FWIW, we’re in the process of migrating off of Cisco ASR9K BNG to netElastic. Just waiting on a couple of show stopper things to get added to the code base.
It’s a lot more cost effective and has plenty of fun features that rival the Cisco BNG solution. They recently added VPLS / PW-HE support, so we can terminate our many L2VPNs on the netElastic box directly rather than the device in front of it. I’m excited to simplify things for sure vs what we’ve been doing with Cisco. -c > On Feb 14, 2025, at 1:03 PM, Cassidy B. Larson <c...@infowest.com> wrote: > > Depends on "Bandwidth" and "users".. Attached is their 2024 retail pricing. > > Also, a bunch of other options for like CGNAT, etc. > > > <RPL-NA (4-24).pdf> > >> On Feb 14, 2025, at 11:13 AM, Josh Baird <joshba...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> Anybody know how much netElastic's BNG solution costs approximately? >> >> On Fri, Feb 14, 2025 at 12:29 PM Mark - Myakka Technologies via AF >> <af@af.afmug.com <mailto:af@af.afmug.com>> wrote: >>> 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 >>> <mailto:m...@mailmt.com> >>> >>> Myakka Communications >>> www.Myakka.com <http://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 >>> >> <mailto:m...@mailmt.com> >>> >> >>> >> Myakka Communications >>> >> www.Myakka.com <http://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 <http://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 <http://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 >>> >>>> <mailto:m...@mailmt.com> >>> >>>> >>> >>>> Myakka Communications >>> >>>> www.Myakka.com <http://www.myakka.com/> >>> >>>> >>> >>>> Serving Manatee and Sarasota Counties with High-Speed Internet for >>> >>>> over 20 years >>> >>>> >>> >>>> >>> >> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> AF mailing list >>> AF@af.afmug.com <mailto:AF@af.afmug.com> >>> http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com >> -- >> AF mailing list >> AF@af.afmug.com >> http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com > > -- > AF mailing list > AF@af.afmug.com > http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
-- AF mailing list AF@af.afmug.com http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
