I've just converted my home network and a remote site from UniFi to Omada, mostly because I was tired of the terrible software quality of the Ubiquiti stuff, and their tendency to run off in new directions before actually finishing the previous product lines. TP-Link seems to be taking user feedback seriously, and I'm quite impressed so far. Nothing's perfect, and there are some issues that I've encountered that I think could be addressed in future releases.

Here's a bit of a brain dump of things that I've found along the way:

1. DNS/DHCP
   • There's no way to set a hostname for a LAN device in the local DNS server. Sometimes a hostname shows in the client details, but it doesn't appear that there's any local DNS resolution at all.
   • DHCP reservations can be set, but they need to be inside the dynamic range. This is different from almost any other implementation, and it's common practice to have reservations in an address range *outside* the dynamic address pool.
   • Support for RFC2136 Dynamic DNS would be greatly appreciated.
2. Bandwidth Configuration
   • I would like to be able to edit the uplink bandwidth directly, rather than relying on a speedtest client running in the gateway. I know that I have symmetrical gigabit fiber, and the Speedtest client running on my desktop shows a reliable 930/930, but the speed test in the Controller UI shows 500down/800up on a good day, usually far worse. Why not just let the user set this?
3. VPN Configuration
   • OpenVPN Client configuration requires an IP address instead of an FQDN. This certainly isn't a limitation of OpenVPN, and is problematic for servers with dynamic IP addresses (but dynamic DNS to match)
4. WAN configuration of remote sites
   • I mentioned this in another post, but getting the WAN configuration right for a site without a controller is a little tricky. It would be nice to be able to configure (only?) the WAN setup of a router locally, just to allow it to communicate with the controller. As it stands, changing WAN configurations on a remote site is a complicated dance, where you either risk overwriting the updated WAN configuration, or you have to reconfigure the set of "site" settings that reside in the router. Backups are opaque, so there's no way to use that as a text-based config, either.
5. Push notifications
   • I was surprised and delighted when I got a push notification that "3 APs on controller [NAME] are disconnected." In fact, it was 1 AP, 1 Switch, and 1 Router (all at the same site). I get that the message needs to be brief, but if they aren't all APs, maybe "3 devices..." would be better. Bonus points for mentioning the site, but I can certainly log in and figure that out myself.

Of these, only the DNS/DHCP issues are a big deal, and I might well end up running a Pi with DNS and DHCP servers as a workaround.
Thanks, and keep up the good work, I'm really quite impressed with this platform so far.