I have considered that as an option as well,mikrotik, but if it is possible
I wanted to keep it all Karlnet based because of the way we are setup. See
we have our data feed coming from a data center sent to one central relay
point. From this relay point we have all our towers pulling off a horizontal
omni. So the config is basically:
TOWER 1
<RG1000 SAT>-<SWITCH>-<AP1000 BASE> -[CUSTOMERS]
/
<3MB Feed>-<RG1000 SAT>-<KN-200 BASE [CENTRAL RELAY]> /
\
\
TOWER 2
<RG1000 SAT>-<SWITCH>-<AP1000 BASE> -[CUSTOMERS]
Etc... So if we made the central relay point a mikrotik box and it would be
serving all the tower locations we would defeat the whole purpose of using
karlnetat each tower and customer as each tower would be subject to the
dreaded hidden node issue because there all meeting at a non karlnet based
point to get out, which is mostly why we are 100% karlnet based anyhow.
I think karlnet realy realy needs to come up with something for backhauls
that would support faster feeds. Only getting a little over a meg to each
tower is not going to cut it. I dont know if this needs to be
software/hardware/spectrum or what but if some one wants to keep a 100%
karlnet shop and it wont meet the need what are ya to do ?
John
> Drop in some MicroTik boxes where you can.
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Bryan" <blsutton@airnetwifi.net>
> To: "Karlnet Mailing List" <karlnet@WISPNotes.com>
> Sent: Wednesday, November 26, 2003 11:54 PM
> Subject: Re: [Karlnet] Transfer Rates
>
>
> > Well since I don't have this equipment in place I'm not familiar with
> > it's options - I frouting is a better way to go I will implement that
> > option.
> >
> > On the AP2Ks I was using, there was nothing but the ability to talk to
> > another AP via it's WDS, no routing option so I couldn't do anything
> > with that.
> >
> > If the SG4200/4400 software allows me to route - I'll use it.
> >
> > bryan
> >
> > Bob Hrbek wrote:
> >
> > >I think you'll regret not routing.
> > >
> > >I think once you get to about 25 users, routing will have some serious
> > >benefits.
> > >
> > >
> > >----- Original Message -----
> > >From: "Bryan" <blsutton@airnetwifi.net>
> > >To: "Karlnet Mailing List" <karlnet@WISPNotes.com>
> > >Sent: Wednesday, November 26, 2003 11:37 PM
> > >Subject: Re: [Karlnet] Transfer Rates
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >>Yes - using one of the radios solely for BackHaul the other solely for
> > >>customers.
> > >>A little clarification on 64 BH links - such as the 2nd Kn200 has 2 BH
> > >>links - I was told that it could support upto 64...
> > >>
> > >>Bryan
> > >>
> > >>Bob Hrbek wrote:
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>>all bridged?
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>----- Original Message -----
> > >>>From: "Bryan" <blsutton@airnetwifi.net>
> > >>>To: "Karlnet Mailing List" <karlnet@WISPNotes.com>
> > >>>Sent: Wednesday, November 26, 2003 11:15 PM
> > >>>Subject: Re: [Karlnet] Transfer Rates
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>>It stripped the image...
> > >>>>See text based attempt below - you may have to widen your window to
> see
> > >>>>properly
> > >>>>Bryan wrote:
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>>Interesting - I was just getting ready to purchase KN-200s to
resolve
> > >>>>>that very same issue, I was using Orinoco AP2000s and having same
> > >>>>>problem. I will hold hold off pending a resultion to your
problem -
> > >>>>>no sense spending the money for new equipment with same problem.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>I proved to Proxim that it wasn't a network congestion problem or a
> > >>>>>problem with the internet speed tests by:
> > >>>>>1. Setting up an FTP server internal on my network.
> > >>>>>2. Shutting off all customers - this wasn't much of an issue as I
was
> > >>>>>testing network and only had people that were willing to use for
> free,
> > >>>>>under the understanding that it could go down at any time.
> > >>>>>3. Repeatedly DLing & ULing a 120meg file from server to laptop &
> > >>>>>back, at vatious points in the network while watching with DU
Meter.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>As for your Ping test - it would seem to me that if you are Rxing
> ~3.4
> > >>>>>mbps ROUND TRIP - since thisis half duplex the one way should be
2x
> > >>>>>that or 6.8mbps...?????
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>Personnally - I don't give rat's @ss about any latency tests or any
> > >>>>>other built in tests - Those can be manipulated by the writer of
the
> > >>>>>software to show favorable results. The only thing a customer, and
> > >>>>>therefore myself, cares about is that if they are being sold a
> service
> > >>>>>at particular speed, they get it. The only way to prove that is to
> > >>>>>have an internal network speed test of some sort.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>Here what they told me would support upto 1mbps thruput to
customers
> > >>>>>at any point in the network (using TC for backhaul on one
radio -the
> > >>>>>other radio to serve customers)
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>NOC<>KN200w/SG4400<=>KN200w/SG4400<=>KN200w/SG4400<=>KN200w/SG4200
> > >>>>
> > >>>>| |
> > >>>> KN200w/SG4400
> > >>>>KN200w/SG4400
> > >>>> |
> > >>>> |
> > >>>> KN200w/SG4400
> > >>>> Future
> > >>>> |
> > >>>> KN200w/SG4200
> > >>>>Upto 64 backhaul links off any one radio - I was told
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>>Anyone using a network in similiar config, i.e. 4 wireless
backhauls,
> > >>>>>that can verify this?
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>Bryan
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>jna wrote:
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>>Hello Group,
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>I am trying to diagnose bad transfer rates in my network and
started
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >at
> > >
> > >
> > >>>>>>square 1. We have an RG1000 SAT shooting a 3MB/S feed to a central
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>relay
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>>>>tower only about 1 mile from the datacenter (-47db Signal). The
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >central
> > >
> > >
> > >>>>>>relay is running on kn-200 BASE. When I connect to the relay point
> > >>>>>>via my
> > >>>>>>laptop I am lucky to see 800K to 1.2MB/S over the net transfers.
> > >>>>>>Using the
> > >>>>>>ping fill utility I measure that the transfer rates from the
RG1000
> > >>>>>>SAT to
> > >>>>>>the KN-200 is an average of 3.2 with a max of 3.6MB/S over the
air.
> > >>>>>>According to the ping fill this should should be sufficent to cary
> my
> > >>>>>>3MB/S
> > >>>>>>feed but I am not seeing it at the central relay not even half of
> it.
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>I asked Karlnet support about it and they said that is normal
> because
> > >>>>>>the
> > >>>>>>ping fill shows round trip so my 3.2 to 3.6MB/S transfer to the
> relay
> > >>>>>>point
> > >>>>>>should on support 1.6 to 1.8MB/S one way (Even though there not
even
> > >>>>>>seeing
> > >>>>>>that much). I questioned this and never received a reply back. On
> our
> > >>>>>>main
> > >>>>>>tower which is still on a T1 I have my home connection to the main
> > >>>>>>tower via
> > >>>>>>ping fill shows my average transfer time of 1,271,009 and max of
> > >>>>>>1,484,160.
> > >>>>>>Now if we took the half duplex analogy to mean this result is
round
> > >>>>>>trip and
> > >>>>>>my connection according to ping fill and karlnet should only
handle
> > >>>>>>630K -
> > >>>>>>742K either up or down, correct? But if this is true then why is
it
> I
> > >>>>>>can
> > >>>>>>register on the bandwidth testing sites using this same connection
> > >>>>>>double
> > >>>>>>that actually about what the ping fill says? My average over the
net
> > >>>>>>connection rating is 1.2MB/S ... Does anyone else have any
> > >>>>>>information on
> > >>>>>>the actuall ping fill and if it even works right at all? If the
> above
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>is
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>>>>true then my 3.2-3.6MB/S link to the relay is accurate should get
me
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >my
> > >
> > >
> > >>>>>>3MB/S feed there with no problem.
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>I cant get answers from karlnet support, does anyone have a clue
> here?
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>Is anyone else using Karlnet for backhauling locations? Are you
able
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >to
> > >
> > >
> > >>>>>>backhaul more than a T1?
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>Thank You,
> > >>>>>>John
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>_______________________________________________
> > >>>>>>Karlnet mailing list
> > >>>>>>Karlnet@WISPNotes.com
> > >>>>>>http://lists.wispnotes.com/mailman/listinfo/karlnet
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>_______________________________________________
> > >>>>>Karlnet mailing list
> > >>>>>Karlnet@WISPNotes.com
> > >>>>>http://lists.wispnotes.com/mailman/listinfo/karlnet
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>_______________________________________________
> > >>>>Karlnet mailing list
> > >>>>Karlnet@WISPNotes.com
> > >>>>http://lists.wispnotes.com/mailman/listinfo/karlnet
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>_______________________________________________
> > >>>Karlnet mailing list
> > >>>Karlnet@WISPNotes.com
> > >>>http://lists.wispnotes.com/mailman/listinfo/karlnet
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>_______________________________________________
> > >>Karlnet mailing list
> > >>Karlnet@WISPNotes.com
> > >>http://lists.wispnotes.com/mailman/listinfo/karlnet
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >
> > >_______________________________________________
> > >Karlnet mailing list
> > >Karlnet@WISPNotes.com
> > >http://lists.wispnotes.com/mailman/listinfo/karlnet
> > >
> > >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Karlnet mailing list
> > Karlnet@WISPNotes.com
> > http://lists.wispnotes.com/mailman/listinfo/karlnet
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> Karlnet mailing list
> Karlnet@WISPNotes.com
> http://lists.wispnotes.com/mailman/listinfo/karlnet
>
_______________________________________________
Karlnet mailing list
Karlnet@WISPNotes.com
http://lists.wispnotes.com/mailman/listinfo/karlnet
|