@UKJim 

If the 215RX bridge is anything like the TPlink wall APs which also have 3 LAN ports, one with POE, then they should just work as if they were ports of the same switch the 215TX is plugged into.

The most common error using these ports is to 'enable' them via the vlan section of the device on the controller when in reality what that does is VLAN TAG the packets on those ports, instead of leaving them untagged.

Capturing packets on each port via Wireshark running on a laptop should give you a fast answer as to what is working and what not.

  @d0ugmac1 

Hi Doug, thanks for your help again.

The nearest I can find to what you're talking about is this article:-

https://www.tp-link.com/uk/support/faq/3312/

But I cannot find any actual settings for these devices showing the names of the 3 ports found at the bottom of the EAP21x bridges.

If I plug my laptop into any of these ports it acquires an address from DHCP.

But if I try plugging an EAP650 into these ports the EAP21x thinks it has become a "wired" device, presumably getting connectivity from the EAP650 which is meshed to other EAP650's.

Has the settings to make the ports untagged not been implemented in the EAP21x units?

  @UKJim 

Hmmm.  That does sound like a bug!  If not a bug, then possibly something you won't be able to work around in the remaining time unless @Hank21 can get you a quick beta load built that prevents the 215 from accepting a connection from any of those 3 ports as a valid uplink or basically forces the unit to be subservient ie always a wireless endpoint.

  @UKJim 

How are those devices connected? Could you sketch up a draft for me?

Router ---> passive PoE injector --> EAP215 AP Tx =>==>=5G=<==<= EAP215 sub-AP Rx -->LAN port 1 --> PoE port of EAP215 passive PoE inj----out of LAN port---> plugged into LAN port of 48v injector---> PoE out to EAP650 PoE/LAN in.

Why is the third EAP215 added here? And the front end Sub-AP's LAN port 1 is linked to the passive adapter's PoE port? This appears to be incorrect.Here, the LAN port is merely an Ethernet. The LAN port of the EAP650 adapter can be connected directly to Sub-AP‘s LAN port 1.

Also, when you say LAN port1, do you mean the first port near the passive PoE in port? Passive PoE in this port is for the power adapter to power itself, not for other device.

Besides, what do you mean by this? How many EAPs do you have? How do you determine that it has become a "wird" device?

But if I try plugging an EAP650 into these ports the EAP21x thinks it has become a "wired" device, presumably getting connectivity from the EAP650 which is meshed to other EAP650's.

  @Hank21 

Hi Hank, thanks for taking the time to look at this for me.

Here is a picture of the layout I was hoping would work....

SG2008P switch (from router), feeding into the left hand EAP211 via its PoE injector which will be located on Mast 1.

This will beam across to other side of site to Mast 2 with a receiving EAP211 which has PoE power only into its leftmost port (PoE In/LAN1).

Note that the EAP211 has the 3 ports. The leftmost port is labelled "PoE/LAN1", middle is "LAN2", right is "LAN3".

The received signal then feeds from its LAN2 port to the EAP650 (via the EAP650 PoE injector).

Both these are mounted on Mast 2. EAP650 at the top and EAP211 a foot or so below.

What I don't understand is that I can't see a "Ports" config anywhere in the OC200 Omada screens for setting VLAN or tagging/untagged for the 3 ports (PoE/LAN1, LAN2, LAN3). I expected there would be a Ports config screen similar to the 8-ports display provided for SG2008P in the Switch screens of the controller where I can select a ports profile.

What I meant by "wired" is that without the EAP650 connected, the right-hand EAP211 in its Mesh config section shows that it is linked to the left-hand EAP211, as you would expect. But upon connecting the EAP650 to the right-hand 211 the 211's Mesh config then says its "Wired", i.e. no longer meshed with the Tx 211 because I presume it thinks the EAP650 is now supplying the network connection, because the 650 had previously meshed with another 650 close by? I do understand that the Bridge units are incompatible with 650's in terms of meshing. I don't expect or want them to mesh together. I just thought it was possible to simply connect an EAP to the bridge without requiring a switch.

I hope that this helps make things clear, and I also hope the reason I'm not getting anywhere is simply due to me making a silly mistake in configuration!

The bridge actually has 4 EAP211's with a Main AP and 3 x sub-APs.

If I incorporate another SG2008P switch between the right hand EAP211 and the EAP650 it works as I expect, but I really can't afford to buy an extra Switch for each receiving mast!!

I have not found any helpful documentation explaining how to configure this requirement, which I would think would be useful for users wanting similar setup.

Thanks, Jim

  @UKJim 

Let us check the last point you mentioned: when EAP650 Outdoor connects the EAP211 bridge kits sub-AP, it shows that it is wired to the network, and EAP650 Outdoor provides internet access instead.Can you try disabling the EAP650 Outdoor's Mesh to prevent it from connecting to a nearby AP via Mesh, so it can access the internet through the EAP211's LAN port?By default, this setup works and requires no additional setting.

  @Hank21 

The problem is he needs to mesh elsewhere on the site, in fact likely from the very 650 you asked him to disable! 

Things may have changed  but as I recall mesh is a site wide setting, not per AP anyways.

  @d0ugmac1 @Hank21 

Thanks Doug, yes I thought Mesh on/off is site parameter, not per AP. I'm happy to try if per AP but currently we are in rebuild on the showground, so can't check anything right now.

  @d0ugmac1 

The issue here is that when an EAP650 Outdoor attached to a sub-AP is connected to another AP, would the other AP in nearby function as the root AP? Where is the root access point connected? One option is to try disabling the EAP650 Outdoor linked to the sub-AP, see if it can receive internet access, and then try re-enabling.

  @UKJim @Hank21 

Sounds like there needs to be a way to force the downstream 215 bridge unit to always be a remote endpoint (ie ignore any potential upstream connections via its ether ports and stay a client).  Perhaps a quick firmware build to prevent a unit from becoming the dominant unit?  Longer term this could be a controller option and eventually some smart heuristic?