@Warlocc 

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 .

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.

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.

  @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.

  @Decolingo Based on some of the replies I've seen on these forums, including in this thread, I'll be moving to a competitor when the time comes, as well. They're offering much more for similar price points now.

Clive_A wrote

Hi @Decolingo 

Thanks for posting in our business forum.

Decolingo wrote

  @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.

Just a little reminder, Link Aggregation does not mean you will get an add-up speed on the Internet. 2.5G WAN, 2*1Gbps LAN, they would mostly utilize 1Gbps. It is layer 4 LAG which can aggregate the speed to 2Gbps.

All of the products we have now are layer 2 and 3 based. No intention for layer 4 yet. The LAG is under market investigation.

Please add a vote then.

  @Clive_A I have no idea what you are talking about. But then again, neither do you. Protocol layers have no relevancy to absolute bandwidth.

My post stands. Thanks for attempting to play.

  @Clive_A we're talking link aggregation between routers and switches. Not sure why you'd want to stick two NICs in a single PC -- are you trying to stream a 20 4K movies at once on a single computer? Or conduct some pointless "speed test"?

If you run a hotel, a campground, or something similar, 1.5 or 3gig from your ISP isn't for bragging rights at the bar, it's important for your customers. No link aggregation support in TPLink routers is either hardware-limited, or a gambit hoping customers will upgrade all their downstream equipment to multi-gig. Since the company's market positioning is largely based on price, that's a fool's errand.

TPLink makes quality hardware and has solid software -- a new concept for the pricepoint for sure. I'm a paying customer with a real need -- I even use TPLink equipment at home. If you want to argue with someone for the sake or arguing, find someone else -- you obviously don't know what you're talking about.