Hi @Decolingo 

Thanks for posting in our business forum.

Decolingo wrote

  @Alex_UTS, I also want support for static LAGs (or ideally LACP) on a 2.5G-capable TP Link router (like maybe the upcoming ER-7412-M2).

 

Use case is pretty simple: Existing networks with 1gig WAN ports where I'm moving ISP service to 1.5gig or more. The router can take advantage of the extra bandwidth via its 2.5G port, but I can't share that downstream to the rest of the network unless 1) I upgrade all downstream hardware with 2.5G ports or 2) I plug everything into the router. Neither apporach works as there just aren't enough ports on the router -- that's why I have a bunch of (TPLink) switches. That's aside from PoE considerations, LAG for my multiport WAPs, and so on.

 

Your competition does support this. Ubiquiti has it, Cisco has it, others have it. Sometimes it's just static LAGs and not LACP, but even static LAGs are better than nothing.

 

Availability of the LAG or LACP support in a multi-gigabit router (ideally 2.5G for cost reasons) will determine if my routers get replaced with newer TP Link units, or if I have to find something else and live with the reduced one-stop-management I get from Omada today.

Just a little reminder, Link Aggregation does not mean you will get an add-up speed on the Internet. 2.5G WAN, 2*1Gbps LAN, they would mostly utilize 1Gbps. It is layer 4 LAG which can aggregate the speed to 2Gbps.

All of the products we have now are layer 2 and 3 based. No intention for layer 4 yet. The LAG is under market investigation.

Please add a vote then.

Hi @Decolingo 

Thanks for posting in our business forum.

Decolingo wrote

Clive_A wrote

Hi @Decolingo 

Thanks for posting in our business forum.

Decolingo wrote

  @Alex_UTS, I also want support for static LAGs (or ideally LACP) on a 2.5G-capable TP Link router (like maybe the upcoming ER-7412-M2).

 

Use case is pretty simple: Existing networks with 1gig WAN ports where I'm moving ISP service to 1.5gig or more. The router can take advantage of the extra bandwidth via its 2.5G port, but I can't share that downstream to the rest of the network unless 1) I upgrade all downstream hardware with 2.5G ports or 2) I plug everything into the router. Neither apporach works as there just aren't enough ports on the router -- that's why I have a bunch of (TPLink) switches. That's aside from PoE considerations, LAG for my multiport WAPs, and so on.

 

Your competition does support this. Ubiquiti has it, Cisco has it, others have it. Sometimes it's just static LAGs and not LACP, but even static LAGs are better than nothing.

 

Availability of the LAG or LACP support in a multi-gigabit router (ideally 2.5G for cost reasons) will determine if my routers get replaced with newer TP Link units, or if I have to find something else and live with the reduced one-stop-management I get from Omada today.

Just a little reminder, Link Aggregation does not mean you will get an add-up speed on the Internet. 2.5G WAN, 2*1Gbps LAN, they would mostly utilize 1Gbps. It is layer 4 LAG which can aggregate the speed to 2Gbps.

All of the products we have now are layer 2 and 3 based. No intention for layer 4 yet. The LAG is under market investigation.

Please add a vote then.

  @Clive_A I have no idea what you are talking about. But then again, neither do you. Protocol layers have no relevancy to absolute bandwidth.

 

My post stands. Thanks for attempting to play.

When you aggregate a computer that has two 1Gb NICs and plug them into the router under the assumption it supports LAG, it will not work and you'll see what I mean.

Hi @Decolingo 

Decolingo wrote

  @Clive_A we're talking link aggregation between routers and switches. Not sure why you'd want to stick two NICs in a single PC -- are you trying to stream a 20 4K movies at once on a single computer? Or conduct some pointless "speed test"?

 

If you run a hotel, a campground, or something similar, 1.5 or 3gig from your ISP isn't for bragging rights at the bar, it's important for your customers. No link aggregation support in TPLink routers is either hardware-limited, or a gambit hoping customers will upgrade all their downstream equipment to multi-gig. Since the company's market positioning is largely based on price, that's a fool's errand.

 

TPLink makes quality hardware and has solid software -- a new concept for the pricepoint for sure. I'm a paying customer with a real need -- I even use TPLink equipment at home. If you want to argue with someone for the sake or arguing, find someone else -- you obviously don't know what you're talking about.

I am giving a way which previously people suggested. A user case.

And I am explaining that even if we add it, it is gonna be L2 and L3 and for some people, you don't see what you expected results. A lot in this thread are expecting the aggregated speed. Not like your case. Like what happened to the load balance where people thought it would add up the speed.

There is a misconception in people that they think LAG is gonna be a performance booster to the network speed. 

NVM. I am just saying. I don't wanna explain the LAG either and it's gonna be a long story. Just take my reply as a joke. Apologize for my ignorance. But I am still not sure why you are so aggressive.

I do hope everyone is as tech-savvy as you are. It would save me a lot of explanations.

BTW, I previously replied to this about the timeline. Did not get it pinned timely. It is NOT scheduled this year. I'll leave this thread open and not gonna reply to this until I have anything new.