Hello,

Did anyone tried to put R11e-5HnD in BaseBox5 and then using two dual-pol antennas make bonding rr with the exact same configuration on the other side?

BR...

I have done this with two test routers. I used two 1 x RB433AH and 2 x R52n's on each side and then bonded the interfaces with balance RR and ARP monitoring via to IPs on the wireless interfaces. My throughput did more or less double.

In the real world: Bonding is not a good idea on wireless links. You can easily end up with packet out-of-order issues. This results in the bonded interface resending packets because the routers think that packets have been dropped. Also, out-of-order packets really mess around with VOIP.

I have found that bonding is best left for Ethernet or fixed line setups. Besides, there are better ways to pool resources for wireless links than bonding.

If it works, then fine. But, don't do this for a VOIP link. You'll be wondering WTF is going on with the audio in the calls.

There will be no VOIP trafic (besides maybe skype or something like that). I will test that setup during the weekend on 14.4km. Currently we are using two pairs of ubnt titanium configured just like in http://wiki.ubnt.com/Mikrotik_bonding, but I hope that mtk will beat that configuration. With current setup I can't access ubnt while they are bonded.

The reason for you not being able to access the UBNTs is that each point to point link is actually a channel in your bond. The bonding takes over the interfaces and then pings to the UBNTs will fail too for this reason.

To reach the UBNTs again, simply disable the bond on each side or remove the channel from the bond.

BTW: for the link to keep running when a channel fails, drop your ARP monitoring interval to a lower value. The ARP monitoring rate will increase and therefore you will have more overhead on the link, but it won't drop packets if a channel breaks. You can therefore almost use the RR configuration as a type of fail over.

Try unplugging a channel to test this before relying on it. It might take some tweaking of the ARP intervals to get right, it does depend on the link distance. Generally a lower ARP interval will give you better protection against packet loss if a channel breaks but with a cost of higher overhead traffic on the link.

Big smile on my face
140mbit/s, 14.4km, semi-urban area. We still have to find right frequency for links. The only thing that is bugging me is arp monitoring. As soon as I try to turn it on, traffic stops, but links are ok. It was a very long day so enough for today.

Conclusion for today - WAY TO GO MTK!!!

One question. Since we are planing to change all of our ubnt rocket links with BaseBox5, I like the presence of USB port for maybe some 3g emergency ssh backup link. Now, is there tiny 3g modem that can fit under the cover of BaseBox. Serbia's VipMobile is giving me usb stick but it is too large to fit inside. Naturally I can't use built in sim card slot since I used it for R11e-5HnD...

AnRkey, could You post that test configuration of yours. For Whole weekend I can't get mikrotik to work OK with arp monitoring. I am doing something very wrong You have mention the better way for wireless that bonding - what is that solution?

BR...

One question. Since we are planing to change all of our ubnt rocket links with BaseBox5, I like the presence of USB port for maybe some 3g emergency ssh backup link. Now, is there tiny 3g modem that can fit under the cover of BaseBox. Serbia's VipMobile is giving me usb stick but it is too large to fit inside. Naturally I can't use built in sim card slot since I used it for R11e-5HnD...

The basebox 5 takes a standard sim card and then you add a Sierra mini pcie card for the 3G modem. I've connected quite well at 21Mbit/s with these. The model we used is: Sierra Wireless MC8775

More info here about 3G cards that are supported: http://wiki.mikrotik.com/wiki/Supported ... e#3G_cards

AnRkey, could You post that test configuration of yours. For Whole weekend I can't get mikrotik to work OK with arp monitoring. I am doing something very wrong You have mention the better way for wireless that bonding - what is that solution?

BR...

Sorry, that config is long gone and I'm way to busy to build it again at the moment.

The other technology that is better suited: http://wiki.mikrotik.com/wiki/Nstreme_dual_Step-by-Step

I'd test your current setup against this one.

In the real world: Bonding is not a good idea on wireless links.

I would prefer it to solve this question like other have done it right, by using
two WLAN APs on each side that would be a better solution in my eyes.

In the real world: Bonding is not a good idea on wireless links.

I would prefer it to solve this question like other have done it right, by using
two WLAN APs on each side that would be a better solution in my eyes.

I just want you to be happy bud