TP-LINK Smart Switches anyone?

Derelict

Because they are junk.

robi

They are not junk. They are pretty reliable pieces of hardware, especially for their price.

I have the TL-SG108E and I'm quite confused by the separation of the VLAN membership and the PVID.
If I set a port to untagged and member of a VLAN (like 70), why do I have to manually set the PVID (to 70) for this port AGAIN?
Is there any use case when the PVID doesn't need to be set to that VLAN ID?
thanks

The interfaces on various TP-Link switch types vary depending on their "feature level".
If you look at the config file you can export as a backup from the web interface using a text editor, you'll see lots of cisco IOS-style commands. Some TP-Link models only support "GENERAL" type to be specified for ports, that means the ingress and the egress direction of packets has to be specified separately, for example on TL-SG2210P or T1600G-52TS:```
interface gigabitEthernet 1/0/6
switchport general allowed vlan 420 untagged
switchport pvid 420


Other higher-class models like TL-SG5428 or T2600G-28MPS have this single command, for the same function:```
interface gigabitEthernet 1/0/6
  switchport access vlan 420

This reflects on the web interface too, PVID is set automatically if port type is ACCESS.
Either CLI or WebIf, one model has two commands to be entered, the other has only one. Why is that, I don't know, but I suppose it's for marketing reasons - perhaps they try to make pricier models look more professional.

It's not like you have to configure hundreds of ports every day. One can live with this in any standard or mid-size office environment, and not pay 10x price for a Cisco labelled noisy box.
Apart from this, they work as expected. Running cold, silent, 24 hours a day for many years. Set it and forget it.

johnpoz

The cheap ones this thread is about does not allow for text export of the config that I can see the file you can download is not in normal text format.

Are you saying there is a way to remove vlan 1 from ports? It does not seem possible with the low end model that is discussion here. TL-SG108E, and there seems to be a cosmetic bug that marks like any tagged packet as bad.. While this does not make the switch junk - it does prevent actual use of the counters for any sort of troubleshooting in any sense where tag vlans are used.

I would not call them junk like Derelict - but they are lacking some basics that would make them great little devices for the price point for any small setup for sure. But they still doing what they are meant to do.. Working error counters, and the ability to remove vlan 1 would make them more useful to be sure.

robi

@johnpoz:

The cheap ones this thread is about does not allow for text export of the config that I can see the file you can download is not in normal text format.

All models I quoted above and TL-SG2216, TL-SG2008 from my experience, can export config backup from web interface. They give you a file with .cfg extension, which you can edit with any text editor.

johnpoz

And those are not the one that you actually quoted being discussed.

you quoted
https://forum.pfsense.org/index.php?topic=76022.msg721163#msg721163

Which clearly stated the "I have the TL-SG108E" Which while it allows you to download a backup cfg file - it is not text editable file.

robi

Back in 2014, when I opened this thread, I intended it to be genearally about TP-Link switches, not only particular models. Since this is not TP-Link's support forum, I guess we don't really have to be so strict.
Yes I quoted a certain message reffering to that type, but nowhere in my answer I stated that that specific model has to have this feature. I outlined though, that there are many switch families in the TP-Link product line, and simply because the lowest end model is not a full-featured piece, that doesn't mean that higher models aren't.

johnpoz

"not a full-featured piece, that doesn't mean that higher models aren't."

Agreed.. My point was you were pointing to something that the user/post you quoted can not do is all.

robi

Well that's true….

But what the user can do however (based on information in this topic) is to choose the apropriate model to suit his/her needs. Unfortunately manufacturers (all of them, not only tplink) don't make publicly available detailed tech documentation, most of the advanced features are being discovered by trial and error, after one buys the hardware.

This is the reason why I always describe in detail my experiences with certain devices, so that people looking forward to acquire them, could perhaps save time and money wasting on hardware unsuitable for their needs, or on hardware which could be overkilling/overpriced.

stephenw10

I have the TL-SG1016DE 1.0. I wouldn't go as far as calling it junk, it's still good as a 16 port fanless gigabit switch. I use it for testing various VLAN setups but I would not use it in any scenario requiring isolation for security purposes.

However I hear good things about the full managed TP-Link models. Haven't ever tried one myself….

Steve

Derelict

Specifically commenting about the SG108E. Stand by it. :)

BrucexLing

@marcf:

The TP Easy Smart switches do support trunking (if by trunking you mean tagging multiple vlans on a single port to carry those networks to another managed switch).

I'm running two of this in a production environment and there is a trunk line between them to carry the VLANs. Have not had a single problem.

I'm purchasing a Netgear ProSafe smart switch to try out - it has a built in webUI instead of relying solely on a windows utility for configuration like the TP-LINK. For the price point though I've been happy with TP-LINK.

I am just starting to learn about VLANs and switch capabilty. I now have an older TL-SG108E switch and have just bought a new TL-SG1024DE switch (both Easy Smart switches). The documentation and configuration menu for the older TL-SG108E makes reference to Port Trunking so I jumped to the conclusion that I would be able to span VLANs across these two switches, and so bought the newer switch too. When I look at the documentation for the newer switch I see that TP-Link have done what appears to be a global search and replace of the term “Trunk” with the term “LAG”. This bit of editing was only partly successful though, because there are still references to Trunking persisting in the newer document.

I would conclude that I have just been misled by TP-Link’s misuse of terminology, except for the earlier post by marcf (quoted here) where he claims to be successfully Trunking between two Easy Smart switches.

I, and probably others, would much appreciate if someone could condense the wisdom gained over the last 3 years on this topic into a statement of just what these Easy Smart switches are capable of. (Beyond the role of door stop of course Derelict https://forum.pfsense.org/Smileys/default/wink.gif)

jahonix

Someone is mixing up the terms LAG (Link Aggregation Group) and Trunking.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Link_aggregation
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trunking#Computer_networks

Both sing in the same choir but with different pitch.

Derelict

If you can tag vlans on both sides you can "trunk" the vlans between switches.

BrucexLing

Thanks guys. I now see the distinction between Port Trunking and Ethernet Trunking. In a sense one is the inverse of the other?

And Derelict, I will give your test suggestion a work out as soon as I can.