New home setup

[skygod]

I am moving to a new place which has a fiber connection and I am planing to take full advantage of that. So now I am deciding on how to setup my new network and while researching some products some questions arose.

First some information about my current situation:

-the fiber-optic socket is located in the breaker box.
-the ports to the different rooms are also located in the box (there are 4 of them).
-in each room with a socket has only one ethernet port.

So now I was looking at the Ubiquiti EdgeRouter series and at the Unfi AP AC products the have and I am planing on ordering them. (1 Router and 2 AccessPoints)

At the moment I have 7 Machines that would need a wired connection.

So now my plan is to setup the whole network like this:

Fiber-Optic Socket -> Media Converter -> Router -> Switch (that connects the 4 Wall socket in the different rooms)

And then for the separate rooms:
I would need 4 more switches and two of them would be connected to the access points.

So now my question is:
What kind of router should I get and what kind of setup is the best for my breaker box?
-If I get the EdgeRouter Lite (2 Ports) I would have to connect it to a switch and then connect the ports to the separate plugs for the different rooms.
-If I get the EdgeRouter PoE I would have 4 Ports and could connect each plug for the different rooms directly to the the router.
-And then I was also playing with the Idea of getting the EdgeRouter Pro so I would not have to get a media converter and I also have some ports in case I would like to get a NAS or something down the road.

Is it better to connect the plugs for the different rooms directly to the router or is okay if I put a switch between router and the the 4 plugs?
Also since the EdgeRouter Pro does not have an integrated switch like the PoE I was wondering if I would still need a switch since I do not want to use it in bridge mode and I also do not really need 1 lan for each single room.

 

[abailey]

What is your level of networking knowledge? I assume you have some level of familiarity with networks, routers and lans (or Vlans) since you talk about them in your post. Also the products you list are great products but take a little bit of knowledge to set up correctly. If you are comfortable with your networking skills this is what I would probably do.
Purchase an Edgerouter Lite for your router/firewall.
Purchase either a TP-Link TL-SG3210 or TP-Link TL-SG2216 switch depending on how much expansion you are looking to plan for.
Purchase the Unifi AP AC WAPs (if you are comfortable with the price).
Now I would definitely not use a router to do the work of a switch. Get a switch for that. I have never had good luck with router/switch combinations. There are usually too many factors that can cause the router to stop using hardware acceleration on the switch ports and then you are left with much less than Gigabit switching. So what I would do on the switch is partition off an SFP port and an Ethernet port (with port based VLANs or 802.1 Vlans). This way you can just use your switch to do the fiber to copper conversion.
Then use the rest of the switch for your main network.
Consider using inexpensive managed switches in your rooms in case you want to send different VLANs to your WAP's one day (you can get a 5 port TP-Link TL-SG105E easy smart switch for $30).
Anyway those are my thoughts.

 

[L&LD]

I don't know what a media converter is, but it doesn't seem it should be in front of the router and first to connect to your ISP?

Are you able to run more LAN cables at this point? A single LAN run to each room is less than optimal.

If you are able to run more cables, I would be selecting the location that is the most central in the area to be covered (horizontally and vertically) and run an additional 5 or more CAT5e or higher cables there.

With this setup, you will be able to put a wireless router in the optimal / primary location and be able to run the LAN ports back down to the wiring closet to your switch. Consider that with this location you want to be at least 10 feet above ground level (not just from the floor).

Unless you have a mansion, you will not have a need for more than one wireless router to have good coverage everywhere. Yes, the two AP's will be better. They will also cost 5x as much, not to mention the switches and router you still need with that setup.

The connection will then be:

Fiber-Optic Socket -> Wireless Router (WAN Port) -> Router LAN Ports 1-4 -> To Box with minimum 8 Port Switch (that connects the 4 Wall socket in the different rooms and the LAN Ports from the Wireless Router). I would not recommend putting an 8 Port switch there as all ports will be used immediately; minimum 12 or 16 Port GB switch instead.

With the comment from abailey about router / switch combinations being unreliable. That is not my experience. The switch side is independent of the router side and both perform at their capabilities without affecting the other.

You will still need switches in each room for the remaining wired devices, but you need these in any case.

With the money saved over your suggested layout, you can have a wireless router in every room that has a LAN drop. Much better overall performance than 2 AP's and each router will give you a 4 Port Switch for 'free'.

With one or two Wireless Routers (main floor / basement), I would recommend the RT-AC68U or above, with RMerlin firmware.

With a router in each room, I would recommend at least an RT-AC56U or above. On sale, the price of 4 RT-AC56U's will be less than a single AP.

Or consider a single RT-AC68U as the main router (I'm assuming you can locate it properly and run additional LAN cables now) and the remaining routers the RT-AC56U's.


This may not be what you wanted to see, but I hope it gives you an idea of a different and maybe a better configuration for your new network. And saves you money too.

 

[abailey]

With the comment from abailey about router / switch combinations being unreliable. That is not my experience. The switch side is independent of the router side and both perform at their capabilities without affecting the other.

The comment I made was talking about prosumer and pro level routers like the Ubiquiti Edgerouter, Cisco routers, etc. With these routers when you apply anything special to their switch ports, like VLANs, or bandwidth control, etc. this causes the packets to have to go to the CPU and thus you loose the hardware acceleration that is there for the switch ports. On consumer routers you usually cannot do VLANs and any bandwidth control is only between the LAN switched ports and the WAN thus the switched LAN ports on a consumer router are usually fine to use (as a switch).

 

[L&LD]

abailey, thank you for clarifying.

 

[Cloud200]

1st. You are absolutely correct in that the Edgerouter pro does not have a built in switch.
The ports are never to be used as a switch should you value performance.
That being said, if you internet connection is fast enough and you have enough of a need for processing power or RAM, or want to save on having to install a media converter . . . or just like things rack mounted instead of desktop . . . go for it.

2nd. The edge router POE has the same limitation on ports 0 and 1.
You will need to bridge from ETH1 to the switch chip if you want 4 ports.

3rd. As much as I love ubiquiti products, the UAP-AC has given me nothing but headaches on some jobs. If you are intent on getting ubiquiti I suggest you either stick with the UAP-Pro. Otherwise go with a different WAP. Personally I am finding for standalone installs the ZyXEL NWA1123-AC to be pretty good. A decent alternative is the Linksys LAP-AC1200 or D-Link DAP-2660. Something interesting to look at may be the Xclaim Xi-3 but I have personally never seen it used and am very hesitant to recommend something both new and untested. Then again, it is put out by Ruckus so . . . who knows.

4th. If you are wiring for new access points I would suggest running the cables through the ceiling.
Power the WAPs with a POE+ switch. Something simple like an Engenius EGS5110P would do the trick but no real preference here.
Personally I prefer the HP 1920 series. but go with what you are comfortable with.

5th. Talking about switches. Like abailey said, you can cheat with the media converter using a managed switch that has an SFP port.
Wire as follows (assuming an 8 port + 1 SFP switch):
SFP in on the switch
Config a new untagged VLAN to both port 8 and the SFP port.
Ethernet out on port 8. Connect to the WAN interface of the router.
Ethernet out on port 7. Connect to the LAN interface of the router.

6th. For the wired computers, cable drops that are home run to the switch are always best.
If you can't do it or don't want to, a simple 5 port switch will do fine.
I remember 3com used to make a POE powered single gang in wall 5 port switch but it was only 10/100. I don't know if a gigabit model was ever released or home much it would cost.


Finally, Can you take a picture of the media box so we can get an idea of what will fit inside and what wont?

 

[skygod]

Thanks a lot for the answers!

What is your level of networking knowledge?

It's limited, but I can learn since my general computer knowledge is solid. So I think I will be able to configure the hardware.

Purchase either a TP-Link TL-SG3210 or TP-Link TL-SG2216 switch depending on how much expansion you are looking to plan for.

I like the idea of using a managed switch with integrated SFP port. Do you have any prior experience with the two products you mentioned?

I don't know what a media converter is, but it doesn't seem it should be in front of the router and first to connect to your ISP?

A media converter is used to convert fiber to copper media or vice versa.

Are you able to run more LAN cables at this point? A single LAN run to each room is less than optimal.

Sadly I cannot run more cables, since the electrical work at my place (I'm renting) is rather poor and there is not more space to add more cables through the wall and I do not want free cables going from room to room.

1st. You are absolutely correct in that the Edgerouter pro does not have a built in switch.
The ports are never to be used as a switch should you value performance.
That being said, if you internet connection is fast enough and you have enough of a need for processing power or RAM, or want to save on having to install a media converter . . . or just like things rack mounted instead of desktop . . . go for it.

1st I have a 1 Gbit/s symmetric connection. What you said about need for processing power and RAM, it is not that I need it, it's that I want it ;-). I prefer rack mounted since I am planing on setting up a small rack since the media box is way too small for my taste. (regarding your question about the size)

3rd. As much as I love ubiquiti products, the UAP-AC has given me nothing but headaches on some jobs. If you are intent on getting ubiquiti I suggest you either stick with the UAP-Pro. Otherwise go with a different WAP. Personally I am finding for standalone installs the ZyXEL NWA1123-AC to be pretty good. A decent alternative is the Linksys LAP-AC1200 or D-Link DAP-2660. Something interesting to look at may be the Xclaim Xi-3 but I have personally never seen it used and am very hesitant to recommend something both new and untested. Then again, it is put out by Ruckus so . . . who knows.

3rd What kind of issues? If possible I would prefer an Access Point that supports the ac standard, but that's just because I like to buy the newest coolest stuff. But that's a rather ideological argument, so if there is a good rational argument I am open to consider alternatives.

4th. If you are wiring for new access points I would suggest running the cables through the ceiling.
Power the WAPs with a POE+ switch. Something simple like an Engenius EGS5110P would do the trick but no real preference here.
Personally I prefer the HP 1920 series. but go with what you are comfortable with.

4th As I said before I cannot run more cables, I have to work with what I got. So what are the implications if I would have to connect the WAP's to a switch in the room? Would I need managed switches for the room to create a VLAN for the WAP's or is it fine to have an unmanaged one.

5th. Talking about switches. Like abailey said, you can cheat with the media converter using a managed switch that has an SFP port.
Wire as follows (assuming an 8 port + 1 SFP switch):
SFP in on the switch
Config a new untagged VLAN to both port 8 and the SFP port.
Ethernet out on port 8. Connect to the WAN interface of the router.
Ethernet out on port 7. Connect to the LAN interface of the router.

5th So this is still a little fuzzy to me.

Let's assume to scenarios:

1. Fiber Optic Socket -> Switch with SFP Port (converts optical to copper; exits through Gbit Ethernet port) ->in: WAN interface of Ubiquiti EdgeRouter Lite out: LAN interface-> Switch (same switch as before) -> different rooms -> Small Switch (managed or unmanaged?) -> End Devices and Wireless Access Points.

2. Fiber Optic Socket ->in: SFP Port in Ubiquiti EdgeRouter Pro out: Ethernet ports -> different rooms -> Small Switch (managed or unmanaged?) -> End Devices and Wireless Access Points.

In 1. I have a switch and in 2. I have a router with several ports. So now as was mentioned before if I use scenario 2. I will get less performance since I am using a router to do the switch work and he does not like that.

So my question (just for my theoretical understanding) why would I ever need a router with 8 ports if I could just get a small router with 2 ports(WAN in; LAN out) and than go to a managed switch?

If I would want to get the max speed in scenario 2. would I need to do:

Fiber Optic Socket ->in: SFP Port in Ubiquiti EdgeRouter Pro out: Ethernet ports -> Switch -> different rooms -> Small Switch (managed or unmanaged?) -> End Devices and Wireless Access Points. ?

Thanks a lot for the help! And sorry for the very detailed questions I just want to make sure I understand everything right.

 

[abailey]

Yes I use TP-Link switches extensively in my house. I have four of them, with 3 of them being managed switches. My main or "core" switch is the TP-Link TL-SG2216 I mentioned above. There are many good switch vendors, though. I just mentioned TP-Link because they represent a very high value for the money. Also I have an Edge Router Lite. Like you I wanted rack mounted equipment. I purchased this so I could rack mount my ERL: http://www.ispsupplies.com/categories/Indoor-Enclosures/KAM-Fab-UB-RM1.html
Here is a link with my ERL and TPlink switch mounted: https://community.ubnt.com/t5/EdgeM...-home-network-with-Ubiquiti-gear/cns-p/760484

Anyway I think the ERL would do what you want. I don't think you would ever need a router with 8 ports in a home environment but the ER-Pro does have about twice the processing power. That could be useful for things like VPN if you decide to do that.

 

[Cloud200]

One of the reasons to have more than 2 ports on a router is so you can leverage multiple networks at the same time for speed and redundancy.
eg.
Installing the ER-Pro in failover mode with 2 ISPs plus a DMZ along with 2 core switches for failover
This requires 2 ports WAN side and 3 ports LAN side
If you are connecting this to a secondary and tertiary network with OSPF that may require 1,2 or more ports. depending if it is a hub and spoke, ring or mesh

It all depends on how you interconnect your network and while this may really warrant a layer 3 switch instead of a router . . . layer 3 switches are really just wirespeed routers to begin with.

 

[coxhaus]

It all depends on how you interconnect your network and while this may really warrant a layer 3 switch instead of a router . . . layer 3 switches are really just wirespeed routers to begin with.

With the low prices for layer 3 switches now that is what I am going to buy. Hopefully they will add routing protocols so we can route between them without using a slow router.

I think the best plan is to use the router for off network routing and use layer3 switches for in network routing. This way you maintain wire speed

 

[Cloud200]

1st I have a 1 Gbit/s symmetric connection. What you said about need for processing power and RAM, it is not that I need it, it's that I want it ;-). I prefer rack mounted since I am planing on setting up a small rack since the media box is way too small for my taste. (regarding your question about the size)

Then I suggest getting the ER-Pro8

3rd What kind of issues? If possible I would prefer an Access Point that supports the ac standard, but that's just because I like to buy the newest coolest stuff. But that's a rather ideological argument, so if there is a good rational argument I am open to consider alternatives.

Some people have great results with it, others have had the same experience as me;
There were issues with version 1 of the hardware. It overheated, dropped connections, etc.
The version 2 is just coming on the market but it is really unknown if all the problems have been solved as well as there being no way to tell which you got until you adopt it to a controller.
The firmware on it is still very much in beta and does not support all the features of the rest of the UAP line (zero handoff, wireless uplink, and some others).
Check the ubnt forums if you want more info on it.

4th As I said before I cannot run more cables, I have to work with what I got. So what are the implications if I would have to connect the WAP's to a switch in the room? Would I need managed switches for the room to create a VLAN for the WAP's or is it fine to have an unmanaged one.

Theoretically an un-managed switch can pass VLAN tags. The requirement is to forward frames of 1518 bytes or more. It is hit or miss though.
for more information read this blog post;
http://blog.thelifeofkenneth.com/2014/03/pushing-vlan-tags-through-unmanaged.html

5th So this is still a little fuzzy to me.

Let's assume to scenarios:

1. Fiber Optic Socket -> Switch with SFP Port (converts optical to copper; exits through Gbit Ethernet port) ->in: WAN interface of Ubiquiti EdgeRouter Lite out: LAN interface-> Switch (same switch as before) -> different rooms -> Small Switch (managed or unmanaged?) -> End Devices and Wireless Access Points.

2. Fiber Optic Socket ->in: SFP Port in Ubiquiti EdgeRouter Pro out: Ethernet ports -> different rooms -> Small Switch (managed or unmanaged?) -> End Devices and Wireless Access Points.

In 1. I have a switch and in 2. I have a router with several ports. So now as was mentioned before if I use scenario 2. I will get less performance since I am using a router to do the switch work and he does not like that.

So my question (just for my theoretical understanding) why would I ever need a router with 8 ports if I could just get a small router with 2 ports(WAN in; LAN out) and than go to a managed switch?

If I would want to get the max speed in scenario 2. would I need to do:

Fiber Optic Socket ->in: SFP Port in Ubiquiti EdgeRouter Pro out: Ethernet ports -> Switch -> different rooms -> Small Switch (managed or unmanaged?) -> End Devices and Wireless Access Points. ?

Thanks a lot for the help! And sorry for the very detailed questions I just want to make sure I understand everything right.

This is what option 1 looks like drawn out:

The real benefit to this method is if you have multiple WAN IP addresses and want to share them out to different devices.

 

[System Error Message]

mikrotik CCR has wirespeed L3 routing, switching and L2 switching. RouterOS in mikrotik is very flexible in configurations compared to edgeOS in ubiquiti. There are many routerboards you can use in your setup and there are a number of them that have SFP with a number of ports so you could reduce the total number of networking devices you have. With the routing speed they have you could use them as firewalls and it would still max out your connection. Ubiquiti edgerouters use dualcore complex MIPS with hardware NAT/routing acceleration whereas mikrotik equivalents use PPC/TILE with hardware encryption acceleration. I suggest mikrotik because they have SFP/SFP+ on some of their routers and some of them are fast enough that they dont require switch chips making it much easier to configure which means less bugs to worry about in switches.the PPC and TILE already do gigabit NAT rates and TILE does it a lot faster.