@JaredBusch said in Ubiquiti on the Evolution of Home Wifi Part 1:

@coliver said in Ubiquiti on the Evolution of Home Wifi Part 1:

@Dashrender said in Ubiquiti on the Evolution of Home Wifi Part 1:

lol

Can't wait for the smart contact lens.... or a brain to machine interface.

large_vTXgUgB4KyntDSUezLljcm1Ol6Ns.jpg

Yep pretty much...

I do notice that Linphone provides real time feedback no individual calls, which is nice.

By default, traffic will pass between VLANs 1 & 2, unless you go into the firewall & add rules to deny traffic

I like to build "Internal networks" with some servers on "one side" and some servers on the "other side"... and put VyOS or pfSense, etc... between the two.

[Generally, I do this with VirtualBox on my laptop, but this setup also works well in Hyper-V]

@StuartJordan said in Scott Alan Miller: SMB System Architectural Patterns:

I watched your Storage 101 video, that was very good Scott.

Thanks 🙂

@bransona said in MS-CHAP on Ubiquiti EdgeRouter:

@scottalanmiller is correct. I have Edgerouter 2.0.9 and it STILL requires PAP in the Windows policy. Under Config Tree, there is no way to make the router use MSCHAP or MSCHAPv2 instead of PAP (cleartext). I went to notify Ubiquiti hoping they can potentially have this included in another firmware release soon, but Ubiquiti Support was apprised of this 5 years ago! https://community.ui.com/questions/Encrypted-Radius-Supported/7857b119-91d8-4365-8c2a-8c21de0937a4

Yup it has been a big issue for a while now on the EdgeSwitches too.

These kinds of speeds would be great for implementing an iSCSI SAN or FCoE.

@dafyre said in EdgeRouter PoE high CPU usage:

@travisdh1 -- Maybe he should start with something simple... like a reboot? (I haven't seen him mention that anywhere).

The entire reason it came back up is that the unit rebooted itself (crashed) at 1300 CDT yesterday.

Sounds good, thanks for the help.

Wow crazy problem, never seen that before.

I think that he skips mentioning that PPP, the Point to Point Protocol is not a VPN protocol. Even in the 1990s it was not considered that as it is not virtually private, as a VPN is. It's useful to have mentioned here and the Network+ might require it and it is certainly good to know and understand, but he lists it along with VPN protocols and I didn't hear him ever point out that it isn't a VPN Protocol even though it was the first one mentioned in the VPN Protocol list.

@tiagom said in Simple but Effective Packet Loss Monitor?:

To install one of the larger monitoring packages just for some simple packet loss monitoring seems like overkill. Especially since its like 10 lines to script this.

https://bash.cyberciti.biz/monitoring/monitor-windows-linux-server-with-ping-script/

Everything is either a little more, or a little less, than I want. But this might suffice. Thanks.

Nice, a few things to check out.

No problem!

On the Ubuntu Linux family, for instance, you can fix it with the following steps:

Open /etc/sysctl.conf, with an editor, such as vim. Enter the line: net.ipv4.tcp_challenge_ack_limit = 999999999 Save the file. Use the shell command "sysctl -p" to update the configuration.

@JaredBusch said in Will CORD Change the Economics of Broadband?:

@DustinB3403 said in Will CORD Change the Economics of Broadband?:

The focus of CORD as explained in the article is to find a solution using virtualization at a cloud level for the last mile.

I got nothing like that at all out of that article.

That's what it read like to me. They service providers need to upgrade the 'last mile' and are looking to do it with cloud type virtualization. This way they can still maintain a very wide range of supported equipment while maintaining up time.