think I'll actually be saving any 
address space as it isn't as simple as everything goes to the head-end because 
there are multiple "head-ends". 



- 
Mike Hammett 
Intelligent Computing Solutions 
http://www.ics-il.com 




From: "Shayne Lebrun" < sleb...@muskoka.com > 
To: af@afmug.com 
Sent: Friday, August 7, 2015 3:24:07 PM 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Routed vs bridge with a twist 
I advocate keeping everything routed, and using MPLS/VPLS to move L2 where they 
need to go, when required. 




From: Af [ mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com ] On Behalf Of Glen Waldrop 
Sent: Friday, August 7, 2015 3:09 PM 
To: af@afmug.com 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Routed vs bridge with a twist 


You guys have given me some light reading to do based on my question above. 

Sounds like the consensus is a few mid sized L2 rather than one large L2 for 
backhauls? Or stick with a subnet per link as I have now? 







- Original Message - 

From: Shayne Lebrun 

To: af@afmug.com 

Sent: Friday, August 07, 2015 1:52 PM 

Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Routed vs bridge with a twist 


That’s the basics. On a Mikrotik: 
Create a bridge with no ports. Call it ‘Loopback’. Assign a /32 to it, and 
advertise via OSPF. 
Set your OSPF instance router ID to this IP. 
MPLS->MPLS, under LDP Settings, select Enabled, use the Loopback IP as the LSR 
ID and Transport Address. Add the interface under LDP Interface and MPLS 
Interface. 

Now, MTU is the big sticking point. On MPLS Interface, I use 1586, which gives 
plenty of room for full 1500 byte packets plus VLANs, MPLS labels, VPLS labels, 
and so on. But all equipment needs to support that MTU; backhauls, routers, 
everything. So no 493 family Mikrotiks. No Canopy FSK or 430 backhauls. 
Ubiquiti, depends. And so on. 

Once you have an MPLS network, you can create VPLS tunnels just like EoIP 
tunnels, only there’ll be no fragmenting and way WAY less encapsulation 
overhead. 

RSVP, I think is what Mikrotik calls ‘Traffic Engineering.’ Tell it how much 
bandwidth you have on each interface, and you can avoid the situation where you 
have router a->b->c->d and router a->d means the first path is idle as long as 
the second path is up. 

I’ll reiterate, though, MTU will be the sticking point. 

Mikrotik’s wiki has some great write-ups on all this. 



From: Af [ mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com ] On Behalf Of Paul Stewart 
Sent: Friday, August 7, 2015 2:40 PM 
To: af@afmug.com 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Routed vs bridge with a twist 

If you have even a couple of routers (ideally with switches off of each), you 
can simulate some pretty cool stuff… then add a third router into the mix and 
it’s even more fun. 

MPLS isn’t something you just learn right away – it’s something that takes time 
to learn and run through in a lab setting ideally … there’s a lot of 
complexities that you can use if you want to … or there are simpler 
approaches…. 

Very very high level…. (not Microtik specific – I don’t know Microtik very 
well) 

Enable loopback interfaces on all routers (which often is already setup) 
Enable OSPF between the routers (pretty typical) 
Enable RSVP on the interfaces facing one another (this will be new) 
Enable MPLS “protocol” on the interfaces facing one another (this will be new) 
Configure iBGP between the routers (full mesh, peering with loopbacks – not 
interface IP’s) 
Configure LSP’s between all routers (remember, LSP’s are unidirect

Re: [AFMUG] Is anyone here doing ePTP at all?

[Mathew Howard]

Pretty sure it would be the same... poke the reset button.

On Sat, Aug 8, 2015 at 9:55 PM, Mike Hammett  wrote:

> Would it be any different than any other radio mode?
>
>
>
> -
> Mike Hammett
> Intelligent Computing Solutions
> http://www.ics-il.com
>
> --
> *From: *"Rory Conaway" 
> *To: *af@afmug.com
> *Sent: *Saturday, August 8, 2015 8:47:26 PM
>
> *Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] Is anyone here doing ePTP at all?
>
> How do you do a hard reset on the ePTP?
>
>
>
> Rory
>
>
>
> *From:* Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] *On Behalf Of *Josh Luthman
> *Sent:* Saturday, August 8, 2015 6:26 PM
> *To:* af@afmug.com
> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Is anyone here doing ePTP at all?
>
>
>
> Synced, yes.  Eptp no sync 2ms.
>
> Josh Luthman
> Office: 937-552-2340
> Direct: 937-552-2343
> 1100 Wayne St
> Suite 1337
> Troy, OH 45373
>
> On Aug 8, 2015 8:36 PM, "Mike Hammett"  wrote:
>
> I hadn't realized that ePTP mode didn't have any up\down ratios set. I
> just checked my radios and sure enough...
>
> So the best we're going to get out of ePMP synced backhauls is...  ~7.5ms?
>
>
>
> -
> Mike Hammett
> Intelligent Computing Solutions
> http://www.ics-il.com
>
>
> --
>
> *From: *"Dan Sullivan" 
> *To: *af@afmug.com
> *Sent: *Saturday, August 8, 2015 1:52:13 PM
> *Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] Is anyone here doing ePTP at all?
>
> 2.5 msec frame allows for sync and improves PTP latency as compared to 5
> msec frame.
>
>
>
> ePTP cannot be synced as communication is driven based on dynamic data
> from each link.
>
>
> Dan Sullivan
>
> ePMP Software Manager
>
>
>
> *From:* Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] *On Behalf Of *Mathew Howard
> *Sent:* Saturday, August 08, 2015 10:11 AM
> *To:* af
> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Is anyone here doing ePTP at all?
>
>
>
> Yep, I'm pretty sure it doesn't use fixed frames in ePTP mode... trying to
> sync that sounds like it'd end up like airmax sync.
>
> 2.5ms frames make sync a lot more useful for ptp though.
>
>
>
> On Sat, Aug 8, 2015 at 7:06 AM, Josh Luthman 
> wrote:
>
> But that depends on frame timing which would leave you at the current tdd
> ptp (5ms today, 2.5ms after 2.5).  I'd love to see the 2ms latency be
> synced but I don't see how that would be doable.
>
> Josh Luthman
> Office: 937-552-2340
> Direct: 937-552-2343
> 1100 Wayne St
> Suite 1337
> Troy, OH 45373
>
> On Aug 8, 2015 7:54 AM, "Mike Hammett"  wrote:
>
> No, I mean exactly what I said ePTP sync.
>
> There's no reason that I'm aware of that the ePTP up\down cycles couldn't
> be synced. The regular sync has to deal with potentially dozens of clients.
> The ePTP just has to deal with one.
>
>
>
> -
> Mike Hammett
> Intelligent Computing Solutions
> http://www.ics-il.com
>
>
> --
>
> *From: *"Josh Luthman" 
> *To: *af@afmug.com
> *Sent: *Saturday, August 8, 2015 6:48:14 AM
> *Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] Is anyone here doing ePTP at all?
>
> Eptp sync doesn't sound possible.  That's what the tdd ptp is for.  Do you
> mean the 2.5ms timing?
>
> Josh Luthman
> Office: 937-552-2340
> Direct: 937-552-2343
> 1100 Wayne St
> Suite 1337
> Troy, OH 45373
>
> On Aug 8, 2015 7:47 AM, "Mike Hammett"  wrote:
>
> Though*  Early in the morning...
>
>
>
> -
> Mike Hammett
> Intelligent Computing Solutions
> http://www.ics-il.com
>
>
> --
>
> *From: *"Mike Hammett" 
> *To: *af@afmug.com
> *Sent: *Saturday, August 8, 2015 6:45:55 AM
> *Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] Is anyone here doing ePTP at all?
>
> Is it, thought?  ;-)
>
>
> FWIW, I have some ePTP up (eagerly awaiting ePTP sync!) and no issues that
> I'm aware of.
>
>
>
> -
> Mike Hammett
> Intelligent Computing Solutions
> http://www.ics-il.com
>
>
> --
>
> *From: *"Josh Luthman" 
> *To: *af@afmug.com
> *Sent: *Friday, August 7, 2015 4:41:45 PM
> *Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] Is anyone here doing ePTP at all?
>
> How long has it been up?  According to Cambium I'm the only one that's
> been experiencing a bug and it's all over the place.  They've got a fix for
> it but it's just so weird that I'm the only one with the problem =/
>
>
>
>
> Josh Luthman
> Office: 937-552-2340
> Direct: 937-552-2343
> 1100 Wayne St
> Suite 1337
> Troy, OH 45373
>
>
>
> On Fri, Aug 7, 2015 at 5:32 PM, Mathew Howard 
> wrote:
>
> Yep, I just replaced a pair of NanoBridges with Force 110's doing ePTP a
> couple days ago and we have at least one other.
>
>
>
> On Fri, Aug 7, 2015 at 4:07 PM, Josh Luthman 
> wrote:
>
> Anyone at all?
>
>
>
> Josh Luthman
> Office: 937-552-2340
> Direct: 937-552-2343
> 1100 Wayne St
> Suite 1337
> Troy, OH 45373
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

Re: [AFMUG] Routed vs bridge with a twist

[Jason McKemie]

I'm pretty ignorant on MPLS, but doesn't it work without OSPF? Or is a
routing protocol necessary for it to function correctly?

On Saturday, August 8, 2015, Mike Hammett  wrote:

> Head-ends and NOC all geographically diverse, so then each tower
> potentially has three public /30s instead of one for however many
> neighboring towers. Decisions...
>
> It should improve latency and possibly re-route times.  *shrugs*
>
>
>
> -
> Mike Hammett
> Intelligent Computing Solutions
> http://www.ics-il.com
>
> --
> *From: *"Sterling Jacobson"  >
> *To: *af@afmug.com 
> *Sent: *Saturday, August 8, 2015 10:44:06 AM
> *Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] Routed vs bridge with a twist
>
> That’s what I’m struggling with too.
>
>
>
> Multiple potential head ends that are geographically diverse on the
> network.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com
> ] *On Behalf Of *Mike
> Hammett
> *Sent:* Saturday, August 8, 2015 6:11 AM
> *To:* af@afmug.com 
> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Routed vs bridge with a twist
>
>
>
> Agreed. Currently I'm all routed, but am looking to move to VPLS for those
> beyond router-router L2 segments. I don't think I'll actually be saving any
> address space as it isn't as simple as everything goes to the head-end
> because there are multiple "head-ends".
>
>
>
> -
> Mike Hammett
> Intelligent Computing Solutions
> http://www.ics-il.com
>
>
> --
>
> *From: *"Shayne Lebrun"  >
> *To: *af@afmug.com 
> *Sent: *Friday, August 7, 2015 3:24:07 PM
> *Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] Routed vs bridge with a twist
>
> I advocate keeping everything routed, and using MPLS/VPLS to move L2 where
> they need to go, when required.
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com
> ] *On Behalf Of *Glen
> Waldrop
> *Sent:* Friday, August 7, 2015 3:09 PM
> *To:* af@afmug.com 
> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Routed vs bridge with a twist
>
>
>
> You guys have given me some light reading to do based on my question above.
>
> Sounds like the consensus is a few mid sized L2 rather than one large L2
> for backhauls? Or stick with a subnet per link as I have now?
>
>
>
>
>
> - Original Message -
>
> *From:* Shayne Lebrun
> 
>
> *To:* af@afmug.com 
>
> *Sent:* Friday, August 07, 2015 1:52 PM
>
> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Routed vs bridge with a twist
>
>
>
> That’s the basics.  On a Mikrotik:
>
> Create a bridge with no ports.  Call it ‘Loopback’.  Assign a /32 to it,
> and advertise via OSPF.
>
> Set your OSPF instance router ID to this IP.
>
> MPLS->MPLS, under LDP Settings, select Enabled, use the Loopback IP as the
> LSR ID and Transport Address.  Add the interface under LDP Interface and
> MPLS Interface.
>
>
>
> Now, MTU is the big sticking point.  On MPLS Interface, I use 1586, which
> gives plenty of room for full 1500 byte packets plus VLANs, MPLS labels,
> VPLS labels, and so on.  But all equipment needs to support that MTU;
> backhauls, routers, everything.  So no 493 family Mikrotiks.  No Canopy FSK
> or 430 backhauls.  Ubiquiti, depends.  And so on.
>
>
>
> Once you have an MPLS network, you can create VPLS tunnels just like EoIP
> tunnels, only there’ll be no fragmenting and way WAY less encapsulation
> overhead.
>
>
>
> RSVP, I think is what Mikrotik calls ‘Traffic Engineering.’  Tell it how
> much bandwidth you have on each interface, and you can avoid the situation
> where you have router a->b->c->d and router a->d means the first path is
> idle as long as the second path is up.
>
>
>
> I’ll reiterate, though, MTU will be the sticking point.
>
>
>
> Mikrotik’s wiki has some great write-ups on all this.
>
>
>
> *From:* Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com
> ] *On Behalf Of *Paul
> Stewart
> *Sent:* Friday, August 7, 2015 2:40 PM
> *To:* af@afmug.com 
> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Routed vs bridge with a twist
>
>
>
> If you have even a couple of routers (ideally with switches off of each),
> you can simulate some pretty cool stuff… then add a third router into the
> mix and it’s even more fun.
>
>
>
> MPLS isn’t something you just learn right away – it’s something that takes
> time to learn and run through in a lab setting ideally … there’s a lot of
> complexities that you can use if you want to … or there are simpler
> approaches….
>
>
>
> Very very high level…. (not Microtik specific – I don’t know Microtik very
> well)
>
>
>
> Enable loopback interfaces on all routers (which often is already setup)
>
> Enable OSPF between the routers (pretty typical)
>
> Enable RSVP on the interfaces facing one another (this will be new)
>
> Enable MPLS “protocol” on the interfaces facing one another (this will be
> new)
>
> Configure iBGP between the routers (full mesh, peering with loopbacks –
> not interface IP’s)
>
> Configure LSP’s between all routers (remember, LSP’s are unidirectional so
> need all routers configured to all routers).
>
>
>
> This is assuming you want an RSVP based MPLS network and not LDP based –
> RSVP has advantages over LDP but is more complex to setup. 

Re: [AFMUG] Is anyone here doing ePTP at all?

[Mike Hammett]

Would it be any different than any other radio mode? 




- 
Mike Hammett 
Intelligent Computing Solutions 
http://www.ics-il.com 

- Original Message -

From: "Rory Conaway"  
To: af@afmug.com 
Sent: Saturday, August 8, 2015 8:47:26 PM 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Is anyone here doing ePTP at all? 



How do you do a hard reset on the ePTP? 

Rory 

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Josh Luthman 
Sent: Saturday, August 8, 2015 6:26 PM 
To: af@afmug.com 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Is anyone here doing ePTP at all? 

Synced, yes. Eptp no sync 2ms. 
Josh Luthman 
Office: 937-552-2340 
Direct: 937-552-2343 
1100 Wayne St 
Suite 1337 
Troy, OH 45373 

On Aug 8, 2015 8:36 PM, "Mike Hammett" < af...@ics-il.net > wrote: 


I hadn't realized that ePTP mode didn't have any up\down ratios set. I just 
checked my radios and sure enough... 

So the best we're going to get out of ePMP synced backhauls is... ~7.5ms? 



- 
Mike Hammett 
Intelligent Computing Solutions 
http://www.ics-il.com 




From: "Dan Sullivan" < daniel.sulli...@cambiumnetworks.com > 
To: af@afmug.com 
Sent: Saturday, August 8, 2015 1:52:13 PM 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Is anyone here doing ePTP at all? 

2.5 msec frame allows for sync and improves PTP latency as compared to 5 msec 
frame. 

ePTP cannot be synced as communication is driven based on dynamic data from 
each link. 

Dan Sullivan 
ePMP Software Manager 

From: Af [mailto: af-boun...@afmug.com ] On Behalf Of Mathew Howard 
Sent: Saturday, August 08, 2015 10:11 AM 
To: af 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Is anyone here doing ePTP at all? 



Yep, I'm pretty sure it doesn't use fixed frames in ePTP mode... trying to sync 
that sounds like it'd end up like airmax sync. 
2.5ms frames make sync a lot more useful for ptp though. 



On Sat, Aug 8, 2015 at 7:06 AM, Josh Luthman < j...@imaginenetworksllc.com > 
wrote: 
But that depends on frame timing which would leave you at the current tdd ptp 
(5ms today, 2.5ms after 2.5). I'd love to see the 2ms latency be synced but I 
don't see how that would be doable. 
Josh Luthman 
Office: 937-552-2340 
Direct: 937-552-2343 
1100 Wayne St 
Suite 1337 
Troy, OH 45373 



On Aug 8, 2015 7:54 AM, "Mike Hammett" < af...@ics-il.net > wrote: 


No, I mean exactly what I said ePTP sync. 

There's no reason that I'm aware of that the ePTP up\down cycles couldn't be 
synced. The regular sync has to deal with potentially dozens of clients. The 
ePTP just has to deal with one. 



- 
Mike Hammett 
Intelligent Computing Solutions 
http://www.ics-il.com 




From: "Josh Luthman" < j...@imaginenetworksllc.com > 
To: af@afmug.com 
Sent: Saturday, August 8, 2015 6:48:14 AM 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Is anyone here doing ePTP at all? 
Eptp sync doesn't sound possible. That's what the tdd ptp is for. Do you mean 
the 2.5ms timing? 
Josh Luthman 
Office: 937-552-2340 
Direct: 937-552-2343 
1100 Wayne St 
Suite 1337 
Troy, OH 45373 

On Aug 8, 2015 7:47 AM, "Mike Hammett" < af...@ics-il.net > wrote: 


Though* Early in the morning... 



- 
Mike Hammett 
Intelligent Computing Solutions 
http://www.ics-il.com 




From: "Mike Hammett" < af...@ics-il.net > 
To: af@afmug.com 
Sent: Saturday, August 8, 2015 6:45:55 AM 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Is anyone here doing ePTP at all? 

Is it, thought? ;-) 


FWIW, I have some ePTP up (eagerly awaiting ePTP sync!) and no issues that I'm 
aware of. 



- 
Mike Hammett 
Intelligent Computing Solutions 
http://www.ics-il.com 




From: "Josh Luthman" < j...@imaginenetworksllc.com > 
To: af@afmug.com 
Sent: Friday, August 7, 2015 4:41:45 PM 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Is anyone here doing ePTP at all? 

How long has it been up? According to Cambium I'm the only one that's been 
experiencing a bug and it's all over the place. They've got a fix for it but 
it's just so weird that I'm the only one with the problem =/ 








Josh Luthman 
Office: 937-552-2340 
Direct: 937-552-2343 
1100 Wayne St 
Suite 1337 
Troy, OH 45373 


On Fri, Aug 7, 2015 at 5:32 PM, Mathew Howard < mhoward...@gmail.com > wrote: 

Yep, I just replaced a pair of NanoBridges with Force 110's doing ePTP a couple 
days ago and we have at least one other. 





On Fri, Aug 7, 2015 at 4:07 PM, Josh Luthman < j...@imaginenetworksllc.com > 
wrote: 

Anyone at all? 






Josh Luthman 
Office: 937-552-2340 
Direct: 937-552-2343 
1100 Wayne St 
Suite 1337 
Troy, OH 45373 

Re: [AFMUG] ToughSwitch 8 PRO

[Cassidy B. Larson]

The first run of DCs have shipped. We got a couple we’re deploying next week.  
The next run will be in a week or two I think.


> On Aug 8, 2015, at 8:17 PM, Jeremy  wrote:
> 
> Well I am on their list and I wasn't notified.  I'd love to pre-order.
> 
> On Sat, Aug 8, 2015 at 6:30 PM, Mike Hammett  > wrote:
> There is in no way shape or form a fable that Netonix is producing great 
> switches for WISPs. The DC version has taken longer than expected, but that  
> doesn't mean that the Netonix switch is fabled. They announced pre-orders a 
> couple weeks ago.
> 
> 
> -
> Mike Hammett
> Intelligent Computing Solutions
> http://www.ics-il.com 
> 
> From: "Jeremy" mailto:jeremysmi...@gmail.com>>
> To: af@afmug.com 
> Sent: Saturday, August 8, 2015 6:42:33 PM
> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] ToughSwitch 8 PRO
> 
> Still waiting for this fabled Netonix switch.  I need a DC version.  Please 
> tell me where I can find this mystical creature.
> 
> On Sat, Aug 8, 2015 at 4:21 PM, Gino Villarini  > wrote:
> Netonix for the win!
> 
> 
> On Friday, August 7, 2015, Brett A Mansfield  > wrote:
> I have a few of these laying around. I removed them after I realized they 
> don't like a mix of 100Mb and Gigabit. I really want to use them though 
> rather than let them collect dust.
> 
> Does anyone have a setup where these are working for them? Or are they just a 
> lost cause?
> 
> Thank you,
> Brett A Mansfield
> Silver Lake Internet, LLC
> 
> 
> 

Re: [AFMUG] ToughSwitch 8 PRO

[Jeremy]

Well I am on their list and I wasn't notified.  I'd love to pre-order.

On Sat, Aug 8, 2015 at 6:30 PM, Mike Hammett  wrote:

> There is in no way shape or form a fable that Netonix is producing great
> switches for WISPs. The DC version has taken longer than expected, but
> that  doesn't mean that the Netonix switch is fabled. They announced
> pre-orders a couple weeks ago.
>
>
> -
> Mike Hammett
> Intelligent Computing Solutions
> http://www.ics-il.com
>
> --
> *From: *"Jeremy" 
> *To: *af@afmug.com
> *Sent: *Saturday, August 8, 2015 6:42:33 PM
> *Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] ToughSwitch 8 PRO
>
> Still waiting for this fabled Netonix switch.  I need a DC version.
> Please tell me where I can find this mystical creature.
>
> On Sat, Aug 8, 2015 at 4:21 PM, Gino Villarini 
> wrote:
>
>> Netonix for the win!
>>
>>
>> On Friday, August 7, 2015, Brett A Mansfield <
>> li...@silverlakeinternet.com> wrote:
>>
>>> I have a few of these laying around. I removed them after I realized
>>> they don't like a mix of 100Mb and Gigabit. I really want to use them
>>> though rather than let them collect dust.
>>>
>>> Does anyone have a setup where these are working for them? Or are they
>>> just a lost cause?
>>>
>>> Thank you,
>>> Brett A Mansfield
>>> Silver Lake Internet, LLC
>>>
>>
>
>

Re: [AFMUG] Is anyone here doing ePTP at all?

[Rory Conaway]

How do you do a hard reset on the ePTP?

Rory

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Josh Luthman
Sent: Saturday, August 8, 2015 6:26 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Is anyone here doing ePTP at all?


Synced, yes.  Eptp no sync 2ms.

Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373
On Aug 8, 2015 8:36 PM, "Mike Hammett" 
mailto:af...@ics-il.net>> wrote:
I hadn't realized that ePTP mode didn't have any up\down ratios set. I just 
checked my radios and sure enough...

So the best we're going to get out of ePMP synced backhauls is...  ~7.5ms?


-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
http://www.ics-il.com


From: "Dan Sullivan" 
mailto:daniel.sulli...@cambiumnetworks.com>>
To: af@afmug.com
Sent: Saturday, August 8, 2015 1:52:13 PM
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Is anyone here doing ePTP at all?
2.5 msec frame allows for sync and improves PTP latency as compared to 5 msec 
frame.

ePTP cannot be synced as communication is driven based on dynamic data from 
each link.

Dan Sullivan
ePMP Software Manager

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf 
Of Mathew Howard
Sent: Saturday, August 08, 2015 10:11 AM
To: af
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Is anyone here doing ePTP at all?

Yep, I'm pretty sure it doesn't use fixed frames in ePTP mode... trying to sync 
that sounds like it'd end up like airmax sync.
2.5ms frames make sync a lot more useful for ptp though.

On Sat, Aug 8, 2015 at 7:06 AM, Josh Luthman 
mailto:j...@imaginenetworksllc.com>> wrote:

But that depends on frame timing which would leave you at the current tdd ptp 
(5ms today, 2.5ms after 2.5).  I'd love to see the 2ms latency be synced but I 
don't see how that would be doable.

Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373
On Aug 8, 2015 7:54 AM, "Mike Hammett" 
mailto:af...@ics-il.net>> wrote:
No, I mean exactly what I said ePTP sync.

There's no reason that I'm aware of that the ePTP up\down cycles couldn't be 
synced. The regular sync has to deal with potentially dozens of clients. The 
ePTP just has to deal with one.


-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
http://www.ics-il.com


From: "Josh Luthman" 
mailto:j...@imaginenetworksllc.com>>
To: af@afmug.com
Sent: Saturday, August 8, 2015 6:48:14 AM
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Is anyone here doing ePTP at all?

Eptp sync doesn't sound possible.  That's what the tdd ptp is for.  Do you mean 
the 2.5ms timing?

Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373
On Aug 8, 2015 7:47 AM, "Mike Hammett" 
mailto:af...@ics-il.net>> wrote:
Though*  Early in the morning...


-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
http://www.ics-il.com


From: "Mike Hammett" mailto:af...@ics-il.net>>
To: af@afmug.com
Sent: Saturday, August 8, 2015 6:45:55 AM
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Is anyone here doing ePTP at all?
Is it, thought?  ;-)


FWIW, I have some ePTP up (eagerly awaiting ePTP sync!) and no issues that I'm 
aware of.


-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
http://www.ics-il.com


From: "Josh Luthman" 
mailto:j...@imaginenetworksllc.com>>
To: af@afmug.com
Sent: Friday, August 7, 2015 4:41:45 PM
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Is anyone here doing ePTP at all?
How long has it been up?  According to Cambium I'm the only one that's been 
experiencing a bug and it's all over the place.  They've got a fix for it but 
it's just so weird that I'm the only one with the problem =/


Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373

On Fri, Aug 7, 2015 at 5:32 PM, Mathew Howard 
mailto:mhoward...@gmail.com>> wrote:
Yep, I just replaced a pair of NanoBridges with Force 110's doing ePTP a couple 
days ago and we have at least one other.

On Fri, Aug 7, 2015 at 4:07 PM, Josh Luthman 
mailto:j...@imaginenetworksllc.com>> wrote:
Anyone at all?

Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373

Re: [AFMUG] Is anyone here doing ePTP at all?

[Josh Luthman]

Synced, yes.  Eptp no sync 2ms.

Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373
On Aug 8, 2015 8:36 PM, "Mike Hammett"  wrote:

> I hadn't realized that ePTP mode didn't have any up\down ratios set. I
> just checked my radios and sure enough...
>
> So the best we're going to get out of ePMP synced backhauls is...  ~7.5ms?
>
>
>
> -
> Mike Hammett
> Intelligent Computing Solutions
> http://www.ics-il.com
>
> --
> *From: *"Dan Sullivan" 
> *To: *af@afmug.com
> *Sent: *Saturday, August 8, 2015 1:52:13 PM
> *Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] Is anyone here doing ePTP at all?
>
> 2.5 msec frame allows for sync and improves PTP latency as compared to 5
> msec frame.
>
>
>
> ePTP cannot be synced as communication is driven based on dynamic data
> from each link.
>
>
> Dan Sullivan
>
> ePMP Software Manager
>
>
>
> *From:* Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] *On Behalf Of *Mathew Howard
> *Sent:* Saturday, August 08, 2015 10:11 AM
> *To:* af
> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Is anyone here doing ePTP at all?
>
>
>
> Yep, I'm pretty sure it doesn't use fixed frames in ePTP mode... trying to
> sync that sounds like it'd end up like airmax sync.
>
> 2.5ms frames make sync a lot more useful for ptp though.
>
>
>
> On Sat, Aug 8, 2015 at 7:06 AM, Josh Luthman 
> wrote:
>
> But that depends on frame timing which would leave you at the current tdd
> ptp (5ms today, 2.5ms after 2.5).  I'd love to see the 2ms latency be
> synced but I don't see how that would be doable.
>
> Josh Luthman
> Office: 937-552-2340
> Direct: 937-552-2343
> 1100 Wayne St
> Suite 1337
> Troy, OH 45373
>
> On Aug 8, 2015 7:54 AM, "Mike Hammett"  wrote:
>
> No, I mean exactly what I said ePTP sync.
>
> There's no reason that I'm aware of that the ePTP up\down cycles couldn't
> be synced. The regular sync has to deal with potentially dozens of clients.
> The ePTP just has to deal with one.
>
>
>
> -
> Mike Hammett
> Intelligent Computing Solutions
> http://www.ics-il.com
>
>
> --
>
> *From: *"Josh Luthman" 
> *To: *af@afmug.com
> *Sent: *Saturday, August 8, 2015 6:48:14 AM
> *Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] Is anyone here doing ePTP at all?
>
> Eptp sync doesn't sound possible.  That's what the tdd ptp is for.  Do you
> mean the 2.5ms timing?
>
> Josh Luthman
> Office: 937-552-2340
> Direct: 937-552-2343
> 1100 Wayne St
> Suite 1337
> Troy, OH 45373
>
> On Aug 8, 2015 7:47 AM, "Mike Hammett"  wrote:
>
> Though*  Early in the morning...
>
>
>
> -
> Mike Hammett
> Intelligent Computing Solutions
> http://www.ics-il.com
>
>
> --
>
> *From: *"Mike Hammett" 
> *To: *af@afmug.com
> *Sent: *Saturday, August 8, 2015 6:45:55 AM
> *Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] Is anyone here doing ePTP at all?
>
> Is it, thought?  ;-)
>
>
> FWIW, I have some ePTP up (eagerly awaiting ePTP sync!) and no issues that
> I'm aware of.
>
>
>
> -
> Mike Hammett
> Intelligent Computing Solutions
> http://www.ics-il.com
>
>
> --
>
> *From: *"Josh Luthman" 
> *To: *af@afmug.com
> *Sent: *Friday, August 7, 2015 4:41:45 PM
> *Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] Is anyone here doing ePTP at all?
>
> How long has it been up?  According to Cambium I'm the only one that's
> been experiencing a bug and it's all over the place.  They've got a fix for
> it but it's just so weird that I'm the only one with the problem =/
>
>
>
>
> Josh Luthman
> Office: 937-552-2340
> Direct: 937-552-2343
> 1100 Wayne St
> Suite 1337
> Troy, OH 45373
>
>
>
> On Fri, Aug 7, 2015 at 5:32 PM, Mathew Howard 
> wrote:
>
> Yep, I just replaced a pair of NanoBridges with Force 110's doing ePTP a
> couple days ago and we have at least one other.
>
>
>
> On Fri, Aug 7, 2015 at 4:07 PM, Josh Luthman 
> wrote:
>
> Anyone at all?
>
>
>
> Josh Luthman
> Office: 937-552-2340
> Direct: 937-552-2343
> 1100 Wayne St
> Suite 1337
> Troy, OH 45373
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

Re: [AFMUG] Another neighborhood on fiber, sexy sexy!

[Mike Hammett]

Home-run your glass and then at the cabinet, decide AE or GPON as needed. 




- 
Mike Hammett 
Intelligent Computing Solutions 
http://www.ics-il.com 

- Original Message -

From: "Sterling Jacobson"  
To: af@afmug.com 
Sent: Saturday, August 8, 2015 10:42:47 AM 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Another neighborhood on fiber, sexy sexy! 



Good suggestions, thanks! 

GPON vs active is interesting, but I really wanted to be able to up the ante 
when necessary. 
I wasn’t sure with GPON how high I could go. 

But with active I am doing a “true” gigabit per customer, limited only by 
upstream switch port density. 
The Dell switches have no problem doing multiple 1Gig streams and have 10Gig 
backplane between them on stacking and multiple 10Gig SFP+ ports for upstream. 

It’s all data center stuff, so there is no lack of horsepower in this setup. 

I do have a couple of Force10 units that I use for higher density projects 
right now such that I can supply the Force10 with 160Gbps backbone and service 
48 10Gig ports to 48 individual CSR switches at 8 1Gig ports each. 

Not sure GPON can do that. 

I also am planning on 2Gig end user plans soon. 



From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Chuck Hogg 
Sent: Saturday, August 8, 2015 8:19 AM 
To: af@afmug.com 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Another neighborhood on fiber, sexy sexy! 


I've been using ZTE lately, and testing Alphion when it comes in. We have a 
Dasan deployment, ZTE deployment, and soon Alphion on our next one. Each one 
has it's own issues. The ZTE I imported direct from China, so my cost per port 
is super cheap. I got 32 ONT's and a OLT from ZTE and we are at <$5k. The OLT 
is capable of 8 PON ports per card, for a total of 1024 customers. Based on the 
ONT pricing as well, we could serve 1,024 customers for something like $65/sub 
all in with optics including the customer ONT. Can't beat that with AE and 
MikroTik, even with the 260GS. 





Regards, 
Chuck 


On Fri, Aug 7, 2015 at 11:04 PM, Mike Hammett < af...@ics-il.net > wrote: 




Waiting for you to figure out a GPON company you like long term so we all can 
steal it. ;-) 



- 
Mike Hammett 
Intelligent Computing Solutions 
http://www.ics-il.com 




From: "Chuck Hogg" < ch...@shelbybb.com > 
To: af@afmug.com 
Sent: Friday, August 7, 2015 5:10:32 PM 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Another neighborhood on fiber, sexy sexy! 

GPON does all that in one nice switch ;) Actually happy for residential that we 
made the switch. 





Regards, 
Chuck 


On Fri, Aug 7, 2015 at 5:37 PM, Sterling Jacobson < sterl...@avative.net > 
wrote: 


I guess the list doesn't like 2MB file attachments, lol! 





-Original Message- 
From: Af [mailto: af-boun...@afmug.com ] On Behalf Of Sterling Jacobson 
Sent: Friday, August 7, 2015 3:35 PM 
To: ' af@afmug.com ' < af@afmug.com > 
Subject: [AFMUG] Another neighborhood on fiber, sexy sexy! 

This time I used a super dense 4U LC fiber panel that can connect up to 576. 

I've got about 370 of it loaded with fiber, about a third of that will be 
connected here. 

It requires the thinner mil cable which is the only PITA about this setup 
really. 

It's using 24 port 1U fiber switches, but I'm still looking for a good Planet 
rep to get the 48 port 1U density. 
I could upgrade to those and fill out the entire 12U switch space to match the 
576 panel capacity. 
Not going to have 100 percent take rate I'm sure, but it's nice to know I can 
get the density in one cabinet. 

Re: [AFMUG] Another neighborhood on fiber, sexy sexy!

[Mike Hammett]

Is ZTE less evil that Huawei? 




- 
Mike Hammett 
Intelligent Computing Solutions 
http://www.ics-il.com 

- Original Message -

From: "Chuck Hogg"  
To: af@afmug.com 
Sent: Saturday, August 8, 2015 9:18:31 AM 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Another neighborhood on fiber, sexy sexy! 


I've been using ZTE lately, and testing Alphion when it comes in. We have a 
Dasan deployment, ZTE deployment, and soon Alphion on our next one. Each one 
has it's own issues. The ZTE I imported direct from China, so my cost per port 
is super cheap. I got 32 ONT's and a OLT from ZTE and we are at <$5k. The OLT 
is capable of 8 PON ports per card, for a total of 1024 customers. Based on the 
ONT pricing as well, we could serve 1,024 customers for something like $65/sub 
all in with optics including the customer ONT. Can't beat that with AE and 
MikroTik, even with the 260GS. 



Regards, 
Chuck 

On Fri, Aug 7, 2015 at 11:04 PM, Mike Hammett < af...@ics-il.net > wrote: 




Waiting for you to figure out a GPON company you like long term so we all can 
steal it. ;-) 




- 
Mike Hammett 
Intelligent Computing Solutions 
http://www.ics-il.com 



From: "Chuck Hogg" < ch...@shelbybb.com > 
To: af@afmug.com 
Sent: Friday, August 7, 2015 5:10:32 PM 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Another neighborhood on fiber, sexy sexy! 


GPON does all that in one nice switch ;) Actually happy for residential that we 
made the switch. 



Regards, 
Chuck 

On Fri, Aug 7, 2015 at 5:37 PM, Sterling Jacobson < sterl...@avative.net > 
wrote: 


I guess the list doesn't like 2MB file attachments, lol! 





-Original Message- 
From: Af [mailto: af-boun...@afmug.com ] On Behalf Of Sterling Jacobson 
Sent: Friday, August 7, 2015 3:35 PM 
To: ' af@afmug.com ' < af@afmug.com > 
Subject: [AFMUG] Another neighborhood on fiber, sexy sexy! 

This time I used a super dense 4U LC fiber panel that can connect up to 576. 

I've got about 370 of it loaded with fiber, about a third of that will be 
connected here. 

It requires the thinner mil cable which is the only PITA about this setup 
really. 

It's using 24 port 1U fiber switches, but I'm still looking for a good Planet 
rep to get the 48 port 1U density. 
I could upgrade to those and fill out the entire 12U switch space to match the 
576 panel capacity. 
Not going to have 100 percent take rate I'm sure, but it's nice to know I can 
get the density in one cabinet. 

Re: [AFMUG] Routed vs bridge with a twist

[Mike Hammett]

Head-ends and NOC all geographically diverse, so then each tower potentially 
has three public /30s instead of one for however many neighboring towers. 
Decisions... 

It should improve latency and possibly re-route times. *shrugs* 




- 
Mike Hammett 
Intelligent Computing Solutions 
http://www.ics-il.com 

- Original Message -

From: "Sterling Jacobson"  
To: af@afmug.com 
Sent: Saturday, August 8, 2015 10:44:06 AM 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Routed vs bridge with a twist 



That’s what I’m struggling with too. 

Multiple potential head ends that are geographically diverse on the network. 





From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Mike Hammett 
Sent: Saturday, August 8, 2015 6:11 AM 
To: af@afmug.com 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Routed vs bridge with a twist 


Agreed. Currently I'm all routed, but am looking to move to VPLS for those 
beyond router-router L2 segments. I don't think I'll actually be saving any 
address space as it isn't as simple as everything goes to the head-end because 
there are multiple "head-ends". 



- 
Mike Hammett 
Intelligent Computing Solutions 
http://www.ics-il.com 

- Original Message -


From: "Shayne Lebrun" < sleb...@muskoka.com > 
To: af@afmug.com 
Sent: Friday, August 7, 2015 3:24:07 PM 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Routed vs bridge with a twist 
I advocate keeping everything routed, and using MPLS/VPLS to move L2 where they 
need to go, when required. 




From: Af [ mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com ] On Behalf Of Glen Waldrop 
Sent: Friday, August 7, 2015 3:09 PM 
To: af@afmug.com 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Routed vs bridge with a twist 


You guys have given me some light reading to do based on my question above. 

Sounds like the consensus is a few mid sized L2 rather than one large L2 for 
backhauls? Or stick with a subnet per link as I have now? 







- Original Message - 

From: Shayne Lebrun 

To: af@afmug.com 

Sent: Friday, August 07, 2015 1:52 PM 

Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Routed vs bridge with a twist 


That’s the basics. On a Mikrotik: 
Create a bridge with no ports. Call it ‘Loopback’. Assign a /32 to it, and 
advertise via OSPF. 
Set your OSPF instance router ID to this IP. 
MPLS->MPLS, under LDP Settings, select Enabled, use the Loopback IP as the LSR 
ID and Transport Address. Add the interface under LDP Interface and MPLS 
Interface. 

Now, MTU is the big sticking point. On MPLS Interface, I use 1586, which gives 
plenty of room for full 1500 byte packets plus VLANs, MPLS labels, VPLS labels, 
and so on. But all equipment needs to support that MTU; backhauls, routers, 
everything. So no 493 family Mikrotiks. No Canopy FSK or 430 backhauls. 
Ubiquiti, depends. And so on. 

Once you have an MPLS network, you can create VPLS tunnels just like EoIP 
tunnels, only there’ll be no fragmenting and way WAY less encapsulation 
overhead. 

RSVP, I think is what Mikrotik calls ‘Traffic Engineering.’ Tell it how much 
bandwidth you have on each interface, and you can avoid the situation where you 
have router a->b->c->d and router a->d means the first path is idle as long as 
the second path is up. 

I’ll reiterate, though, MTU will be the sticking point. 

Mikrotik’s wiki has some great write-ups on all this. 



From: Af [ mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com ] On Behalf Of Paul Stewart 
Sent: Friday, August 7, 2015 2:40 PM 
To: af@afmug.com 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Routed vs bridge with a twist 

If you have even a couple of routers (ideally with switches off of each), you 
can simulate some pretty cool stuff… then add a third router into the mix and 
it’s even more fun. 

MPLS isn’t something you just learn right away – it’s something that takes time 
to learn and run through in a lab setting ideally … there’s a lot of 
complexities that you can use if you want to … or there are simpler 
approaches…. 

Very very high level…. (not Microtik specific – I don’t know Microtik very 
well) 

Enable loopback interfaces on all routers (which often is already setup) 
Enable OSPF between the routers (pretty typical) 
Enable RSVP on the interfaces facing one another (this will be new) 
Enable MPLS “protocol” on the interfaces facing one another (this will be new) 
Configure iBGP between the routers (full mesh, peering with loopbacks – not 
interface IP’s) 
Configure LSP’s between all routers (remember, LSP’s are unidirectional so need 
all routers configured to all routers). 

This is assuming you want an RSVP based MPLS network and not LDP based – RSVP 
has advantages over LDP but is more complex to setup. You may also prefer using 
ISIS instead of OSPF in some networks. 

Once the LSP’s are established then you can look to create l2vpn, l3vpn, vpls, 
or multicast-vpn instances (there are many things you can do here). Easiest is 
an l2vpn where you transport a VLAN from one switchport to another switchport 
via the routers “in the middle”. Once you have some test traffic going, then 
you can investigate protection options such as fast re-route, node link 
protectio

Re: [AFMUG] Is anyone here doing ePTP at all?

[Mike Hammett]

I hadn't realized that ePTP mode didn't have any up\down ratios set. I just 
checked my radios and sure enough... 

So the best we're going to get out of ePMP synced backhauls is... ~7.5ms? 




- 
Mike Hammett 
Intelligent Computing Solutions 
http://www.ics-il.com 

- Original Message -

From: "Dan Sullivan"  
To: af@afmug.com 
Sent: Saturday, August 8, 2015 1:52:13 PM 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Is anyone here doing ePTP at all? 



2.5 msec frame allows for sync and improves PTP latency as compared to 5 msec 
frame. 

ePTP cannot be synced as communication is driven based on dynamic data from 
each link. 

Dan Sullivan 
ePMP Software Manager 

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Mathew Howard 
Sent: Saturday, August 08, 2015 10:11 AM 
To: af 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Is anyone here doing ePTP at all? 



Yep, I'm pretty sure it doesn't use fixed frames in ePTP mode... trying to sync 
that sounds like it'd end up like airmax sync. 
2.5ms frames make sync a lot more useful for ptp though. 



On Sat, Aug 8, 2015 at 7:06 AM, Josh Luthman < j...@imaginenetworksllc.com > 
wrote: 
But that depends on frame timing which would leave you at the current tdd ptp 
(5ms today, 2.5ms after 2.5). I'd love to see the 2ms latency be synced but I 
don't see how that would be doable. 
Josh Luthman 
Office: 937-552-2340 
Direct: 937-552-2343 
1100 Wayne St 
Suite 1337 
Troy, OH 45373 



On Aug 8, 2015 7:54 AM, "Mike Hammett" < af...@ics-il.net > wrote: 


No, I mean exactly what I said ePTP sync. 

There's no reason that I'm aware of that the ePTP up\down cycles couldn't be 
synced. The regular sync has to deal with potentially dozens of clients. The 
ePTP just has to deal with one. 



- 
Mike Hammett 
Intelligent Computing Solutions 
http://www.ics-il.com 




From: "Josh Luthman" < j...@imaginenetworksllc.com > 
To: af@afmug.com 
Sent: Saturday, August 8, 2015 6:48:14 AM 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Is anyone here doing ePTP at all? 
Eptp sync doesn't sound possible. That's what the tdd ptp is for. Do you mean 
the 2.5ms timing? 
Josh Luthman 
Office: 937-552-2340 
Direct: 937-552-2343 
1100 Wayne St 
Suite 1337 
Troy, OH 45373 

On Aug 8, 2015 7:47 AM, "Mike Hammett" < af...@ics-il.net > wrote: 


Though* Early in the morning... 



- 
Mike Hammett 
Intelligent Computing Solutions 
http://www.ics-il.com 




From: "Mike Hammett" < af...@ics-il.net > 
To: af@afmug.com 
Sent: Saturday, August 8, 2015 6:45:55 AM 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Is anyone here doing ePTP at all? 

Is it, thought? ;-) 


FWIW, I have some ePTP up (eagerly awaiting ePTP sync!) and no issues that I'm 
aware of. 



- 
Mike Hammett 
Intelligent Computing Solutions 
http://www.ics-il.com 




From: "Josh Luthman" < j...@imaginenetworksllc.com > 
To: af@afmug.com 
Sent: Friday, August 7, 2015 4:41:45 PM 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Is anyone here doing ePTP at all? 

How long has it been up? According to Cambium I'm the only one that's been 
experiencing a bug and it's all over the place. They've got a fix for it but 
it's just so weird that I'm the only one with the problem =/ 








Josh Luthman 
Office: 937-552-2340 
Direct: 937-552-2343 
1100 Wayne St 
Suite 1337 
Troy, OH 45373 


On Fri, Aug 7, 2015 at 5:32 PM, Mathew Howard < mhoward...@gmail.com > wrote: 

Yep, I just replaced a pair of NanoBridges with Force 110's doing ePTP a couple 
days ago and we have at least one other. 





On Fri, Aug 7, 2015 at 4:07 PM, Josh Luthman < j...@imaginenetworksllc.com > 
wrote: 

Anyone at all? 






Josh Luthman 
Office: 937-552-2340 
Direct: 937-552-2343 
1100 Wayne St 
Suite 1337 
Troy, OH 45373 

Re: [AFMUG] ToughSwitch 8 PRO

[Mike Hammett]

There is in no way shape or form a fable that Netonix is producing great 
switches for WISPs. The DC version has taken longer than expected, but that 
doesn't mean that the Netonix switch is fabled. They announced pre-orders a 
couple weeks ago. 



- 
Mike Hammett 
Intelligent Computing Solutions 
http://www.ics-il.com 

- Original Message -

From: "Jeremy"  
To: af@afmug.com 
Sent: Saturday, August 8, 2015 6:42:33 PM 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] ToughSwitch 8 PRO 


Still waiting for this fabled Netonix switch. I need a DC version. Please tell 
me where I can find this mystical creature. 


On Sat, Aug 8, 2015 at 4:21 PM, Gino Villarini < ginovi...@gmail.com > wrote: 


Netonix for the win! 



On Friday, August 7, 2015, Brett A Mansfield < li...@silverlakeinternet.com > 
wrote: 


I have a few of these laying around. I removed them after I realized they don't 
like a mix of 100Mb and Gigabit. I really want to use them though rather than 
let them collect dust. 

Does anyone have a setup where these are working for them? Or are they just a 
lost cause? 

Thank you, 
Brett A Mansfield 
Silver Lake Internet, LLC 

Re: [AFMUG] ToughSwitch 8 PRO

[Josh Luthman]

On the Internet.  There's a bunch from what I saw on the stores.

Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373
On Aug 8, 2015 7:42 PM, "Jeremy"  wrote:

> Still waiting for this fabled Netonix switch.  I need a DC version.
> Please tell me where I can find this mystical creature.
>
> On Sat, Aug 8, 2015 at 4:21 PM, Gino Villarini 
> wrote:
>
>> Netonix for the win!
>>
>>
>> On Friday, August 7, 2015, Brett A Mansfield <
>> li...@silverlakeinternet.com> wrote:
>>
>>> I have a few of these laying around. I removed them after I realized
>>> they don't like a mix of 100Mb and Gigabit. I really want to use them
>>> though rather than let them collect dust.
>>>
>>> Does anyone have a setup where these are working for them? Or are they
>>> just a lost cause?
>>>
>>> Thank you,
>>> Brett A Mansfield
>>> Silver Lake Internet, LLC
>>>
>>
>

Re: [AFMUG] ToughSwitch 8 PRO

[Jeremy]

Still waiting for this fabled Netonix switch.  I need a DC version.  Please
tell me where I can find this mystical creature.

On Sat, Aug 8, 2015 at 4:21 PM, Gino Villarini  wrote:

> Netonix for the win!
>
>
> On Friday, August 7, 2015, Brett A Mansfield 
> wrote:
>
>> I have a few of these laying around. I removed them after I realized they
>> don't like a mix of 100Mb and Gigabit. I really want to use them though
>> rather than let them collect dust.
>>
>> Does anyone have a setup where these are working for them? Or are they
>> just a lost cause?
>>
>> Thank you,
>> Brett A Mansfield
>> Silver Lake Internet, LLC
>>
>

Re: [AFMUG] Is anyone here doing ePTP at all?

[Josh Luthman]

Oooh!

Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373
On Aug 8, 2015 6:03 PM, "Sriram Chaturvedi" <
sriram.chaturv...@cambiumnetworks.com> wrote:

> FYI, A Beta release with 2.5ms frame support is available:
> http://community.cambiumnetworks.com/t5/ePMP-Beta/ePMP-Beta-Release-2-5-RC10-is-now-available/m-p/42702#U42702
>
>
> It will be great to get some feedback on it.
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Sriram
>
>
> --
> *From:* Af  on behalf of Mathew Howard <
> mhoward...@gmail.com>
> *Sent:* Saturday, August 8, 2015 3:50 PM
> *To:* af
> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Is anyone here doing ePTP at all?
>
> +1 about.
>
> So I assume we'll see about half the current latency with 2.5 msec? I can
> live with that for most links.
>
> On Sat, Aug 8, 2015 at 1:53 PM, Josh Luthman 
> wrote:
>
>> Thanks for the confirmation.  And on a Saturday!!!
>>
>>
>> Josh Luthman
>> Office: 937-552-2340
>> Direct: 937-552-2343
>> 1100 Wayne St
>> Suite 1337
>> Troy, OH 45373
>>
>> On Sat, Aug 8, 2015 at 2:52 PM, Dan Sullivan <
>> daniel.sulli...@cambiumnetworks.com> wrote:
>>
>>> 2.5 msec frame allows for sync and improves PTP latency as compared to 5
>>> msec frame.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ePTP cannot be synced as communication is driven based on dynamic data
>>> from each link.
>>>
>>>
>>> Dan Sullivan
>>>
>>> ePMP Software Manager
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> *From:* Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] *On Behalf Of *Mathew Howard
>>> *Sent:* Saturday, August 08, 2015 10:11 AM
>>> *To:* af
>>> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Is anyone here doing ePTP at all?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Yep, I'm pretty sure it doesn't use fixed frames in ePTP mode... trying
>>> to sync that sounds like it'd end up like airmax sync.
>>>
>>> 2.5ms frames make sync a lot more useful for ptp though.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Sat, Aug 8, 2015 at 7:06 AM, Josh Luthman <
>>> j...@imaginenetworksllc.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> But that depends on frame timing which would leave you at the current
>>> tdd ptp (5ms today, 2.5ms after 2.5).  I'd love to see the 2ms latency be
>>> synced but I don't see how that would be doable.
>>>
>>> Josh Luthman
>>> Office: 937-552-2340
>>> Direct: 937-552-2343
>>> 1100 Wayne St
>>> Suite 1337
>>> Troy, OH 45373
>>>
>>> On Aug 8, 2015 7:54 AM, "Mike Hammett"  wrote:
>>>
>>> No, I mean exactly what I said ePTP sync.
>>>
>>> There's no reason that I'm aware of that the ePTP up\down cycles
>>> couldn't be synced. The regular sync has to deal with potentially dozens of
>>> clients. The ePTP just has to deal with one.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> -
>>> Mike Hammett
>>> Intelligent Computing Solutions
>>> http://www.ics-il.com
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>>
>>> *From: *"Josh Luthman" 
>>> *To: *af@afmug.com
>>> *Sent: *Saturday, August 8, 2015 6:48:14 AM
>>> *Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] Is anyone here doing ePTP at all?
>>>
>>> Eptp sync doesn't sound possible.  That's what the tdd ptp is for.  Do
>>> you mean the 2.5ms timing?
>>>
>>> Josh Luthman
>>> Office: 937-552-2340
>>> Direct: 937-552-2343
>>> 1100 Wayne St
>>> Suite 1337
>>> Troy, OH 45373
>>>
>>> On Aug 8, 2015 7:47 AM, "Mike Hammett"  wrote:
>>>
>>> Though*  Early in the morning...
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> -
>>> Mike Hammett
>>> Intelligent Computing Solutions
>>> http://www.ics-il.com
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>>
>>> *From: *"Mike Hammett" 
>>> *To: *af@afmug.com
>>> *Sent: *Saturday, August 8, 2015 6:45:55 AM
>>> *Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] Is anyone here doing ePTP at all?
>>>
>>> Is it, thought?  ;-)
>>>
>>>
>>> FWIW, I have some ePTP up (eagerly awaiting ePTP sync!) and no issues
>>> that I'm aware of.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> -
>>> Mike Hammett
>>> Intelligent Computing Solutions
>>> http://www.ics-il.com
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>>
>>> *From: *"Josh Luthman" 
>>> *To: *af@afmug.com
>>> *Sent: *Friday, August 7, 2015 4:41:45 PM
>>> *Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] Is anyone here doing ePTP at all?
>>>
>>> How long has it been up?  According to Cambium I'm the only one that's
>>> been experiencing a bug and it's all over the place.  They've got a fix for
>>> it but it's just so weird that I'm the only one with the problem =/
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Josh Luthman
>>> Office: 937-552-2340
>>> Direct: 937-552-2343
>>> 1100 Wayne St
>>> Suite 1337
>>> Troy, OH 45373
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Fri, Aug 7, 2015 at 5:32 PM, Mathew Howard 
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Yep, I just replaced a pair of NanoBridges with Force 110's doing ePTP a
>>> couple days ago and we have at least one other.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Fri, Aug 7, 2015 at 4:07 PM, Josh Luthman <
>>> j...@imaginenetworksllc.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Anyone at all?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Josh Luthman
>>> Office: 937-552-2340
>>> Direct: 937-552-2343
>>> 1100 Wayne St
>>> Suite 1337
>>> Troy, OH 45373
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>

Re: [AFMUG] ToughSwitch 8 PRO

[Gino Villarini]

Netonix for the win!

On Friday, August 7, 2015, Brett A Mansfield 
wrote:

> I have a few of these laying around. I removed them after I realized they
> don't like a mix of 100Mb and Gigabit. I really want to use them though
> rather than let them collect dust.
>
> Does anyone have a setup where these are working for them? Or are they
> just a lost cause?
>
> Thank you,
> Brett A Mansfield
> Silver Lake Internet, LLC
>

Re: [AFMUG] Routed vs bridge with a twist

[Gino Villarini]

Stay away from STP, go MpLS , MPLS-TP if possible



On Thursday, August 6, 2015, Glen Waldrop  wrote:

> I'm running Mikrotik, all routed, got a different subnet for each tower,
> got a different subnet between each tower, public IP's routed to the
> customers, all the fun stuff.
>
> I'm thinking of restructuring my network so the entire backbone is one big
> L2 network. If I plug into the switch at the tower at tower 5 it will be no
> different than tower 1 or 7. Each AP would still have it's own subnet, but
> the backside of each AP would be on the same L2 as the rest.
>
> I'm planning on looping it all the way around and building redundancy into
> the network, haven't quite decided how I'm going to do that yet, might use
> STP, that is a little ways down the road. I'll have another fiber feed in
> case the main goes down and I'd like to have a level of redundancy should a
> tower go out, I'll only lose the one rather than the ones behind it as well.
>
> I've fried my brain today, so if I'm sounding half crazy, just tell me to
> take the rest of the day off...
>
> I'm thinking it might be best to have a few large L2 segments to the
> backbone, maybe three or four, rather than one big L2 and much simpler than
> 12+ subnets from tower to tower.
>
> Input is appreciated.
>

Re: [AFMUG] Another neighborhood on fiber, sexy sexy!

[Gino Villarini]

You can do 10gpon

On Saturday, August 8, 2015, Sterling Jacobson  wrote:

> Good suggestions, thanks!
>
>
>
> GPON vs active is interesting, but I really wanted to be able to up the
> ante when necessary.
>
> I wasn’t sure with GPON how high I could go.
>
>
>
> But with active I am doing a “true” gigabit per customer, limited only by
> upstream switch port density.
>
> The Dell switches have no problem doing multiple 1Gig streams and have
> 10Gig backplane between them on stacking and multiple 10Gig SFP+ ports for
> upstream.
>
>
>
> It’s all data center stuff, so there is no lack of horsepower in this
> setup.
>
>
>
> I do have a couple of Force10 units that I use for higher density projects
> right now such that I can supply the Force10 with 160Gbps backbone and
> service 48 10Gig ports to 48 individual CSR switches at 8 1Gig ports each.
>
>
>
> Not sure GPON can do that.
>
>
>
> I also am planning on 2Gig end user plans soon.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com
> ] *On Behalf Of *Chuck
> Hogg
> *Sent:* Saturday, August 8, 2015 8:19 AM
> *To:* af@afmug.com 
> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Another neighborhood on fiber, sexy sexy!
>
>
>
> I've been using ZTE lately, and testing Alphion when it comes in.  We have
> a Dasan deployment, ZTE deployment, and soon Alphion on our next one.  Each
> one has it's own issues.  The ZTE I imported direct from China, so my cost
> per port is super cheap.  I got 32 ONT's and a OLT from ZTE and we are at
> <$5k.  The OLT is capable of 8 PON ports per card, for a total of 1024
> customers.  Based on the ONT pricing as well, we could serve 1,024
> customers for something like $65/sub all in with optics including the
> customer ONT.  Can't beat that with AE and MikroTik, even with the 260GS.
>
>
> Regards,
> Chuck
>
>
>
> On Fri, Aug 7, 2015 at 11:04 PM, Mike Hammett  > wrote:
>
> Waiting for you to figure out a GPON company you like long term so we all
> can steal it.  ;-)
>
>
>
> -
> Mike Hammett
> Intelligent Computing Solutions
> http://www.ics-il.com
>
>
> --
>
> *From: *"Chuck Hogg"  >
> *To: *af@afmug.com 
> *Sent: *Friday, August 7, 2015 5:10:32 PM
> *Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] Another neighborhood on fiber, sexy sexy!
>
> GPON does all that in one nice switch ;)  Actually happy for residential
> that we made the switch.
>
>
> Regards,
> Chuck
>
>
>
> On Fri, Aug 7, 2015 at 5:37 PM, Sterling Jacobson  > wrote:
>
> I guess the list doesn't like 2MB file attachments, lol!
>
>
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com
> ] On Behalf Of
> Sterling Jacobson
> Sent: Friday, August 7, 2015 3:35 PM
> To: 'af@afmug.com ' <
> af@afmug.com >
> Subject: [AFMUG] Another neighborhood on fiber, sexy sexy!
>
> This time I used a super dense 4U LC fiber panel that can connect up to
> 576.
>
> I've got about 370 of it loaded with fiber, about a third of that will be
> connected here.
>
> It requires the thinner mil cable which is the only PITA about this setup
> really.
>
> It's using 24 port 1U fiber switches, but I'm still looking for a good
> Planet rep to get the 48 port 1U density.
> I could upgrade to those and fill out the entire 12U switch space to match
> the 576 panel capacity.
> Not going to have 100 percent take rate I'm sure, but it's nice to know I
> can get the density in one cabinet.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

Re: [AFMUG] Another neighborhood on fiber, sexy sexy!

[Jason McKemie]

Gotcha.  This is how I've been doing it, just wondered if there was an
easier way.

On Sat, Aug 8, 2015 at 2:28 PM, Sterling Jacobson 
wrote:

> The rack company sells trays with precut lengths of fiber.
>
>
>
> So I think we ordered with 100’ lengths and spliced it in the truck in a
> large case splice that sits in a handhold about 10 feet away from the rack
> on the curb.
>
>
>
> The crew liked this way better than splicing on the rack itself.
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] *On Behalf Of *Jason McKemie
> *Sent:* Saturday, August 8, 2015 1:15 PM
> *To:* af@afmug.com
> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Another neighborhood on fiber, sexy sexy!
>
>
>
> Looks good, how are you transitioning from the OSP cable to the TE
> rackmount unit?
>
> On Friday, August 7, 2015, Sterling Jacobson  wrote:
>
> I guess the list doesn't like 2MB file attachments, lol!
>
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Sterling Jacobson
> Sent: Friday, August 7, 2015 3:35 PM
> To: 'af@afmug.com' 
> Subject: [AFMUG] Another neighborhood on fiber, sexy sexy!
>
> This time I used a super dense 4U LC fiber panel that can connect up to
> 576.
>
> I've got about 370 of it loaded with fiber, about a third of that will be
> connected here.
>
> It requires the thinner mil cable which is the only PITA about this setup
> really.
>
> It's using 24 port 1U fiber switches, but I'm still looking for a good
> Planet rep to get the 48 port 1U density.
> I could upgrade to those and fill out the entire 12U switch space to match
> the 576 panel capacity.
> Not going to have 100 percent take rate I'm sure, but it's nice to know I
> can get the density in one cabinet.
>
>

Re: [AFMUG] Is anyone here doing ePTP at all?

[Sriram Chaturvedi]

FYI, A Beta release with 2.5ms frame support is available: 
http://community.cambiumnetworks.com/t5/ePMP-Beta/ePMP-Beta-Release-2-5-RC10-is-now-available/m-p/42702#U42702


It will be great to get some feedback on it.


Thanks,

Sriram



From: Af  on behalf of Mathew Howard 

Sent: Saturday, August 8, 2015 3:50 PM
To: af
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Is anyone here doing ePTP at all?

+1 about.

So I assume we'll see about half the current latency with 2.5 msec? I can live 
with that for most links.

On Sat, Aug 8, 2015 at 1:53 PM, Josh Luthman 
mailto:j...@imaginenetworksllc.com>> wrote:
Thanks for the confirmation.  And on a Saturday!!!


Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373

On Sat, Aug 8, 2015 at 2:52 PM, Dan Sullivan 
mailto:daniel.sulli...@cambiumnetworks.com>>
 wrote:
2.5 msec frame allows for sync and improves PTP latency as compared to 5 msec 
frame.

ePTP cannot be synced as communication is driven based on dynamic data from 
each link.

Dan Sullivan
ePMP Software Manager

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf 
Of Mathew Howard
Sent: Saturday, August 08, 2015 10:11 AM
To: af
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Is anyone here doing ePTP at all?

Yep, I'm pretty sure it doesn't use fixed frames in ePTP mode... trying to sync 
that sounds like it'd end up like airmax sync.
2.5ms frames make sync a lot more useful for ptp though.

On Sat, Aug 8, 2015 at 7:06 AM, Josh Luthman 
mailto:j...@imaginenetworksllc.com>> wrote:

But that depends on frame timing which would leave you at the current tdd ptp 
(5ms today, 2.5ms after 2.5).  I'd love to see the 2ms latency be synced but I 
don't see how that would be doable.

Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373
On Aug 8, 2015 7:54 AM, "Mike Hammett" 
mailto:af...@ics-il.net>> wrote:
No, I mean exactly what I said ePTP sync.

There's no reason that I'm aware of that the ePTP up\down cycles couldn't be 
synced. The regular sync has to deal with potentially dozens of clients. The 
ePTP just has to deal with one.


-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
http://www.ics-il.com


From: "Josh Luthman" 
mailto:j...@imaginenetworksllc.com>>
To: af@afmug.com
Sent: Saturday, August 8, 2015 6:48:14 AM
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Is anyone here doing ePTP at all?

Eptp sync doesn't sound possible.  That's what the tdd ptp is for.  Do you mean 
the 2.5ms timing?

Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373
On Aug 8, 2015 7:47 AM, "Mike Hammett" 
mailto:af...@ics-il.net>> wrote:
Though*  Early in the morning...


-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
http://www.ics-il.com


From: "Mike Hammett" mailto:af...@ics-il.net>>
To: af@afmug.com
Sent: Saturday, August 8, 2015 6:45:55 AM
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Is anyone here doing ePTP at all?
Is it, thought?  ;-)


FWIW, I have some ePTP up (eagerly awaiting ePTP sync!) and no issues that I'm 
aware of.


-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
http://www.ics-il.com


From: "Josh Luthman" 
mailto:j...@imaginenetworksllc.com>>
To: af@afmug.com
Sent: Friday, August 7, 2015 4:41:45 PM
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Is anyone here doing ePTP at all?
How long has it been up?  According to Cambium I'm the only one that's been 
experiencing a bug and it's all over the place.  They've got a fix for it but 
it's just so weird that I'm the only one with the problem =/


Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373

On Fri, Aug 7, 2015 at 5:32 PM, Mathew Howard 
mailto:mhoward...@gmail.com>> wrote:
Yep, I just replaced a pair of NanoBridges with Force 110's doing ePTP a couple 
days ago and we have at least one other.

On Fri, Aug 7, 2015 at 4:07 PM, Josh Luthman 
mailto:j...@imaginenetworksllc.com>> wrote:
Anyone at all?

Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373

Re: [AFMUG] Is anyone here doing ePTP at all?

[Craig House]

EPTP 

- Original Message -

From: "Josh Luthman"  
To: af@afmug.com 
Sent: Saturday, August 8, 2015 4:53:35 PM 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Is anyone here doing ePTP at all? 



Tdd ptp or eptp? 

Josh Luthman 
Office: 937-552-2340 
Direct: 937-552-2343 
1100 Wayne St 
Suite 1337 
Troy, OH 45373 
On Aug 8, 2015 5:37 PM, "Craig House" < cr...@totalhighspeed.net > wrote: 



I have a pair of unsynced 5Ghz on Force dishes that I put up in April. They run 
pretty much flawlessly. They are 4 miles apart and push around 80mb each way in 
a 20mhz channel. No complaints. Other than the crappy design of the dish which 
I would have tossed off the tower when I was installing it if I had an 
alternative. 

Craig 



From: "Mathew Howard" < mhoward...@gmail.com > 
To: "af" < af@afmug.com > 
Sent: Saturday, August 8, 2015 3:50:51 PM 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Is anyone here doing ePTP at all? 

+1 about. 

So I assume we'll see about half the current latency with 2.5 msec? I can live 
with that for most links. 

On Sat, Aug 8, 2015 at 1:53 PM, Josh Luthman < j...@imaginenetworksllc.com > 
wrote: 



Thanks for the confirmation. And on a Saturday!!! 


Josh Luthman 
Office: 937-552-2340 
Direct: 937-552-2343 
1100 Wayne St 
Suite 1337 
Troy, OH 45373 

On Sat, Aug 8, 2015 at 2:52 PM, Dan Sullivan < 
daniel.sulli...@cambiumnetworks.com > wrote: 





2.5 msec frame allows for sync and improves PTP latency as compared to 5 msec 
frame. 



ePTP cannot be synced as communication is driven based on dynamic data from 
each link. 


Dan Sullivan 

ePMP Software Manager 



From: Af [mailto: af-boun...@afmug.com ] On Behalf Of Mathew Howard 
Sent: Saturday, August 08, 2015 10:11 AM 
To: af 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Is anyone here doing ePTP at all? 




Yep, I'm pretty sure it doesn't use fixed frames in ePTP mode... trying to sync 
that sounds like it'd end up like airmax sync. 


2.5ms frames make sync a lot more useful for ptp though. 





On Sat, Aug 8, 2015 at 7:06 AM, Josh Luthman < j...@imaginenetworksllc.com > 
wrote: 


But that depends on frame timing which would leave you at the current tdd ptp 
(5ms today, 2.5ms after 2.5). I'd love to see the 2ms latency be synced but I 
don't see how that would be doable. 


Josh Luthman 
Office: 937-552-2340 
Direct: 937-552-2343 
1100 Wayne St 
Suite 1337 
Troy, OH 45373 


On Aug 8, 2015 7:54 AM, "Mike Hammett" < af...@ics-il.net > wrote: 


No, I mean exactly what I said ePTP sync. 

There's no reason that I'm aware of that the ePTP up\down cycles couldn't be 
synced. The regular sync has to deal with potentially dozens of clients. The 
ePTP just has to deal with one. 




- 
Mike Hammett 
Intelligent Computing Solutions 
http://www.ics-il.com 






From: "Josh Luthman" < j...@imaginenetworksllc.com > 
To: af@afmug.com 
Sent: Saturday, August 8, 2015 6:48:14 AM 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Is anyone here doing ePTP at all? 

Eptp sync doesn't sound possible. That's what the tdd ptp is for. Do you mean 
the 2.5ms timing? 

Josh Luthman 
Office: 937-552-2340 
Direct: 937-552-2343 
1100 Wayne St 
Suite 1337 
Troy, OH 45373 


On Aug 8, 2015 7:47 AM, "Mike Hammett" < af...@ics-il.net > wrote: 


Though* Early in the morning... 




- 
Mike Hammett 
Intelligent Computing Solutions 
http://www.ics-il.com 






From: "Mike Hammett" < af...@ics-il.net > 
To: af@afmug.com 
Sent: Saturday, August 8, 2015 6:45:55 AM 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Is anyone here doing ePTP at all? 


Is it, thought? ;-) 


FWIW, I have some ePTP up (eagerly awaiting ePTP sync!) and no issues that I'm 
aware of. 




- 
Mike Hammett 
Intelligent Computing Solutions 
http://www.ics-il.com 






From: "Josh Luthman" < j...@imaginenetworksllc.com > 
To: af@afmug.com 
Sent: Friday, August 7, 2015 4:41:45 PM 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Is anyone here doing ePTP at all? 


How long has it been up? According to Cambium I'm the only one that's been 
experiencing a bug and it's all over the place. They've got a fix for it but 
it's just so weird that I'm the only one with the problem =/ 








Josh Luthman 
Office: 937-552-2340 
Direct: 937-552-2343 
1100 Wayne St 
Suite 1337 
Troy, OH 45373 





On Fri, Aug 7, 2015 at 5:32 PM, Mathew Howard < mhoward...@gmail.com > wrote: 


Yep, I just replaced a pair of NanoBridges with Force 110's doing ePTP a couple 
days ago and we have at least one other. 





On Fri, Aug 7, 2015 at 4:07 PM, Josh Luthman < j...@imaginenetworksllc.com > 
wrote: 


Anyone at all? 





Josh Luthman 
Office: 937-552-2340 
Direct: 937-552-2343 
1100 Wayne St 
Suite 1337 
Troy, OH 45373 

Re: [AFMUG] Is anyone here doing ePTP at all?

[Ken Hohhof]

Too confusing.  Makes brain hurt.



From: Josh Luthman 
Sent: Saturday, August 08, 2015 4:53 PM
To: af@afmug.com 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Is anyone here doing ePTP at all?

Tdd ptp or eptp?

Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373

On Aug 8, 2015 5:37 PM, "Craig House"  wrote:

  I have a pair of unsynced 5Ghz on Force dishes that I put up in April.  They 
run pretty much flawlessly.  They are 4 miles apart and push around 80mb each 
way in a 20mhz channel.  No complaints.   Other than the crappy design of the 
dish which I would have tossed off the tower when I was installing it if I had 
an alternative.


  Craig



--

  From: "Mathew Howard" 
  To: "af" 
  Sent: Saturday, August 8, 2015 3:50:51 PM
  Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Is anyone here doing ePTP at all?


  +1 about.


  So I assume we'll see about half the current latency with 2.5 msec? I can 
live with that for most links.


  On Sat, Aug 8, 2015 at 1:53 PM, Josh Luthman  
wrote:

Thanks for the confirmation.  And on a Saturday!!!



Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373


On Sat, Aug 8, 2015 at 2:52 PM, Dan Sullivan 
 wrote:

  2.5 msec frame allows for sync and improves PTP latency as compared to 5 
msec frame.



  ePTP cannot be synced as communication is driven based on dynamic data 
from each link.


  Dan Sullivan

  ePMP Software Manager



  From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Mathew Howard
  Sent: Saturday, August 08, 2015 10:11 AM
  To: af
  Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Is anyone here doing ePTP at all?



  Yep, I'm pretty sure it doesn't use fixed frames in ePTP mode... trying 
to sync that sounds like it'd end up like airmax sync.

  2.5ms frames make sync a lot more useful for ptp though.



  On Sat, Aug 8, 2015 at 7:06 AM, Josh Luthman 
 wrote:

  But that depends on frame timing which would leave you at the current tdd 
ptp (5ms today, 2.5ms after 2.5).  I'd love to see the 2ms latency be synced 
but I don't see how that would be doable.

  Josh Luthman
  Office: 937-552-2340
  Direct: 937-552-2343
  1100 Wayne St
  Suite 1337
  Troy, OH 45373

  On Aug 8, 2015 7:54 AM, "Mike Hammett"  wrote:

  No, I mean exactly what I said ePTP sync.

  There's no reason that I'm aware of that the ePTP up\down cycles couldn't 
be synced. The regular sync has to deal with potentially dozens of clients. The 
ePTP just has to deal with one.



  -
  Mike Hammett
  Intelligent Computing Solutions
  http://www.ics-il.com




--

  From: "Josh Luthman" 
  To: af@afmug.com
  Sent: Saturday, August 8, 2015 6:48:14 AM
  Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Is anyone here doing ePTP at all?

  Eptp sync doesn't sound possible.  That's what the tdd ptp is for.  Do 
you mean the 2.5ms timing?

  Josh Luthman
  Office: 937-552-2340
  Direct: 937-552-2343
  1100 Wayne St
  Suite 1337
  Troy, OH 45373

  On Aug 8, 2015 7:47 AM, "Mike Hammett"  wrote:

  Though*  Early in the morning...



  -
  Mike Hammett
  Intelligent Computing Solutions
  http://www.ics-il.com




--

  From: "Mike Hammett" 
  To: af@afmug.com
  Sent: Saturday, August 8, 2015 6:45:55 AM
  Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Is anyone here doing ePTP at all?

  Is it, thought?  ;-)


  FWIW, I have some ePTP up (eagerly awaiting ePTP sync!) and no issues 
that I'm aware of.



  -
  Mike Hammett
  Intelligent Computing Solutions
  http://www.ics-il.com




--

  From: "Josh Luthman" 
  To: af@afmug.com
  Sent: Friday, August 7, 2015 4:41:45 PM
  Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Is anyone here doing ePTP at all?

  How long has it been up?  According to Cambium I'm the only one that's 
been experiencing a bug and it's all over the place.  They've got a fix for it 
but it's just so weird that I'm the only one with the problem =/






  Josh Luthman
  Office: 937-552-2340
  Direct: 937-552-2343
  1100 Wayne St
  Suite 1337
  Troy, OH 45373



  On Fri, Aug 7, 2015 at 5:32 PM, Mathew Howard  
wrote:

  Yep, I just replaced a pair of NanoBridges with Force 110's doing ePTP a 
couple days ago and we have at least one other.



  On Fri, Aug 7, 2015 at 4:07 PM, Josh Luthman 
 wrote:

  Anyone at all?




  Josh Luthman
  Office: 937-552-2340
  Direct: 937-552-2343
  1100 Wayne St
  Suite 1337
  Troy, OH 45373

Re: [AFMUG] Is anyone here doing ePTP at all?

[Josh Luthman]

Tdd ptp or eptp?

Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373
On Aug 8, 2015 5:37 PM, "Craig House"  wrote:

> I have a pair of unsynced 5Ghz on Force dishes that I put up in April.
> They run pretty much flawlessly.  They are 4 miles apart and push around
> 80mb each way in a 20mhz channel.  No complaints.   Other than the crappy
> design of the dish which I would have tossed off the tower when I was
> installing it if I had an alternative.
>
> Craig
>
>
> --
> *From: *"Mathew Howard" 
> *To: *"af" 
> *Sent: *Saturday, August 8, 2015 3:50:51 PM
> *Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] Is anyone here doing ePTP at all?
>
> +1 about.
>
> So I assume we'll see about half the current latency with 2.5 msec? I can
> live with that for most links.
>
> On Sat, Aug 8, 2015 at 1:53 PM, Josh Luthman 
> wrote:
>
>> Thanks for the confirmation.  And on a Saturday!!!
>>
>>
>> Josh Luthman
>> Office: 937-552-2340
>> Direct: 937-552-2343
>> 1100 Wayne St
>> Suite 1337
>> Troy, OH 45373
>>
>> On Sat, Aug 8, 2015 at 2:52 PM, Dan Sullivan <
>> daniel.sulli...@cambiumnetworks.com> wrote:
>>
>>> 2.5 msec frame allows for sync and improves PTP latency as compared to 5
>>> msec frame.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ePTP cannot be synced as communication is driven based on dynamic data
>>> from each link.
>>>
>>>
>>> Dan Sullivan
>>>
>>> ePMP Software Manager
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> *From:* Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] *On Behalf Of *Mathew Howard
>>> *Sent:* Saturday, August 08, 2015 10:11 AM
>>> *To:* af
>>> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Is anyone here doing ePTP at all?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Yep, I'm pretty sure it doesn't use fixed frames in ePTP mode... trying
>>> to sync that sounds like it'd end up like airmax sync.
>>>
>>> 2.5ms frames make sync a lot more useful for ptp though.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Sat, Aug 8, 2015 at 7:06 AM, Josh Luthman <
>>> j...@imaginenetworksllc.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> But that depends on frame timing which would leave you at the current
>>> tdd ptp (5ms today, 2.5ms after 2.5).  I'd love to see the 2ms latency be
>>> synced but I don't see how that would be doable.
>>>
>>> Josh Luthman
>>> Office: 937-552-2340
>>> Direct: 937-552-2343
>>> 1100 Wayne St
>>> Suite 1337
>>> Troy, OH 45373
>>>
>>> On Aug 8, 2015 7:54 AM, "Mike Hammett"  wrote:
>>>
>>> No, I mean exactly what I said ePTP sync.
>>>
>>> There's no reason that I'm aware of that the ePTP up\down cycles
>>> couldn't be synced. The regular sync has to deal with potentially dozens of
>>> clients. The ePTP just has to deal with one.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> -
>>> Mike Hammett
>>> Intelligent Computing Solutions
>>> http://www.ics-il.com
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>>
>>> *From: *"Josh Luthman" 
>>> *To: *af@afmug.com
>>> *Sent: *Saturday, August 8, 2015 6:48:14 AM
>>> *Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] Is anyone here doing ePTP at all?
>>>
>>> Eptp sync doesn't sound possible.  That's what the tdd ptp is for.  Do
>>> you mean the 2.5ms timing?
>>>
>>> Josh Luthman
>>> Office: 937-552-2340
>>> Direct: 937-552-2343
>>> 1100 Wayne St
>>> Suite 1337
>>> Troy, OH 45373
>>>
>>> On Aug 8, 2015 7:47 AM, "Mike Hammett"  wrote:
>>>
>>> Though*  Early in the morning...
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> -
>>> Mike Hammett
>>> Intelligent Computing Solutions
>>> http://www.ics-il.com
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>>
>>> *From: *"Mike Hammett" 
>>> *To: *af@afmug.com
>>> *Sent: *Saturday, August 8, 2015 6:45:55 AM
>>> *Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] Is anyone here doing ePTP at all?
>>>
>>> Is it, thought?  ;-)
>>>
>>>
>>> FWIW, I have some ePTP up (eagerly awaiting ePTP sync!) and no issues
>>> that I'm aware of.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> -
>>> Mike Hammett
>>> Intelligent Computing Solutions
>>> http://www.ics-il.com
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>>
>>> *From: *"Josh Luthman" 
>>> *To: *af@afmug.com
>>> *Sent: *Friday, August 7, 2015 4:41:45 PM
>>> *Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] Is anyone here doing ePTP at all?
>>>
>>> How long has it been up?  According to Cambium I'm the only one that's
>>> been experiencing a bug and it's all over the place.  They've got a fix for
>>> it but it's just so weird that I'm the only one with the problem =/
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Josh Luthman
>>> Office: 937-552-2340
>>> Direct: 937-552-2343
>>> 1100 Wayne St
>>> Suite 1337
>>> Troy, OH 45373
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Fri, Aug 7, 2015 at 5:32 PM, Mathew Howard 
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Yep, I just replaced a pair of NanoBridges with Force 110's doing ePTP a
>>> couple days ago and we have at least one other.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Fri, Aug 7, 2015 at 4:07 PM, Josh Luthman <
>>> j...@imaginenetworksllc.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Anyone at all?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Josh Luthman
>>> Office: 937-552-2340
>>> Direct: 937-552-2343
>>> 1100 Wayne St
>>> Suite 1337
>>> Troy, OH 45373
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>

Re: [AFMUG] Is anyone here doing ePTP at all?

[Craig House]

I have a pair of unsynced 5Ghz on Force dishes that I put up in April. They run 
pretty much flawlessly. They are 4 miles apart and push around 80mb each way in 
a 20mhz channel. No complaints. Other than the crappy design of the dish which 
I would have tossed off the tower when I was installing it if I had an 
alternative. 

Craig 


- Original Message -

From: "Mathew Howard"  
To: "af"  
Sent: Saturday, August 8, 2015 3:50:51 PM 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Is anyone here doing ePTP at all? 

+1 about. 

So I assume we'll see about half the current latency with 2.5 msec? I can live 
with that for most links. 

On Sat, Aug 8, 2015 at 1:53 PM, Josh Luthman < j...@imaginenetworksllc.com > 
wrote: 



Thanks for the confirmation. And on a Saturday!!! 


Josh Luthman 
Office: 937-552-2340 
Direct: 937-552-2343 
1100 Wayne St 
Suite 1337 
Troy, OH 45373 

On Sat, Aug 8, 2015 at 2:52 PM, Dan Sullivan < 
daniel.sulli...@cambiumnetworks.com > wrote: 





2.5 msec frame allows for sync and improves PTP latency as compared to 5 msec 
frame. 



ePTP cannot be synced as communication is driven based on dynamic data from 
each link. 


Dan Sullivan 

ePMP Software Manager 



From: Af [mailto: af-boun...@afmug.com ] On Behalf Of Mathew Howard 
Sent: Saturday, August 08, 2015 10:11 AM 
To: af 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Is anyone here doing ePTP at all? 




Yep, I'm pretty sure it doesn't use fixed frames in ePTP mode... trying to sync 
that sounds like it'd end up like airmax sync. 


2.5ms frames make sync a lot more useful for ptp though. 





On Sat, Aug 8, 2015 at 7:06 AM, Josh Luthman < j...@imaginenetworksllc.com > 
wrote: 


But that depends on frame timing which would leave you at the current tdd ptp 
(5ms today, 2.5ms after 2.5). I'd love to see the 2ms latency be synced but I 
don't see how that would be doable. 


Josh Luthman 
Office: 937-552-2340 
Direct: 937-552-2343 
1100 Wayne St 
Suite 1337 
Troy, OH 45373 


On Aug 8, 2015 7:54 AM, "Mike Hammett" < af...@ics-il.net > wrote: 


No, I mean exactly what I said ePTP sync. 

There's no reason that I'm aware of that the ePTP up\down cycles couldn't be 
synced. The regular sync has to deal with potentially dozens of clients. The 
ePTP just has to deal with one. 




- 
Mike Hammett 
Intelligent Computing Solutions 
http://www.ics-il.com 






From: "Josh Luthman" < j...@imaginenetworksllc.com > 
To: af@afmug.com 
Sent: Saturday, August 8, 2015 6:48:14 AM 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Is anyone here doing ePTP at all? 

Eptp sync doesn't sound possible. That's what the tdd ptp is for. Do you mean 
the 2.5ms timing? 

Josh Luthman 
Office: 937-552-2340 
Direct: 937-552-2343 
1100 Wayne St 
Suite 1337 
Troy, OH 45373 


On Aug 8, 2015 7:47 AM, "Mike Hammett" < af...@ics-il.net > wrote: 


Though* Early in the morning... 




- 
Mike Hammett 
Intelligent Computing Solutions 
http://www.ics-il.com 






From: "Mike Hammett" < af...@ics-il.net > 
To: af@afmug.com 
Sent: Saturday, August 8, 2015 6:45:55 AM 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Is anyone here doing ePTP at all? 


Is it, thought? ;-) 


FWIW, I have some ePTP up (eagerly awaiting ePTP sync!) and no issues that I'm 
aware of. 




- 
Mike Hammett 
Intelligent Computing Solutions 
http://www.ics-il.com 






From: "Josh Luthman" < j...@imaginenetworksllc.com > 
To: af@afmug.com 
Sent: Friday, August 7, 2015 4:41:45 PM 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Is anyone here doing ePTP at all? 


How long has it been up? According to Cambium I'm the only one that's been 
experiencing a bug and it's all over the place. They've got a fix for it but 
it's just so weird that I'm the only one with the problem =/ 








Josh Luthman 
Office: 937-552-2340 
Direct: 937-552-2343 
1100 Wayne St 
Suite 1337 
Troy, OH 45373 





On Fri, Aug 7, 2015 at 5:32 PM, Mathew Howard < mhoward...@gmail.com > wrote: 


Yep, I just replaced a pair of NanoBridges with Force 110's doing ePTP a couple 
days ago and we have at least one other. 





On Fri, Aug 7, 2015 at 4:07 PM, Josh Luthman < j...@imaginenetworksllc.com > 
wrote: 


Anyone at all? 





Josh Luthman 
Office: 937-552-2340 
Direct: 937-552-2343 
1100 Wayne St 
Suite 1337 
Troy, OH 45373 

Re: [AFMUG] Is anyone here doing ePTP at all?

[Mathew Howard]

+1 about.

So I assume we'll see about half the current latency with 2.5 msec? I can
live with that for most links.

On Sat, Aug 8, 2015 at 1:53 PM, Josh Luthman 
wrote:

> Thanks for the confirmation.  And on a Saturday!!!
>
>
> Josh Luthman
> Office: 937-552-2340
> Direct: 937-552-2343
> 1100 Wayne St
> Suite 1337
> Troy, OH 45373
>
> On Sat, Aug 8, 2015 at 2:52 PM, Dan Sullivan <
> daniel.sulli...@cambiumnetworks.com> wrote:
>
>> 2.5 msec frame allows for sync and improves PTP latency as compared to 5
>> msec frame.
>>
>>
>>
>> ePTP cannot be synced as communication is driven based on dynamic data
>> from each link.
>>
>>
>> Dan Sullivan
>>
>> ePMP Software Manager
>>
>>
>>
>> *From:* Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] *On Behalf Of *Mathew Howard
>> *Sent:* Saturday, August 08, 2015 10:11 AM
>> *To:* af
>> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Is anyone here doing ePTP at all?
>>
>>
>>
>> Yep, I'm pretty sure it doesn't use fixed frames in ePTP mode... trying
>> to sync that sounds like it'd end up like airmax sync.
>>
>> 2.5ms frames make sync a lot more useful for ptp though.
>>
>>
>>
>> On Sat, Aug 8, 2015 at 7:06 AM, Josh Luthman 
>> wrote:
>>
>> But that depends on frame timing which would leave you at the current tdd
>> ptp (5ms today, 2.5ms after 2.5).  I'd love to see the 2ms latency be
>> synced but I don't see how that would be doable.
>>
>> Josh Luthman
>> Office: 937-552-2340
>> Direct: 937-552-2343
>> 1100 Wayne St
>> Suite 1337
>> Troy, OH 45373
>>
>> On Aug 8, 2015 7:54 AM, "Mike Hammett"  wrote:
>>
>> No, I mean exactly what I said ePTP sync.
>>
>> There's no reason that I'm aware of that the ePTP up\down cycles couldn't
>> be synced. The regular sync has to deal with potentially dozens of clients.
>> The ePTP just has to deal with one.
>>
>>
>>
>> -
>> Mike Hammett
>> Intelligent Computing Solutions
>> http://www.ics-il.com
>>
>>
>> --
>>
>> *From: *"Josh Luthman" 
>> *To: *af@afmug.com
>> *Sent: *Saturday, August 8, 2015 6:48:14 AM
>> *Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] Is anyone here doing ePTP at all?
>>
>> Eptp sync doesn't sound possible.  That's what the tdd ptp is for.  Do
>> you mean the 2.5ms timing?
>>
>> Josh Luthman
>> Office: 937-552-2340
>> Direct: 937-552-2343
>> 1100 Wayne St
>> Suite 1337
>> Troy, OH 45373
>>
>> On Aug 8, 2015 7:47 AM, "Mike Hammett"  wrote:
>>
>> Though*  Early in the morning...
>>
>>
>>
>> -
>> Mike Hammett
>> Intelligent Computing Solutions
>> http://www.ics-il.com
>>
>>
>> --
>>
>> *From: *"Mike Hammett" 
>> *To: *af@afmug.com
>> *Sent: *Saturday, August 8, 2015 6:45:55 AM
>> *Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] Is anyone here doing ePTP at all?
>>
>> Is it, thought?  ;-)
>>
>>
>> FWIW, I have some ePTP up (eagerly awaiting ePTP sync!) and no issues
>> that I'm aware of.
>>
>>
>>
>> -
>> Mike Hammett
>> Intelligent Computing Solutions
>> http://www.ics-il.com
>>
>>
>> --
>>
>> *From: *"Josh Luthman" 
>> *To: *af@afmug.com
>> *Sent: *Friday, August 7, 2015 4:41:45 PM
>> *Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] Is anyone here doing ePTP at all?
>>
>> How long has it been up?  According to Cambium I'm the only one that's
>> been experiencing a bug and it's all over the place.  They've got a fix for
>> it but it's just so weird that I'm the only one with the problem =/
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Josh Luthman
>> Office: 937-552-2340
>> Direct: 937-552-2343
>> 1100 Wayne St
>> Suite 1337
>> Troy, OH 45373
>>
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Aug 7, 2015 at 5:32 PM, Mathew Howard 
>> wrote:
>>
>> Yep, I just replaced a pair of NanoBridges with Force 110's doing ePTP a
>> couple days ago and we have at least one other.
>>
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Aug 7, 2015 at 4:07 PM, Josh Luthman 
>> wrote:
>>
>> Anyone at all?
>>
>>
>>
>> Josh Luthman
>> Office: 937-552-2340
>> Direct: 937-552-2343
>> 1100 Wayne St
>> Suite 1337
>> Troy, OH 45373
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>

Re: [AFMUG] Another neighborhood on fiber, sexy sexy!

[Chuck Hogg]

There is 10G Gpon...

On Saturday, August 8, 2015, Sterling Jacobson  wrote:

> Good suggestions, thanks!
>
>
>
> GPON vs active is interesting, but I really wanted to be able to up the
> ante when necessary.
>
> I wasn’t sure with GPON how high I could go.
>
>
>
> But with active I am doing a “true” gigabit per customer, limited only by
> upstream switch port density.
>
> The Dell switches have no problem doing multiple 1Gig streams and have
> 10Gig backplane between them on stacking and multiple 10Gig SFP+ ports for
> upstream.
>
>
>
> It’s all data center stuff, so there is no lack of horsepower in this
> setup.
>
>
>
> I do have a couple of Force10 units that I use for higher density projects
> right now such that I can supply the Force10 with 160Gbps backbone and
> service 48 10Gig ports to 48 individual CSR switches at 8 1Gig ports each.
>
>
>
> Not sure GPON can do that.
>
>
>
> I also am planning on 2Gig end user plans soon.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com
> ] *On Behalf Of *Chuck
> Hogg
> *Sent:* Saturday, August 8, 2015 8:19 AM
> *To:* af@afmug.com 
> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Another neighborhood on fiber, sexy sexy!
>
>
>
> I've been using ZTE lately, and testing Alphion when it comes in.  We have
> a Dasan deployment, ZTE deployment, and soon Alphion on our next one.  Each
> one has it's own issues.  The ZTE I imported direct from China, so my cost
> per port is super cheap.  I got 32 ONT's and a OLT from ZTE and we are at
> <$5k.  The OLT is capable of 8 PON ports per card, for a total of 1024
> customers.  Based on the ONT pricing as well, we could serve 1,024
> customers for something like $65/sub all in with optics including the
> customer ONT.  Can't beat that with AE and MikroTik, even with the 260GS.
>
>
> Regards,
> Chuck
>
>
>
> On Fri, Aug 7, 2015 at 11:04 PM, Mike Hammett  > wrote:
>
> Waiting for you to figure out a GPON company you like long term so we all
> can steal it.  ;-)
>
>
>
> -
> Mike Hammett
> Intelligent Computing Solutions
> http://www.ics-il.com
>
>
> --
>
> *From: *"Chuck Hogg"  >
> *To: *af@afmug.com 
> *Sent: *Friday, August 7, 2015 5:10:32 PM
> *Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] Another neighborhood on fiber, sexy sexy!
>
> GPON does all that in one nice switch ;)  Actually happy for residential
> that we made the switch.
>
>
> Regards,
> Chuck
>
>
>
> On Fri, Aug 7, 2015 at 5:37 PM, Sterling Jacobson  > wrote:
>
> I guess the list doesn't like 2MB file attachments, lol!
>
>
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com
> ] On Behalf Of
> Sterling Jacobson
> Sent: Friday, August 7, 2015 3:35 PM
> To: 'af@afmug.com ' <
> af@afmug.com >
> Subject: [AFMUG] Another neighborhood on fiber, sexy sexy!
>
> This time I used a super dense 4U LC fiber panel that can connect up to
> 576.
>
> I've got about 370 of it loaded with fiber, about a third of that will be
> connected here.
>
> It requires the thinner mil cable which is the only PITA about this setup
> really.
>
> It's using 24 port 1U fiber switches, but I'm still looking for a good
> Planet rep to get the 48 port 1U density.
> I could upgrade to those and fill out the entire 12U switch space to match
> the 576 panel capacity.
> Not going to have 100 percent take rate I'm sure, but it's nice to know I
> can get the density in one cabinet.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>


-- 
Regards,
Chuck

Re: [AFMUG] Another neighborhood on fiber, sexy sexy!

[TJ Trout]

sounds like home owner power
On Aug 8, 2015 1:25 PM, "Tushar Patel"  wrote:

> So you are allowed to put cabinet of that size on right of way? Or you get
> lease from home owner?
>
> Power from power company at 15 amp?
>
> Tushar
>
>
> On Aug 8, 2015, at 3:11 PM, Sterling Jacobson 
> wrote:
>
> Most of our cabinets sit back from the curb 10-20 feet.
>
>
>
> There is usually a large hand hold next to the curb, or even part of the
> cabinet pad that we pour.
>
>
>
> Then we just plumb several pipes through the pad to the hand hole for
> access (before the pour).
>
>
>
> The cabinets are cooled with re-circulating AC units that draw about 450W
> of power.
>
>
>
> My power budget is usually pretty tight at 15 amps due to the location of
> most of these cabinets.
>
>
>
> So I have to make sure I calculate appropriate watt usage and not go over
> budget with everything.
>
>
>
> I also have to calculate btu/heat output to make sure I don’t exceed my
> A/C capacity to cool.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com ] *On
> Behalf Of *Tushar Patel
> *Sent:* Saturday, August 8, 2015 1:36 PM
> *To:* Tushar Patel 
> *Cc:* af@afmug.com
> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Another neighborhood on fiber, sexy sexy!
>
>
>
> It says curb side never mind. Does it need cooling?
>
> Tushar
>
>
>
>
> On Aug 8, 2015, at 2:34 PM, Tushar Patel  wrote:
>
> Where is that rack sitting? Curb side?
>
> Tushar
>
>
>
>
> On Aug 8, 2015, at 2:28 PM, Sterling Jacobson 
> wrote:
>
> The rack company sells trays with precut lengths of fiber.
>
>
>
> So I think we ordered with 100’ lengths and spliced it in the truck in a
> large case splice that sits in a handhold about 10 feet away from the rack
> on the curb.
>
>
>
> The crew liked this way better than splicing on the rack itself.
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com ] *On
> Behalf Of *Jason McKemie
> *Sent:* Saturday, August 8, 2015 1:15 PM
> *To:* af@afmug.com
> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Another neighborhood on fiber, sexy sexy!
>
>
>
> Looks good, how are you transitioning from the OSP cable to the TE
> rackmount unit?
>
> On Friday, August 7, 2015, Sterling Jacobson  wrote:
>
> I guess the list doesn't like 2MB file attachments, lol!
>
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Sterling Jacobson
> Sent: Friday, August 7, 2015 3:35 PM
> To: 'af@afmug.com' 
> Subject: [AFMUG] Another neighborhood on fiber, sexy sexy!
>
> This time I used a super dense 4U LC fiber panel that can connect up to
> 576.
>
> I've got about 370 of it loaded with fiber, about a third of that will be
> connected here.
>
> It requires the thinner mil cable which is the only PITA about this setup
> really.
>
> It's using 24 port 1U fiber switches, but I'm still looking for a good
> Planet rep to get the 48 port 1U density.
> I could upgrade to those and fill out the entire 12U switch space to match
> the 576 panel capacity.
> Not going to have 100 percent take rate I'm sure, but it's nice to know I
> can get the density in one cabinet.
>
>

Re: [AFMUG] Another neighborhood on fiber, sexy sexy!

[Tushar Patel]

So you are allowed to put cabinet of that size on right of way? Or you get 
lease from home owner?

Power from power company at 15 amp?

Tushar


> On Aug 8, 2015, at 3:11 PM, Sterling Jacobson  wrote:
> 
> Most of our cabinets sit back from the curb 10-20 feet.
>  
> There is usually a large hand hold next to the curb, or even part of the 
> cabinet pad that we pour.
>  
> Then we just plumb several pipes through the pad to the hand hole for access 
> (before the pour).
>  
> The cabinets are cooled with re-circulating AC units that draw about 450W of 
> power.
>  
> My power budget is usually pretty tight at 15 amps due to the location of 
> most of these cabinets.
>  
> So I have to make sure I calculate appropriate watt usage and not go over 
> budget with everything.
>  
> I also have to calculate btu/heat output to make sure I don’t exceed my A/C 
> capacity to cool.
>  
>  
>  
> From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Tushar Patel
> Sent: Saturday, August 8, 2015 1:36 PM
> To: Tushar Patel 
> Cc: af@afmug.com
> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Another neighborhood on fiber, sexy sexy!
>  
> It says curb side never mind. Does it need cooling?
> 
> Tushar
>  
> 
> On Aug 8, 2015, at 2:34 PM, Tushar Patel  wrote:
> 
> Where is that rack sitting? Curb side?
> 
> Tushar
>  
> 
> On Aug 8, 2015, at 2:28 PM, Sterling Jacobson  wrote:
> 
> The rack company sells trays with precut lengths of fiber.
>  
> So I think we ordered with 100’ lengths and spliced it in the truck in a 
> large case splice that sits in a handhold about 10 feet away from the rack on 
> the curb.
>  
> The crew liked this way better than splicing on the rack itself.
>  
>  
> From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Jason McKemie
> Sent: Saturday, August 8, 2015 1:15 PM
> To: af@afmug.com
> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Another neighborhood on fiber, sexy sexy!
>  
> Looks good, how are you transitioning from the OSP cable to the TE rackmount 
> unit?
> 
> On Friday, August 7, 2015, Sterling Jacobson  wrote:
> I guess the list doesn't like 2MB file attachments, lol!
> 
> 
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Sterling Jacobson
> Sent: Friday, August 7, 2015 3:35 PM
> To: 'af@afmug.com' 
> Subject: [AFMUG] Another neighborhood on fiber, sexy sexy!
> 
> This time I used a super dense 4U LC fiber panel that can connect up to 576.
> 
> I've got about 370 of it loaded with fiber, about a third of that will be 
> connected here.
> 
> It requires the thinner mil cable which is the only PITA about this setup 
> really.
> 
> It's using 24 port 1U fiber switches, but I'm still looking for a good Planet 
> rep to get the 48 port 1U density.
> I could upgrade to those and fill out the entire 12U switch space to match 
> the 576 panel capacity.
> Not going to have 100 percent take rate I'm sure, but it's nice to know I can 
> get the density in one cabinet.

Re: [AFMUG] Another neighborhood on fiber, sexy sexy!

[Sterling Jacobson]

Most of our cabinets sit back from the curb 10-20 feet.

There is usually a large hand hold next to the curb, or even part of the 
cabinet pad that we pour.

Then we just plumb several pipes through the pad to the hand hole for access 
(before the pour).

The cabinets are cooled with re-circulating AC units that draw about 450W of 
power.

My power budget is usually pretty tight at 15 amps due to the location of most 
of these cabinets.

So I have to make sure I calculate appropriate watt usage and not go over 
budget with everything.

I also have to calculate btu/heat output to make sure I don’t exceed my A/C 
capacity to cool.



From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Tushar Patel
Sent: Saturday, August 8, 2015 1:36 PM
To: Tushar Patel 
Cc: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Another neighborhood on fiber, sexy sexy!

It says curb side never mind. Does it need cooling?

Tushar


On Aug 8, 2015, at 2:34 PM, Tushar Patel 
mailto:tpa...@ecpi.com>> wrote:
Where is that rack sitting? Curb side?

Tushar


On Aug 8, 2015, at 2:28 PM, Sterling Jacobson 
mailto:sterl...@avative.net>> wrote:
The rack company sells trays with precut lengths of fiber.

So I think we ordered with 100’ lengths and spliced it in the truck in a large 
case splice that sits in a handhold about 10 feet away from the rack on the 
curb.

The crew liked this way better than splicing on the rack itself.


From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Jason McKemie
Sent: Saturday, August 8, 2015 1:15 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Another neighborhood on fiber, sexy sexy!

Looks good, how are you transitioning from the OSP cable to the TE rackmount 
unit?

On Friday, August 7, 2015, Sterling Jacobson 
mailto:sterl...@avative.net>> wrote:
I guess the list doesn't like 2MB file attachments, lol!



-Original Message-
From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Sterling 
Jacobson
Sent: Friday, August 7, 2015 3:35 PM
To: 'af@afmug.com' >
Subject: [AFMUG] Another neighborhood on fiber, sexy sexy!

This time I used a super dense 4U LC fiber panel that can connect up to 576.

I've got about 370 of it loaded with fiber, about a third of that will be 
connected here.

It requires the thinner mil cable which is the only PITA about this setup 
really.

It's using 24 port 1U fiber switches, but I'm still looking for a good Planet 
rep to get the 48 port 1U density.
I could upgrade to those and fill out the entire 12U switch space to match the 
576 panel capacity.
Not going to have 100 percent take rate I'm sure, but it's nice to know I can 
get the density in one cabinet.

Re: [AFMUG] Another neighborhood on fiber, sexy sexy!

[Tushar Patel]

It says curb side never mind. Does it need cooling?

Tushar


> On Aug 8, 2015, at 2:34 PM, Tushar Patel  wrote:
> 
> Where is that rack sitting? Curb side?
> 
> Tushar
> 
> 
>> On Aug 8, 2015, at 2:28 PM, Sterling Jacobson  wrote:
>> 
>> The rack company sells trays with precut lengths of fiber.
>>  
>> So I think we ordered with 100’ lengths and spliced it in the truck in a 
>> large case splice that sits in a handhold about 10 feet away from the rack 
>> on the curb.
>>  
>> The crew liked this way better than splicing on the rack itself.
>>  
>>  
>> From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Jason McKemie
>> Sent: Saturday, August 8, 2015 1:15 PM
>> To: af@afmug.com
>> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Another neighborhood on fiber, sexy sexy!
>>  
>> Looks good, how are you transitioning from the OSP cable to the TE rackmount 
>> unit?
>> 
>> On Friday, August 7, 2015, Sterling Jacobson  wrote:
>> I guess the list doesn't like 2MB file attachments, lol!
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> -Original Message-
>> From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Sterling Jacobson
>> Sent: Friday, August 7, 2015 3:35 PM
>> To: 'af@afmug.com' 
>> Subject: [AFMUG] Another neighborhood on fiber, sexy sexy!
>> 
>> This time I used a super dense 4U LC fiber panel that can connect up to 576.
>> 
>> I've got about 370 of it loaded with fiber, about a third of that will be 
>> connected here.
>> 
>> It requires the thinner mil cable which is the only PITA about this setup 
>> really.
>> 
>> It's using 24 port 1U fiber switches, but I'm still looking for a good 
>> Planet rep to get the 48 port 1U density.
>> I could upgrade to those and fill out the entire 12U switch space to match 
>> the 576 panel capacity.
>> Not going to have 100 percent take rate I'm sure, but it's nice to know I 
>> can get the density in one cabinet.

Re: [AFMUG] Another neighborhood on fiber, sexy sexy!

[Tushar Patel]

Where is that rack sitting? Curb side?

Tushar


> On Aug 8, 2015, at 2:28 PM, Sterling Jacobson  wrote:
> 
> The rack company sells trays with precut lengths of fiber.
>  
> So I think we ordered with 100’ lengths and spliced it in the truck in a 
> large case splice that sits in a handhold about 10 feet away from the rack on 
> the curb.
>  
> The crew liked this way better than splicing on the rack itself.
>  
>  
> From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Jason McKemie
> Sent: Saturday, August 8, 2015 1:15 PM
> To: af@afmug.com
> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Another neighborhood on fiber, sexy sexy!
>  
> Looks good, how are you transitioning from the OSP cable to the TE rackmount 
> unit?
> 
> On Friday, August 7, 2015, Sterling Jacobson  wrote:
> I guess the list doesn't like 2MB file attachments, lol!
> 
> 
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Sterling Jacobson
> Sent: Friday, August 7, 2015 3:35 PM
> To: 'af@afmug.com' 
> Subject: [AFMUG] Another neighborhood on fiber, sexy sexy!
> 
> This time I used a super dense 4U LC fiber panel that can connect up to 576.
> 
> I've got about 370 of it loaded with fiber, about a third of that will be 
> connected here.
> 
> It requires the thinner mil cable which is the only PITA about this setup 
> really.
> 
> It's using 24 port 1U fiber switches, but I'm still looking for a good Planet 
> rep to get the 48 port 1U density.
> I could upgrade to those and fill out the entire 12U switch space to match 
> the 576 panel capacity.
> Not going to have 100 percent take rate I'm sure, but it's nice to know I can 
> get the density in one cabinet.

Re: [AFMUG] Another neighborhood on fiber, sexy sexy!

[Sterling Jacobson]

The rack company sells trays with precut lengths of fiber.

So I think we ordered with 100’ lengths and spliced it in the truck in a large 
case splice that sits in a handhold about 10 feet away from the rack on the 
curb.

The crew liked this way better than splicing on the rack itself.


From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Jason McKemie
Sent: Saturday, August 8, 2015 1:15 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Another neighborhood on fiber, sexy sexy!

Looks good, how are you transitioning from the OSP cable to the TE rackmount 
unit?

On Friday, August 7, 2015, Sterling Jacobson 
mailto:sterl...@avative.net>> wrote:
I guess the list doesn't like 2MB file attachments, lol!



-Original Message-
From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Sterling 
Jacobson
Sent: Friday, August 7, 2015 3:35 PM
To: 'af@afmug.com' >
Subject: [AFMUG] Another neighborhood on fiber, sexy sexy!

This time I used a super dense 4U LC fiber panel that can connect up to 576.

I've got about 370 of it loaded with fiber, about a third of that will be 
connected here.

It requires the thinner mil cable which is the only PITA about this setup 
really.

It's using 24 port 1U fiber switches, but I'm still looking for a good Planet 
rep to get the 48 port 1U density.
I could upgrade to those and fill out the entire 12U switch space to match the 
576 panel capacity.
Not going to have 100 percent take rate I'm sure, but it's nice to know I can 
get the density in one cabinet.

Re: [AFMUG] Another neighborhood on fiber, sexy sexy!

[Jason McKemie]

Looks good, how are you transitioning from the OSP cable to the TE
rackmount unit?

On Friday, August 7, 2015, Sterling Jacobson  wrote:

> I guess the list doesn't like 2MB file attachments, lol!
>
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com ] On Behalf Of
> Sterling Jacobson
> Sent: Friday, August 7, 2015 3:35 PM
> To: 'af@afmug.com ' >
> Subject: [AFMUG] Another neighborhood on fiber, sexy sexy!
>
> This time I used a super dense 4U LC fiber panel that can connect up to
> 576.
>
> I've got about 370 of it loaded with fiber, about a third of that will be
> connected here.
>
> It requires the thinner mil cable which is the only PITA about this setup
> really.
>
> It's using 24 port 1U fiber switches, but I'm still looking for a good
> Planet rep to get the 48 port 1U density.
> I could upgrade to those and fill out the entire 12U switch space to match
> the 576 panel capacity.
> Not going to have 100 percent take rate I'm sure, but it's nice to know I
> can get the density in one cabinet.
>

Re: [AFMUG] Is anyone here doing ePTP at all?

[Josh Luthman]

Thanks for the confirmation.  And on a Saturday!!!


Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373

On Sat, Aug 8, 2015 at 2:52 PM, Dan Sullivan <
daniel.sulli...@cambiumnetworks.com> wrote:

> 2.5 msec frame allows for sync and improves PTP latency as compared to 5
> msec frame.
>
>
>
> ePTP cannot be synced as communication is driven based on dynamic data
> from each link.
>
>
> Dan Sullivan
>
> ePMP Software Manager
>
>
>
> *From:* Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] *On Behalf Of *Mathew Howard
> *Sent:* Saturday, August 08, 2015 10:11 AM
> *To:* af
> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Is anyone here doing ePTP at all?
>
>
>
> Yep, I'm pretty sure it doesn't use fixed frames in ePTP mode... trying to
> sync that sounds like it'd end up like airmax sync.
>
> 2.5ms frames make sync a lot more useful for ptp though.
>
>
>
> On Sat, Aug 8, 2015 at 7:06 AM, Josh Luthman 
> wrote:
>
> But that depends on frame timing which would leave you at the current tdd
> ptp (5ms today, 2.5ms after 2.5).  I'd love to see the 2ms latency be
> synced but I don't see how that would be doable.
>
> Josh Luthman
> Office: 937-552-2340
> Direct: 937-552-2343
> 1100 Wayne St
> Suite 1337
> Troy, OH 45373
>
> On Aug 8, 2015 7:54 AM, "Mike Hammett"  wrote:
>
> No, I mean exactly what I said ePTP sync.
>
> There's no reason that I'm aware of that the ePTP up\down cycles couldn't
> be synced. The regular sync has to deal with potentially dozens of clients.
> The ePTP just has to deal with one.
>
>
>
> -
> Mike Hammett
> Intelligent Computing Solutions
> http://www.ics-il.com
>
>
> --
>
> *From: *"Josh Luthman" 
> *To: *af@afmug.com
> *Sent: *Saturday, August 8, 2015 6:48:14 AM
> *Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] Is anyone here doing ePTP at all?
>
> Eptp sync doesn't sound possible.  That's what the tdd ptp is for.  Do you
> mean the 2.5ms timing?
>
> Josh Luthman
> Office: 937-552-2340
> Direct: 937-552-2343
> 1100 Wayne St
> Suite 1337
> Troy, OH 45373
>
> On Aug 8, 2015 7:47 AM, "Mike Hammett"  wrote:
>
> Though*  Early in the morning...
>
>
>
> -
> Mike Hammett
> Intelligent Computing Solutions
> http://www.ics-il.com
>
>
> --
>
> *From: *"Mike Hammett" 
> *To: *af@afmug.com
> *Sent: *Saturday, August 8, 2015 6:45:55 AM
> *Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] Is anyone here doing ePTP at all?
>
> Is it, thought?  ;-)
>
>
> FWIW, I have some ePTP up (eagerly awaiting ePTP sync!) and no issues that
> I'm aware of.
>
>
>
> -
> Mike Hammett
> Intelligent Computing Solutions
> http://www.ics-il.com
>
>
> --
>
> *From: *"Josh Luthman" 
> *To: *af@afmug.com
> *Sent: *Friday, August 7, 2015 4:41:45 PM
> *Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] Is anyone here doing ePTP at all?
>
> How long has it been up?  According to Cambium I'm the only one that's
> been experiencing a bug and it's all over the place.  They've got a fix for
> it but it's just so weird that I'm the only one with the problem =/
>
>
>
>
> Josh Luthman
> Office: 937-552-2340
> Direct: 937-552-2343
> 1100 Wayne St
> Suite 1337
> Troy, OH 45373
>
>
>
> On Fri, Aug 7, 2015 at 5:32 PM, Mathew Howard 
> wrote:
>
> Yep, I just replaced a pair of NanoBridges with Force 110's doing ePTP a
> couple days ago and we have at least one other.
>
>
>
> On Fri, Aug 7, 2015 at 4:07 PM, Josh Luthman 
> wrote:
>
> Anyone at all?
>
>
>
> Josh Luthman
> Office: 937-552-2340
> Direct: 937-552-2343
> 1100 Wayne St
> Suite 1337
> Troy, OH 45373
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

Re: [AFMUG] Is anyone here doing ePTP at all?

[Dan Sullivan]

2.5 msec frame allows for sync and improves PTP latency as compared to 5 msec 
frame.

ePTP cannot be synced as communication is driven based on dynamic data from 
each link.

Dan Sullivan
ePMP Software Manager

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Mathew Howard
Sent: Saturday, August 08, 2015 10:11 AM
To: af
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Is anyone here doing ePTP at all?

Yep, I'm pretty sure it doesn't use fixed frames in ePTP mode... trying to sync 
that sounds like it'd end up like airmax sync.
2.5ms frames make sync a lot more useful for ptp though.

On Sat, Aug 8, 2015 at 7:06 AM, Josh Luthman 
mailto:j...@imaginenetworksllc.com>> wrote:

But that depends on frame timing which would leave you at the current tdd ptp 
(5ms today, 2.5ms after 2.5).  I'd love to see the 2ms latency be synced but I 
don't see how that would be doable.

Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373
On Aug 8, 2015 7:54 AM, "Mike Hammett" 
mailto:af...@ics-il.net>> wrote:
No, I mean exactly what I said ePTP sync.

There's no reason that I'm aware of that the ePTP up\down cycles couldn't be 
synced. The regular sync has to deal with potentially dozens of clients. The 
ePTP just has to deal with one.


-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
http://www.ics-il.com


From: "Josh Luthman" 
mailto:j...@imaginenetworksllc.com>>
To: af@afmug.com
Sent: Saturday, August 8, 2015 6:48:14 AM
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Is anyone here doing ePTP at all?

Eptp sync doesn't sound possible.  That's what the tdd ptp is for.  Do you mean 
the 2.5ms timing?

Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373
On Aug 8, 2015 7:47 AM, "Mike Hammett" 
mailto:af...@ics-il.net>> wrote:
Though*  Early in the morning...


-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
http://www.ics-il.com


From: "Mike Hammett" mailto:af...@ics-il.net>>
To: af@afmug.com
Sent: Saturday, August 8, 2015 6:45:55 AM
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Is anyone here doing ePTP at all?
Is it, thought?  ;-)


FWIW, I have some ePTP up (eagerly awaiting ePTP sync!) and no issues that I'm 
aware of.


-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
http://www.ics-il.com


From: "Josh Luthman" 
mailto:j...@imaginenetworksllc.com>>
To: af@afmug.com
Sent: Friday, August 7, 2015 4:41:45 PM
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Is anyone here doing ePTP at all?
How long has it been up?  According to Cambium I'm the only one that's been 
experiencing a bug and it's all over the place.  They've got a fix for it but 
it's just so weird that I'm the only one with the problem =/


Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373

On Fri, Aug 7, 2015 at 5:32 PM, Mathew Howard 
mailto:mhoward...@gmail.com>> wrote:
Yep, I just replaced a pair of NanoBridges with Force 110's doing ePTP a couple 
days ago and we have at least one other.

On Fri, Aug 7, 2015 at 4:07 PM, Josh Luthman 
mailto:j...@imaginenetworksllc.com>> wrote:
Anyone at all?

Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373

[AFMUG] outbound spam filtering company

[Ken Hohhof]

I saw this company mentioned in a Krebs On Security article.

http://www.mailchannels.com/

Probably not too many of us do enough hosting business that we have to worry 
about signing up a spammer who trashes the reputation of our IP blocks.  I 
do get a few unsolicited requests per year from people wanting to pay big 
bucks for hosting and specifying they want a big block of virgin IP 
addresses.  What could go wrong?


Even so, we all have trouble with blacklisting from time to time.

Just out of curiosity, has anyone looked into this company or have knowledge 
about them (or similar services)?


Certainly inbound spam filtering is not perfect, I wonder how outbound 
filtering can be?  How would it know that my farm co-op customer is just 
sending out crop news blasts to their members?  I guess there is additional 
info like SMTP rejection codes, blacklists and honeypots and feedback loops. 
But can they really promise you will never get blacklisted?  Maybe if you 
relay through them, their mailservers are trusted by the big guys.  Like I 
assume the big guys all whitelist each other so that GMail, AOL, Yahoo, 
Hotmail, etc. don't filter or blacklist each other. 

Re: [AFMUG] Another neighborhood on fiber, sexy sexy!

[Sterling Jacobson]

Oh ok!

I’ll take a look at that and maybe order one to play with.

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of John Blake
Sent: Friday, August 7, 2015 5:38 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Another neighborhood on fiber, sexy sexy!

If you need 48 ports per 1RU, then I would recommend you consider the Huawei 
S5700-52X-LI-48CS-AC.  They do need moderate cooling, but have excellent 
cost-per-port and all the features you would want for Ethernet based FTTH 
(downstream port isolation, per port rate-limiting, SNMP, sticky MAC, stacking, 
tons of other features). We have one in our lab we have been evaluating for 
another FTTH project and they are awesome.  Much better feature set than 
Planet.  They use the dual-port CSFP transceivers to get 48 ports into that 
space.  The switches are about $2k each depending on quantity.  We are a Huawei 
VAR so message me if you want more info.

John Blake
N1 Networks
jbl...@n1networks.com

On Fri, Aug 7, 2015 at 4:56 PM, Lewis Bergman 
mailto:lewis.berg...@gmail.com>> wrote:

I am shocked there is no writing on the sheet describing connections ;). It 
does underscore how much more gear switching takes over PON.

On Fri, Aug 7, 2015, 4:35 PM Sterling Jacobson 
mailto:sterl...@avative.net>> wrote:
This time I used a super dense 4U LC fiber panel that can connect up to 576.

I've got about 370 of it loaded with fiber, about a third of that will be 
connected here.

It requires the thinner mil cable which is the only PITA about this setup 
really.

It's using 24 port 1U fiber switches, but I'm still looking for a good Planet 
rep to get the 48 port 1U density.
I could upgrade to those and fill out the entire 12U switch space to match the 
576 panel capacity.
Not going to have 100 percent take rate I'm sure, but it's nice to know I can 
get the density in one cabinet.

Re: [AFMUG] Routed vs bridge with a twist

[Sterling Jacobson]

That’s what I’m struggling with too.

Multiple potential head ends that are geographically diverse on the network.



From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Mike Hammett
Sent: Saturday, August 8, 2015 6:11 AM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Routed vs bridge with a twist

Agreed. Currently I'm all routed, but am looking to move to VPLS for those 
beyond router-router L2 segments. I don't think I'll actually be saving any 
address space as it isn't as simple as everything goes to the head-end because 
there are multiple "head-ends".


-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
http://www.ics-il.com


From: "Shayne Lebrun" mailto:sleb...@muskoka.com>>
To: af@afmug.com
Sent: Friday, August 7, 2015 3:24:07 PM
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Routed vs bridge with a twist
I advocate keeping everything routed, and using MPLS/VPLS to move L2 where they 
need to go, when required.


From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Glen Waldrop
Sent: Friday, August 7, 2015 3:09 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Routed vs bridge with a twist

You guys have given me some light reading to do based on my question above.

Sounds like the consensus is a few mid sized L2 rather than one large L2 for 
backhauls? Or stick with a subnet per link as I have now?


- Original Message -
From: Shayne Lebrun
To: af@afmug.com
Sent: Friday, August 07, 2015 1:52 PM
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Routed vs bridge with a twist

That’s the basics.  On a Mikrotik:
Create a bridge with no ports.  Call it ‘Loopback’.  Assign a /32 to it, and 
advertise via OSPF.
Set your OSPF instance router ID to this IP.
MPLS->MPLS, under LDP Settings, select Enabled, use the Loopback IP as the LSR 
ID and Transport Address.  Add the interface under LDP Interface and MPLS 
Interface.

Now, MTU is the big sticking point.  On MPLS Interface, I use 1586, which gives 
plenty of room for full 1500 byte packets plus VLANs, MPLS labels, VPLS labels, 
and so on.  But all equipment needs to support that MTU; backhauls, routers, 
everything.  So no 493 family Mikrotiks.  No Canopy FSK or 430 backhauls.  
Ubiquiti, depends.  And so on.

Once you have an MPLS network, you can create VPLS tunnels just like EoIP 
tunnels, only there’ll be no fragmenting and way WAY less encapsulation 
overhead.

RSVP, I think is what Mikrotik calls ‘Traffic Engineering.’  Tell it how much 
bandwidth you have on each interface, and you can avoid the situation where you 
have router a->b->c->d and router a->d means the first path is idle as long as 
the second path is up.

I’ll reiterate, though, MTU will be the sticking point.

Mikrotik’s wiki has some great write-ups on all this.

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Paul Stewart
Sent: Friday, August 7, 2015 2:40 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Routed vs bridge with a twist

If you have even a couple of routers (ideally with switches off of each), you 
can simulate some pretty cool stuff… then add a third router into the mix and 
it’s even more fun.

MPLS isn’t something you just learn right away – it’s something that takes time 
to learn and run through in a lab setting ideally … there’s a lot of 
complexities that you can use if you want to … or there are simpler approaches….

Very very high level…. (not Microtik specific – I don’t know Microtik very well)

Enable loopback interfaces on all routers (which often is already setup)
Enable OSPF between the routers (pretty typical)
Enable RSVP on the interfaces facing one another (this will be new)
Enable MPLS “protocol” on the interfaces facing one another (this will be new)
Configure iBGP between the routers (full mesh, peering with loopbacks – not 
interface IP’s)
Configure LSP’s between all routers (remember, LSP’s are unidirectional so need 
all routers configured to all routers).

This is assuming you want an RSVP based MPLS network and not LDP based – RSVP 
has advantages over LDP but is more complex to setup.  You may also prefer 
using ISIS instead of OSPF in some networks.

Once the LSP’s are established then you can look to create l2vpn, l3vpn, vpls, 
or multicast-vpn instances (there are many things you can do here).  Easiest is 
an l2vpn where you transport a VLAN from one switchport to another switchport 
via the routers “in the middle”.Once you have some test traffic going, then 
you can investigate protection options such as fast re-route, node link 
protection etc… this is where MPLS really starts to “shine” when there is more 
than one path available to carry the traffic … how you influence how the 
traffic flows and how fast traffic will failover during an outage etc etc…

This is incredibly high level overview and I may be missing something depending 
on your network hardware and topology …. But again, the basics from a high 
level.

Paul



From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.co

Re: [AFMUG] Another neighborhood on fiber, sexy sexy!

[Sterling Jacobson]

Good suggestions, thanks!

GPON vs active is interesting, but I really wanted to be able to up the ante 
when necessary.
I wasn’t sure with GPON how high I could go.

But with active I am doing a “true” gigabit per customer, limited only by 
upstream switch port density.
The Dell switches have no problem doing multiple 1Gig streams and have 10Gig 
backplane between them on stacking and multiple 10Gig SFP+ ports for upstream.

It’s all data center stuff, so there is no lack of horsepower in this setup.

I do have a couple of Force10 units that I use for higher density projects 
right now such that I can supply the Force10 with 160Gbps backbone and service 
48 10Gig ports to 48 individual CSR switches at 8 1Gig ports each.

Not sure GPON can do that.

I also am planning on 2Gig end user plans soon.



From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Chuck Hogg
Sent: Saturday, August 8, 2015 8:19 AM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Another neighborhood on fiber, sexy sexy!

I've been using ZTE lately, and testing Alphion when it comes in.  We have a 
Dasan deployment, ZTE deployment, and soon Alphion on our next one.  Each one 
has it's own issues.  The ZTE I imported direct from China, so my cost per port 
is super cheap.  I got 32 ONT's and a OLT from ZTE and we are at <$5k.  The OLT 
is capable of 8 PON ports per card, for a total of 1024 customers.  Based on 
the ONT pricing as well, we could serve 1,024 customers for something like 
$65/sub all in with optics including the customer ONT.  Can't beat that with AE 
and MikroTik, even with the 260GS.

Regards,
Chuck

On Fri, Aug 7, 2015 at 11:04 PM, Mike Hammett 
mailto:af...@ics-il.net>> wrote:
Waiting for you to figure out a GPON company you like long term so we all can 
steal it.  ;-)


-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
http://www.ics-il.com


From: "Chuck Hogg" mailto:ch...@shelbybb.com>>
To: af@afmug.com
Sent: Friday, August 7, 2015 5:10:32 PM
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Another neighborhood on fiber, sexy sexy!
GPON does all that in one nice switch ;)  Actually happy for residential that 
we made the switch.

Regards,
Chuck

On Fri, Aug 7, 2015 at 5:37 PM, Sterling Jacobson 
mailto:sterl...@avative.net>> wrote:
I guess the list doesn't like 2MB file attachments, lol!



-Original Message-
From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf 
Of Sterling Jacobson
Sent: Friday, August 7, 2015 3:35 PM
To: 'af@afmug.com' mailto:af@afmug.com>>
Subject: [AFMUG] Another neighborhood on fiber, sexy sexy!

This time I used a super dense 4U LC fiber panel that can connect up to 576.

I've got about 370 of it loaded with fiber, about a third of that will be 
connected here.

It requires the thinner mil cable which is the only PITA about this setup 
really.

It's using 24 port 1U fiber switches, but I'm still looking for a good Planet 
rep to get the 48 port 1U density.
I could upgrade to those and fill out the entire 12U switch space to match the 
576 panel capacity.
Not going to have 100 percent take rate I'm sure, but it's nice to know I can 
get the density in one cabinet.

[AFMUG] Black Hat 2015: IoT devices can become transmitters to steal data | Network World

[Jaime Solorza]

http://www.networkworld.com/article/2960544/security/black-hat-2015-iot-devices-can-become-transmitters-to-steal-data.html?google_editors_picks=true

Re: [AFMUG] Is anyone here doing ePTP at all?

[Mathew Howard]

Yep, I'm pretty sure it doesn't use fixed frames in ePTP mode... trying to
sync that sounds like it'd end up like airmax sync.

2.5ms frames make sync a lot more useful for ptp though.

On Sat, Aug 8, 2015 at 7:06 AM, Josh Luthman 
wrote:

> But that depends on frame timing which would leave you at the current tdd
> ptp (5ms today, 2.5ms after 2.5).  I'd love to see the 2ms latency be
> synced but I don't see how that would be doable.
>
> Josh Luthman
> Office: 937-552-2340
> Direct: 937-552-2343
> 1100 Wayne St
> Suite 1337
> Troy, OH 45373
> On Aug 8, 2015 7:54 AM, "Mike Hammett"  wrote:
>
>> No, I mean exactly what I said ePTP sync.
>>
>> There's no reason that I'm aware of that the ePTP up\down cycles couldn't
>> be synced. The regular sync has to deal with potentially dozens of clients.
>> The ePTP just has to deal with one.
>>
>>
>>
>> -
>> Mike Hammett
>> Intelligent Computing Solutions
>> http://www.ics-il.com
>>
>> --
>> *From: *"Josh Luthman" 
>> *To: *af@afmug.com
>> *Sent: *Saturday, August 8, 2015 6:48:14 AM
>> *Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] Is anyone here doing ePTP at all?
>>
>> Eptp sync doesn't sound possible.  That's what the tdd ptp is for.  Do
>> you mean the 2.5ms timing?
>>
>> Josh Luthman
>> Office: 937-552-2340
>> Direct: 937-552-2343
>> 1100 Wayne St
>> Suite 1337
>> Troy, OH 45373
>> On Aug 8, 2015 7:47 AM, "Mike Hammett"  wrote:
>>
>>> Though*  Early in the morning...
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> -
>>> Mike Hammett
>>> Intelligent Computing Solutions
>>> http://www.ics-il.com
>>>
>>> --
>>> *From: *"Mike Hammett" 
>>> *To: *af@afmug.com
>>> *Sent: *Saturday, August 8, 2015 6:45:55 AM
>>> *Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] Is anyone here doing ePTP at all?
>>>
>>> Is it, thought?  ;-)
>>>
>>>
>>> FWIW, I have some ePTP up (eagerly awaiting ePTP sync!) and no issues
>>> that I'm aware of.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> -
>>> Mike Hammett
>>> Intelligent Computing Solutions
>>> http://www.ics-il.com
>>>
>>> --
>>> *From: *"Josh Luthman" 
>>> *To: *af@afmug.com
>>> *Sent: *Friday, August 7, 2015 4:41:45 PM
>>> *Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] Is anyone here doing ePTP at all?
>>>
>>> How long has it been up?  According to Cambium I'm the only one that's
>>> been experiencing a bug and it's all over the place.  They've got a fix for
>>> it but it's just so weird that I'm the only one with the problem =/
>>>
>>>
>>> Josh Luthman
>>> Office: 937-552-2340
>>> Direct: 937-552-2343
>>> 1100 Wayne St
>>> Suite 1337
>>> Troy, OH 45373
>>>
>>> On Fri, Aug 7, 2015 at 5:32 PM, Mathew Howard 
>>> wrote:
>>>
 Yep, I just replaced a pair of NanoBridges with Force 110's doing ePTP
 a couple days ago and we have at least one other.

 On Fri, Aug 7, 2015 at 4:07 PM, Josh Luthman <
 j...@imaginenetworksllc.com> wrote:

> Anyone at all?
>
> Josh Luthman
> Office: 937-552-2340
> Direct: 937-552-2343
> 1100 Wayne St
> Suite 1337
> Troy, OH 45373
>


>>>
>>>
>>>
>>

Re: [AFMUG] ToughSwitch 8 PRO

[Bill Prince]

So... Not so tough? Perhaps Wimp Switch? WS?

bp


On 8/8/2015 4:29 AM, Mike Hammett wrote:
The TSes have known issues. Even fanboys pulled them all out of their 
networks.




-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
http://www.ics-il.com


*From: *cstann...@gmail.com
*To: *af@afmug.com
*Sent: *Friday, August 7, 2015 9:13:57 PM
*Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] ToughSwitch 8 PRO

I can't recall last time I saw a switch that didn't gracefully mix 100 
and 1000mbit - what are the symptoms? What did Ubiquiti tech support say?


--Original Message--
From: Brett A Mansfield
Sender: Af
To: af@afmug.com
ReplyTo: af@afmug.com
Subject: [AFMUG] ToughSwitch 8 PRO
Sent: Aug 7, 2015 5:06 PM

I have a few of these laying around. I removed them after I realized 
they don't like a mix of 100Mb and Gigabit. I really want to use them 
though rather than let them collect dust.


Does anyone have a setup where these are working for them? Or are they 
just a lost cause?


Thank you,
Brett A Mansfield
Silver Lake Internet, LLC

Re: [AFMUG] Another neighborhood on fiber, sexy sexy!

[Chuck Hogg]

I've been using ZTE lately, and testing Alphion when it comes in.  We have
a Dasan deployment, ZTE deployment, and soon Alphion on our next one.  Each
one has it's own issues.  The ZTE I imported direct from China, so my cost
per port is super cheap.  I got 32 ONT's and a OLT from ZTE and we are at
<$5k.  The OLT is capable of 8 PON ports per card, for a total of 1024
customers.  Based on the ONT pricing as well, we could serve 1,024
customers for something like $65/sub all in with optics including the
customer ONT.  Can't beat that with AE and MikroTik, even with the 260GS.

Regards,
Chuck

On Fri, Aug 7, 2015 at 11:04 PM, Mike Hammett  wrote:

> Waiting for you to figure out a GPON company you like long term so we all
> can steal it.  ;-)
>
>
>
> -
> Mike Hammett
> Intelligent Computing Solutions
> http://www.ics-il.com
>
> --
> *From: *"Chuck Hogg" 
> *To: *af@afmug.com
> *Sent: *Friday, August 7, 2015 5:10:32 PM
> *Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] Another neighborhood on fiber, sexy sexy!
>
> GPON does all that in one nice switch ;)  Actually happy for residential
> that we made the switch.
>
> Regards,
> Chuck
>
> On Fri, Aug 7, 2015 at 5:37 PM, Sterling Jacobson 
> wrote:
>
>> I guess the list doesn't like 2MB file attachments, lol!
>>
>>
>>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Sterling Jacobson
>> Sent: Friday, August 7, 2015 3:35 PM
>> To: 'af@afmug.com' 
>> Subject: [AFMUG] Another neighborhood on fiber, sexy sexy!
>>
>> This time I used a super dense 4U LC fiber panel that can connect up to
>> 576.
>>
>> I've got about 370 of it loaded with fiber, about a third of that will be
>> connected here.
>>
>> It requires the thinner mil cable which is the only PITA about this setup
>> really.
>>
>> It's using 24 port 1U fiber switches, but I'm still looking for a good
>> Planet rep to get the 48 port 1U density.
>> I could upgrade to those and fill out the entire 12U switch space to
>> match the 576 panel capacity.
>> Not going to have 100 percent take rate I'm sure, but it's nice to know I
>> can get the density in one cabinet.
>>
>
>
>

Re: [AFMUG] Is anyone here doing ePTP at all?

[Mike Hammett]

I'm not seeing the problem here. Either option beats 15 - 20 ms that standard 
sync does. 




- 
Mike Hammett 
Intelligent Computing Solutions 
http://www.ics-il.com 

- Original Message -

From: "Josh Luthman"  
To: af@afmug.com 
Sent: Saturday, August 8, 2015 7:06:29 AM 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Is anyone here doing ePTP at all? 


But that depends on frame timing which would leave you at the current tdd ptp 
(5ms today, 2.5ms after 2.5). I'd love to see the 2ms latency be synced but I 
don't see how that would be doable. 
Josh Luthman 
Office: 937-552-2340 
Direct: 937-552-2343 
1100 Wayne St 
Suite 1337 
Troy, OH 45373 
On Aug 8, 2015 7:54 AM, "Mike Hammett" < af...@ics-il.net > wrote: 




No, I mean exactly what I said ePTP sync. 

There's no reason that I'm aware of that the ePTP up\down cycles couldn't be 
synced. The regular sync has to deal with potentially dozens of clients. The 
ePTP just has to deal with one. 




- 
Mike Hammett 
Intelligent Computing Solutions 
http://www.ics-il.com 



From: "Josh Luthman" < j...@imaginenetworksllc.com > 
To: af@afmug.com 
Sent: Saturday, August 8, 2015 6:48:14 AM 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Is anyone here doing ePTP at all? 


Eptp sync doesn't sound possible. That's what the tdd ptp is for. Do you mean 
the 2.5ms timing? 
Josh Luthman 
Office: 937-552-2340 
Direct: 937-552-2343 
1100 Wayne St 
Suite 1337 
Troy, OH 45373 
On Aug 8, 2015 7:47 AM, "Mike Hammett" < af...@ics-il.net > wrote: 




Though* Early in the morning... 




- 
Mike Hammett 
Intelligent Computing Solutions 
http://www.ics-il.com 



From: "Mike Hammett" < af...@ics-il.net > 
To: af@afmug.com 
Sent: Saturday, August 8, 2015 6:45:55 AM 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Is anyone here doing ePTP at all? 


Is it, thought? ;-) 


FWIW, I have some ePTP up (eagerly awaiting ePTP sync!) and no issues that I'm 
aware of. 




- 
Mike Hammett 
Intelligent Computing Solutions 
http://www.ics-il.com 



From: "Josh Luthman" < j...@imaginenetworksllc.com > 
To: af@afmug.com 
Sent: Friday, August 7, 2015 4:41:45 PM 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Is anyone here doing ePTP at all? 


How long has it been up? According to Cambium I'm the only one that's been 
experiencing a bug and it's all over the place. They've got a fix for it but 
it's just so weird that I'm the only one with the problem =/ 






Josh Luthman 
Office: 937-552-2340 
Direct: 937-552-2343 
1100 Wayne St 
Suite 1337 
Troy, OH 45373 

On Fri, Aug 7, 2015 at 5:32 PM, Mathew Howard < mhoward...@gmail.com > wrote: 



Yep, I just replaced a pair of NanoBridges with Force 110's doing ePTP a couple 
days ago and we have at least one other. 





On Fri, Aug 7, 2015 at 4:07 PM, Josh Luthman < j...@imaginenetworksllc.com > 
wrote: 



Anyone at all? 





Josh Luthman 
Office: 937-552-2340 
Direct: 937-552-2343 
1100 Wayne St 
Suite 1337 
Troy, OH 45373 

Re: [AFMUG] Routed vs bridge with a twist

[Mike Hammett]

Agreed. Currently I'm all routed, but am looking to move to VPLS for those 
beyond router-router L2 segments. I don't think I'll actually be saving any 
address space as it isn't as simple as everything goes to the head-end because 
there are multiple "head-ends". 




- 
Mike Hammett 
Intelligent Computing Solutions 
http://www.ics-il.com 

- Original Message -

From: "Shayne Lebrun"  
To: af@afmug.com 
Sent: Friday, August 7, 2015 3:24:07 PM 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Routed vs bridge with a twist 



I advocate keeping everything routed, and using MPLS/VPLS to move L2 where they 
need to go, when required. 




From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Glen Waldrop 
Sent: Friday, August 7, 2015 3:09 PM 
To: af@afmug.com 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Routed vs bridge with a twist 


You guys have given me some light reading to do based on my question above. 

Sounds like the consensus is a few mid sized L2 rather than one large L2 for 
backhauls? Or stick with a subnet per link as I have now? 







- Original Message - 

From: Shayne Lebrun 

To: af@afmug.com 

Sent: Friday, August 07, 2015 1:52 PM 

Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Routed vs bridge with a twist 


That’s the basics. On a Mikrotik: 
Create a bridge with no ports. Call it ‘Loopback’. Assign a /32 to it, and 
advertise via OSPF. 
Set your OSPF instance router ID to this IP. 
MPLS->MPLS, under LDP Settings, select Enabled, use the Loopback IP as the LSR 
ID and Transport Address. Add the interface under LDP Interface and MPLS 
Interface. 

Now, MTU is the big sticking point. On MPLS Interface, I use 1586, which gives 
plenty of room for full 1500 byte packets plus VLANs, MPLS labels, VPLS labels, 
and so on. But all equipment needs to support that MTU; backhauls, routers, 
everything. So no 493 family Mikrotiks. No Canopy FSK or 430 backhauls. 
Ubiquiti, depends. And so on. 

Once you have an MPLS network, you can create VPLS tunnels just like EoIP 
tunnels, only there’ll be no fragmenting and way WAY less encapsulation 
overhead. 

RSVP, I think is what Mikrotik calls ‘Traffic Engineering.’ Tell it how much 
bandwidth you have on each interface, and you can avoid the situation where you 
have router a->b->c->d and router a->d means the first path is idle as long as 
the second path is up. 

I’ll reiterate, though, MTU will be the sticking point. 

Mikrotik’s wiki has some great write-ups on all this. 



From: Af [ mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com ] On Behalf Of Paul Stewart 
Sent: Friday, August 7, 2015 2:40 PM 
To: af@afmug.com 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Routed vs bridge with a twist 

If you have even a couple of routers (ideally with switches off of each), you 
can simulate some pretty cool stuff… then add a third router into the mix and 
it’s even more fun. 

MPLS isn’t something you just learn right away – it’s something that takes time 
to learn and run through in a lab setting ideally … there’s a lot of 
complexities that you can use if you want to … or there are simpler 
approaches…. 

Very very high level…. (not Microtik specific – I don’t know Microtik very 
well) 

Enable loopback interfaces on all routers (which often is already setup) 
Enable OSPF between the routers (pretty typical) 
Enable RSVP on the interfaces facing one another (this will be new) 
Enable MPLS “protocol” on the interfaces facing one another (this will be new) 
Configure iBGP between the routers (full mesh, peering with loopbacks – not 
interface IP’s) 
Configure LSP’s between all routers (remember, LSP’s are unidirectional so need 
all routers configured to all routers). 

This is assuming you want an RSVP based MPLS network and not LDP based – RSVP 
has advantages over LDP but is more complex to setup. You may also prefer using 
ISIS instead of OSPF in some networks. 

Once the LSP’s are established then you can look to create l2vpn, l3vpn, vpls, 
or multicast-vpn instances (there are many things you can do here). Easiest is 
an l2vpn where you transport a VLAN from one switchport to another switchport 
via the routers “in the middle”. Once you have some test traffic going, then 
you can investigate protection options such as fast re-route, node link 
protection etc… this is where MPLS really starts to “shine” when there is more 
than one path available to carry the traffic … how you influence how the 
traffic flows and how fast traffic will failover during an outage etc etc… 

This is incredibly high level overview and I may be missing something depending 
on your network hardware and topology …. But again, the basics from a high 
level. 

Paul 





From: Af [ mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com ] On Behalf Of Mike Hammett 
Sent: Friday, August 7, 2015 9:04 AM 
To: af@afmug.com 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Routed vs bridge with a twist 


I haven't grasped how this would work, but I haven't tried it in a lab yet 
either. 



- 
Mike Hammett 
Intelligent Computing Solutions 
http://www.ics-il.com 




From: "Paul Stewart" < p...@paulstewart.org > 
To: af@afmug.com 
S

Re: [AFMUG] Is anyone here doing ePTP at all?

[Josh Luthman]

But that depends on frame timing which would leave you at the current tdd
ptp (5ms today, 2.5ms after 2.5).  I'd love to see the 2ms latency be
synced but I don't see how that would be doable.

Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373
On Aug 8, 2015 7:54 AM, "Mike Hammett"  wrote:

> No, I mean exactly what I said ePTP sync.
>
> There's no reason that I'm aware of that the ePTP up\down cycles couldn't
> be synced. The regular sync has to deal with potentially dozens of clients.
> The ePTP just has to deal with one.
>
>
>
> -
> Mike Hammett
> Intelligent Computing Solutions
> http://www.ics-il.com
>
> --
> *From: *"Josh Luthman" 
> *To: *af@afmug.com
> *Sent: *Saturday, August 8, 2015 6:48:14 AM
> *Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] Is anyone here doing ePTP at all?
>
> Eptp sync doesn't sound possible.  That's what the tdd ptp is for.  Do you
> mean the 2.5ms timing?
>
> Josh Luthman
> Office: 937-552-2340
> Direct: 937-552-2343
> 1100 Wayne St
> Suite 1337
> Troy, OH 45373
> On Aug 8, 2015 7:47 AM, "Mike Hammett"  wrote:
>
>> Though*  Early in the morning...
>>
>>
>>
>> -
>> Mike Hammett
>> Intelligent Computing Solutions
>> http://www.ics-il.com
>>
>> --
>> *From: *"Mike Hammett" 
>> *To: *af@afmug.com
>> *Sent: *Saturday, August 8, 2015 6:45:55 AM
>> *Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] Is anyone here doing ePTP at all?
>>
>> Is it, thought?  ;-)
>>
>>
>> FWIW, I have some ePTP up (eagerly awaiting ePTP sync!) and no issues
>> that I'm aware of.
>>
>>
>>
>> -
>> Mike Hammett
>> Intelligent Computing Solutions
>> http://www.ics-il.com
>>
>> --
>> *From: *"Josh Luthman" 
>> *To: *af@afmug.com
>> *Sent: *Friday, August 7, 2015 4:41:45 PM
>> *Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] Is anyone here doing ePTP at all?
>>
>> How long has it been up?  According to Cambium I'm the only one that's
>> been experiencing a bug and it's all over the place.  They've got a fix for
>> it but it's just so weird that I'm the only one with the problem =/
>>
>>
>> Josh Luthman
>> Office: 937-552-2340
>> Direct: 937-552-2343
>> 1100 Wayne St
>> Suite 1337
>> Troy, OH 45373
>>
>> On Fri, Aug 7, 2015 at 5:32 PM, Mathew Howard 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Yep, I just replaced a pair of NanoBridges with Force 110's doing ePTP a
>>> couple days ago and we have at least one other.
>>>
>>> On Fri, Aug 7, 2015 at 4:07 PM, Josh Luthman <
>>> j...@imaginenetworksllc.com> wrote:
>>>
 Anyone at all?

 Josh Luthman
 Office: 937-552-2340
 Direct: 937-552-2343
 1100 Wayne St
 Suite 1337
 Troy, OH 45373

>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>

Re: [AFMUG] Is anyone here doing ePTP at all?

[Mike Hammett]

No, I mean exactly what I said ePTP sync. 

There's no reason that I'm aware of that the ePTP up\down cycles couldn't be 
synced. The regular sync has to deal with potentially dozens of clients. The 
ePTP just has to deal with one. 




- 
Mike Hammett 
Intelligent Computing Solutions 
http://www.ics-il.com 

- Original Message -

From: "Josh Luthman"  
To: af@afmug.com 
Sent: Saturday, August 8, 2015 6:48:14 AM 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Is anyone here doing ePTP at all? 


Eptp sync doesn't sound possible. That's what the tdd ptp is for. Do you mean 
the 2.5ms timing? 
Josh Luthman 
Office: 937-552-2340 
Direct: 937-552-2343 
1100 Wayne St 
Suite 1337 
Troy, OH 45373 
On Aug 8, 2015 7:47 AM, "Mike Hammett" < af...@ics-il.net > wrote: 




Though* Early in the morning... 




- 
Mike Hammett 
Intelligent Computing Solutions 
http://www.ics-il.com 



From: "Mike Hammett" < af...@ics-il.net > 
To: af@afmug.com 
Sent: Saturday, August 8, 2015 6:45:55 AM 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Is anyone here doing ePTP at all? 


Is it, thought? ;-) 


FWIW, I have some ePTP up (eagerly awaiting ePTP sync!) and no issues that I'm 
aware of. 




- 
Mike Hammett 
Intelligent Computing Solutions 
http://www.ics-il.com 



From: "Josh Luthman" < j...@imaginenetworksllc.com > 
To: af@afmug.com 
Sent: Friday, August 7, 2015 4:41:45 PM 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Is anyone here doing ePTP at all? 


How long has it been up? According to Cambium I'm the only one that's been 
experiencing a bug and it's all over the place. They've got a fix for it but 
it's just so weird that I'm the only one with the problem =/ 






Josh Luthman 
Office: 937-552-2340 
Direct: 937-552-2343 
1100 Wayne St 
Suite 1337 
Troy, OH 45373 

On Fri, Aug 7, 2015 at 5:32 PM, Mathew Howard < mhoward...@gmail.com > wrote: 



Yep, I just replaced a pair of NanoBridges with Force 110's doing ePTP a couple 
days ago and we have at least one other. 





On Fri, Aug 7, 2015 at 4:07 PM, Josh Luthman < j...@imaginenetworksllc.com > 
wrote: 



Anyone at all? 





Josh Luthman 
Office: 937-552-2340 
Direct: 937-552-2343 
1100 Wayne St 
Suite 1337 
Troy, OH 45373 

Re: [AFMUG] Is anyone here doing ePTP at all?

[Josh Luthman]

Eptp sync doesn't sound possible.  That's what the tdd ptp is for.  Do you
mean the 2.5ms timing?

Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373
On Aug 8, 2015 7:47 AM, "Mike Hammett"  wrote:

> Though*  Early in the morning...
>
>
>
> -
> Mike Hammett
> Intelligent Computing Solutions
> http://www.ics-il.com
>
> --
> *From: *"Mike Hammett" 
> *To: *af@afmug.com
> *Sent: *Saturday, August 8, 2015 6:45:55 AM
> *Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] Is anyone here doing ePTP at all?
>
> Is it, thought?  ;-)
>
>
> FWIW, I have some ePTP up (eagerly awaiting ePTP sync!) and no issues that
> I'm aware of.
>
>
>
> -
> Mike Hammett
> Intelligent Computing Solutions
> http://www.ics-il.com
>
> --
> *From: *"Josh Luthman" 
> *To: *af@afmug.com
> *Sent: *Friday, August 7, 2015 4:41:45 PM
> *Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] Is anyone here doing ePTP at all?
>
> How long has it been up?  According to Cambium I'm the only one that's
> been experiencing a bug and it's all over the place.  They've got a fix for
> it but it's just so weird that I'm the only one with the problem =/
>
>
> Josh Luthman
> Office: 937-552-2340
> Direct: 937-552-2343
> 1100 Wayne St
> Suite 1337
> Troy, OH 45373
>
> On Fri, Aug 7, 2015 at 5:32 PM, Mathew Howard 
> wrote:
>
>> Yep, I just replaced a pair of NanoBridges with Force 110's doing ePTP a
>> couple days ago and we have at least one other.
>>
>> On Fri, Aug 7, 2015 at 4:07 PM, Josh Luthman > > wrote:
>>
>>> Anyone at all?
>>>
>>> Josh Luthman
>>> Office: 937-552-2340
>>> Direct: 937-552-2343
>>> 1100 Wayne St
>>> Suite 1337
>>> Troy, OH 45373
>>>
>>
>>
>
>
>

Re: [AFMUG] Is anyone here doing ePTP at all?

[Mike Hammett]

Though* Early in the morning... 




- 
Mike Hammett 
Intelligent Computing Solutions 
http://www.ics-il.com 

- Original Message -

From: "Mike Hammett"  
To: af@afmug.com 
Sent: Saturday, August 8, 2015 6:45:55 AM 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Is anyone here doing ePTP at all? 


Is it, thought? ;-) 


FWIW, I have some ePTP up (eagerly awaiting ePTP sync!) and no issues that I'm 
aware of. 




- 
Mike Hammett 
Intelligent Computing Solutions 
http://www.ics-il.com 

- Original Message -

From: "Josh Luthman"  
To: af@afmug.com 
Sent: Friday, August 7, 2015 4:41:45 PM 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Is anyone here doing ePTP at all? 


How long has it been up? According to Cambium I'm the only one that's been 
experiencing a bug and it's all over the place. They've got a fix for it but 
it's just so weird that I'm the only one with the problem =/ 






Josh Luthman 
Office: 937-552-2340 
Direct: 937-552-2343 
1100 Wayne St 
Suite 1337 
Troy, OH 45373 

On Fri, Aug 7, 2015 at 5:32 PM, Mathew Howard < mhoward...@gmail.com > wrote: 



Yep, I just replaced a pair of NanoBridges with Force 110's doing ePTP a couple 
days ago and we have at least one other. 





On Fri, Aug 7, 2015 at 4:07 PM, Josh Luthman < j...@imaginenetworksllc.com > 
wrote: 



Anyone at all? 





Josh Luthman 
Office: 937-552-2340 
Direct: 937-552-2343 
1100 Wayne St 
Suite 1337 
Troy, OH 45373 

Re: [AFMUG] Is anyone here doing ePTP at all?

[Mike Hammett]

Is it, thought? ;-) 


FWIW, I have some ePTP up (eagerly awaiting ePTP sync!) and no issues that I'm 
aware of. 




- 
Mike Hammett 
Intelligent Computing Solutions 
http://www.ics-il.com 

- Original Message -

From: "Josh Luthman"  
To: af@afmug.com 
Sent: Friday, August 7, 2015 4:41:45 PM 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Is anyone here doing ePTP at all? 


How long has it been up? According to Cambium I'm the only one that's been 
experiencing a bug and it's all over the place. They've got a fix for it but 
it's just so weird that I'm the only one with the problem =/ 






Josh Luthman 
Office: 937-552-2340 
Direct: 937-552-2343 
1100 Wayne St 
Suite 1337 
Troy, OH 45373 

On Fri, Aug 7, 2015 at 5:32 PM, Mathew Howard < mhoward...@gmail.com > wrote: 



Yep, I just replaced a pair of NanoBridges with Force 110's doing ePTP a couple 
days ago and we have at least one other. 





On Fri, Aug 7, 2015 at 4:07 PM, Josh Luthman < j...@imaginenetworksllc.com > 
wrote: 



Anyone at all? 





Josh Luthman 
Office: 937-552-2340 
Direct: 937-552-2343 
1100 Wayne St 
Suite 1337 
Troy, OH 45373 

Re: [AFMUG] ToughSwitch 8 PRO

[Mike Hammett]

The TSes have known issues. Even fanboys pulled them all out of their networks. 




- 
Mike Hammett 
Intelligent Computing Solutions 
http://www.ics-il.com 

- Original Message -

From: cstann...@gmail.com 
To: af@afmug.com 
Sent: Friday, August 7, 2015 9:13:57 PM 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] ToughSwitch 8 PRO 

I can't recall last time I saw a switch that didn't gracefully mix 100 and 
1000mbit - what are the symptoms? What did Ubiquiti tech support say? 

--Original Message-- 
From: Brett A Mansfield 
Sender: Af 
To: af@afmug.com 
ReplyTo: af@afmug.com 
Subject: [AFMUG] ToughSwitch 8 PRO 
Sent: Aug 7, 2015 5:06 PM 

I have a few of these laying around. I removed them after I realized they don't 
like a mix of 100Mb and Gigabit. I really want to use them though rather than 
let them collect dust. 

Does anyone have a setup where these are working for them? Or are they just a 
lost cause? 

Thank you, 
Brett A Mansfield 
Silver Lake Internet, LLC