Hi:
I’m planning to do this kind of network
Here is a detailed explanation of the model i’ve made:
1) I have one static IP address (200.55.x.x) attached to eth1 on a Linux box (powerful enough). This Linux Router is making NAT , so the eth0 interface has this ip: 10.254.254.254, mask: 255.0.0.0
2) All the red lines between towers are BackHaul 5.7 Ghz Canopy units.
3) Blue lines represent 2.4 Radio link from towers to subscriptors. This are made with non-canopy (using 802.11b) radios.
4) Each green circle represents one subscriptor (I pretend about 2000 clients)
5) There is a detailed view of one subscriptor wich has an internal LAN.
In this detailed view let’s consider that:
- The Suscriptor Unit is working as wireless router.
- WLAN (Wan) IP Address: 10.0.4.1
- WLAN: Subnet Mask: 255.0.0.0
- WLAN: Gateway: 10.254.254.254 (wich points directly to the NAT Router)
- LAN IP: 192.168.1.1
- LAN Mask: 255.255.255.248
- Acting as DHCP Server to the Internal LAN
PC Config:
IP: 192.168.1.x (taken by DHCP)
MS: 255.255.255.248 (taken by DHCP)
Gateway: 192.168.1.1 (Subscritor Unit)
DNS: Provided by my external ISP (Internet)
--------------------------------------------------------
6) Tower structures:
I receive data with one Canopy (BH) and it goes down to an ethernet switch, then goes to other Canopy or 2.4 Access Points with sector antennas. This access points can restrict Bandwidth for every client (subscriptor unit) according to their MAC address
—
So, the question i have following this model:
a) Are IP addresses/Subnet mask the optimal considering i pretend to have more than 2000 subscriptors?
b) If all the Canopys I use for my Backhaul are 20 Mbps (wich really I can use 7 Mbps up and 7 Mbps down) how can I ensure this is not going to collapse with a few hundred users??
c) Wich should be the recommended Internet output speed I should consider to have no bandwidth problems?
d) I know is not recommended to manage 1000 users under the same public IP address, but NAT is the only cheap mechanism I’ve found to make this work. Is there any other solution?
c) What about considering public IP addresses for clients?
d) Should I only control bandwidth on the Access Points? For example if someone requires 256/128 Kbps I could restrict to 300/160 Kbps on the Access Points and 256/128 in the Linux router. Is this right?
e) Finnally (uff)
I’ve noticed from the subscriptor side there could be a problem on Internet capacity because now I’m having 3 hops. Traceroute should show me something like
1- 192.168.1.1
2- 10.254.254.254
3- 200.55.x.x (not the Linux Router but the external ISP Gateway)
.
Am I doing something non-recommended or wrong? Should I change something?
Thanks in advance.
[/img]
a) Are IP addresses/Subnet mask the optimal considering i pretend to have more than 2000 subscriptors?
Yes, you can assign about 16.5 mln. addresses in 10.0.0.0/8 .
b) If all the Canopys I use for my Backhaul are 20 Mbps (wich really I can use 7 Mbps up and 7 Mbps down) how can I ensure this is not going to collapse with a few hundred users??
c) Wich should be the recommended Internet output speed I should consider to have no bandwidth problems?
Let's assume you have 2000 users on 256K lines. The total channel is 2000*256K=512M. With oversubscription from 10 to 20 you need 25.6M - 51.2M channel. (http://wiki.personaltelco.net/index.cgi ... bscription)
So I suggest to use 30M backhauls on Canopy1-Canopy2 and Canopy2-Canopy4 links. Later you can upgrade Canopy1-Canopy2 BH to 60M.
d) I know is not recommended to manage 1000 users under the same public IP address, but NAT is the only cheap mechanism I've found to make this work. Is there any other solution?
c) What about considering public IP addresses for clients?
It's normal to hide everybody behind NAT, but to give a public IP to certain users.
d) Should I only control bandwidth on the Access Points? For example if someone requires 256/128 Kbps I could restrict to 300/160 Kbps on the Access Points and 256/128 in the Linux router. Is this right?
I think one restriction have to be enough. But a restriction on the router doesn't affect the traffic inside the 10.0.0.0 network.
e) Finnally (uff)
I've noticed from the subscriptor side there could be a problem on Internet capacity because now I'm having 3 hops. Traceroute should show me something like
1- 192.168.1.1
2- 10.254.254.254
3- 200.55.x.x (not the Linux Router but the external ISP Gateway)
.
Am I doing something non-recommended or wrong? Should I change something?
No, that's correctly. You shouldn't change anything. It wouldn't be a problem, just a delay will increase slightly.