TP-LINK Smart Switches anyone?
-
I didn't find a way to avoid that. As I wrote, it seems you can't have a port with tagged-only traffic, a PVID must be set. That means you'd have to sacrifice a (dummy) VLAN number to catch the untagged traffic. Not a big problem as you can have up to 512 VLANs simultaneously (on the Smart series).
Can't you just set the PVID to 4095 (the "discard" VLAN)?
-
No because the PVID appears as a dropdown box in the GUI, and it contains only the defined VLANs. Could work in CLI though, but I guess that may cause unpredictable results when looking at the GUI…
-
Here purchased two of the TP-Link Easy switches (24 ports each).
That said one is mounted inside of a Leviton can which replaced a small 24 port generic switch.
I haven't had much time to play other than I am over port capacity on the two switches and had to add my old non managed Gb switches back into play (also 24 port).
-
I was looking for a 16port smart switch aswell and ended up getting a Cisco SG300 20 port and have not looked back, I was initially looking at the 200 series but then decided to get the best i could afford. most cisco equipment costs an arm and a leg but surprisingly the SG-200 18 port was cheaper here than most of the 16port competitors(TPlink did not have a gigabit smart switch with the same features available here at the time). Now with the 300 series i got 2 more ports (having 4 uplink ports ontop of the 16 ports i was looking for has been very helpful and gives me more room to grow) and more features than i needed at the time and firmware upgrades keep adding more. The one feature the hp pro-curve had cisco did not was that you could turn off the link LEDs to save power, upgraded the firmware on my cisco before i started using it and the feature was now added.
Ive had mixed experences with TP-Link equipment, i find that in basic operation it works well but start doing anything complex and performance goes down. You will not get full gigabit thoughput on every port at once but then in a home enviroment do you really need to. if it works for you then great but price up all the options, you might be surprised as i was.
-
I was looking for a 16port smart switch aswell and ended up getting a Cisco SG300 20 port and have not looked back
I've been looking at it too, but unfortunately the price for it in my area is almost 4x the price of the TL-SG2216. And I needed 2 of them.
-
I was looking for a 16port smart switch aswell and ended up getting a Cisco SG300 20 port and have not looked back
I've been looking at it too, but unfortunately the price for it in my area is almost 4x the price of the TL-SG2216. And I needed 2 of them.
The price is way more because the SG300 series is L3. The best comparable would be the SG200 series, which is the L2 series. I guess the one that comes closest is the SG200-18; It will be still more expensive than a TP-Link, but that is what I would consider normal.
As most of the time; you get what you pay for, and there's rarely such a thing as free lunch.
FWIW: I'm using a couple SG200 series @home instead of the TL-SG2216 I had previously, and am also very satisfied. But that's not because the TP-link had issues, I just needed other kind of setup over time.my €0.02 -> YMMV. ;)
-
I was looking for a 16port smart switch aswell and ended up getting a Cisco SG300 20 port and have not looked back
I've been looking at it too, but unfortunately the price for it in my area is almost 4x the price of the TL-SG2216. And I needed 2 of them.
The price is way more because the SG300 series is L3. The best comparable would be the SG200 series, which is the L2 series. I guess the one that comes closest is the SG200-18; It will be still more expensive than a TP-Link, but that is what I would consider normal.
As most of the time; you get what you pay for, and there's rarely such a thing as free lunch.
FWIW: I'm using a couple SG200 series @home instead of the TL-SG2216 I had previously, and am also very satisfied. But that's not because the TP-link had issues, I just needed other kind of setup over time.my €0.02 -> YMMV. ;)
layer 2/3 modes are actually switchable to get MAC based vlans I run mine in layer 2 mode and do the routing in pfsense. However I agree that the 200 series is more comparable to the tl-SG2216. I had budgeted for the SG200-18 but after selling my netgear 8 port for about the difference i could afford the SG300-20, I didn't really need the extra features at the end of the day i like having things to be able to play with but my going upto the best i could afford it also provided a future proof solution. While no one has a crystal ball i advise you to look beyond what you need right now and try and look into what you may need in the future or else the cheaper solution may end up being more expensive when you have to augment it or replace it. Im going through this with my TPlink access point at the moment, i thought it would be ok for what i needed at home but now im finding I just have to bite the bullet and spend the money, doing this twice has costed me more in the long run.
I certainly know that in the right situation tplink gear can be dead on for price/performance/features, however that use case is small so know what your getting into. same thing goes for any brad/manufacturer.
-
Cisco SG200-18 also costs more than twice of the price of TL-SG2216.
I've done some further testing with my TL-SG2216 pair, and I must say I'm perfectly satisfied of the results. Soon they will be installed to their final location. I admit that Cisco as a brand is much more respected one than the others - but for my needs, I'll be perfectly fine with my TP-Links. I really don't see the reason to just pay for the brand name, while in my setup they would perform equally well.
-
Yup here I come from using Cisco in a "work" environment; work was an airline for many many years.
Cisco is embedded/ingrained in my head; it is a good product.
My PFSense firewall is at home.
I did initially use Cisco stuff at home; then went to downsizing the stuff to smaller footprint non managed switches, then to unmanaged "el cheapo" Gb switches; then to the TP-Link Managed switches which have worked fine for me.
I was just looking for a reasonably priced product for my home and that would work with my automation stuff.
I push the two 24 port switches and they are at port capacity such that I have more switches in place today (well and POE stuff). I have little Aopen DE's connected to the GB network running XBMC. (well in every room that has an LCD TV). I have tested all of the streaming HD stuff and they do fine. I also have some 20 touchscreens connected via Gb connectivity; they have multiple CCTV streaming video streams plus TV streaming and an assortment of other stuff to manage my automation. I have not broken the two switches yet. My home is sort of a sandbox and I have filled up about 1/2 of a class c subnet with a variety of connected do whats; well need to go to a full class c as I am running of of IPs.
I do side stuff stuff related to my hobbies. Helping (well forum moderation) a new company in Taiwan called Securifi which has a neato product that I am playing with called the Almond +.
This is a plug for the Almond plus as it is a combo router, firewall, Wireless Gb (well AC) and automation touch screen about 4" square and maybe 1.5" thick that talks Zigbee and Z-Wave and wireless automation protocols.
That said Securifi just installed a few of the TP-Link managed switches in their offices in Taiwan and they are really happy with them.
-
I've got a TL-SG2216 at home, it works fine with pfSense using VLAN's setup with a Trunk to pfSense and my Hyper-V Server, also you can check out a copy of the web interface here http://www.tp-link.com/en/support/emulators/?pcid=204
-
My experience with TP-Link products, not only switches, is that you get what you pay for. Generally it works, but biggest downside is firmware. It tends to be very buggy. I wouldn't use it in any mission critical or business environment, but for home use it's fine and excellent value. Honestly, I don't have much better experience with Cisco small business line of products.
-
Honestly, I don't have much better experience with Cisco small business line of products.
Agree with this statement.
-
Yup; here installed one TP-Link 24 port Easy Smart switch inside of a Leviton 42" media cabinet.
Its quiet, cool and fits nicely inside of my media cabinet.
The second TP-Link 24 port Easy Smart switch is sitting on a rack and just dedicated to servers and to date has not caused me any issues.
Personally I see TP-Link pushing on the commercial side and honestly now providing some quality stuff at reasonable prices.
The above noted I would recommend the TP-Link line of commercial stuff for that typical SOHO office with some 20 or so desktop clients and one server type of environment running on a tight IT budget.
-
Can you confirm if the Easy Smart range have a webgui? There seemed to references to one in the manual for the 16port version but not the 8port.
Also you could clear up the original question from this thread: can you do a trunked VLAN connection such that you can use it to get more interfaces with pfSense?Steve
-
Can you confirm if the Easy Smart range have a webgui? There seemed to references to one in the manual for the 16port version but not the 8port.
No cuz I only have the 24 port Easy Smart Switches.
Thinking I purchased the two of them for less than $150 USD each with free shipping.
Wow; just looked at the 8 port Easy Smart Switch and features. Amazing.
$72 USD is a bit high right now for it. $50 USD sounds better though.
I do not see why the OS would be much different than the 24 port Easy Smart Switch.
Centrally manage all Easy Smart Switches with Easy Smart Configuration Utility
This offered Easy Smart Configuration Utility looks just like the built in GUI. (I have played with it).
It doesn't look though like the GUI is built into the device itself from the description I am reading on the TP-Link Website.
I prefer to have it built in; especially for a small 8 port managed switch; then again I guess this makes it a bit more secure?
1.0-01.jpg)
http://www.tp-link.us/products/details/?categoryid=2878&model=TL-SG108E#over
-
Also you could clear up the original question from this thread: can you do a trunked VLAN connection such that you can use it to get more interfaces with pfSense?
will do
-
Can you confirm if the Easy Smart range have a webgui? There seemed to references to one in the manual for the 16port version but not the 8port.
Also you could clear up the original question from this thread: can you do a trunked VLAN connection such that you can use it to get more interfaces with pfSense?Yes - it works with pfSense trunked, you can create as many as 512 VLANs in the switch and give them all to pfSense on one interface as tagged packets. In pfSense you can create then virtual interfaces for them. I've tested this successfully with two VLANs.
That's why I finally bought two TP-Link TL-SG2216. They both are Easy Smart and have webgui and cli interfaces. I'm planning to use about 5-6 VLANs at the beginning. -
So you guys got me playing this morning with the TP-Link TL-SG1042DE with just the Easysmart GUI interface (no CLI).
-
That's why I finally bought two TP-Link TL-SG2216. They both are Easy Smart and have webgui and cli interfaces.
Erm… am I missing something here. :-\ Forgive me Robi if I am. The TL-SG2216 is not in the Easy Smart range hence it has all the features you might expect from an entry level managed switch like webgui and CLI etc. The Easy Smart, such as the one Pete has, is cut right back to allow them to offer it as cheaply as possible. It appears to me that they are directly competing with Netgears 'Prosafe Plus' range, GS105E, GS108E etc, which offer some entry level management features, including VLANs, but do not have a webgui. You have to use their Windows only utility, boo! If TP-Links competing range does have a webgui then that's a distinct advantage. I huge advantage in my house where I have no Windows boxes. ;)
Pete's screenshot appears to show that at least the 24port model does have a webgui. Unfortunately it's the entry level 8 port model I'm most interested in.
Edit: Or is that a screenshot of the utility?
Steve
-
Actually the Web GUI on the switch is a bit simpler looking than the management application.
Yeah from the description it appears that the EasySmart 8 and 16 port switches do not have a built in Web GUI.
The EasySmart managment application might run in Linux as its Java.
\TP-LINK\Easy Smart Configuration Utility\jre\lib
05/25/2014 04:58 PM
<dir> .
05/25/2014 04:58 PM<dir> ..
05/16/2013 11:38 AM 155 accessibility.properties
05/16/2013 11:38 AM 123,547 alt-rt.jar
03/16/2014 02:40 PM<dir> applet
05/16/2013 11:38 AM 1,232 calendars.properties
05/16/2013 11:38 AM 3,605,930 charsets.jar
05/16/2013 11:38 AM 75,075 classlist
03/16/2014 02:41 PM<dir> cmm
05/16/2013 11:38 AM 5,483 content-types.properties
05/16/2013 11:38 AM 4,200 currency.data
03/16/2014 02:41 PM<dir> deploy
05/16/2013 11:38 AM 4,230,196 deploy.jar
03/16/2014 02:41 PM<dir> ext
05/25/2014 04:58 PM 0 EZ.txt
05/16/2013 11:38 AM 3,928 flavormap.properties
05/16/2013 11:38 AM 3,670 fontconfig.bfc
05/16/2013 11:38 AM 10,479 fontconfig.properties.src
03/16/2014 02:41 PM<dir> fonts
03/16/2014 02:41 PM<dir> i386
03/16/2014 02:41 PM<dir> images
05/16/2013 11:38 AM 29 javafx.properties
05/16/2013 11:38 AM 894,198 javaws.jar
05/16/2013 11:38 AM 109,196 jce.jar
05/16/2013 11:38 AM 462,133 jfr.jar
05/16/2013 11:38 AM 15,092,678 jfxrt.jar
05/16/2013 11:38 AM 580,526 jsse.jar
05/16/2013 11:38 AM 4,226 jvm.hprof.txt
05/16/2013 11:38 AM 39,840 launcher.exe
05/16/2013 11:38 AM 2,455 logging.properties
03/16/2014 02:41 PM<dir> management
05/16/2013 11:38 AM 385 management-agent.jar
05/16/2013 11:38 AM 2,196 meta-index
05/16/2013 11:38 AM 3,070 net.properties
05/16/2013 11:38 AM 1,905,758 plugin.jar
05/16/2013 11:38 AM 2,796 psfont.properties.ja
05/16/2013 11:38 AM 10,393 psfontj2d.properties
05/16/2013 11:38 AM 2,466,336 resources.jar
05/16/2013 11:38 AM 60,008,624 rt.jar
03/16/2014 02:41 PM<dir> security
03/16/2014 02:41 PM<dir> servicetag
05/16/2013 11:38 AM 1,210 sound.properties
05/16/2013 11:38 AM 8,138 tzmappings
03/16/2014 02:41 PM<dir> zi</dir>
</dir>
</dir>
</dir>
</dir>
</dir>
</dir>
</dir>
</dir>
</dir>
</dir>
</dir>
</dir>
