Feature requests for Omada Controller

This thread has been locked for further replies. You can start a new thread to share your ideas or ask questions.

Feature requests for Omada Controller

This thread has been locked for further replies. You can start a new thread to share your ideas or ask questions.
39 Reply
Re:Feature requests for Omada Controller
2020-06-20 23:54:21 - last edited 2020-06-20 23:55:21

@Rod-IT, ah, I see. Yes, the count of client devices differs from the number of clients shown on the page. I guess that the update times for the count and the »Clients« page are different, the headline counter is updated more often.

༺ 0100 1101 0010 10ཏ1 0010 0110 1010 1110 ༻
  0  
  0  
#22
Options
Re:Feature requests for Omada Controller
2020-06-30 20:34:51

@R1D2 Yep I also vote for the client isolation n7. I use pfsense captive portal for my guest network  as I have currently several APs from different brands so I really need it.

  1  
  1  
#23
Options
Re:Feature requests for Omada Controller
2020-10-01 19:50:14

@R1D2 I would like to add my vote for this important feature!

 

7. Client isolation

Please consider to add a setting for »Client Isolation« again. It would be not necessary to change the current existing setting »Guest Network«, which still could co-exist and which could enable client isolation, too.  But it would be beneficial to only enable client isolation without the invisible ACLs being set when using »Guest Network« setting. This would also simplify access from guest users to the OC200 portal when OC200 is the only device in the (wired) LAN.

  0  
  0  
#24
Options
Re:Feature requests for Omada Controller
2020-10-01 19:51:30
Same here! I am currently in the same boat. Client isolation was a really great feature to have!!
  0  
  0  
#25
Options
Re:Feature requests for Omada Controller
2020-10-07 06:02:43

Vote here for #3 Proxy capability.

 

Just tried to set this up for a client (that use a reverse proxy for anything that needs external connectivity) and was shocked to find it does not work.

 

Can't imagine too many people want to open custom ports through their firewall specifically for the Omada software

  0  
  0  
#26
Options
Re:Feature requests for Omada Controller
2020-11-03 21:18:47 - last edited 2020-11-03 21:30:11

@forrest 

I've just registered to the forum only to say: PLEASE separate "guest network" from "client isolation".

There is no sane reason for combining "client isolation" and "block private (rfc1918) networks" in a single setting. Just implement two check boxes in a common section:

______

guest network settings:

[x] client isolation

[x] block private (rfc1918) networks

______

 

reason:

I've put untrusted wifi (IoT) device in their own SSID/VLAN network. They are supposed to access local services, but they shouldn't talk to each other when connected to the EAP. All of them are just local - no internet involved. This scenario was broken by combining "client isolation" and "block private networks" in a single "guest network" setting.

  0  
  0  
#27
Options
Re:Feature requests for Omada Controller
2020-11-05 09:32:06

 

imoula wrote

@forrest 

I've just registered to the forum only to say: PLEASE separate "guest network" from "client isolation".

There is no sane reason for combining "client isolation" and "block private (rfc1918) networks" in a single setting. Just implement two check boxes in a common section:

______

guest network settings:

[x] client isolation

[x] block private (rfc1918) networks

______

 

Forrest did transfer moderation over to Fae.

 

Dear Fae, please add one more vote for re-introducing the »Client Isolation« setting in Omada Controller. We now should have ~24 votes for this request.

 

imoula, yes, it was a pretty bad idea by TP-Link to remove »Client Isolation« (which was falsely called »SSID Isolation«, it didn't isolate SSIDs) in Omada Controller V3.

 

Both settings, »Client Isolation« as well as »Guest Network« could easily co-exist. The former setting would be for professionals, the latter for home users.

༺ 0100 1101 0010 10ཏ1 0010 0110 1010 1110 ༻
  0  
  0  
#28
Options
Re:Feature requests for Omada Controller
2020-11-05 11:15:06

Dear @R1D2,

 

I've written it down. Thank you!

>> Omada EAP Firmware Trial Available Here << *Try filtering posts on each forum by Label of [Early Access]*
  0  
  0  
#29
Options
Re:Feature requests for Omada Controller
2020-11-05 14:28:06

@R1D2 

Many thanks! I'm looking forward to a firmware update :-)

  0  
  0  
#30
Options
Re:Feature requests for Omada Controller
2020-12-07 14:55:22

@R1D2 Sorry - about time I jumped in...

 

It seems to me that the DNS update has not occurred yet.  However I'm still seeing some clients pull a hostname from somewhere - I'm not sure where.  I'm running PFSense and DNS resolver (named I think).

 

For SNMP polling - the capability still remains in the EAP's (I think).  I read some time back about a workaround whereby you could un-adopt an EAP.  Login via the web interface, then configure the SNMP settings as needed.  Once re-adopted, the EAP still responds to SNMP requests using the generic SNMP MIBs.  Of course there is a question as to whether TP-LINK have their own MIB base - anyone?  Either way, enabling the functionality from within Omada should be straight forward.

 

For those with concerns over JAVA and user separation - have you considered taking a look at docker?  I run the software controller in a separate container.  Whevener a new release occurs, 'mbentley' (what a kind chap!) updates his images accordingly and, as if by magic, we can quickly pull the image and restart the container.

 

I believe this approach is becoming adopted by many organisations currently, and provides for many advantages in an ever-more cloud centric world.

 

For myself, I acquired an HP ml350p earlier this year, which now runs around 25 separate containers with a wide variety of containerised applications.  The Omada Software-Controller is but one of these.

 

I offer my vote for DNS, SNMP, and using an existing MongoDB servver - especially as containerisation makes shared database servers (or in their own containers) far easier to maintain and manage.

 

 

 

 

 

 

  0  
  0  
#31
Options