Trey, The other added benefit to netelastic that I'm hoping for is support. If something hits the fan and I'm not around to work on it, maybe someone else in the office can deal with it with help from netelastic. -- Best regards, Mark mailto:m...@mailmt.com
Myakka Communications www.Myakka.com ------ Friday, February 14, 2025, 10:15:49 AM, you wrote: TS> Yeah at that customer count I would definitely say netelastic or go with Juniper/Cisco/Nokia BNG then the /32 would be no issue. NetElastic is the best bang for your buck some people have an issue with running routers on server hardware though. I doubt that is you if your doing this with mikrotik now I'd think you probably already are. TS> On 2/13/25 15:11, Mark - Myakka Technologies via AF wrote: >> Trey, >> >> Currently we are using Mikrotik for the PPPoE stuff. Currently running 4000 >> customers over 3 PPPoE servers adding more and more everyday. >> >> Seriously going to look at the netElastic stuff. We may be out growing the >> mikrotik on this. >> >> >> -- >> Best regards, >> Mark mailto:m...@mailmt.com >> >> Myakka Communications >> www.Myakka.com >> >> ------ >> >> Thursday, February 13, 2025, 11:35:57 AM, you wrote: >> >> TS> I have had pretty good luck with the /32 method what routing platform >> are you using? Assuming it is mikrotik it is pretty easy to do using dhcp up >> and down scripts or proxy arp. Forget about the option 121 it is not needed. >> What type of scale are you talking about 200 customers per router or 2k >> customers per router? >> >> TS> On 2/11/25 16:12, Mark - Myakka Technologies via AF wrote: >>>> We currently run 3 PPPoE servers using an OSPF concentrator and radius to >>>> manage the IP addresses. With this setup, it doesn't matter which IP >>>> lands on which PPPoE server. OSFP handles it. >>>> >>>> We now need to do something similar with DHCP. I've been messing around >>>> with /32's and Option 121, but just can not get a stable solution. I'm >>>> now thinking about plan B. Similar general setup we use on the PPPoE >>>> side. Lets say we go with 3 DHCP servers connected to an OSPF >>>> concentrator. I would have to set my DHCP network on all 3 servers to >>>> something like 192.168.0.0/23 for about 512 address total. Server one >>>> will do a GW of 192.168.0.1, Server two will do a GW of 192.168.0.2, >>>> server 3 will do a GW of 192.168.0.3. When a client connects they will >>>> randomly connect to one of the 3 servers and receive an IP address from >>>> radius. My current thoughts are >>>> >>>> 1. Each server will have a /32 address not the /23. IP address on server >>>> 1 will be 192.168.0.1/32. >>>> 2. OSFP will only announce the /32 address of the server to the >>>> concentrator. >>>> 3. I will have to use the DHCP script option to insert and delete the >>>> clients ip address as a /32 in OSPF on the server to update the >>>> concentrator. >>>> >>>> The one issue I see off the bat is when a client reboots. If the client >>>> reboots and moves from server 1 to server 3, I now have two servers with >>>> the same IP address. I think I can deal with that by using a short lease >>>> time. >>>> >>>> >>>> Thoughts? I'm still digging around looking for other (better) options of >>>> having DHCP fail-over. The one option that will not work is reserving a >>>> block of IPs per server. We have several customers that are using static >>>> IPs, so they need to be accessible from all 3 servers. >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> >>>> Thanks, >>>> Mark mailto:m...@mailmt.com >>>> >>>> Myakka Communications >>>> www.Myakka.com >>>> >>>> Serving Manatee and Sarasota Counties with High-Speed Internet for over 20 >>>> years >>>> >>>> >> -- AF mailing list AF@af.afmug.com http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
