Is it better to convert a dynamic wds entry into a static one? Are there any benefits / pitfalls that I might run into? Being able to setup a queue based on the static name is why I am wanting to convert.
My main goal is having static wds interface names for each CPE so I can run queues against their entire network, not by IP address.
Is it okay to leave the AP in ‘dynamic wds’ mode and still use static?
And another wds question. For an AP running wds and clients using station-wds to transparently bridge to their network … should I put the AP’s wlan1 interface into the bridge with the clients? it seems to work without that, just wondering if I’m not supposed to.
I searched the forums and can’t find the answers im looking for.
Hi changeip, in static or dynamic i can’t see changes, disvantages or advantages…
In example, static is useful in the special case of a ring configuration between 4 points(A-B-C-D) and you need only to connect in a sequential scheme, avoiding casuals wds connection between A - C and B - D…
In the other question, if all connected clients are doing WDS, is not necessary to put the real wlan card of the AP like a bridge port… only do this if have a mix of clients with and without WDS…
Thank you - thank makes complete sense. I did try applying simple queues to each of the static wds interfaces. It seemed to show some traffic - but it didn’t reflect what was actually passing thru the wds interface. It also would not queue the traffic down, and made it horrible up. Do I need the main wlan1 interface as the parent to make the wds queues work? I have ‘use ip firewall’ in the bridge config. The simple queues just don’t work right.
Hi changeip
me too, I converted to static in order to get “static interfaces” for SNMP traffic control. Otherwise I did see wds1, wds2, wds3 without a specific meaning.
The only problem I see is when you change client. You will then have to change the WDS MAC address to reflect the substitution.