View Full Version : Best config for using Bullet M for Point-To-Point
wispwest
08-16-2009, 12:42 PM
We're currently using Mikrotiks for a backhaul and I'm excited to switch out these with the Bullet M's. We had problems at first with the Mikrotiks not passing real ARP Mac addresses through the MT's in AP to Bridge mode. One of our big customers uses BGP through our system as well. Do you guy's foresee any problems with our requirements and Bullet M's? With MT we had to set up some WDS ****, is that the same with Bullet or just Access Point -to- Station Bridge is fine? Or would Station WDS work better, I get confused after all the crap MT put me through in getting it to work correctly. All of our real backhauls are easily programed and I'm not use to this WDS stuff. Please advise, thanks.
skyhook
08-16-2009, 12:58 PM
We're currently using Mikrotiks for a backhaul and I'm excited to switch out these with the Bullet M's. We had problems at first with the Mikrotiks not passing real ARP Mac addresses through the MT's in AP to Bridge mode. One of our big customers uses BGP through our system as well. Do you guy's foresee any problems with our requirements and Bullet M's? With MT we had to set up some WDS ****, is that the same with Bullet or just Access Point -to- Station Bridge is fine? Or would Station WDS work better, I get confused after all the crap MT put me through in getting it to work correctly. All of our real backhauls are easily programed and I'm not use to this WDS stuff. Please advise, thanks.
MT implement transparent bridge setting AP-Bridge/WDS e StationWDS.
You can also use EIOP tunnel...
We're currently using Mikrotiks for a backhaul and I'm excited to switch out these with the Bullet M's. We had problems at first with the Mikrotiks not passing real ARP Mac addresses through the MT's in AP to Bridge mode. One of our big customers uses BGP through our system as well. Do you guy's foresee any problems with our requirements and Bullet M's? With MT we had to set up some WDS ****, is that the same with Bullet or just Access Point -to- Station Bridge is fine? Or would Station WDS work better, I get confused after all the crap MT put me through in getting it to work correctly. All of our real backhauls are easily programed and I'm not use to this WDS stuff. Please advise, thanks.
You need to use WDS with Bullets as well, the default is to replace the MAC.
Bullets go faster with WDS because they don't need to change the MAC, it's one ebtables rule less in the way of the traffic...
Shockware1
08-16-2009, 08:13 PM
Ya, WDS mode is a transparent bridge, Non WDS is not as transparent. It performs some operations on the packets it seems. If you wish your links to pass anything be it ARP or DHCP even, you will have to use WDS on each side of your link for sure.
All of our real backhauls are easily programed and I'm not use to this WDS stuff.
That's why your "real backhauls" can't talk to different brands, because they are not 802.11 compliant and use their own bridging implementation. WDS is as close as it gets to universal compatibility in 802.11 bridging.
osnet
08-17-2009, 05:47 PM
You need to setup Mikrotik AP WDS ----- Station WDS and will pass all the VLAN tags bro like with Ubiquiti
=))
In an 802.11n world though, there are some who say that WDS strips off the 802.11n performance advantage. See this topic at MT forum:
http://forum.mikrotik.com/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=33800
:shock:
Those of you that tested Bullet M noted performance gains in not using WDS ?
wispwest
08-17-2009, 06:03 PM
thanks for the replies. I'm gearing up to use 2 Bullet M's as a backhaul, hopefully they will pass the correct MAC address on ARP and work fine with BGP (requires fast packets per second).
I'm a little worried about the article noted in the above post. So WDS will degrade the performance of the Bullet M??? Mike? WHT?
In an 802.11n world though, there are some who say that WDS strips off the 802.11n performance advantage. See this topic at MT forum:
http://forum.mikrotik.com/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=33800
:shock:
Those of you that tested Bullet M noted performance gains in not using WDS ?
That's why we have EoIP :)
wispwest
08-17-2009, 07:58 PM
wow just when I was learning WDS. Now EoIP. Time to crack open the books I guess.
We just did a run with WDS.
Over an hour period of testing with AP/Sta for five minutes and then AP-WDS/Sta-WDS for five mibnutes, we consistently saw the TX/RX Data Rates hold at 58/58 without WDS and 52/52 with WDS running.
We were running multiple FTPs sessions in both directions.
Shockware1
08-17-2009, 09:13 PM
we consistently saw the TX/RX Data Rates hold at 58/58 without WDS and 52/52 with WDS running.
In a way that worries me...
Is anyone having issues using UBNT products as a backbone while not using WDS mode? We have in the past. For us with Current products Non-WDS is not an option due to a TTL exceeded error we get.
we consistently saw the TX/RX Data Rates hold at 58/58 without WDS and 52/52 with WDS running.
In a way that worries me...
Is anyone having issues using UBNT products as a backbone while not using WDS mode? We have in the past. For us with Current products Non-WDS is not an option due to a TTL exceeded error we get.
We use either WDS or EoIP when we need a layer 2 link.
Mikrotik also has an issue with WDS and N ... it's reasonable to give them all time to perfect a new product.
george
08-18-2009, 03:56 AM
MPLS is another option instead of EoIP. Less load, faster and you can tell if its running or not, which can be more of a challenge when setting up and EoIP tunnel.
Haven't used MPLS yet, but we're thinking about it...
http://wiki.mikrotik.com/wiki/Transparently_Bridge_two_Networks_using_MPLS
We will likely try this across two Bullet Ms and see what happens.
George
osnet
08-18-2009, 05:31 AM
George,
I am doing right know a migration from OSPF with pure routing to MPLS with OSPF & VPLS. We use a lot of VLAN for commercials clients. I work with Mikrotik and I implemented for a few clients MPLS and work really well. =)
george
08-18-2009, 05:34 AM
Cool!
Thanks Ivan. If you get a spare minute, I would be interested in more details and how its working in relation to the UBNT AirMax gear.
George
osnet
08-18-2009, 05:50 AM
I have some links in productions with the MPLS/VPLS using regular Nanostation5 with APWDS----StationWDS does't change anything from the BulletM5 in term of funcionability. The only thing that change it's the performance.
Most of the issue with the MPLS are related to the MTU that the antenna can pass....
You will use MPLs for the VPLS right????
The advantage of the VPLS it's that you can use OSPF with MPLS across your entire network install a Mikrotik Router at the client site Main and site Branch in a different WPOP do a VPLS and have aprivate network. Or if the equipment support vlan do that in your WPOPs in each of one that the client have endpoints and do a bridge between the VPLS ---- VLANXXX and end the traffic in a VLAN...
=)
