I run a WISP and we will be retiring our 2Ghz network soon. i would like to leave the network in tact and move it over to AREDN. I would like to keep it set up in point to point mode and just add a Mesh Unit at each site to expand the mesh through the local ham communities. Does the ARDEN firmware have provisions for PTP links?
Thanks
K5MOB
Sorry about the image size, the add photo size selection box looks like it has broken code!
You are here
Point to Point Network
Mon, 05/02/2016 - 01:07
#1
K5MOB
Point to Point Network
Theme by Danetsoft and Danang Probo Sayekti inspired by Maksimer
I've got a feature request in to add an actual back haul VLAN that is not sensitive to packet loss but there are a couple major tickets that I fear may bump that ticket.
Another option would be to run tunnels over the link (treating it like the internet)
if if you want to actually convert the PTP links to AREDN firmware the firmware doesn't care that it's a PTP or PtMP. The only downside is it doesn't have the TDMA of AIROS (which in theory should only matter in a hidden node situation) or the AIROS transmitter synchronization (if using GPS models)
I was looking to maintain the PTP as a back bone as it is currently set up with OSPF. The backbone transfers VoIP fairly well but where the sectors are going out to the customers gets kinda choppy due to all the noise and little radio time advalable when you have 20 or so CPEs on a AP. The amateur load will be nothing like the commercial load on this network, so I guess I should do a bit more home work on the mesh but from what I have seen in the past mesh is not very VoIP friendly.
We have a 100 watt 2 meter repeater WA5MC at 320ft in the air, under normal conditions we can get 75 to 100 miles out of the transmitter. Mobiles have no problem at the 75 mile mark if they transmit 50 watts. HT units however can hear the repeater but can only key no more than the 25 to 30 mile mark. We are going to install some RoIP nodes on the inner edge of the repeater foot print to pick up the HT signal and send it over the 2.3Ghz network and out the repeater. I want the network to perform at is best so we don't have issues with the RoIP. If I maintain the OSPF routing in the MikroTik routers i can set QOS to ensure my RoIP has priority over general traffic.
I may keep the AIROS on the backhaul network and just install AREDN on the sectors. I have not even started testing any thing yet as we are still about 8 months away from shutting down the 2.4Ghz network. But I have convinced my business partners to keep it online for amateur use.
We are also in talks with the Louisiana ARES about extending the network to cover into New Orleans, as we will have a lot of extra devices once we start pulling the CPE radios.
73
K5MOB
BTW, I LOVE the idea that you are wanting to convert your network to HAM use!
C'est si bon!!
If I was doing it all over again, I'd keep Ubiquiti's AirOS on the backbone and use AREDN on the edges. Putting AREDN on the sectors or OMNIs is a good idea.
Best of luck! Welcome to AREDN!
Mike, KG9DW
The same reason routing is done via BGP routes on fiber backbone and OSPF routes from tower to tower in a WISP network instead of one big layer 2 like metro ethernet.
Each one of our towers gets its own subnet, traffic is routed to each tower based on its subnet. This keeps unnecessary traffic off the links and improves network latency. Redundancy is achieved by having multiple OSPF links to the tower. Plus the airmax protocol keeps your backhauls as backhauls meaning only a device with airmax can connect to them.
Mesh in is early days was slow, this was due to radios having to repeat signals. If you started out with 40mbps of internet at the gateway and cascaded through 4 mesh node repeaters you would have about 10mbps at the last node. With a OSPF backbone you could maintain 40mbps. It has been quite a few years since I have even looked at mesh for a WWAN so this may have been corrected to some extent, but I don't see this getting much better with out using dual radio nodes as you will still have to stop receiving to transmit due to the half duplex nature of 802.11 and is the sole idea behind RoofNet making dual radio units. Products such as the Mimosa Networks that have 4x4 radios can do full duplex but all UBNT M gear is only 2x2 and does not support full duplex. The only UBNT products that support full duplex are the AirFiber products.
If you get the international or compliance test versions of the UBNT products you can set the backhaul units to the amateur frequencies with out the need for the modified firmware. By keeping the Backbone Network in a manageable state we can set QOS to insure the traffic we need to have priority will stay on top the list Ex Our APRS data and RoIP.
Our AREDN Wireless Wide Area Networks primary function will be to support out APRS and RoIP in the event of ARES activation, The second function will be general amateur use. We will uplink a limited amount of bandwith from our fiber connection into the mesh as a community service most likely about 100mbps or so. This uplink will take place at each end of the network and one in the middle. The network will also have the ability to transverse fiber connections in the event of a radio/link failure. As I currently see it none of these automatic routing controls would be easy to manage without maintaining the carrier class backbone.
Now this brings me to another topic. Do any previsions currently exist to ensure that only amateur operators have access to the network? If the nodes are operating in the 2.3 band this is achieved by default. If you have any nodes that are 2.3/2.4 Ie some one puts two radios in and sets it so they can connect via a unmodified laptop. Then we could be handing out free internet. In a emergency this is a non-issue as for the past hurricanes we have turned on Public WiFi access at all of our towers so safety/public workers and news crews ect can just pull up to the tower and connect. But for every day applications I don't want the general public to leach internet remember we are in the business of selling internet and that business is what donates all the tower space, server space, bandwidth, tower climbers, and equipment to our local amateurs.
73
K5MOB
This was never actually a limitation of the routing side of a mesh, it was the RF side of a mesh. This is the same as the Packet days as well (if you were involved with those.) The exact same thing actually can and still happen in a mesh where a repeat slows down a link, but the same thing also can happen in a backbone running OSPF as well if any PtMP hop is involved or any location shares the same frequency between two links that can see each other. The AREDN mesh can handle jumping between different devices with different bands/channels/ssids to to avoid having to load down any single spot, but just like in the current backbone you have its not the routing protocol its the network design that increased your throughput.in this case.This isn't to say that the OSPF backbone doesn't have it spot (and if its using non Ubiquiti hardware as it sounds like it may then it does have a spot) as it does play in and its already seen in our design considerations for the future. I just want to make sure that the advantage of that network is correctly attributed to the fact it was a designed network. Some of the tools already in your network very well justify this all on its for not converting it as some of the AREDN tools are indeed a bit behind and some tools will just likely never make it in because they conflict with design considerations of network. A controled backone with a MESH feeder would make sense in those cases.
" Do any previsions currently exist to ensure that only amateur operators have access to the network?"
At the moment theres no authentication that it is a ham. That said you can't just throw up a laptop and connect to the network with a WIFI card either.
You do have to setup the associated mesh routing protocols correctly and correctly integrate into the routing system. This is a lot like a 2m repeater, you have to have the radio first, then you have to have the access tone. Is it insurmountable, no, is a hindrance yes as there are a number of configurations (IP address space, mesh routing protocol, mesh routing configuration) that need to be done. You can't just quietly sit there and go unnoticed because of this, you will show up on the network screens. With some of the existing tools on the system it would be very easy to monitor for new connections and alert about it (unknown callsign for example) and trigger it into a monitor queue or something, etc.
Provide method to limit nodes that can join mesh http://bloodhound.aredn.org/products/AREDN/ticket/147
73
K5MOB
Any chance you could walk me thru setting up a small WISP for my subdivision? None of my neighbors have internet. We are very rural...
Drop me a line samrock (at) piertopier.us
K5MOB
http://www.aredn.org/content/are-m3-nanostation-and-m3-nanobridge-same-r...
MB