In the grand scheme, I am happy with my setup as well.  Moving from a budget residential router/AP/Firewall, this is a great leap forwards in terms of reliability and throughput in my growing smart home environment.  But, I had expectations based on what I was seeing in the Unifi videos, that were not realized in the Omada system.  Most videos I've watched on the Omada system claim its just like the Unifi, but I haven't seen any videos of setting it up in a smart home to the level that Unifi has been documented. 

In addition to mDNS, I would like to see established and related ACL features created on the VLAN/switch level.  Maybe we need to created a post strictly for feature requests. 

@trimmkm  100% agree.  Both mDNS and Accept established and related sessions in the ACL settings are 2 primary features missing to get the setup with my IoT devices that I aimed for in the first place. Its terrible to find these limitations after spending $$$ on their router, controller, switch and EAP. I wish I found this thread beforehand.  Despite the note from TPLink about these requirements now sitting in a backlog, the reality is that I would not recommend this line for anyone looking to upgrade their network gear until resolved;  segmenting IoT devices such as Chromecasts and such is tablestakes with their target home consumer. I can only hope that TPLink understands the importance of these new additions in their prioritization; it can open up a lot of potential new customers give the price points. 

@DavM As a sidenote: segmeting is just possible with different vLAN's. Without mDNS it takes carefull planning for devices to be able to see eachother (same vLAN).

For me it works now, but mDNS would be highly appreciated.

@DavM My thoughts exactly! Because I don't feel like sitting around waiting for them to implement the features while my network is less secure than I would like I ended up ordering a bunch of Unifi gear. For now, I have given up on my Omada gear and shelved it. I might revisit Omada in the future once these features are released, but as of right now I'm quite happy with the Unifi so I might just sell the Omada stuff.

I also sent them an email with the requests a while back and at that time they did not have any intention of implementing mDNS or E-R rules at the LAN level ACLs. It seems they have changed their minds but for me, it might be too late.

To anyone with IoT devices reading this thread with the intention of buying Omada gear as a cheaper Unifi alternative for your home network, don't do it!.... yet

@DavM the problem is that this is NOT the only limitation, missing feature or bug that the Omada system and devices have. There are a lot, and I think the same as you, it's so irritating having spent those money for a bad copy of Unifi which is promoted as a professional system. Worst is that they don't reply, don't support and don't promptly continous upgrade the system, in the last six months I didn't see anything relevant in the updates...so disappointed

@Xstreem @DavM  Just to be clear: are the features you are referring to not available in Omada SDN mode or also not in stand-alone mode?

I didn't try in stand-alone.

Maybe it's an idea to start a new topic with the missing and higly suggested features. People from TP-Link (Fae, Jonas) are reading this forum.

I agree, we pay a lot of bucks for prosumer goods and it's not weird to expect prosumer features.

Glad I found this thread.  I'll stick with my Tomato based router that has mDNS working and wait for TP-Link to get its act together.

Was hoping to be able to get that last piece switched over.  oh well..

@Xstreem 

Its a shame the mDNS is missing amongst other things, and i cant see it getting resolved.

There is too big a wall between the developers and the end users in TP-link that just was not hindering ubiquiti

Personally i moved from Ubiquiti to Omada only because of unresolved DHCP issues i had in that ecosystem otherwise id still be there.

Ive now got tplink APs, a poe switch and a pfsense VPN firewall

Whilst it is nice to have one web portal to manage all you EAP and vlans etc, this is just not anywhere near ready it seems.

Id not put this nsystem into production anywhere, home use only and then in one flat VLAN!
 

mDNS is a major issue that hinders much of the principle of VLANS for home automation and segmenting

1 .your cant print without much issues

2. you cant do googlecast

3. you cant play sonos

4. you cant play heos speakers

5., you can't aircast

software defined networking only works with big budgets.

Your best with one tool for each job.

Replacing your £50 Omada VPN router with an equivalently priced pfsense device will give you all that you need.

granularity to ACLs,

mDNS via avahi plug ins etc etc.

I'd love the system to be omada complete but only to get the critical "internet throughput" bit to light up in the web app.

but thats not happening till they resolve what they are missing

Wow, this blows my mind.  I actually came to Omada from Unifi as I was going to need to add another AP in my Unifi system to extend coverage, and mDNS casting, to my backyard.  While there are pros and cons with each controller, I think I'd gotten to where performance and manageability were good enough that I could stay on Omada - then this.  

This is a deal-breaker, for me.  With Unifi, and most every other AP setup I've had to date, I can cast from one network or VLAN to another.  I can see my Chromecast speaker groups, etc.  With this Omada and my EAP245s? Nope.  I hope i have lucky timing on some sort of enhancement by TPL, because I'm sending these all back the beginning of next week and returning to my Unifi setup if not.

I'm no professional, and figuring out my set up as I go, but what I've found is my pixel 2 phone can see all the Google homes / chromecasts on a different VLAN, and so can my Galaxy Tab 2. 

I got a new phone as the pixel 2 is dying (a Galaxy S21).  When I first set up the S21 it could see all the homes and chromecasts, but then this morning it couldn't.   We've also got a pixel 4 in the house and it was the same with this - at first it could see them, now it can't.   None of the ipads can see them.