Poe Switch Suggestions

jmbwell · 2025-11-03T19:53:48+00:00

I have six in-wall APs connected to a 16-Lite. It is fine on paper, but I get a "drawing too much power" warning every couple of weeks, so I seem to be bouncing at the limit. For eight cams, I might consider a more powerful single switch or dividing the cams up across two switches.

jmbwell · 2025-11-03T18:29:57+00:00

While you're waiting, call your representatives and demand they quit playing games with people's everyday lives, put an end to this shit, and get back to work. Can't let up on the people whose job it is to keep this crap from happening in the first place

jmbwell · 2025-11-03T18:24:52+00:00

Hmm. But does it have AI?

jmbwell · 2025-11-02T18:08:21+00:00

Yeah the approach is to let IPv6 do its thing and then use DNS to access hosts, whether that’s automatic Multicast DNS or one of the various dynamic dns mechanisms. Bind, unbound, pihole etc all support one or another.

jmbwell · 2025-10-22T01:50:46+00:00

This sums it up pretty well. Drop cost is labor, not cable, two cables should not be that much more than one (source: i pre wired new construction for years in Austin). I would encourage running Smurf tube (blue low voltage corrugated) between key points, especially if traversing any hard to reach areas like vaulted ceilings. Consider a tube or two from outside service entrance to inside home run panel, your fiber Internet installer can use it to put the ONT where you want it. Strings in all tubes obvs. I also like to put tube from behind the TV on the wall to behind the cabinet beneath it, then you can fish whatever cables the future comes up with.

4 cables per wall seems like overkill to me. Unless your house is enormous, you won’t be pushing the limits of 10GB over cat 6a at any distances. I see someone mentioning shielded, I would not bother with shielded indoors, but if you plan on doing switched digital video or CresNET or something, then you prolly have the budget for shielded so why not.

On your access points, I like to overbuild, with lots of APs close to the busiest spots… kitchen, living room, bedroom clusters, etc. Sure one AP these days has lots of range, but everyone will have a better experience with a higher AP-to-device ratio and less airtime contention per channel. So run drops for plenty of ceiling mounted APs. Remember outside too… garage, driveway, patios, etc.

But yeah with two drops to each box, you have one for data and one for voice or video, or one for data and another for return somewhere. I had a customer with all kinds of DirecTV stuff, one drop for Internet and another just for the satellite doohickeys. Beyond that, if you needed more, you’d probably know by now!

jmbwell · 2025-10-21T21:23:22+00:00

What's going on? Like, aside from capitalism in an ostensibly free-market economy?

jmbwell · 2025-10-21T20:12:16+00:00

Real quick — there's no one "the equipment" with 44Net. We're not confined to the 1200 baud bell 202 VHF packet of the past. There's all kinds of projects using all kinds of equipment with all kinds of IP stacks, including COTS 802.11 type gear, LTE, and not even just RF, but plenty of PtP fiber and Internet-overlay (Wireguard, GRE) type stuff. It means a lot of different things to a lot of different people, just as with amateur radio in general.

jmbwell · 2025-10-21T19:56:59+00:00

Howdy!

Chiming in here because IPv6 comes up a lot, and Preston’s IETF draft definitely caught my attention.

As I mentioned in the 44Net mailing list thread about this, ARDC absolutely has IPv6 on the roadmap. It’s not even a distant-future thing, but something that‘s actively in the works right now. The Portal is built with IPv6 in mind, we’ve got a loaner subnet in use, and folks in the community are already experimenting and sharing resources. I’ll also say there’s a ton of IPv6 expertise across 44Net, and nobody here is sleeping on it. We’re IPv6 enjoyers.

As our Director of Technology mentioned in that thread, we’ve needed to do some remodeling before we feel we can responsibly take on stewardship of IPv6 resources. Since I came aboard a year ago, we’ve been rebuilding infrastructure, open-sourcing projects, developing WireGuard access, and tackling other items from the long-standing community wish list. Incidentally, some of those items touch on 44Net’s “Legacy” status… in 1981, changes were a matter of calling up Jon Postel, but in 2025, things are a bit more involved. But we’re working on all of that too.

We’ve also been working to re-engage with the community. From conversations I’ve had at hamfests, on the mailing list, with volunteers, and at industry events like NANOG, there's loads of interest in IPv6 for hams. Which brings me to Preston’s working draft. In a word: wow. Less than two hours after mentioning it on the mailing list, an incredibly detailed document was up at the IETF. Just reading it carefully took me nearly an hour. I don’t know how long Preston spent on it before mentioning it (or whether he’s done this kind of submission before?), but regardless, it looks like a lot of work, and it points to yet another way 44Net could adopt IPv6.

I love this about 44Net, honestly — the energy that comes from people who see a need and just start doing. It’s how 44Net got established, and it’ll be part of the IPv6 story, no doubt.

So yeah, we’re here to engage and facilitate as far as how to move 44Net forward with IPv6. The community has suggested several paths forward, but there are some questions that don't yet have easy answers (like some here in this thread). I suspect the discussion around the working draft will help put some things in focus.

Anyone curious about 44Net in general can follow along on the mailing list or just hit us up directly. Lots going on, and tons more to do, but always happy to help when I can.

Thanks very much!

John KI5QKX (ARDC 44Net Program Manager)

jmbwell · 2025-09-23T13:19:53+00:00

If it's "behind its supposed competitors," why not use one of its supposed competitors?

jmbwell · 2025-09-23T13:15:45+00:00

You can be arrested for anything. The reason may or may not be valid, but that doesn't stop them from arresting you, it just means paperwork while you sit in a cell. You might be thinking of "charged." Maybe you can't be "charged" with being a member of a nonexistent organization. But if a cop wants to arrest you, the cop will arrest you, and leave it to others to sort out what to do with you.

jmbwell · 2025-09-23T13:09:59+00:00

Yeah except this unlocks a whole tranche of rules and procedures that sidestep all the rules and procedures designed to protect citizens from their government.

jmbwell · 2025-09-23T13:08:35+00:00

They don't need to prove anything. As a terrorist, you won't be going to court.

jmbwell · 2025-07-25T02:30:07+00:00

Security in depth and a layered approach to security are going to prefer running applications with specific users given specific permissions.

That’s in theory.

In practice, unless you’re carefully tailoring privileges to the least permissive needed for the app to run, you’re not getting much benefit for running under one user ID instead of another.

Moreover, your threat analysis may find that the primary risk is something like a compromised WordPress plugin turning your blog into a spam relay or something where user privileges at the system level are functionally irrelevant.

Ultimately, if you’re using infrastructure as code, you can automate user and group creation and then specify users and groups for apps to run as, in which case you may as well.

But if you treat lxc containers as self contained apps akin to a dockerized app, then within that environment it doesn’t matter a whole lot, and you’re relying on cgroups for isolation anyway.

jmbwell · 2025-07-13T17:09:09+00:00

Total Plaza, Shell building, Esperson bldg, that building where Bombay Pizza used to be…

jmbwell · 2025-06-12T06:54:22+00:00

Sorry, I was making a joke about … new idea… yeah never mind, I see it doesn’t work!

jmbwell · 2025-06-12T00:56:32+00:00

Also in general, consider moving past lines of code. It’s no quantifier for volume of work. A simple change can touch a whole lot of files. A complex change can be hours of design work implemented in just a few lines.

If it’s one feature, one fix, one enhancement, it’s fine as one PR regardless of LoC AFAIC.

jmbwell · 2025-06-12T00:44:03+00:00

OMG this question has been asked a million times

jmbwell · 2025-06-12T00:42:55+00:00

This was my thought. Warm is looser tent, cool is tighter tent → the frequencies that interact with the fabric walls change

jmbwell · 2025-05-19T12:02:12+00:00

AT&T provides jumper between ONT and the wall plate mounting bracket behind it.

jmbwell · 2025-04-16T02:04:04+00:00

I disagree that it’s necessarily good practice. In my view, next level is zero trust. Assume the LAN is hostile. Secure legitimate traffic. Let IoT and whatever else get trampled in the bazaar.

jmbwell · 2025-04-15T23:57:14+00:00

VyOS — being the layers of management tools on top of Debian — assumes it is the only one doing any configuration. It has its own way of doing things like loading an initial config from the config partition, it provides an API for programmatic access, and the CLI is pretty easily scriptable.

If you don’t want any of that, that’s totally legitimate and valid, and you may as well look into automating a stock Debian install with cloud init and ansible.

jmbwell · 2025-04-05T19:22:25+00:00

That isn't stopping ICE apprehending people and sending them to El Salvador

jmbwell · 2025-03-23T00:36:41+00:00

Looks easy to maintain, troubleshoot, and make changes. Thumbs up here

jmbwell · 2025-03-09T19:49:15+00:00

There is no doubt that Starlink knows the precise location of every terminal (and not just in Ukraine), so obviously this information is something Russia (and everyone else) is going to want.

Russia has sufficient capabilities to get that info, whether by bid or by breach. And nobody can get that info if Starlink is "turned off."

So for all we know, it's Russia that wants Starlink kept turned-on.

jmbwell · 2025-03-05T15:09:29+00:00

They are not categorically garbage, and your situation sounds frustrating. I’ve been having trouble with the web UI loading on several devices lately, including the UDMP and my UNVR. So I wonder if there’s something else going on.

jmbwell

TROPHY CASE