P2P wireless bridge using Mikrotik’s RouterOS: Unterschied zwischen den Versionen

Aktuelle Version vom 11. April 2010, 05:30 Uhr

This project is closely related to another project: High Performance WIFI link.

Since the named project didn't really go on very well because of hardware purchasing issues, I decided to try something else. Actually there have been many reasons why the other project has not been as successful as I intended:

• No link partner station in sight so far.
• 1 meter diameter is too big for a 5,6 GHz link. The beam becomes too small and the dish is a too big target for the wind. Really wind-resistive mounting is hardly possible.
• The cases I had built for the RB433 boards was actually too small for them. One MiniPCI slot was wasted because there was not enough space for a third card.
• Unclarities about the mounting situation in our garden.
• The Fonera 2100A has a defect: It is getting terribly hot. So I thought about exchanging them by a Fonera 2200, which does not have the problem.
• Uncertainties about the frequency allocation. I wanted to try out the 5 GHz band, which kept me from trying on.
• Rumors saying that one should use Winstron DCMA-82 cards instead of R5H because the Winstron cards are more reliable allegedly. So I feared that I had bought the wrong transceiver cards.

Eventually I got hold of three RB411 boards and I had some spare R5H transceivers, so everything was in place that would make a nice project:

• The RB411 boards
• The cases which I had built earlier
• A set of R5H cards
• pigtails
• 5GHz flat panel antennas
• all the necessary cabling

And sone really excellent instructions:

• http://dkprojects.wordpress.com/p2p-wireless-bridge-using-mikrotiks-routeros/ This project is based on the excellent description given here.
• http://kuliahku.com/category/mikrotik/ Other fantastic MikroTik stuff

Short summary:

In order to build a real bridge, it is necessary to define one system as the server and the other as a client.

1 Server configuration

In my scenario I decided to have MHB as the server because it is meant to supply the Hamnet connection to BUL.

[admin@MikroTik] > system identity set name="db0mhb"
[admin@db0mhb] > interface bridge add name=”bridge1”
[admin@db0mhb] > interface bridge port add interface=ether1 bridge=bridge1
[admin@db0mhb] > interface bridge port add interface=wlan1 bridge=bridge1
[admin@db0mhb] > interface wireless set wlan1 ssid=db0mhbdb0bul frequency=5180 mode=bridge disabled=no
[admin@db0mhb] > interface wireless set wlan1 wds-mode=dynamic wds-default-bridge=bridge1
[admin@db0mhb] > ip address add address=10.254.0.251/24 interface=bridge1
[admin@db0mhb] > ip firewall connection tracking set enabled=no
[admin@db0mhb] > ip route add gateway=192.168.178.1

Note that this scenario is my test scenario and the default gateway is not a Hamnet node but my normal FritzBox. The "Server" is simply connected to my FritzBox because I want to simulate the logic that a Notebook connected behind the Client should connect a greater network, here the internet.

2 Client configuration

[admin@MikroTik] > system identity set name="db0bul"
[admin@db0bul] > interface bridge add name=”bridge1”
[admin@db0bul] > interface bridge port add interface=ether1 bridge=bridge1
[admin@db0bul] > interface bridge port add interface=wlan1 bridge=bridge1
[admin@db0bul] > interface wireless set wlan1 mode=station-wds  ssid=db0mhbdb0bul disabled=no
[admin@db0bul] > ip address add address=10.254.0.252/24 interface=bridge1 

Note that this configuration is only most fundamental. It is not at all secure and optimized to the situation. It does not consider legal constraints not anything else. It is just a proof of concept.