@braswelljay said in Ubiquiti Edgeswitch console cable ...:

Will this usb to rj45 console cable work with the Ubiquiti edgeswitch?

Ubiquiti uses standard RS232 communication on a standard EIA-232 port. So this should work fine.

@scottalanmiller said in Basic Ubiquiti Network:

@eddiejennings said in Basic Ubiquiti Network:

@jaredbusch said in Basic Ubiquiti Network:

@eddiejennings said in Basic Ubiquiti Network:

The Dream Machine looks interesting, but I'm not inpressed with it also being an 8-port switch.

I have not looked at it yet, but are they fixed switch ports, or assignable? The ER-X is an example of this.

The documentation I've seen doesn't tell me much. It seems like the switch ports create just a plain layer 2 switch. They aren't assignable interfaces like the old EdgeRouter Lite's eth0, 1 and 2.

I believe that to be true.

The old ER Lite were software bridged only and not something you ever wanted to do. Horrible performance killer.

The ER-X and ER-4 have an actual switch chip. You don't have to make each port use it, but it is there.

So you could make eth0 be WAN and eth1 through eth3 be members of switch0

@Donahue said in Hyper-V teaming worth it for LACP?:

Yeah, i think i need to learn powershell. I probably rely too much on GUI's

Same fees, tenth of the time. 😉

@krisleslie said in Configuring QoS on a Edge Switch 48 Lite:

See for me I don't understand when and where to apply QoS. As one minute your told it's useless the other it's useful. Like what's missing is the context behind the usage. I agree with Jared in that if your enabling it, by that alone it doesn't mean something magical is happening, something specific is.

It's EXTREMELY USEFUL in VERY LIMITED CIRCUMSTANCES.

It's like a shotgun isn't useful at the grocery store, but in the limited case of hunting, it's useful.

@jaredbusch said in EdgeSwitch firmware 1.7.4.5075842 released:

Adding a VLAN is a snap.

It was already trivial!

@FATeknollogee

You've said that the bosses want the networks to be separate.
You've also said that company B provides a service for company A akin to B providing email services to A, so A needs access to B's network for that single service.

All that said - what is the goal in splitting the networks? Why do it? If you don't know why the bosses want this - ask them. Let's not worry about the how of splitting yet allowing things to continue to work, let's work on the why first - because the helps lead to the correct solution for the goal.

@Dashrender said in Time to gut the network - thoughts?:

@JaredBusch said in Time to gut the network - thoughts?:

Correct you do have QoS. It is on the VLAN, that contains the voice devices.

So the following is an incorrect assumption.

@scottalanmiller said in Time to gut the network - thoughts?:

You might want to LEAD with.... since we discovered that QoS was not set up properly and has never been a problem we can assume that QoS and ensuring call quality cannot be the reason.

Let them come up with a reason if you head that off at the pass.

No, it's correct. They didn't do their jobs properly. They neither did the sensible, cost effective thing for the business, which would have been to not have a VLAN at all. Nor did they properly do QoS for your VoIP traffic.

So no matter what, they didn't set up QoS correctly for you.

For a super simple no VPNs network, the USG works great, pretty straight forward and has some nice pictograms in the Controller.

The issue I ran into was a VPN tunnel between two endpoints that both had static IPs. This just didn't work. A few people have posted their work arounds on my UBNT thread about putting the IP into the JSON config file and not using the GUI to enter the static IPs and have it work.

and that is what my vendor said - but then there is this vendor
http://www.balticnetworks.com/ubiquiti-unifi-switch-48-port-poe-switch-750w.html

who indicates on their site that it does support Layer 3.