capsman dual radios, dual band

RouterOS Wireless Networking
1

Does capsman allow provisioning radios with the concept of “first radio” and “second radio”? I’m using a RB with two dual-band cards (in the sense that they can each either use 2.4 or 5). I can create two provisioning rules: one for 2.4 and another for 5Ghz. But, both radios in the RB get configured with the first provisioning rule. I think this is because each radio can function with the first rule.

What I’d like is for one radio to operate at 2.4 and the other at 5Ghz. If I could provision based on the cap’s interface name I could assign one provisioning rule to “wlan1” and the other to “wlan2” but I haven’t figured out how to do that.

2

use the radio-mac of the each wireless interface in the provision rules. In that case you will know which wireless interlace will use which provisioning configuration.

3

Hi uldis. Yes, that works. Though, it means hard coding each radio’s mac address into the system, which takes the convenience out of the process. For an installation of my size it means 150 provisioning rules. I think it would be useful to consider a regex field for the default interface name (similar to the identity). But, perhaps most people aren’t using this type of routerboard anyway.

4

Can’t you just use the HW Modes field?

add action=create-dynamic-enabled comment="802.11 B/G/N" hw-supported-modes
    master-configuration=Blah-2.4-Auto name-format=identity slave-configu
    Blah-2.4-Guest
add action=create-dynamic-enabled comment="802.11 AC" hw-supported-modes=ac
    master-configuration=Blah-5-Auto name-format=identity slave-configura
    Blah-5-Guest
add comment=Any master-configuration=Blah name-format=identity
5

I don’t think so. Each radio matches my first provision rule. Each radio is a R52nM type that can be 2.4 or 5Ghz. I think this would not be a problem in an access point that has dedicated band radios. The trouble is that these cards are too flexible. :wink:

6

Ah… yes… I see your problem. My radios are specific.

7

Hi,
sorry for reopening this old thread, but i am still facing the same issue with dual-band access points. Were you able to solve this problem without creating individual provisioning rules?

Thanks,
Jan