Ok I would like some definite answers on what works and what doesn't. I
have 3 towers that I am dumping all the old StarOS Wrap boards off of and
going to RB411a. The only thing that attaches to these AP's is Tranzeo's.
I know that MT 3.17 works ok with Tranzeo's What about 3.24? What Tranzeo
f
__
> Mikrotik mailing list
> Mikrotik@mail.butchevans.com
> http://www.butchevans.com/mailman/listinfo/mikrotik
>
> Visit http://blog.butchevans.com/ for tutorials related to Mikrotik
> RouterOS
>
-- next part --
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
There are issues with 4.0.2 if you are running WPA/AES on the Tranzeo
devices. Otherwise, i've been running 3.24 and 4.0.2 without encryption
without any problems.
Chris Gotstein
Sr Network Engineer
UP Logon/Computer Connection UP
500 N Stephenson Ave
Iron Mountain, MI 49801
Phone: 906-774-484
How can you set the radio name on the Tranzeo??? This is one of my
favorite features on Mikrotik.
On 6/8/09, Chris Gotstein wrote:
> There are issues with 4.0.2 if you are running WPA/AES on the Tranzeo
> devices. Otherwise, i've been running 3.24 and 4.0.2 without encryption
> without any prob
On Mon, 2009-06-08 at 11:21 -0400, Erik Turk wrote:
> I miss being able to see the Radio Name from the Tranzeos in the
> Registration List of the Mikrotiks. It means that I have to continue to
> remember customers MAC addresses.
In the Mikrotik AP, do the following (Winbox instructions):
WIRELESS
I do that sometimes, too. Works well but it drops the radio for a
second while you do it. Not a major concern, but neither is an itch
on the roof of your mouth :/
On 6/8/09, Butch Evans wrote:
> On Mon, 2009-06-08 at 11:21 -0400, Erik Turk wrote:
>> I miss being able to see the Radio Name from
Yeah, never understand why Mikrotik doesn't grab the SNMP name that The
Tranzeo uses. If you use the MT IPSCAN in tools it shows the name of the
Tranzeo's if you assign them in the Tranzeo Administration screen. SNMP
isn't a column option in registration either.
Steve Barnes
Executive Manager
P
vans.com
> http://www.butchevans.com/mailman/listinfo/mikrotik
>
> Visit http://blog.butchevans.com/ for tutorials related to Mikrotik
> RouterOS
>
>
>
> ___
> Mikrotik mailing list
> Mikrotik@mail.butchevans.com
> http://w
bable, must be the truth."
> --- Sir Arthur Conan Doyle
> ___
> Mikrotik mailing list
> Mikrotik@mail.butchevans.com
> http://www.butchevans.com/mailman/listinfo/mikrotik
>
> Visit http://blog.butchevans.com/ for tutorials re
>> Office: 937-552-2340
>> Direct: 937-552-2343
>> 1100 Wayne St
>> Suite 1337
>> Troy, OH 45373
>>
>> "When you have eliminated the impossible, that which remains, however
>> improbable, must be the tr
On Mon, 2009-06-08 at 16:34 -0400, steve wrote:
> I think your right. I think it is a Mikrotik special thing. Just not sure
> why they didn't use the SNMP. Makes interoperability between vendors a lot
> easier.
SNMP would be a nice option. They don't document this, but from what I
can tell fro
MT and tranzeo with WPA work great here.. Solid as a rock, distances to
18 miles through heavy city noise/urban...
Robert
Chris Gotstein wrote:
There are issues with 4.0.2 if you are running WPA/AES on the Tranzeo
devices. Otherwise, i've been running 3.24 and 4.0.2 without
encryption witho
It would be nice if we could set the radio type, but we put that all in
the radio ID plus the end of the mac...
Butch Evans wrote:
On Mon, 2009-06-08 at 16:34 -0400, steve wrote:
I think your right. I think it is a Mikrotik special thing. Just not sure
why they didn't use the SNMP. Makes
They likely are doing it in the vendor extensions on the packet. We do
both, the packet and SNMP. I'd gladly share our packet format with them
if they will share theirs with me. See what you can do Butch, since I
get the feeling that MT has the following procmail filter installed
sometimes :->
18 miles??? What hardware are you using???
On 6/8/09, Damian Wallace wrote:
> They likely are doing it in the vendor extensions on the packet. We do
> both, the packet and SNMP. I'd gladly share our packet format with them
> if they will share theirs with me. See what you can do Butch, since I
On Mon, 2009-06-08 at 16:46 -0700, Damian Wallace wrote:
> They likely are doing it in the vendor extensions on the packet.
That has been my suspicion, but being as it isn't documented...
> We do
> both, the packet and SNMP. I'd gladly share our packet format with them
> if they will share the
XR5+tr5a+28db dish at the ap... Tests out at 19mb/s udp, 15mb/s tcp.
I do have to complement Damien, his gear does stuff that I wouldn't
guess it will..
Robert
Josh Luthman wrote:
18 miles??? What hardware are you using???
On 6/8/09, Damian Wallace wrote:
They likely are doing it i
I am of the opinion that their fights with StarOS has soured them on
interoperability. Note that Ubiquiti does show up in the MT AP with
the correct info, so someone has figured it out, don't know if that was
with help or without.
Robert
Butch Evans wrote:
On Mon, 2009-06-08 at 16:46 -0700
Are both antennas 28dbi? That would explain why you can hit 18 miles.
I was think you had a ptmp ap with a customer at that distance.
On 6/8/09, Robert Andrews wrote:
> I am of the opinion that their fights with StarOS has soured them on
> interoperability. Note that Ubiquiti does show up in
The far side is a tr5a-24, the regular panel antenna.That is a
customer...
Josh Luthman wrote:
Are both antennas 28dbi? That would explain why you can hit 18 miles.
I was think you had a ptmp ap with a customer at that distance.
On 6/8/09, Robert Andrews wrote:
I am of the opinio
Right but with a dish you're not doing ptmp.
On 6/8/09, Robert Andrews wrote:
> The far side is a tr5a-24, the regular panel antenna.That is a
> customer...
>
> Josh Luthman wrote:
>> Are both antennas 28dbi? That would explain why you can hit 18 miles.
>> I was think you had a ptmp ap with
you doing AES though??
Robert Andrews wrote:
MT and tranzeo with WPA work great here.. Solid as a rock, distances to
18 miles through heavy city noise/urban...
Robert
Chris Gotstein wrote:
There are issues with 4.0.2 if you are running WPA/AES on the Tranzeo
devices. Otherwise, i've been r
No we do wpa, not wpa2 either... just wpa.
Chris Gotstein wrote:
you doing AES though??
Robert Andrews wrote:
MT and tranzeo with WPA work great here.. Solid as a rock, distances
to 18 miles through heavy city noise/urban...
Robert
Chris Gotstein wrote:
There are issues with 4.0.2 if y
wpa tkip?
Robert Andrews wrote:
No we do wpa, not wpa2 either... just wpa.
Chris Gotstein wrote:
you doing AES though??
Robert Andrews wrote:
MT and tranzeo with WPA work great here.. Solid as a rock, distances
to 18 miles through heavy city noise/urban...
Robert
Chris Gotstein wrote:
T
that's a rog...
Chris Gotstein wrote:
wpa tkip?
Robert Andrews wrote:
No we do wpa, not wpa2 either... just wpa. Chris Gotstein wrote:
you doing AES though??
Robert Andrews wrote:
MT and tranzeo with WPA work great here.. Solid as a rock,
distances to 18 miles through heavy city noise/ur
problem seems to be with WPA/AES and/or WPA2
Robert Andrews wrote:
that's a rog...
Chris Gotstein wrote:
wpa tkip?
Robert Andrews wrote:
No we do wpa, not wpa2 either... just wpa. Chris Gotstein wrote:
you doing AES though??
Robert Andrews wrote:
MT and tranzeo with WPA work great here..
26 matches
Mail list logo
