[App_rpt-users] Intranet project

Sat Jul 30 20:37:40 UTC 2011

Hey Lu

Ok wasn't aware of that but 3.5g and 5g ant are small compared to the VHF/UHF ones 

I'd get some mikrotik routers and setup VPNs back to the hub site then you should be all set

Get some Rb450 or rb450g (what I have at our synagogue) and you'll be in like flint

Leon

Sent from my iPhone

On Jul 30, 2011, at 4:29 PM, "Lu Vencl" <vencl at att.net> wrote:

> Leon,
> 
> Appreciate the reply. First, I can’t add anymore antennas on the towers. I am lucky with what I have today as they are grandfathered.
> 
> Secondly, the  50-100 MB links are solid with redundancy (underground fiber) used to feed the cell sites. So I am confident that these link will stay up in a storm. I know, I have been through a couple and they did hold up.
> 
> So I don’t think I would be venturing into adding any more expense then I already have.
> 
> If I did not have the solid links available, then I would be considering other options.
> 
> 73 and thanks
> 
> Lu,
> 
> KA4EPS
> 
>  
> 
> From: Leon D. Zetekoff [mailto:wa4zlw at arrl.net] 
> Sent: Saturday, July 30, 2011 3:30 PM
> To: Leon D. Zetekoff
> Cc: Lu Vencl; app_rpt mailing list
> Subject: Re: [App_rpt-users] Intranet project
> 
>  
> 
> I just noticed your map below ( one of the disadvantages of using a phone ) 
> 
>  
> 
> My proposal is still doable if you can get access to other locations fir backhauls
> 
>  
> 
> We can check using radio mobile and other tools LOS etc and then see where to make up the holes
> 
>  
> 
> Maybe you can get with the packet groups and work with them and they'll have a true hispeed network instead of what they have.
> 
>  
> 
> I've been trying to do likewise up here and so far no takers
> 
>  
> 
> 73 leon
> 
> Sent from my iPhone
> 
> 
> On Jul 30, 2011, at 3:23 PM, "Leon D. Zetekoff" <wa4zlw at arrl.net> wrote:
> 
> Hey Lu
> 
>  
> 
> Shame on you!!! 
> 
>  
> 
> U don't need dsl or other wired connectivity at any of these sites. What I wanted to do before leaving fl in 2002 was setup a WiSP at our repeater site or use it as a hub becuz it's in a good location and sees a lot. I suggest u do likewise. There's plenty of NOW low cost part 15 gear that can be used as part 97
> 
> There's even part 90 gear for 3.65g that can be used on part 97 freq
> 
>  
> 
> I've tried to light a fire under the guys down there but no takers. What you'll end up having is a nice PT-2-PT or PT-2-multi PT network. 
> 
>  
> 
> Let me know if u need any help
> 
>  
> 
> Leon wa4zlw now in pa
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone
> 
> 
> On Jul 30, 2011, at 1:49 PM, "Lu Vencl" <vencl at att.net> wrote:
> 
> So now that I have the first set of nodes up on DSL circuits, I have remaining nodes / repeaters that I would like to include but do not have DSL circuits at these sites.
> 
> The good news is that I do have private “intranet” circuits at each of these locations but of course they do not have capabilities of reaching the public internet.
> 
> That’s ok, because what I figured I could do is just have each of these talk to one of the sites that has both the public and private feeds and find some way to let these nodes do the interconnecting to the public side.
> 
> I figure I could just add a second NIC card at the Margate node which has access to both the internet and intranet,  tie the second NIC card to the intranet side and just have the other allstar boxes permanently attached to the node that has the public side working.
> 
> These remaining sites are really in rural areas and they really don’t need direct connections, but I guess I could always just use the *4 command if I needed to make a connections right?
> 
> So I hope this I making sense because I really want to make this a reality.. Just will need some advice on how to add the second NIC and how to make the connections. I assume a few lines in the extention.conf file and a few fake node #s correct?
> 
> The intranet network is made up of a netmask of 255.255.255.248 and each site has a router that talks to a central switch and allows all ports to pass through. Each site can talk to each other by the way if needed, but I figure just bringing the main communications back to the main node in Margate will be the best choice.
> 
> So if anyone is up to the task to lend me a hand, I will appreciate it very much.
> 
> Thanks and 73
> 
> Lu,
> 
> KA4EPS
> 
>  
> 
>  
> 
> <image001.png>
> 
> _______________________________________________
> App_rpt-users mailing list
> App_rpt-users at ohnosec.org
> http://ohnosec.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/app_rpt-users
> 
> _______________________________________________
> App_rpt-users mailing list
> App_rpt-users at ohnosec.org
> http://ohnosec.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/app_rpt-users
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.keekles.org/pipermail/app_rpt-users/attachments/20110730/e56323ee/attachment.html>