Deployment V1000 + V5000 DN - DN

Good morning,

i need to cover a site with Cambium cPilot and i want to connect the cnPilots thought backbones with cnWave.

ipotesi

The black points are the nodes and some of them are connected with cnpilots (LAN-to-LAN).
The center of the site (v5000) have not LoS with the POP Fiber so i need to do a PTP link with 2 two v1000 and connect the v5000 with another v1000 (the black dot on the right of the image).

My question is:
i need to set the v1000 that connect the V5000 in DN and set the V5000 in DN too or the V5000 will operate correctly even if the v1000 is a v5000 “slave” setted in CN mode and the V5000 is a DN “master”?
It’s possible?

Thanks!

There is only one V5000_DN to V1000_DN link, are you asking about that link ? Are you asking if that particular V1000 can be a CN ?

I have few more questions

  1. Are you using external E2E, if not , on which device have you enabled controller ?
  2. V1000_DN at POP fiber should be a POP. Just checking if that the configuration.
  3. There is a V1000_CN and V1000_DN in one site. Are they connected over wire ? Did you enable relay port ?
1 Like

Yes

Are you using external E2E, if not , on which device have you enabled controller ?

Not yet, i’m pondering about that, i thought the V1000 connected to the V5000 if i can’t use a singular E2E controller on the POP fiber to configure all the devices of the area

V1000_DN at POP fiber should be a POP. Just checking if that the configuration.

Yes, correct

There is a V1000_CN and V1000_DN in one site. Are they connected over wire ? Did you enable relay port ?

I thought to connect them LAN-to-LAN, yes. It’s necessary the relay port? I thought that they need the relay port enable only if there’re more POP nodes to connect

Have you suggestions or you need more specific hints?

The node having fiber/backhaul access should be a POP and onboard controller should be run on POP and not any other node.

Which means it should be on V1000_DN @ POP Fiber. However, E2E controller on V1000 supports one link (PTP topology) only. My suggestion is to use V3000 instead at POP Fiber and enable E2E controller there.

The V3000 support more PTP links instead V1000?

It’s not raccomanded or doesn’t work if i put the E2E controller on a non fiber POP?
Can I set the POP fiber V1000 in PTP with e2e controller on it, connect the remote v1000 in cnmode, connect it to the v1000 in LAN-to-LAN and connect it in DN mode to the v5000 in dn mode too and enable the E2E controller on the v5000?

I have remote access to all the devices so is not very important to have only one e2e controller.

This strategy will work but lead to multiple tunneling (L2 GRE encapsulation / decapsulation overhead).

Consider traffic from a CPE connected to right most V1000_CN.
Tunnel1 from V1000_CN to V5000_DN
Tunnel 2 from V5000_DN to V1000_DN
Tunnel 3 from V1000_CN to V1000_DN at POP Fiber.
Throughput will come down. Especially at V5000 as two tunnels are involved.

I understand that it’s not a perfect deployment.

Can you confirm that the V1000 don’t support more than one link? Is useless to enable the e2e controller to “command” the V5000 and the remote V1000’s on it?

When you add third node in the E2E controller running on V1000, the operation will fail saying that maximum two nodes are supported.

1 Like

The relay port enabled is necessary?
I have a router where the fiber arrive and where i will connect the POP fiber V1000 so i don’t need the OpenR routing.
I’m I wrong?
I can use the relay port (the AUX port for exemple) instead use a switch to connect two V1000 and a cnpilot?

Exemple: LAN-to-LAN the cnpilot with the second V1000 (cn mode) and the other V1000 (cnmode) connected through AUX port in relay mode with the other V1000?

In the two E2E controller strategy - one controller on V1000 POP Fiber and other on V5K ?

Yes, correct.
e2E in the v100 pop fiber and v5000

Those are two independant networks, relay port is not required. Infact should not be configured.

Please add cnPilots, switches in your final picture and we review it ?

sure!
I keep you updated!!! Give me some time!

modified

It’s ok?
I know that is not a state-of-the-art deplyement

Subject to the limitations I already mentioned, this topology should work.

1 Like

Thank you Kiran.
I will bother you if i have more questiones.

Thank you again!