Future Consideration [FEATURE REQUEST]: ER8411 - add LAN LAG (Link Aggregation) feature
Hi Team, @Fae ,
Could you please tell - do you have in your roadmap a plan to add LAG to ER8411? And can this model support the LAG feature at all?
Thank you!
- Copy Link
- Subscribe
- Bookmark
- Report Inappropriate Content
- Copy Link
- Report Inappropriate Content
Hopefully somebody from the dev team will notice us requesting this feature.
I am happy with the device, and I am pretty sure the hw is completelly capable of handling LAG , so i don't see why they wouldn't do it .
- Copy Link
- Report Inappropriate Content
Absolutely agree that this is a workaround solution, but:
1. We still have not received a confirmation from TP-Link that this feature is doable for ER8411. However, due to hardware limitations, it is not possible for ER7206 and other ERs.
2. We have no estimations, ETA or any promises that this feature will be available at all.
3. What alternatives do we have? Ubiquiti has the same issue. Fortinet - the price is double + annual licenses.
4. In case we get a new FW with LAG, how risky will it be to use it in production systems without proper testing? This testing will take more time and money than several hundred for additional switches.
Any other ideas?
- Copy Link
- Report Inappropriate Content
Thanks for posting in our business forum.
Warlocc wrote
@Alex_UTS wrote
Absolutely agree that this is a workaround solution, but:
1. We still have not received a confirmation from TP-Link that this feature is doable for ER8411. However, due to hardware limitations, it is not possible for ER7206 and other ERs.
2. We have no estimations, ETA or any promises that this feature will be available at all.
3. What alternatives do we have? Ubiquiti has the same issue. Fortinet - the price is double + annual licenses.
4. In case we get a new FW with LAG, how risky will it be to use it in production systems without proper testing? This testing will take more time and money than several hundred for additional switches.
Any other ideas?
If I am not informed by the dev that is under consideration, I will not change the label of this post.
Future Consideration has explained the status of this thread.
If you are desperate for this feature, please consider an alternative if you think it is crucial to your network.
Evaluation and the road to this feature will take time. I am not gonna guarantee anything without a confirmation from the dev. And dev will not guarantee me as well because there are projects going on as V5.15 will also be a big release and they are preparing for that.
When we evaluate the feature requests, we will take into the moves of our competitors. Put differently, if UBNT does not support LAG on the router, we might not consider it.
Beyond that, the dev will also consider the chipset and architecture of the chip.
For you, it is a missing feature that we did not guarantee from the very beginning of its release. You should keep that in mind not everything is gonna be added by your request. Not absolute. And we still have many other aspects to consider.
Please be patient as I am consulting with the dev again on this.
- Copy Link
- Report Inappropriate Content
Hi @Alex_UTS and all,
LAG for ER8411 is not considered this year(2024). Dev has looked into this feature now and has started market research.
The schedule is full at this point. We have ruled out it at this moment.
Still in the evaluation phase. I will collect your described use scenario for the dev to mark the priority this week. (This is not a guarantee to any degree either.) For others who did not describe the usage, I cannot write your single line in the report as it does not make any sense in the scenario description.
- Copy Link
- Report Inappropriate Content
- Copy Link
- Report Inappropriate Content
In order to have LAG/LACP you must have STP the very least. or else the switch will just loop.
They don't even have STP in the ER8411.
Kinda sad.
- Copy Link
- Report Inappropriate Content
- Copy Link
- Report Inappropriate Content
mbze430 wrote
In order to have LAG/LACP you must have STP the very least. or else the switch will just loop.
They don't even have STP in the ER8411.
Kinda sad.
Spanning Tree support isn't required for static LAGs or LACP. Since each side is aware that the links are bonded, STP isn't needed to detect loops.
- Copy Link
- Report Inappropriate Content
@Alex_UTS, I also want support for static LAGs (or ideally LACP) on a 2.5G-capable TP Link router (like maybe the upcoming ER-7412-M2).
Use case is pretty simple: Existing networks with 1gig WAN ports where I'm moving ISP service to 1.5gig or more. The router can take advantage of the extra bandwidth via its 2.5G port, but I can't share that downstream to the rest of the network unless 1) I upgrade all downstream hardware with 2.5G ports or 2) I plug everything into the router. Neither apporach works as there just aren't enough ports on the router -- that's why I have a bunch of (TPLink) switches. That's aside from PoE considerations, LAG for my multiport WAPs, and so on.
Your competition does support this. Ubiquiti has it, Cisco has it, others have it. Sometimes it's just static LAGs and not LACP, but even static LAGs are better than nothing.
Availability of the LAG or LACP support in a multi-gigabit router (ideally 2.5G for cost reasons) will determine if my routers get replaced with newer TP Link units, or if I have to find something else and live with the reduced one-stop-management I get from Omada today.
- Copy Link
- Report Inappropriate Content
Information
Helpful: 48
Views: 5692
Replies: 53
Voters 47
