I ended up with fiber to the home in my area, and Have used anywhere from 2-10 TB a month since long before its availability. Only once did I receive a call, I explained I was doing a backup restore to cloud and that was it. . I have heard nothing else since. On Wed, Jun 10, 2020 at 7:58 AM Michael Butash via PLUG-discuss < plug-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org> wrote: > Kind of a funny read, made me think of this Cox discussion. As usual, > even when you pay for unlimited, it's not really, and if you piss off a > random top-talker metric, you get smacked. Actually get what you pay for? > Nah. > > > https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2020/06/cox-slows-internet-speeds-in-entire-neighborhoods-to-punish-any-heavy-users/ > > I don't buy the FUD about the "downgrade the whole neighborhood", unless > the neighborhood is just overused/saturated as it is, in which case Cox > needs to fix it with a node split per normal direction. They won't > police/shape a whole neighborhood like that, rather they'd just > decommission or lower the bandwidth on the offenders modem usually, ala > this guy. > > May be a bit different if an actual Cox fiber/pon site, , but these seem > still rare like hens teeth, and only was deployed as buzz during Google > Fiber threatening them. Cox doing fiber to the home I think died with > Google Fiber. > > -mb > > > On Thu, May 14, 2020 at 9:32 AM Michael Butash wrote: > >> I'll agree with the CL being saturated comment - pretty sure it doesn't >> matter whether DSL or Fiber, their peering and aggregation is the same per >> region, and really it's where they converge that is the problem, which is >> where said saturation occurs. CL just *feels* saturated in use, where I >> didn't get that with Cox. Everything loads a little slower, you can just >> sort of tell after using long enough. Cox would periodically too, but they >> tended to already be working on a fix by the time I'd hit up someone I knew >> there to complain. CL I have no such faith in. >> >> I'm paying almost half my Cox bill with CL however, and no random overage >> charges, so I'm willing to live with it honestly, and it's never been *that >> bad*. If I download something, it downloads quickly, be it http or >> torrents. Just random viewing of pages in quick succession, ala scanning >> news just always seems a bit slow to start. That usually feels like >> buffers are blown out somewhere inline. >> >> -mb >> >> >> On Wed, May 13, 2020 at 8:34 PM Thomas Scott via PLUG-discuss < >> plug-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org> wrote: >> >>> They are welcome to, but node splits are a 6 month minimum last I >>> checked 😁 - granted we're getting faster with how many we're doing. In the >>> next 5 years, most cable operators will implement some sort of >>> aggressive node splitting to keep up with demand. Current employer not >>> excluded. >>> >>> I've had CLink on fiber - they're upstream nodes are a little more >>> saturated, but they do peer locally in the valley. Current employer does >>> have peering with FAANG and a couple other heavy hitters in the valley (not >>> any proprietary information here, any trace route from the valley to those >>> sites will show it terminating in 2 or 3 hops), but if I recall correctly >>> 70% of CLink traffic hits their DCs in Phoenix. Granted it's all best >>> effort past that, but if you don't have a heavily saturated node, you'll do >>> all right. GPON fiber is GPON fiber, regardless of Service Provider. It's >>> just a question of how many other subscribers are on your PON port and how >>> big the upstream links are. >>> >>> - Thomas Scott | mr.thomas.scott@gmail.com >>> >>> >>> On Tue, May 12, 2020 at 4:04 PM Stephen Partington via PLUG-discuss < >>> plug-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org> wrote: >>> >>>> This last bit is interesting. I have Cox Fiber (no data cap for >>>> Gigablast fiber yet) and Century Link just announced a competing service in >>>> my area. For about half the cost. For the same Gigabit Fiber (or 940mbps as >>>> they are calling it). >>>> >>>> Anyone with any experience with them on residential fiber? >>>> >>>> On Tue, May 12, 2020 at 5:59 AM Michael Butash via PLUG-discuss < >>>> plug-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org> wrote: >>>> >>>>> So Cox subs can reach out to you when we're having saturation issues? >>>>> :) >>>>> >>>>> Having been around for the beginnings of cable modem tech at @home >>>>> networks in the 90's dealing with almost every big MSO (Cox, Comcast, ATT, >>>>> Intermedia, etc), I like to talk about the tech as a bit proud where it's >>>>> gone. I liked Cox as one of the last decent hold-outs for things like >>>>> keeping Usenet around longer than they should, not killing customers for >>>>> mpaa/riaa abuse complaints, and keeping data caps off when the industry was >>>>> moving in that direction, so I think they're better than the rest, but >>>>> eventually they hopped on the money train with data caps too. And now >>>>> they're paying for their pro-pirate stance as well with lawsuits >>>>> against them winning >>>>> , >>>>> probably using that extra cap revenue to pay the trolls. >>>>> >>>>> Would I go back? Not as long as they have data caps, and someone else >>>>> around me doesn't, but yes - much better network. I don't like random >>>>> overages in my bill, I get that enough with power. If I thought the covid >>>>> restrictions to remove caps would hold, I'd probably switch back now, but >>>>> I'm sure they'll find a reason to reimplement them asap as that's lost >>>>> revenue on your rsu's. >>>>> >>>>> It's always good to hear from other docsis speakers, welcome back! >>>>> >>>>> -mb >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Mon, May 11, 2020 at 6:54 PM Thomas Scott < >>>>> mr.thomas.scott@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Day job is for a certain ISP HQ in Atlanta that supplies internet for >>>>>> a lot of the valley - I work in Network Operations first in Phoenix and now >>>>>> in Atlanta, and was surprised to see so much of what I talk about everyday >>>>>> in PLUG! >>>>>> >>>>>> CLink trying to play FTTN as FTTH, nothing new there. I live in a >>>>>> neighborhood outside of Atlanta that had some AT&T brownfield development >>>>>> for FTTH, and I've had no regrets (300 up 300 down!) Cox is moving towards >>>>>> "10G" with DOCSIS 4.0 and they are getting fiber closer to the home with >>>>>> their node splits. If you find that you all off a sudden have an extra hop >>>>>> in your path, that might be the seen you've been on one of those nodes that >>>>>> have been lit and split. The amount of bandwidth going up and down will go >>>>>> up dramatically. >>>>>> >>>>>> @Michael - yeah I don't think the caps are going anywhere, the >>>>>> industry as a whole (driven by big red) has moved that direction, but I >>>>>> think you'll see speeds and caps rise as N+0 goes to full duplex DOCSIS. I >>>>>> do know they've been relaxed with the COVID-19 FCC initiatives, but how >>>>>> long that lasts, I'm not sure. >>>>>> >>>>>> @Mac - the cox supplied modems are almost all going to "Panoramic >>>>>> Wi-Fi" and the number of holes found in DOCSIS devices is... disturbing to >>>>>> say the least. It was designed to be operated on a shared RF medium, and >>>>>> like other "trusting" protocols (i.e. BGP) has a lot of issues. The more >>>>>> virtualized it becomes, I think we'll see more of those go away - the >>>>>> smaller the broadcast domains, and the smaller the first upstream router, >>>>>> the better those will be able to be maintained and automated. Looking at >>>>>> the road maps, it will be interesting what comes next. >>>>>> >>>>>> - Thomas Scott | mr.thomas.scott@gmail.com >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On Wed, May 6, 2020 at 3:54 PM Michael Butash via PLUG-discuss < >>>>>> plug-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Oddly enough, the model number of your router stuck in my head, the >>>>>>> C3000Z, and I realized I used the same thing, but for my 150mbps dsl >>>>>>> modem. You sure you have actual gig fiber? They tend to misrepresent >>>>>>> their actual products in sales. Ask me how I know. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I say this because I called CL before going to them, and asked if I >>>>>>> could get fiber in the network. They said yes. Hmm, I knew damn well they >>>>>>> did not, as no one wants to build fiber into old peoria neighborhoods such >>>>>>> as mine. After some conversation and calling him out, he explained that >>>>>>> "oh, it's a gigabit network", just not fiber to your house. I could get >>>>>>> dual-band DSL, which means 75mbps x2, for a total of 150mbps, delivered by >>>>>>> a gigabit network! I sort of facepalmed, but ordered it anyways as it was >>>>>>> significantly more than I had with cox (80mbps at the time I think), >>>>>>> significantly cheaper, and no bandwidth cap. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> If there is anything other than fiber directly in your modem, I'd >>>>>>> call bullocks, but FTTH is a myth to me. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Crappier service, but I'll take the (usually) cheap and fast. It is >>>>>>> most certainly not gigabit fiber to my house, even though that's what they >>>>>>> tried to sell me I was getting. Only new house/community builds get fiber, >>>>>>> and if even that. Cox did the same to compete with Google fiber, and as >>>>>>> soon as Google Fiber died, so did Cox ever mentioning fiber again. Truth >>>>>>> is Cox doesn't need it, shielded coax can deliver soon 10g over it just >>>>>>> fine with new modulation schemas and docsis improvements. Centurylink's >>>>>>> 100 year old 2-8 wire infrastructure cannot, all they can do is build new >>>>>>> with fiber, but they probably won't being decrepit. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I hear friends of mine mention they have fiber, and wonder just if >>>>>>> they really do. This is why Google Fiber folded, it was unrealistic unless >>>>>>> a net-new community build. Google fiber retrofits were a disaster >>>>>>> >>>>>>> . >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Fun-fact: Oddly enough the guy that built Google Fiber, Milo Medin, >>>>>>> is the same guy that started @Home Networks back in late 90's for Cable >>>>>>> Modem services, and pioneered current industry standards in use today >>>>>>> globally to deliver cable internet. The last-mile regional MSO providers >>>>>>> snuffed him/company back then, took it over themselves, and then they >>>>>>> snuffed him out again as he tried the same incursion with Google Fiber, and >>>>>>> realized it just cost too damn much to compete. Cable Monopolies, flawless >>>>>>> victory. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Next I expect he'll team up with Elon or Bezos to try again via >>>>>>> terrestrial. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -mb >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Wed, May 6, 2020 at 10:32 AM Michael Butash >>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I tend to find the CL network a bit wonky, having moved to DSL from >>>>>>>> Cox (damn bandwidth caps). I find the general performance is worse than >>>>>>>> cox, where I suspect they simply don't manage the bandwidth and are far too >>>>>>>> oversubscribed as it feels like the internet buffers at times, literally. >>>>>>>> Cox would occasionally get that way too, and it was easy to see in an >>>>>>>> ongoing MTR when their peering in LA would get slammed and latency would >>>>>>>> jump (not to mention I know the guys that manage that bandwidth, telling >>>>>>>> them often got it fixed). Oddly Using MTR with CL, they filter icmp/udp >>>>>>>> specifically that seems to hide responses to track well. Go figure, truth >>>>>>>> hurts, so hide it. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Having worked for service providers numerous times over the years, >>>>>>>> working in and building them, routers are always an issue in a metro city >>>>>>>> or even interstate networks. No two platforms are ever the same, whether >>>>>>>> buying all Cisco, Juniper, Nokia, or any combo of all and more, which as >>>>>>>> you said, many do. Hardest part is usually capacity planning, particularly >>>>>>>> with something like covid, every isp took a kick in the groin at the same >>>>>>>> time to augment their networks, suddenly by some magnitude, when everyone >>>>>>>> else in the world is doing the same. Slowness in networking can often be >>>>>>>> attributed to those not having enough capacity, though they'll never admit >>>>>>>> it. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I'm on the 150mbps dsl, and a speed test can provide that for sure, >>>>>>>> but general usage, which I use a lot of tabs and apps, tends to bring >>>>>>>> things to a crawl often. I'd even go back to cox if they got rid of the >>>>>>>> bandwidth cap. CL might as well be government, and they're run by unions, >>>>>>>> so nothing happens fast, including capacity augments. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Re: mac limits, having been around Cox both as a customer and >>>>>>>> network engineer working there early 2000's, the mac security was more >>>>>>>> about limiting the amount of hosts behind a modem that could be allowed to >>>>>>>> a single mac and IP address. Back Circa 1998 I had my first Cox modem, >>>>>>>> and there were no routers, you just got yourself a phat 10baset switch from >>>>>>>> computer city and connected up your family on public ip addresses, each >>>>>>>> with their own mac and ip's. With no limits or filters that led to >>>>>>>> security issues (hey, I see my neighbor's c drive shared!), Cox and others >>>>>>>> then pushed people to then buy a router, which by then around 2002, you >>>>>>>> could buy a cheap wrt54g linksys. The advent of docsis also allowed to >>>>>>>> both filter and restrict the macs by default, also let them reduce to now >>>>>>>> 1:1 IP to User ratio, which was good for ip management, the abuse >>>>>>>> departments, and fbi warrants from legal. You used to be able to buy >>>>>>>> another ip, they'd push a new docsis config with mac-alowed=2, but not >>>>>>>> anymore. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Same reasons they're just building in the router functions now, it >>>>>>>> ensures they can offer some basic customer security, plus lets them run >>>>>>>> whatever spyware in their embedded router os they want. Better off buying >>>>>>>> your own standalone modem and router combo, one you ideally trust. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> -mb >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Tue, May 5, 2020 at 10:07 PM Donald Mac McCarthy via >>>>>>>> PLUG-discuss wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Putting a CL modem into a bridge mode where it only handles the >>>>>>>>> PPPoE connection is simply checking a radial select button and hitting >>>>>>>>> apply. If your firewall supports PPoE, even better, as you no longer need >>>>>>>>> their Modem and router in the mix. But, that is just my experience, and it >>>>>>>>> is limited. I have a CL fiber to the door drop, and they gave me a Zyxel >>>>>>>>> C3000Z device for connection. I promptly ripped it out and allowed pfSense >>>>>>>>> to maintain the PPPoE connection. I had to call support for packet loss one >>>>>>>>> time, and they refused to help me. So goes it rolling your own I guess. >>>>>>>>> Turns out a day later we had a several hour outage due to one of the >>>>>>>>> multiplexing cards used to distribute the 40Gb/s core fiber to the GPON >>>>>>>>> devices failed. Seems like that was a likely culprit for some of the packet >>>>>>>>> loss the previous day. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Having just gotten off a call in which the Senior Director of >>>>>>>>> Security Architecture and Engineering (a friend of mine from Atlanta) for >>>>>>>>> Cox was a participant, before he hung up I asked him about the typical Cox >>>>>>>>> supplied modems. Very, very few of them are purely bridge devices - >>>>>>>>> especially with the push to "Panoramic WiFi". A member of CentryLink who >>>>>>>>> was also on the call (ISP InfoSec sharing/working group) mentioned how >>>>>>>>> painful it was to support the number of company issued >>>>>>>>> modems/gateway/router models there are for different infrastructure and >>>>>>>>> connections - let alone ones that customers buy and bring to the party. >>>>>>>>> BTW, the MAC address thing is because they do actually use a MAC locking >>>>>>>>> like feature for security. Apparently it is bad for the network if you just >>>>>>>>> go plug your modem in at several houses in the neighborhood due to the way >>>>>>>>> DOCSIS works. I still have to dig into that and ask some more questions on >>>>>>>>> that one. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> There was a collective groan among the engineers when another ISP >>>>>>>>> spoke up about the number of critical flaws they find in their DOCIS >>>>>>>>> devices each year. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> With the amount of consolidation which has happened in the past 20 >>>>>>>>> years in the broadband market, the landscape is riddled with legacy bits >>>>>>>>> and pieces of this provider and that provider somehow being coerced into >>>>>>>>> working together to accomplish passing traffic. One of the ISPs mentioned >>>>>>>>> they had no less than 350 different models of core switching equipment made >>>>>>>>> by more than a dozen manufacturers in their network. They have a team of 40 >>>>>>>>> (really 5 teams of 8) that simply monitor and ensure that the OSPF >>>>>>>>> functions properly among the various models and brands to make sure that >>>>>>>>> the network properly heals/manages congestion. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Anyway, just throwing it out so that people can see and understand >>>>>>>>> the picture at a higher level. The final comment on the call was from an >>>>>>>>> engineer at a midwestern rural provider and one that I am sure many of us >>>>>>>>> can relate to. She said she spends all day pulling her hair out trying to >>>>>>>>> keep the network functioning at the highest of levels. The first words out >>>>>>>>> of her kids' mouths when she gets home are "Mom, the WiFi seems slow today." >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> I talked with Alexander this afternoon, and it looks like he has a >>>>>>>>> functioning network again. The APs were reluctant to give up their old >>>>>>>>> configuration, so a factory reset and new DHCP leases seem to have done the >>>>>>>>> trick. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Hopefully this sheds a bit of light on something for a few people. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Mac >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Michael Butash via PLUG-discuss wrote on 5/4/20 4:59 PM: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Ideally when you plug into a cable modem, it comes up, and passes >>>>>>>>> your ethernet to the cmts in a bridge, lets one mac address dhcp/arp, and >>>>>>>>> things work. It learns that one ip/mac, and disallows any other mac. No >>>>>>>>> security, nat, nothing, just real dumb dhcp + default routing with a public >>>>>>>>> ip. Routers/firewalls try to NAT you, thus double NAT if using a router >>>>>>>>> behind it. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> CL sells you a dsl modem/router that does your local security >>>>>>>>> whether you want it or not, full router/nat/firewall, and probably >>>>>>>>> spyware. Making it a modem is possible, but takes work, and your firewall >>>>>>>>> has to support PPPoE (not all can/do). Last time I touched a combo Cox >>>>>>>>> router/modem, I didn't see any way to do so. I told them to buy a real >>>>>>>>> modem, and that worked with their belkin/cisco/linksys/netgear they had. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> If your "modem" mentions wifi, it's a router/firewall, not a >>>>>>>>> modem. Not all are clear about this, as they dumb it down for consumers, >>>>>>>>> but an important point. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> -mb >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On Mon, May 4, 2020 at 1:53 PM Stephen Partington via PLUG-discuss >>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> I Owned a Nighthawk Router/Modem combo, The way that Netgear >>>>>>>>>> handled that is that the modem was hard-wired to a bridge on the router >>>>>>>>>> side. and technically you could see it as a separate device in the router >>>>>>>>>> configs if you rooted around enough. but the modem side was just a modem. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> On Mon, May 4, 2020 at 11:03 AM Michael Butash via PLUG-discuss < >>>>>>>>>> plug-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org> wrote: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Cox modems *are* bridges first and foremost typically, unless >>>>>>>>>>> you get a bundled router/modem, which is only what CenturyLink sells. If >>>>>>>>>>> you got a "router/modem" combo, just buy a modem-only device for a dumb >>>>>>>>>>> bridge and simple ethernet for a public ip. I recommend staying with an >>>>>>>>>>> arris cable modem, originally motorola, they basically developed cable >>>>>>>>>>> modem docsis, and are always the best. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> I moved from Cox to CL when Cox started adding a usage cap, and >>>>>>>>>>> that was new to me to get my Fortinet firewall online with CL and their DSL >>>>>>>>>>> doing PPPOE. I've seen the router/cable modem combo boxes later, but never >>>>>>>>>>> owned one as I always have my own router/firewall. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> -mb >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, May 4, 2020 at 8:36 AM Donald Mac McCarthy < >>>>>>>>>>> mac@oscontext.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Will Cox allow for a bridge/virtual bridge mode? Xfinity does, >>>>>>>>>>>> which allows you to put in a firewall, and use the modem only as a gateway, >>>>>>>>>>>> therefore preventing a double NAT situation. Never lived in a Cox area >>>>>>>>>>>> before, and currently ride CL fiber. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Mac >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Michael Butash via PLUG-discuss wrote on 5/3/20 2:00 PM: >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Cox modems will learn and allow only 1 mac at a time (unless >>>>>>>>>>>> business is set to allow more, but not on residential). If switching out >>>>>>>>>>>> firewalls, I 99% of time reboot the modem first and foremost. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> -mb >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> On Sun, May 3, 2020 at 12:08 PM Snyder, Alexander J via >>>>>>>>>>>> PLUG-discuss wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> I got it working. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> I assigned the SFP+ port as my LAN and assigned it the >>>>>>>>>>>>> 10.x.x.x/16 network. Then I had to call COX and list the WAN Mac address >>>>>>>>>>>>> with them. Upon doing so I was able to reach external sites, and all >>>>>>>>>>>>> downstream devices started coming alive! >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks for all the suggestions and help! >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>>>>>>>>> Alexander >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Sent from my Galaxy S10+ >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sun, May 3, 2020, 03:14 Herminio Hernandez, Jr. via >>>>>>>>>>>>> PLUG-discuss wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Can you login to the FW via the LAN interface? Can you ping >>>>>>>>>>>>>> the FW LAN interface? Check the routing and NAT policy on the FW. All >>>>>>>>>>>>>> outbound traffic should NAT to the FW WAN interface and there should be a >>>>>>>>>>>>>> default (0.0.0.0/0) route to the internet. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, May 2, 2020 at 7:27 PM Seabass via PLUG-discuss < >>>>>>>>>>>>>> plug-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm with Mac, I think it is not the firewall, but if you >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> have the ability to plug it into a display with a keyboard, you can use >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that for configuration and modify a different device at the same time. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Makes it easier to troubleshoot by giving you the ability to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> configure your pfSense ports at the same time. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Message: 2 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Date: Sat, 2 May 2020 09:04:35 -0700 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> From: Donald Mac McCarthy >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> To: "Snyder, Alexander J via PLUG-discuss" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Subject: Re: pfSense + Ubiquity >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Message-ID: < >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 18adfa38-3e72-7b0a-e31a-1ddf175d717f@oscontext.com> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I can help - but I am unavailable to do so until tomorrow. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Make sure there are not any thing other than default VLANs >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> on the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> interfaces to start with. Ubiquiti is famous for not >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> havinght eSFP+ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ports active in the default configuration, and I believe the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> switch has >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> all the ports to shutdown on default config as well. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I think it is the switch not passing traffic through - no >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the firewall. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mac >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Snyder, Alexander J via PLUG-discuss wrote on 5/2/20 8:53 AM: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > Does anyone out there have experience with pfSence and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Ubiquity switches? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > I have zero with either but that didn't stop me from >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> buying both .... >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > how hard could it be?! LOL. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > I bought a Negate XG-1537-1U. I bought a Unifi Pro 24 PoE >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> switch. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > I can configure the FW immediately after >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > firstboot/restore-default-configs, but only if i set the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> LAN interface >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > to be the cable that goes directly to my laptop. That's >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> great, but >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > that does shit for the downstream switch. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > I have a 10GB SFP+ Port that I want to configure as the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> downstream >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > port to ubiquity, but any configuration other than >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> mentioned above >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > fails .... and I'm now on my 12th "Reset To Factory >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Defaults" ... any >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > help on this would be greatly appreciated! >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > Thanks, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > Alexander >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > Sent from my Galaxy S10+ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > --------------------------------------------------- >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > PLUG-discuss mailing list - >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > https://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Donald "Mac" McCarthy >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Director, Field Operations >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Open Source Context >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> +1.602.584.4445 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> mac@oscontext.com >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://oscontext.com >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -------------- next part -------------- >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> An HTML attachment was scrubbed... >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> URL: < >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://lists.phxlinux.org/pipermail/plug-discuss/attachments/20200502/aeab14b4/attachment-0001.html >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ------------------------------ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Subject: Digest Footer >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ------------------------------ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> End of PLUG-discuss Digest, Vol 179, Issue 2 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ******************************************** >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --------------------------------------------------- >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> --------------------------------------------------- >>>>>>>>>>>>>> PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org >>>>>>>>>>>>>> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> --------------------------------------------------- >>>>>>>>>>>>> PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org >>>>>>>>>>>>> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings: >>>>>>>>>>>>> https://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> --------------------------------------------------- >>>>>>>>>>>> PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org >>>>>>>>>>>> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:https://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>>>> Donald "Mac" McCarthy >>>>>>>>>>>> Director, Field Operations >>>>>>>>>>>> Open Source Context >>>>>>>>>>>> +1.602.584.4445 >>>>>>>>>>>> mac@oscontext.com >>>>>>>>>>>> https://oscontext.com >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> --------------------------------------------------- >>>>>>>>>>> PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org >>>>>>>>>>> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings: >>>>>>>>>>> https://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>> A mouse trap, placed on top of your alarm clock, will prevent you >>>>>>>>>> from rolling over and going back to sleep after you hit the snooze button. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Stephen >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> --------------------------------------------------- >>>>>>>>>> PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org >>>>>>>>>> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings: >>>>>>>>>> https://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> --------------------------------------------------- >>>>>>>>> PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org >>>>>>>>> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:https://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>> Donald "Mac" McCarthy >>>>>>>>> Director, Field Operations >>>>>>>>> Open Source Context >>>>>>>>> +1.602.584.4445 >>>>>>>>> mac@oscontext.com >>>>>>>>> https://oscontext.com >>>>>>>>> --------------------------------------------------- >>>>>>>>> PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org >>>>>>>>> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings: >>>>>>>>> https://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> --------------------------------------------------- >>>>>>> PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org >>>>>>> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings: >>>>>>> https://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss >>>>>> >>>>>> --------------------------------------------------- >>>>> PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org >>>>> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings: >>>>> https://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> A mouse trap, placed on top of your alarm clock, will prevent you from >>>> rolling over and going back to sleep after you hit the snooze button. >>>> >>>> Stephen >>>> >>>> --------------------------------------------------- >>>> PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org >>>> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings: >>>> https://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss >>> >>> --------------------------------------------------- >>> PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org >>> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings: >>> https://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss >> >> --------------------------------------------------- > PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org > To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings: > https://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss -- A mouse trap, placed on top of your alarm clock, will prevent you from rolling over and going back to sleep after you hit the snooze button. Stephen