ER7212PC and 3 switch
Good morning,
I have installed 2 switches on this router/controller; when installing the 3rd one it tells me that it is limited to 2 switches.
Is there a possibility to extend it to a third switch, even with an additional license?
- Copy Link
- Subscribe
- Bookmark
- Report Inappropriate Content
Hi @MC20
Thanks for posting in our business forum.
Seems to be impossible. The performance of the ER7212PC is limited.
So far, there is no firmware to open the limit of the switch.
ER7212PC V1_1.2.0_Build 20240517 Beta for Omada Controller V5.14 (Released on May 20th, 2024) The latest beta has opened up the EAP limit.
This ER7212PC does not require licenses, unlike the CBC which you need a license for each single device added to the CBC.
- Copy Link
- Report Inappropriate Content
Hi @MC20
Thanks for posting in our business forum.
MC20 wrote
too limiting, it would be necessary to at least bring it to 4-5 switches
For the sake of performance consideration and redundancy, unless there is a further optimization to the controller usage. Or it is not possible to get more switches controlled by it.
Look, we develop a product with performance redundancy to address the more and more entries you may create over time, and we also need to consider the further implementation of the features.
If we take up this redundancy and give it to the switch control, can you accept the performance degradation or discontinue adding features? Most will answer nope. I am aware that in your case you might need that more than 2 switches but this product is designed to be a local device to control a few switches. But overall to all the users who has this product, we cannot make this adjustment because of you.
And, with the minimal two 8-port switches, it can already provide at least a 16-port capacity connection. That fits what this product is designed for. So, the bigger the network you have, the better controller you should consider. That's why OC400 was introduced later on for some data center users or admins.
If you need more switches/ports, you should consider a hardware controller or install a server as you expand.
- Copy Link
- Report Inappropriate Content
Hi @MC20
Thanks for posting in our business forum.
Seems to be impossible. The performance of the ER7212PC is limited.
So far, there is no firmware to open the limit of the switch.
ER7212PC V1_1.2.0_Build 20240517 Beta for Omada Controller V5.14 (Released on May 20th, 2024) The latest beta has opened up the EAP limit.
This ER7212PC does not require licenses, unlike the CBC which you need a license for each single device added to the CBC.
- Copy Link
- Report Inappropriate Content
too limiting, it would be necessary to at least bring it to 4-5 switches
- Copy Link
- Report Inappropriate Content
Hi @MC20
Thanks for posting in our business forum.
MC20 wrote
too limiting, it would be necessary to at least bring it to 4-5 switches
For the sake of performance consideration and redundancy, unless there is a further optimization to the controller usage. Or it is not possible to get more switches controlled by it.
Look, we develop a product with performance redundancy to address the more and more entries you may create over time, and we also need to consider the further implementation of the features.
If we take up this redundancy and give it to the switch control, can you accept the performance degradation or discontinue adding features? Most will answer nope. I am aware that in your case you might need that more than 2 switches but this product is designed to be a local device to control a few switches. But overall to all the users who has this product, we cannot make this adjustment because of you.
And, with the minimal two 8-port switches, it can already provide at least a 16-port capacity connection. That fits what this product is designed for. So, the bigger the network you have, the better controller you should consider. That's why OC400 was introduced later on for some data center users or admins.
If you need more switches/ports, you should consider a hardware controller or install a server as you expand.
- Copy Link
- Report Inappropriate Content
@Clive_A , you said it yourself, a few switches, not couple. This was such a blow to me today when I discovered, after getting a switch for CCTV cameras, that I cannot add a third switch. And it's not even displayed anywhere that I'm at the limit, so I can't discover this before I purchase, unpack, and set it all up.
@MC20 is certainly not alone in needing at least a third switch and/or the ability to choose between more switching for the price of fewer EAP devices. It's not like resources for a switch are being used if there are no switches connected. Also, your new SG2005P-PD, while brilliant for outdoor use, only has 4 outputs and still counts as a full switch. I have 2 of them and one has to be managed separately from its own UI, which is quite frustrating.
Providing the option to choose would prevent users like me from feeling like fools for investing in a setup that places unnecessary roadblocks.
Additionally, your suggested OC400 is like triple the price and supports 200 switches. That’s two orders of magnitude difference. I don't feel like you are being sincere with such a suggestion.
- Copy Link
- Report Inappropriate Content
- Copy Link
- Report Inappropriate Content
- Copy Link
- Report Inappropriate Content
Hi @drulia
drulia wrote
@Clive_A , you said it yourself, a few switches, not couple. This was such a blow to me today when I discovered, after getting a switch for CCTV cameras, that I cannot add a third switch. And it's not even displayed anywhere that I'm at the limit, so I can't discover this before I purchase, unpack, and set it all up.
@MC20 is certainly not alone in needing at least a third switch and/or the ability to choose between more switching for the price of fewer EAP devices. It's not like resources for a switch are being used if there are no switches connected. Also, your new SG2005P-PD, while brilliant for outdoor use, only has 4 outputs and still counts as a full switch. I have 2 of them and one has to be managed separately from its own UI, which is quite frustrating.
Providing the option to choose would prevent users like me from feeling like fools for investing in a setup that places unnecessary roadblocks.
Additionally, your suggested OC400 is like triple the price and supports 200 switches. That’s two orders of magnitude difference. I don't feel like you are being sincere with such a suggestion.
First, I am not very interested in replying to your message because seeing your way of replying to this and being a word police. Do you have to?
I have stated the exact number of the device can control and I use "few" to refer to that. This is clear under the context of that reply which I have stated the exact number unequivocally.
Second, when you get your hands on the product, on the controller settings page, you will see the limit of the switch you can adopt. If that does not fit your network when you have more Omada switches, you can return it within the return window (depending on your retailer policy) and get a router + OC setup.
Third, from the OC200, and OC300 to the latest OC400, I am explaining the situation if you have a much bigger network, you should consider the low to high-end models. And you should consider the performance redundancy and not get throttled.
I am saying this based on that you are aware that the Omada solution is various and has multiple products. Our technical support team, phone, chat or email can answer your questions about pre-sale questions.
A simple query would solve most problems and they can do a great job explaining the different ways to manage the products, free vs paid and their advantages.
I am not gonna argue with you over this topic when you didn't read it under the context while I was explaining the situation and giving the reason for the product design.
drulia wrote
The controller cannot be disabled. So it is a built-in controller 3-in-1 device. That's the product design and what we target when this is projected. The product was not designed for larger networks.
Two minimal 8-port switches, Omada, and the 11 (including SFP, PoE, Gig RJ45) ports on this router. 8+8+11=27. Mostly good for small businesses like stores and cafes and some home users seeking a simple setup.
For anything larger and needing more performance, or without limits, our support would also recommend a router + OC setup. Unless you specify you need an all-in-one solution.
As I have explained, I understand what you asked for but the reason has been explained.
I am not gonna argue with you on the chipset. I am saying the product will carry out the routing, controller, and switch, which will take up a lot of computation already. And this is a dual-core CPU device. The system has not opened up to 3 or more. I don't deny someday in the future that the ER7212PC's controller version will be optimized in the future(because we are optimizing the SDNC and adding more features). But overall, at this moment, the system does not open the limit for the sake of the performance redundancy.
The paid license is not a proper term to describe the built-in Controller(free). That's proprietary for the CBC(paid). Cloud-based Controller. I will not further explain that as it is against the free version idea.
And, think if we add that, isn't that against our "free idea"? That'll bring trouble definitely. Correct? Not from you but from other users thinking we are betraying them and charging people after they get used to it. That's more unethical, isn't t?
I can feedback on this but I can let you know that this might be a small chance request. Repeat what I am gonna send: 3-4 switch support without any sort of fees.
- Copy Link
- Report Inappropriate Content
Information
Helpful: 1
Views: 530
Replies: 7