Previous Employee
Posts: 10,504
Registered: ‎06-09-2011
Kudos: 3141
Solutions: 945
Contributions: 16

Re: Requests/suggestions for new hardware models


@dittman wrote:

For failover support I mean two EdgeRouters linked together, not support for WAN failover.


We have VRRP.

EdgeMAX Router Software Development
Emerging Member
Posts: 67
Registered: ‎11-10-2011
Kudos: 15
Solutions: 1

Re: Requests/suggestions for new hardware models

eMMC, as seen on Beaglebone Black, works really well and comes in comparable sizes. I'd like to see the USB port on ERL and ERPOE be available on the front panel, like the higher end EdgeMAXmodels and ToughSwitch devices.

In this case it would be pretty easy to auto-update and configure a factory-new device using a USB stick. Works really well for ToughSwitches already, with a bit of shell scripting!

Highlighted
Veteran Member
Posts: 5,456
Registered: ‎03-12-2011
Kudos: 2746
Solutions: 129

Re: Requests/suggestions for new hardware models


@dittman wrote:
  1. Faster CPU
  2. non-USB storage
  3. Failover support

So 1 and 2 are covered by the EdgeRouter's and EdgeRouter Pro's.

Failover works on all models with VRRP.

New Member
Posts: 38
Registered: ‎05-14-2014
Kudos: 2

Re: Requests/suggestions for new hardware models


@NVX wrote:

@dittman wrote:
  1. Faster CPU
  2. non-USB storage
  3. Failover support

So 1 and 2 are covered by the EdgeRouter's and EdgeRouter Pro's.

Failover works on all models with VRRP.


I've been corrected on failover (never used VRRP before).

But faster for the smaller boxes and faster than the EdgeRouter Pros.  With the extra stuff that can be done on the EdgeRouters extra speed would be good.

Veteran Member
Posts: 5,456
Registered: ‎03-12-2011
Kudos: 2746
Solutions: 129

Re: Requests/suggestions for new hardware models


@dittman wrote:

@NVX wrote:

@dittman wrote:
  1. Faster CPU
  2. non-USB storage
  3. Failover support

So 1 and 2 are covered by the EdgeRouter's and EdgeRouter Pro's.

Failover works on all models with VRRP.


I've been corrected on failover (never used VRRP before).

But faster for the smaller boxes and faster than the EdgeRouter Pros.  With the extra stuff that can be done on the EdgeRouters extra speed would be good.


Not much point of faster on a 3 port device. Faster would also mean fans too which would push out the form factor as well. The ERL's and ER-PoE's already run fairly hot as-is.

Emerging Member
Posts: 44
Registered: ‎06-19-2014
Kudos: 10

Re: Requests/suggestions for new hardware models

You can't really judge requirements on processor speed by number of ports. It depends a lot on the software it's running. Eg VPN encryption, having complex configurations of NAT's/VLAN's/routes, etc.

Anyway, I've seen the aluminium heatsink inside the ERL. It's adequate for the ERL as it currently is, but it's not great.

You could easily put a better copper heatsink on it, that isn't a real logistical issue. I think the real issue is that adding a faster processor and better copper heatsink would increase cost.

But I also think there are people willing to pay more for a version of the ERL with faster hardware.

New Member
Posts: 38
Registered: ‎05-14-2014
Kudos: 2

Re: Requests/suggestions for new hardware models


@Knowbody wrote:

You can't really judge requirements on processor speed by number of ports. It depends a lot on the software it's running. Eg VPN encryption, having complex configurations of NAT's/VLAN's/routes, etc.

Anyway, I've seen the aluminium heatsink inside the ERL. It's adequate for the ERL as it currently is, but it's not great.

You could easily put a better copper heatsink on it, that isn't a real logistical issue. I think the real issue is that adding a faster processor and better copper heatsink would increase cost.

But I also think there are people willing to pay more for a version of the ERL with faster hardware.


Exactly!

New Member
Posts: 2
Registered: ‎11-25-2013

Re: Requests/suggestions for new hardware models: Core FTTH Switch

FTTH Edge Switch Switch

  • 48 SFP GE Ports
  • 2 SFP+ 10GE Ports for Core Network
  • Level 2
  • Q in Q VLAN
  • Rackmount
  • no POE
  • maybe multicast for IP TV
  • serial console would be nice, but no must
  • price should be not more than USD 1,000.00
  • no unnecessary feauters to justfy low price point
  • redundant power supply 

This should be the switch in the core from where all customers are connected Point to Point. The Bandwidth Limiting would hapen on the Edge at the CPE so the switch would not need to be to smart. Most of it hapens in the Gateway and Accounting Devices and the CPE.

Is there anything in the near future? I need to deploy in November in Europe. 

Veteran Member
Posts: 5,456
Registered: ‎03-12-2011
Kudos: 2746
Solutions: 129

Re: Requests/suggestions for new hardware models: Core FTTH Switch

[ Edited ]

@deggler wrote:

Is there anything in the near future? I need to deploy in November in Europe. 


On that timeline? Not a chance. Even if it was announced today there's no way you'd have it in-hand that quickly.

Edit: Ok, you might get it by November if it was announced today, but you wouldn't have sufficient time to verify its suitibility and design an actual working network around it fixing any nuances/etc - and of course the fact is that ubnt already just had a big announcement, they're not going to be announcing anything else for a while I suspect...

Regular Member
Posts: 372
Registered: ‎07-30-2012
Kudos: 94
Solutions: 8

Re: Requests/suggestions for new hardware models

Right now we need IOS for running into Server or also we need whit interface 100GBe and 40GB or 10GB , modular and doble controller and update whitout stop routing. MPLS-VLAN URGENT. whit min of 16 port at hi speed.

thank you

 

Member
Posts: 276
Registered: ‎11-16-2013
Kudos: 104
Solutions: 15

Re: Requests/suggestions for new hardware models

[ Edited ]

@marnog wrote:

Right now we need IOS for running into Server or also we need whit interface 100GBe and 40GB or 10GB , modular and doble controller and update whitout stop routing. MPLS-VLAN URGENT. whit min of 16 port at hi speed.

thank you

 


iOS on ubnt devices?

Great idea Man Very Happy

Regular Member
Posts: 372
Registered: ‎07-30-2012
Kudos: 94
Solutions: 8

Re: Requests/suggestions for new hardware models


@Sugaroverdose wrote:

@marnog wrote:

Right now we need IOS for running into Server or also we need whit interface 100GBe and 40GB or 10GB , modular and doble controller and update whitout stop routing. MPLS-VLAN URGENT. whit min of 16 port at hi speed.

thank you

 


iOS on ubnt devices?

Great idea Man Very Happy


 

Yes the some IOS but ready to works in server intel 

ready to put 10GB card or 100GB card multiport 

Normaly one core Intel cam routing aroung 10GB and the most new aroung 100Gb per seccond.

 

now thing one server whti new model CPU and 12 CORE per CPU...

 

Man Happy

 

 

Regular Member
Posts: 745
Registered: ‎11-06-2013
Kudos: 230
Solutions: 26

Re: Requests/suggestions for new hardware models

IOS != iOS

 

Just saying.

Member
Posts: 276
Registered: ‎11-16-2013
Kudos: 104
Solutions: 15

Re: Requests/suggestions for new hardware models


@sorvani wrote:

IOS != iOS

 

Just saying.


i guess, everyone understands that noone talks about using Apple iOS on router/switch, or...?)


@marnog wrote:

 

Yes the some IOS but ready to works in server intel 

ready to put 10GB card or 100GB card multiport 

Normaly one core Intel cam routing aroung 10GB and the most new aroung 100Gb per seccond.

 

now thing one server whti new model CPU and 12 CORE per CPU...

 

Man Happy


You've made my day

Emerging Member
Posts: 86
Registered: ‎07-01-2009
Kudos: 5
Solutions: 1

Re: Requests/suggestions for new hardware models

[ Edited ]

UBNT-ancheng,

mFi as one part of a UBNT ECOSYSTEM...


I think a simple way to start is if you can come up with a drawing of the mFi suite BUT as it would be used in a WISP node.  If one reads through this thread and others on the mFi line, what you see (by the numbers) is that almost if not all entries have to do with WHAT WE DO, that is how we can run our WISP networks better with the use of mFi.

It's only logical that if you are selling millions of dollars in wisp hardware, the introduction of a new suite of products, particularly if it has to do with a core aspect of the other lines, like power and security control are for a wisp, then it would only be logical that one would at least partially validate the new suite to the prior "core" wisp business needs.

Sometimes the innovation get's product dev so up on their horses (and we celebrate that!)  that they miss their natural, almost captively natural ecosystem. As the designer of the new suite, while you would not have the ONLY shot at integrating, you would have the BEST shot at integrating with the UBNT wisp product line, in ways particular to how we use your wisp solutions and about which the forum is the testament on all aspects of our operations/network...

Some of the literature and video introduces the mFi line as for "home/office automation". Think of WISP CONTROL within the UBNT ECOSYSTEM. not in parallel as a breakthrough for home automation....almost as a new and separate venture. Not while you have if not a captive market an anxious one to amend the mFi and integrate it into the WISP side of the business.

we know there are other solutions out there but just read the threads and it is more than evident that we want to see the mFi INTEGRATED into the UBNT ECOSYSTEM and from product dev to product compliments or accessories to videos and software sensors etc, we want UBNT ECOSYSTEM INTEGRATION to be at the core of what's rolled out.

I don't know if I am the only one that thinks: "well, let's see, the mFi is already in the market for 2plus years, plus the timeframe it was in development..., then you have a growing business in the wisp side..., how long will it take for UBNT to scale mFi to DC power so the whole mFi suite (at least as far as power control) can become native to the wisp node line...

at least link up at that level, integrate the POE TS line into the mFi software suite, or put out an mFi DC power strip (1, 3, 8, plus ports), at least to 24V while time allows for an af compliant line... This would be a real watershed in terms of the number of autonomous systems operating in DC that we could begin to integrate into the mFi control system...

And to clarify a bit more, those of us who have to operate in rough territories where AC power is more and more to blame for our Network Quality and Hardware durability, to move to an autonomous DC system is THE ROUTE (once too many dollars have been spent on the AC protection side...). so to make us go from a DC power source to AC to make use of mFI and to the plug adapters or POE switches on AC to then do POE... well, it just makes no efficiency sens to do two conversions just to have control.

Even at the AC level, be that for "home/office automation", there is not (or at least I have not found it) a drawin which shows a complete ecosystem (all be it a sample one) that shows how each sensor is connected to each port of the mPort or the mPortS.  Something so basic as that to confir that you can do your port math correctly when trying to put more than a small group of sensors in one place... even a match maker calculator online to modularly grow the mport sets vis a vis a particular combination of types and quantities of sensors would help considerably visualize the potential and illustrate various combinations.

I would say that since the mFi is such a weird animal (as it uses four types of connections to interconnect all system members (Eth, Wifi, mFi, Serial) either a clickeable table for VALIDATED combinations or a handfull of concept implementation drawings could help speed up the product line use/sale/penetration...

Wouldn't we all want that.

hope my two cents worth of comments find an interested audience within your mFi team, both product dev and literature/market teams...

regards

XR

 

New Member
Posts: 17
Registered: ‎07-21-2014
Kudos: 1

Re: Requests/suggestions for new hardware models

I would like to see a USB port on the ERL.  I'd like the ability to save configs on a USB strick for Toughswitches and Edgerouters.   Insert USB stick into slot on router or switch, hold reset button while powering up and it installs config from USB stick and reboots.  Techs could replace/install gear in the field without even needing to open up a laptop.

 

Pete

New Member
Posts: 3
Registered: ‎07-26-2014
Kudos: 1

Re: Requests/suggestions for new hardware models

[ Edited ]

Hi, i am JodelJoe from Germany and new to this community. First of all, i would like to say hello and sorry for
my bad english.

At my search for a new router, actually a WRT54GL, i found a few articles about new routers and have seen
good feedbacks about the edgerouter lite. I have never heard about cavium mips64 processors before and
i was looking for hardware specs. This seems to be a very powerful platform so i ordered my first edgerouter
yesterday and i am very interested how fine this may work. :-)


Ok, but this here is a suggestion what i would like to see:

The same layout like edgerouter POE.
-> 1x RJ45 RS232 Port (Console)
-> 2x RJ45 GbE Ports (2x 1Gbit/s)
-> 3x RJ45 bridged GbE Ports (1x 1Gbit/s)
No need to make the the RJ45 Ports POE, because most of the devices u have, use they´re own power supply.
In my opinion, it makes no sense to give a router POE. If u need POE badly, its possible to buy a cheap
POE injector and use this for powering the needed device.

-> 1x USB Port 2.0

-> A JTAG Port at the Mainboard (If the router is bricked, not sure if it already has)

-> 2x SATA 2.0 Ports
Many people would like to use a SSD these days for an appliance / router if possible. (I would like to use
a Transcend SLC 16GB SSD SATA).

Replace the build in RAM for 2x RAM-Slots, deliver it with 2x 512 DDR3, that would make this router more flexible
and people could change RAM Size if needed. If not possible, deliver it with 2 GB DDR3 build in RAM.

Replace the Cavium Octeon CN5020 CPU to Cavium Octeon II CN6130 (Quadcore 4x 800Mhz) CPU, preferable an AAP, if not possible SCP. The "lowest" nice would also be a Cavium Octeon II CN6120 @800Mhz.

But please, go for the CN6130. :-) (The overall focus should be on the CN61xx platform.)


http://www.cavium.com/OCTEON-II_CN61XX.html

http://www.acalbfi.com/uk/Semiconductors/Processor-Microcontroller/MIPS/p/OCTEON-II-CN6120-2-Core-MI...

http://www.acalbfi.com/uk/Semiconductors/Processor-Microcontroller/MIPS/p/OCTEON-II-CN6130-4-Core-MI...

It could be named edgerouter lite extreme. Price around 220 USD.
I think this would be very nice thing to play for all the network enthusiasts.

Emerging Member
Posts: 44
Registered: ‎06-19-2014
Kudos: 10

Re: Requests/suggestions for new hardware models

[ Edited ]

Why not a CN7120 instead? Two cores at 1.6GHz instead of 4 cores at 800MHz. Then at least they don't have to do extra work in software to take advantage of 4 cores.

Although it looks like the highest end Cavium processors are ARM architecture. Looks like everyone is going to ARM, including Broadcom.

Veteran Member
Posts: 5,456
Registered: ‎03-12-2011
Kudos: 2746
Solutions: 129

Re: Requests/suggestions for new hardware models

So that port configuration already exists in th ER-PoE. You don't have to use the PoE features if you don't want. Man Happy

The JTAG port is not really needed as the serial console alone lets you unbrick the device (unless you munged the bootloader for some reason, but that's your own fault - you can install custom firmwares without touching the bootloader).

The ER8 and ER8-Pro's both have USB host ports on the front (the ERL/ER-PoE doesn't as they use the USB port for storage). They also have removaRAM in a SO-DIMM so you could replace the 2GB of ram with 8GB for example if you so desired.

This really only leaves the SATA port question, which really is going to be a function of the SoC if it has SATA or not. I haven't looked if Caviums have SATA controllers on them, but I imagine being they're designed for routers they probably wouldn't. A router != a NAS.

New Member
Posts: 3
Registered: ‎07-26-2014
Kudos: 1

Re: Requests/suggestions for new hardware models

[ Edited ]

@Knowbody

I dont think it´s an extra work for a software developer if the kernel already supports multiprocessing.
If i know right, the only difference is SingleCore or Multicore, the most important for those processor family is,
to make adjustments for the special features that the CPU supports, without this, the OS isn´t that fast and the
CPU may be higher loaded.

Also the pricing is much higher for the CN7xxx family, and this should be a SoHo or advanced user system.

@NVX

I know that a nearly similar configuration already exists, and have written it also at my post.. ;-)
With the JTAG Port u are maybe right, but i personally would like to have it. :-) But for testing stuff and
programmers this would maybe be nice for unbrick if something went wrong..

The ER-8 and ER8-Pro are really nice, but they are nothing for a SoHo system. I also could´nt find any information
what kind of processors they are using. For me personally, i would like to know what i buy.

For the SATA question i would like to say, i think it´s possible to place a SATA chip onboard which could be
connected to the PCIE channel which the SoC supports.. Not a big deal for a hardware developer.

The main thing is, many people want really strong hardware for a cheap price. A system which is really
flexible for many firmwares and operating systems. Ubiquiti is on the right way. From what i have read, many
OS or projects may support the ER lite in the near future, like DD-WRT, Open WRT maybe later Pfsense.

I personally will give it a try with OpenBSD..

Many others will follow for sure if they realize how powerful that mips64 platform is. This could be a nice run for
Ubiquiti if many others support that hardware..