network design

jreb22 — Tue, 29 Oct 2024 12:02:25 GMT

Hi all

I am an end use and have built my own network. wired and wireless. i am not an expert but have a degree of knowledge.

I have had a ruckus network for some years, and love it. I live in remote location and use 9 ruckus r 500 to form a unleashed network around house and remote buildings.

From the main router I supply a signal to a 16 port netgear switch which then feeds various areas either fed by a wired connection or to communicate to 2 remote area i use a LIGO TX RX system which works fine.

At the other end of the wired connections some of the connection go further to another wired area

My question is:

Is it better to feed the wired connection switch to switch then take a feed off for the ruckus ( so only using 1 ruckus port i suppose you'd call this in parallel). or wired feed to ruckus in then ruckus out to switch, using both ports ( in series)?

I had a lightning strike recently and had to reset the system, and I have been having occasional network recover me issues, possibly due to ip conflicts.

Currently if it goes to recover me i lose everything until rebooted.

My thoughts are if i go switch to switch then at least any wired systems stay up and running and i'll. just lose wifi. I am also about to factory reset all ruckus.

welcome your thoughts

Re: network design

Squozen — Tue, 29 Oct 2024 22:33:31 GMT

You use one port only for the access point. If you’re connecting two switches use a pair of cables between them and set up an LACP team or a static LAG (assuming the switches are capable of this). You should not be attempting to use an access point as a bridge between two switches.

Re: network design

jreb22 — Wed, 30 Oct 2024 11:32:45 GMT

thank you

topic Re: network design in Unleashed

network design

Re: network design

Re: network design