13 ms·

Damn, that's pretty depressing. I really wouldn't like to migrate away but I can't say all the info that's been coming back has been making me want to have the

Damn, that's pretty depressing. I really wouldn't like to migrate away but I can't say all the info that's been coming back has been making me want to have them as a part of my network infrastructure.

posguy 6y ago
I want to fire Ubiquiti, but where can I go to get my router, wireless access points and switches in one management interface? There are plenty of poorly performing consumer grade options out there which hide all complexity, but they break in fun ways (eg: Google WiFi creating loops in the network when users try to do wired backhaul) and only tackle part of the stack. I really just want to manage an OpenWRT based network with one central web interface and not have to deal with corporate/state entities deciding to push fun changes out in the management interfaces that power these systems.
- bpye 6y ago
  It's an interesting idea to have a single pane of glass management experience for OpenWRT - given that all config is under UCI [0] it seems very possible. One of the things on my todo list is to try and get Nix to push config to my Unifi APs when I flash them with OpenWRT. [0] - https://openwrt.org/docs/guide-user/base-system/uci https://openwrt.org/docs/guide-user/base-system/uci
  - posguy 6y ago
    Take a look at https://openwisp.io/docs/ https://openwisp.io/docs/ as it can accomplish this today.
    - bpye 6y ago
      That’s very neat - though I think orthogonal to my Nix plan. Certainly suits anyone that wants to manage multiple APs from the same interface however.
- mopsi 6y ago
  I keep seeing the requests for central management interface, which leave me somewhat puzzled. Why do you need in a home environment? I run a small network with one big router and several access points, and at least with Mikrotik's gear, it's pretty much fire and forget. It has CAPsMAN[1] to centrally manage wireless networks, but I've found it to introduce unneeded complexity. Auto-updates[2] don't need any central management either. Monitoring can be done through SNMP[3], and there's a REST API too[4]. [1] https://wiki.mikrotik.com/wiki/Manual:CAPsMAN https://wiki.mikrotik.com/wiki/Manual:CAPsMAN [2] https://wiki.mikrotik.com/wiki/Manual:Upgrading_RouterOS#RouterOS_massive_auto-upgrade https://wiki.mikrotik.com/wiki/Manual:Upgrading_RouterOS#Rou... [3] https://wiki.mikrotik.com/wiki/Manual:SNMP https://wiki.mikrotik.com/wiki/Manual:SNMP [4] https://help.mikrotik.com/docs/display/ROS/REST+API https://help.mikrotik.com/docs/display/ROS/REST+API
  - posguy 6y ago
    I have a good deal of experience with Mikrotik's offerings, and I am not looking to power networks I support with a patchwork of different systems that each have their own interface. Most of the value proposition of the Unifi lineup is I can look at a single website that I host and see the WiFi clients connected to an access point, what switch feeds that access point internet (and whether its linked at gigabit or 100Mbps), uptime on all devices involved in the stack, whether the client has poor WiFi quality, trouble DHCPing, etc. The single pane of glass to view everything when I am many miles from the networks I support is essential. Compared to when these sites were on PFSense before migrating, these networks have improved uptime, rapid remediation of issues, and changing VLANs, SSIDs and labeling each client on the network is a snap. Edit: Borrowed /u/bpye's single pane of glass term
    - torwayburger 6y ago
      > Most of the value proposition of the Unifi lineup is I can look at a single website ... > The single pane of glass to view everything when I am many miles from the networks I support is essential It's also why we're talking about this.
      - deleted 6y ago
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- frombody 6y ago
  Meraki?
- simple_phrases 6y ago
  Check out OpenWISP. It works with OpenWRT.
- kccqzy 6y ago
  > Google WiFi creating loops in the network when users try to do wired backhaul That's very surprising to hear. The decades-old spanning tree protocol can prevent that. I in fact have a friend who has done the exact same thing (Google Wifi with wired backhaul) with no problems. It switches from 802.11s to STP with no problems.
- bayindirh 6y ago
  I know TP-Link is no Ubiquiti, but I run two identical small networks (VR-2100 routers with RE-200v4 extenders running in mesh mode), and it's pretty solid so far. You can access your network from Tether app via cloud if you wish, too. When you enable Mesh, everything is controlled via the router. You don't need to manage anything on the extenders. RE200 can work as an AP if you can get them a CAT5, or can provide wireless to Ethernet capability. I don't need home-wide VLANs and other exotic stuff (for a home network), but you can adjust QoS on the router in three levels and it has an embedded OpenVPN server if you fancy. While not network related, you can temporarily or permanently turn off all LEDs on the devices so they don't create any light pollution, something I love to have. All in all it's a great package, for my home network, at least.
- growse 6y ago
  I was going to look at OpenWISP, which looks like it can centrally manage a whole bunch of kit, including openwrt and also edgeswitch devices.
- EricE 6y ago
  Keep an eye on the Cisco Small Business line - no subscription, firmware updates without an account (yes, I am still talking about Cisco) and while the management console is a bit weak, I'd wager Cisco will mature faster than UBNT can get their crap together at this point :p
bpye 6y ago
During this week I've been playing around with replacing my USG with my existing home server - it already has two NICs - my first thought was to run OPNSense in a VM but nftables on NixOS seems to work well enough - there are a few examples floating online [0,1]. OpenBSD even supports the USG [2] but I couldn't think of much reason to keep the extra hardware. The next thing I want to do is reflash my Unifi APs with OpenWRT [3] - the hardware is fine, but at that point I'll get all the support without the controller software. My home environment is fairly basic so moving away isn't too hard - this would obviously be much harder for a small business... [0] - https://francis.begyn.be/blog/nixos-home-router https://francis.begyn.be/blog/nixos-home-router [1] - http://www.willghatch.net/blog/2020/06/22/nixos-raspberry-pi-4-google-fiber-router/ http://www.willghatch.net/blog/2020/06/22/nixos-raspberry-pi... [2] - https://www.openbsd.org/octeon.html https://www.openbsd.org/octeon.html [3] - https://openwrt.org/toh/ubiquiti/start https://openwrt.org/toh/ubiquiti/start
- lostlogin 6y ago
  > replacing my USG with my existing home server I like this idea too, but would prefer that the router was physically separated and before any hardware that was in the network. Is this a pointless concern?
  - vageli 6y ago
    It's hard to say whether or not the concern is pointless without knowing its basis. Why do you want it physically separated?
    - lostlogin 6y ago
      I had assumed a setup which had several VMs, with one being a PFSense or similar to be less secure than a standalone firewall. Reading about the pros and cons leads me to conclude that security in a virtual setup is just fine.
  - neolog 6y ago
    If your server is vulnerable to some threat, adding another barrier in front of it could help.

posguy 6y ago

I want to fire Ubiquiti, but where can I go to get my router, wireless access points and switches in one management interface? There are plenty of poorly performing consumer grade options out there which hide all complexity, but they break in fun ways (eg: Google WiFi creating loops in the network when users try to do wired backhaul) and only tackle part of the stack. I really just want to manage an OpenWRT based network with one central web interface and not have to deal with corporate/state entities deciding to push fun changes out in the management interfaces that power these systems.

bpye 6y ago
It's an interesting idea to have a single pane of glass management experience for OpenWRT - given that all config is under UCI [0] it seems very possible. One of the things on my todo list is to try and get Nix to push config to my Unifi APs when I flash them with OpenWRT. [0] - https://openwrt.org/docs/guide-user/base-system/uci https://openwrt.org/docs/guide-user/base-system/uci
- posguy 6y ago
  Take a look at https://openwisp.io/docs/ https://openwisp.io/docs/ as it can accomplish this today.
  - bpye 6y ago
    That’s very neat - though I think orthogonal to my Nix plan. Certainly suits anyone that wants to manage multiple APs from the same interface however.
mopsi 6y ago
I keep seeing the requests for central management interface, which leave me somewhat puzzled. Why do you need in a home environment? I run a small network with one big router and several access points, and at least with Mikrotik's gear, it's pretty much fire and forget. It has CAPsMAN[1] to centrally manage wireless networks, but I've found it to introduce unneeded complexity. Auto-updates[2] don't need any central management either. Monitoring can be done through SNMP[3], and there's a REST API too[4]. [1] https://wiki.mikrotik.com/wiki/Manual:CAPsMAN https://wiki.mikrotik.com/wiki/Manual:CAPsMAN [2] https://wiki.mikrotik.com/wiki/Manual:Upgrading_RouterOS#RouterOS_massive_auto-upgrade https://wiki.mikrotik.com/wiki/Manual:Upgrading_RouterOS#Rou... [3] https://wiki.mikrotik.com/wiki/Manual:SNMP https://wiki.mikrotik.com/wiki/Manual:SNMP [4] https://help.mikrotik.com/docs/display/ROS/REST+API https://help.mikrotik.com/docs/display/ROS/REST+API
- posguy 6y ago
  I have a good deal of experience with Mikrotik's offerings, and I am not looking to power networks I support with a patchwork of different systems that each have their own interface. Most of the value proposition of the Unifi lineup is I can look at a single website that I host and see the WiFi clients connected to an access point, what switch feeds that access point internet (and whether its linked at gigabit or 100Mbps), uptime on all devices involved in the stack, whether the client has poor WiFi quality, trouble DHCPing, etc. The single pane of glass to view everything when I am many miles from the networks I support is essential. Compared to when these sites were on PFSense before migrating, these networks have improved uptime, rapid remediation of issues, and changing VLANs, SSIDs and labeling each client on the network is a snap. Edit: Borrowed /u/bpye's single pane of glass term
  - torwayburger 6y ago
    > Most of the value proposition of the Unifi lineup is I can look at a single website ... > The single pane of glass to view everything when I am many miles from the networks I support is essential It's also why we're talking about this.
    - deleted 6y ago
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
frombody 6y ago
Meraki?
simple_phrases 6y ago
Check out OpenWISP. It works with OpenWRT.
kccqzy 6y ago
> Google WiFi creating loops in the network when users try to do wired backhaul That's very surprising to hear. The decades-old spanning tree protocol can prevent that. I in fact have a friend who has done the exact same thing (Google Wifi with wired backhaul) with no problems. It switches from 802.11s to STP with no problems.
bayindirh 6y ago
I know TP-Link is no Ubiquiti, but I run two identical small networks (VR-2100 routers with RE-200v4 extenders running in mesh mode), and it's pretty solid so far. You can access your network from Tether app via cloud if you wish, too. When you enable Mesh, everything is controlled via the router. You don't need to manage anything on the extenders. RE200 can work as an AP if you can get them a CAT5, or can provide wireless to Ethernet capability. I don't need home-wide VLANs and other exotic stuff (for a home network), but you can adjust QoS on the router in three levels and it has an embedded OpenVPN server if you fancy. While not network related, you can temporarily or permanently turn off all LEDs on the devices so they don't create any light pollution, something I love to have. All in all it's a great package, for my home network, at least.
growse 6y ago
I was going to look at OpenWISP, which looks like it can centrally manage a whole bunch of kit, including openwrt and also edgeswitch devices.
EricE 6y ago
Keep an eye on the Cisco Small Business line - no subscription, firmware updates without an account (yes, I am still talking about Cisco) and while the management console is a bit weak, I'd wager Cisco will mature faster than UBNT can get their crap together at this point :p

bpye 6y ago

During this week I've been playing around with replacing my USG with my existing home server - it already has two NICs - my first thought was to run OPNSense in a VM but nftables on NixOS seems to work well enough - there are a few examples floating online [0,1]. OpenBSD even supports the USG [2] but I couldn't think of much reason to keep the extra hardware. The next thing I want to do is reflash my Unifi APs with OpenWRT [3] - the hardware is fine, but at that point I'll get all the support without the controller software. My home environment is fairly basic so moving away isn't too hard - this would obviously be much harder for a small business... [0] - https://francis.begyn.be/blog/nixos-home-router https://francis.begyn.be/blog/nixos-home-router [1] - http://www.willghatch.net/blog/2020/06/22/nixos-raspberry-pi-4-google-fiber-router/ http://www.willghatch.net/blog/2020/06/22/nixos-raspberry-pi... [2] - https://www.openbsd.org/octeon.html https://www.openbsd.org/octeon.html [3] - https://openwrt.org/toh/ubiquiti/start https://openwrt.org/toh/ubiquiti/start

lostlogin 6y ago
> replacing my USG with my existing home server I like this idea too, but would prefer that the router was physically separated and before any hardware that was in the network. Is this a pointless concern?
- vageli 6y ago
  It's hard to say whether or not the concern is pointless without knowing its basis. Why do you want it physically separated?
  - lostlogin 6y ago
    I had assumed a setup which had several VMs, with one being a PFSense or similar to be less secure than a standalone firewall. Reading about the pros and cons leads me to conclude that security in a virtual setup is just fine.
- neolog 6y ago
  If your server is vulnerable to some threat, adding another barrier in front of it could help.