Installation Issue

Fri Sep 01, 2017 12:56 pm

Hello, everyone!

We recently purchased 3 of the WISP switches, two WS-8-150-AC's and a WS-26-AC. We implemented the WS-8's in our test environment, and are running into a couple of issues that maybe you guys can help us out with.

The switch that is giving us an issue is on a tower that has a backbone hop coming in, and backbone hop going out, and a Telrad base station. Telrad has 4 assigned VLANs (Default, Bearer, PDN, VPLS). The backhauls function properly, however, the Telrad Device can not be pinged by anything else on the network UNLESS we trunk the port over to a lower level switch, then utilize a port on that Switch for the Base station.

I am sure I am doing something wrong in configuration, just simply because the Netonix switches are a little bit more robust than our previous solutions (a large reason why they are being implemented now).

Here is our Current VLAN setup:

We are on Firmware 1.4.7 (the most recent stable version I do believe).

We wanted to get this sorted out in our test environment before we implemented the 26 port switch at our larger servicing tower. Any suggestions would be a great help!

In case there is more information you guys need to locate the issue, port status:

Device Status:

thanks again in advance for taking the time!

Fri Sep 01, 2017 1:59 pm

Mon Sep 04, 2017 2:15 pm

ismooch wrote:Telrad has 4 assigned VLANs (Default, Bearer, PDN, VPLS). The backhauls function properly, however, the Telrad Device can not be pinged by anything else on the network UNLESS we trunk the port over to a lower level switch, then utilize a port on that Switch for the Base station.

You need to know the ID of these 4 VLANs. Those are probably not 1,2,3 and 4 like in your config. Why 11,16,17 and 19 ? If those are the VLAN ID you need, replace 1,2,3 and 4 by those number.

Sat Sep 09, 2017 2:48 pm

The IDs for the those VLANS ARE 1,2,3 & 4

the .11, .16, .17 & .19 are all the IP addressing schemes for our own internal notes. They have no real bearing on the IDs

Everything is working as far as the backhaul (mim-in/mim-out) and the other less important devices (camera/bravo[test point]). But the Telrad device becomes unreachable when terminated directly to the switch. However, if place a patch from that port (port 3 TEL-OUT) to another switch (a managed Netgear) and terminate the Telrad device there, it works fine.

I can't seem to find anything I am actually missing between those two spots that would cause the telrad device to be unresponsive when patched directly to the Netonix switch.

I was reading through all the recommended materials for VLANs as mentioned above, but can not seem to find anything that has proven to be a solution.

I am only trunking the needed VLANs from the individual ports that I need, not all of them. I have the right VLANs being passed. And this exact same configuration as far as vlans go was how our Netgear Managed switch is set up, and it works fine. It is just an awful switch, and we are really wanting to get everything working on the netonix.

We have another tower that has a netonix switch waiting to go in, but it has multiple telrad base stations on it, and is our central access point. I can not afford having this same issue happening on that tower, and is why I am trying to correct it on this one.

I am SURE it is because the Netonix switch does a little more with VLANs than the netgear does, but can not seem to find out what step is being overlooked in this process to cause it not to function.

Sat Sep 09, 2017 10:02 pm

You should poste tour netgear config.

Mon Sep 11, 2017 5:40 pm

Just wanted to make a quick post and thank everyone for the help.

The issue just wound up being that I was trying to annotate all the VLANS (which we have had to do on the Netgear to pass them). I guess in annotating each VLAN I confused myself more than I did the switch.

The hardest part to grasp coming from the Netgear vs. Netonix is that the Netgear 802.1Q settings allow you to Untag on every port for every VLAN, not just one. While I am sure I will get push back here about that just not being correct, understand there is a reason we wanted to switch, and that I personally did not set up the Netgear appliances in the first place.

However, we have managed to work out this one wrinkle by looking through a lot of the posts suggested by sirhc and seeing how others were utilizing the VLAN menu.

Sorry again for the bother, but thank you guys for the help!

The switches are AWESOME especially in regards to monitoring.

Tue Sep 12, 2017 9:20 am

ismooch wrote:The hardest part to grasp coming from the Netgear vs. Netonix is that the Netgear 802.1Q settings allow you to Untag on every port for every VLAN, not just one. While I am sure I will get push back here about that just not being correct, understand there is a reason we wanted to switch, and that I personally did not set up the Netgear appliances in the first place.

You can untag egress (outgoing taffic) of several VLAN but ingress traffic will all go to a single VLAN, the native VLAN of the port (PVID) so the're no use to multiple untagged VLAN. That a bad design for 802.1Q but some will just follow the standard without trying to do it more frendly for the customer.
Else most following Cisco configuration style (access, trunk) and a few that follow HP Procuve (I think inherit from 3com acquisition) config style like Netonix. Personnaly, I use several brand and think the HP style use by Netonix is way better once your use to it.

Tue Sep 12, 2017 12:02 pm

mike99 wrote:
ismooch wrote:The hardest part to grasp coming from the Netgear vs. Netonix is that the Netgear 802.1Q settings allow you to Untag on every port for every VLAN, not just one. While I am sure I will get push back here about that just not being correct, understand there is a reason we wanted to switch, and that I personally did not set up the Netgear appliances in the first place.

You can untag egress (outgoing taffic) of several VLAN but ingress traffic will all go to a single VLAN, the native VLAN of the port (PVID) so the're no use to multiple untagged VLAN. That a bad design for 802.1Q but some will just follow the standard without trying to do it more frendly for the customer.
Else most following Cisco configuration style (access, trunk) and a few that follow HP Procuve (I think inherit from 3com acquisition) config style like Netonix. Personnaly, I use several brand and think the HP style use by Netonix is way better once your use to it.

I think that is just it, that I need to get used to this. Again, great products. And thanks for all of your help Mike!

Installation Issue

Installation Issue

Re: Installation Issue

Re: Installation Issue

Re: Installation Issue

Re: Installation Issue

Re: Installation Issue

Re: Installation Issue

Re: Installation Issue

Who is online