dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
4825
share rss forum feed

OHSrob

join:2011-06-08
reply to gunther_01

Re: UBNT EdgeMax

said by gunther_01:

What are you really supposed to do with a 3 port router?

Use 802.1q to trunk it to your switch if you increase your MTU by 5 bytes it will compensate for the additional framing overhead.

Garbage Integrated switches are super lame many don't even do jumbo frames and if this had it I doubt anyone would ever take this seriously.

gunther_01
Premium
join:2004-03-29
Saybrook, IL
reply to jcremin

I'm talking in the area of a POP that may be routed. I have many more network devices in my networks than 3 at each site. 3 ports would only take care of the routed backhauls. I don't particularly want to have a full rack mount sized device 200 feet in the air in an enclosure on a roof deck.

This is why these products really aren't that special compared to things already on the market. a 3 port router?? For WISP use?? Yeah, not really useful for most of us
--
»www.wirelessdatanet.net


OHSrob

join:2011-06-08

said by gunther_01:

I'm talking in the area of a POP that may be routed. I have many more network devices in my networks than 3 at each site. 3 ports would only take care of the routed backhauls. I don't particularly want to have a full rack mount sized device 200 feet in the air in an enclosure on a roof deck.

This is why these products really aren't that special compared to things already on the market. a 3 port router?? For WISP use?? Yeah, not really useful for most of us

I don't know about the other wisp's here but ever single networking device in my network is rackmountable. If I did buy this product it would not replace a single switch for me.

I require the full cisco feature set for my switch's from dhcp snooping, port-security and ARP inspection. Other vendors do not support all of these features.

Non-rack mountable switch's rarely support anything even if they are managed.

gunther_01
Premium
join:2004-03-29
Saybrook, IL
reply to jcremin

I'm not sure why you are even bringing up "switch's". These aren't switches, they are routers. And in my context I was talking about route-able ports. Not switched.

You are quite lucky to have the space, power, and accessibility for rack mount gear. A lot of wisp's do not. I have one rack, and that's at my head end. Everything else is small form factor, mounted hundreds of feet off the ground, or in small enclosures just big enough for POE's, battery backup, switches and or routers.

At half of my sites if I wanted a rack mount enclosure, it would involve a crane to get it there.
--
»www.wirelessdatanet.net


iansltx

join:2007-02-19
Austin, TX
kudos:2

My guess is that Ubnt wants you to use an EdgeMax for routing in the instances where you need a router, and a ToughSwitch for switching since it builds in PoE.



treichhart

join:2006-12-12
reply to jcremin

see with the 5 port toughswitch it can only power upto 24V so you probably cant go past 100ft with that but with the 8 port toughswitch is 24/48V is probably good past 100ft tower installs.

either way I am looking at each tower I am going have 1 edgemax and 2 5 port toughswitch and why I say that is because I can use one toughswitch for the rockets/sectors and the other one for backhaul if I need to setup a other tower from that tower point.


Newbie

join:2011-04-18

Why would 24V only go 100'? Or do you mean 100 meters?



treichhart

join:2006-12-12
reply to jcremin

my bad 100 meters is 328 ft


iansltx

join:2007-02-19
Austin, TX
kudos:2

...which is about the limit for Ethernet over copper anyway...


gunther_01
Premium
join:2004-03-29
Saybrook, IL
reply to treichhart

said by treichhart:

either way I am looking at each tower I am going have 1 edgemax and 2 5 port toughswitch and why I say that is because I can use one toughswitch for the rockets/sectors and the other one for backhaul if I need to setup a other tower from that tower point.

I wouldn't set up my backhauls in a bridged fashion. That's why I need more routed ports. I don't like switches all over the place. It's one more piece to fail. And if you've done this for a while you will understand that one pretty well LOL.

In another case, you could have your BH's all in a toughswitch or any other brand, and one bad port take the whole switch offline. At least to some degree, with a routed design you don't have flaky switches injecting strange things in to your back bone when there are errors on one port.

The little edgemax just doesn't have a place that will fit for me. The big ones are too big. So MT will keep that business, or another SFF router with more than 3 ports.
--
»www.wirelessdatanet.net

urmom
Premium
join:2010-10-18
Pittsburg, KS
reply to gunther_01

attach 3 things to it?


gunther_01
Premium
join:2004-03-29
Saybrook, IL

said by urmom:

attach 3 things to it?

Huh??

I can have upwards of 10 devices at a site, all in a different subnet. Add a switch to one port and you still have the broadcast traffic moving where ever it wants to. You still have an extra device to fail, take extra power, lower your battery back up times Etc..
--
»www.wirelessdatanet.net

OHSrob

join:2011-06-08

1 edit
reply to jcremin

This thing might not be useless, Apparently it may have an FPGA to take care of most of the logic without taxing the CPU.



battleop

join:2005-09-28
00000
reply to iansltx

It sure would make it hard for Ubnt support to play the vendor blame game.



battleop

join:2005-09-28
00000
reply to Chele

My boss bitches about this all the time because we have to buy at least two of everything.


OHSrob

join:2011-06-08
reply to battleop

said by battleop:

It sure would make it hard for Ubnt support to play the vendor blame game.

I didn't know ubiquiti had support, I though it was all the community.

voxframe

join:2010-08-02

1 recommendation

reply to jcremin

What makes me not even bother to want to buy a single one of these for testing is Ubnt's absolutely HORRIBLE track record over the last couple years.

MAYBE they have fixed supply issues... I still call bullshit on that one as I still have problems from time to time.

What they may have fixed in supply problems, they broke in ETA announcing. So it wouldn't surprise me that the units are ready to go in the Q they announce, but that shipping just hasn't gotten it there lol.

-The firmware schedule is a mess
-The DVR is shit
-The AC is a mess and way off schedule
-Beamforming as far as I'm concerned is a complete failure
-GPS is still shit. Yes it works in 30% of deployments?
-The absolute pooch-screw of a certification process they've gone through with FCC/IC...

It seems to me now that they are trying to jump into markets that they aren't prepared for. DVR is a market all on its own... Yet Ubnt feels they can do that, radios, routers, industrial monitoring, and more all at the same time...

They need to call every new thing an "mFad" because that's what it turns out to be. It's a great fad for the first 6 months that you can't get your hands on it, it's a firmware disaster for the next 6 months, and from there on it is dropped for the next mFad, so support and development sucks from that point forward.

At least I know my Mikrotik equipment has a solid firmware development. LOL yes calling MT solid in the face of Ubnt doesn't look too damn good for Ubnt. At least MT delivers on time!


gunther_01
Premium
join:2004-03-29
Saybrook, IL
reply to battleop

said by battleop:

It sure would make it hard for Ubnt support to play the vendor blame game.

This I don't understand. A switch is a switch and a router a router. Just because it has UBNT stamped on it, doesn't change the fundamentals of how these devices work. And for the most part, how people can't configure them in the first place. The vast majority of UBNT issues are operator error. Which of course is brought up by themselves (UBNT) with the price point and their lack of a proper distro chain that sells to ONLY real WISPs. Coupled with firmware issues. The joys of cheap S%!t LOL.

I will agree the DVR is junk. AirControl2 is pretty well useless unless of course you built your entire network as a bridge or use all UBNT products across your entire network. Which almost no one does... (of course that is still BETA, but it's a joke how long it took to make something AGAIN that we can use after AC1. Don't get me started with AC1 only being able to work with old firmware versions for mass setting changes. Now I'm stuck, and so is my middle finger)

I'm not a fan boy by any means. I'm an operator who expects my products to work properly and not be a beta tester using stable firmware. I was an alfa tester for a while though, and that was a miserable mistake.

I wouldn't mind UBNT if they got their crap together. Stopped trying to be the do all, and fix the stuff they have. For those that think they can do everything well, or they have the staff to do all these projects in a proper fashion, you are wrong. We are looking at YEARS now for some of these things. That can't be excused. I'm almost ready to pull all of their gear and sell it on Ebay for pennies. Just so I can get things working properly again. All the while (of course) dealing with idiots who revamped their networks with UBNT and are interfering with us now. What a fun time it has been.

There used to be a time when you better know what you were doing. And even have some money to give it a shot. Now all you need is a couple hundred bucks and a high point to mount an omni, and your a WISP. Sorry, but if you read this and follow that mindset, you are not a WISP. Your a fool with a couple hundred bucks less, an omni, and a high point to mount it. /rant
--
»www.wirelessdatanet.net


battleop

join:2005-09-28
00000

What the hell are you rambling on about? All I am doing is pointing out that it would rather difficult for Ubnt to blame another vendor's product if you built a 100% Ubnt network.
--
I do not, have not, and will not work for AT&T/Comcast/Verizon/Charter or similar sized company.


gunther_01
Premium
join:2004-03-29
Saybrook, IL

I don't think I have ever heard them say it was "x" router companies fault. Sure when it comes to the wireless side.
--
»www.wirelessdatanet.net