@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

But, like I said, if you are moving everything, you can simply backup and restore, and then update DNS.

@scottalanmiller said in UNMS Cloud:

@JaredBusch said in UNMS Cloud:

Nothing is free, so I am curious, and have not been able to find, what they get out of this.

Loss leader. Netgear already does this, so lacking it meant being behind their competition.

I know you love Netgear, but they are not competition to me. I never consider them.

@FATeknollogee said in UNMS backup question:

@JaredBusch said in UNMS backup question:

If you want to restore an individual unit, that process is already built into the system so what are you trying to get exported?

I'm just asking for info purposes in case of a future restore.

You can download a specific device backup from within UNMS. When you do so, it asks you if you want one for restoring to the same system or a different system (because of the UNMS key negotiation).

@JaredBusch said in EdgeOS 2.0.3 released and available in UNMS:

@dafyre said in EdgeOS 2.0.3 released and available in UNMS:

@JaredBusch said in EdgeOS 2.0.3 released and available in UNMS:

@davide-bonavita said in EdgeOS 2.0.3 released and available in UNMS:

lol it was bugged as fu**
and now "Throughput degradation by 5-10% when comparing with v1.10.9 firmware with older kernel"

Yeah the comments.. I have not been following the beta cycle as I have been too busy.

I did put it on a test router (ERL) with no issues.

Does the 2.0.x series work with ZT? I have an ERX now and was going to try it out.

The ERX doesn't work well with the 2.0.X firmware yet from what I have seen.

But yes. You can put ZT on the 2.X firmware.

Thanks for the heads up. I already have routing and all set up through a VM, so it's not critical, just thought I'd ask.

@FATeknollogee said in Edgerouter experts: UNMS to gui:

@JaredBusch said in Edgerouter experts: UNMS to gui:

No. Why would you want that anyway? You have the terminal already. If you really need the GUI, drop a quick allow in the firewall rules for your current public IP.

I like to have access to the GUI, I thought there was some "backdoor" way through UNMS.
The firewall rule is good enough, thanks.

It provides access to the CLI, but not to the GUI. If you want GUI access in that way, the trick is to make a remote proxy (a la Nginx) and do it that way, no need for UNMS.

I updated all the sites that could be rebooted mid work day already.

The rest will happen this evening.

@dbeato said in UNMS 0.12 rc2 released yesterday:

@bnrstnr said in UNMS 0.12 rc2 released yesterday:

DHCP stuff being in there for the EdgeRouter devices, but I also don't see it in the added features list. Regardless, it's pretty useful for me.

It was there before.

Yes, it has been there since at least version 0.10.0

@dbeato @JaredBusch thanks for the info. If I get time might give it a go over the weekend. Otherwise job for Monday morning

@dashrender said in Ubiquiti publicly rolls out UNMS Beta:

@scottalanmiller said in Ubiquiti publicly rolls out UNMS Beta:

@dashrender said in Ubiquiti publicly rolls out UNMS Beta:

@scottalanmiller said in Ubiquiti publicly rolls out UNMS Beta:

@dashrender said in Ubiquiti publicly rolls out UNMS Beta:

@scottalanmiller said in Ubiquiti publicly rolls out UNMS Beta:

@dashrender said in Ubiquiti publicly rolls out UNMS Beta:

@scottalanmiller said in Ubiquiti publicly rolls out UNMS Beta:

@dashrender said in Ubiquiti publicly rolls out UNMS Beta:

@scottalanmiller said in Ubiquiti publicly rolls out UNMS Beta:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Software_release_life_cycle

0_1513005080161_Software_dev2.svg.png

Beta literally means it's not reached candidacy for release yet. RC is still not released, but is what they might consider for release once tested. Notice Beta is in the middle of the "non-released" period.

These are as the terms have always been used, even going back to the early 1980s and, I assume, long before that. Release being such a structured term that it is nearly impossible to define released without using the term released itself.

While I'm sure this has no baring in reality - for me release is a point but the public can get support for the thing.

That's not quite accurate. There is no reason that something unreleased can't offer support. How else do you really do your testing, get feedback, and so forth? It's an expectation that anything that the public can get would get some amount of support most likely, because otherwise, what is the purpose of the public nature of the testing?

Perhaps I should have added the words "expect to" to the support portion. As you said with the other thread, There should be no expectation of support for the product that was still in beta.

So, here is a question then, does Microsoft ever release software? Because nothing that MS makes comes with support.

What about Debian Linux, is it ever released?

Expect <> free.

But free software has all the same release guidelines as commercial software. And MS products aren't normally free.

Again - what does cost have to do with anything?

As I also said - you'd all probably disagree with me.

Because you mentioned it in the post I quoted.

Please highlight the part where I mentioned costs.

Same thing I quoted and you responded to.

0_1513007495650_DeepinScreenshot_select-area_20171211095123.png

@jaredbusch said in Trying the UNMS built in updater:

refreshed the browser and it shows 0.9.2 so the updater stalled visibly, but did finish.

0_1502896674409_d9e240eb-9be8-4b92-8c9a-619694446bb3-image.png

Just like on prom night. . .

Youtube Video

@hobbit666 said in How to install the Ubiquiti UNMS on Debian 9.1:

Haven't got enough EdgeSwitch out there yet to need central management
🙂

Those are not in yet anyway. Soon™

@bigbear said in Ubiquiti UNMS - First impressions:

@marcinozga said in Ubiquiti UNMS - First impressions:

It doesn't support Toughswitches yet, no support for NVR or cameras, no support for Mfi devices. I wish it would replace Unifi controller too. At the moment it only picked up 2 nano stations, so just too limited for me. Perhaps in the future they add additional devices, firmware upgrades alone across the board would be huge.

Isnt mFi pretty much dead? Really sucks too but I think on ubnt forums the pressed and got leadership to admit they abandoned it in the vine...

I believe that is correct. It was in one of the threads about the ancient vulnerability in them not getting patched or something like that.

@gjacobse said in Ubiquiti released EdgeOS 1.9.7:

@scottalanmiller said in Ubiquiti released EdgeOS 1.9.7:

Just got my EdgeRouter for home hooked up after years of it disconnected.

Welcome back to the world of Internet.....

And to good Internet equipment, as well!

Seems pretty clear that UBNT has gone public with this at this point.