Edge Router LITE and WiFi controller
-
@gjacobse said:
@JaredBusch said:
They make a product for that. The USG
Okay - so it's NOT so far fetched.. Since there is a product.
I'm good with leaving what I have running.
Likely not MIPS based though.
-
@scottalanmiller said:
@gjacobse said:
@scottalanmiller said:
The code is GPL'd, so in theory you could compile it for MIPS if you wanted. But you would never want that controller running on your firewall. What's the end goal?
Mainly a curious thought. Like any one with the ERL and the UniFI controller, I use two IPs to manage my network. It was a wondering if you could combine and use the single IP and the right port.
For myself since I only have / need one site to manage that all was in one place. for a multi site company it doesn't really make sense. But for me, then the ERL has the WiFI db and all that is needed is any browswer.
How often are you needing to manage your Unifi from outside of the network? What's the benefit to having fewer IPs?
Not so much for management as monitoring.. what devices are connected, did either of the APs drop out, who's dogging the network..
-
@JaredBusch said:
@scottalanmiller said:
@gjacobse said:
@scottalanmiller said:
The code is GPL'd, so in theory you could compile it for MIPS if you wanted. But you would never want that controller running on your firewall. What's the end goal?
Mainly a curious thought. Like any one with the ERL and the UniFI controller, I use two IPs to manage my network. It was a wondering if you could combine and use the single IP and the right port.
For myself since I only have / need one site to manage that all was in one place. for a multi site company it doesn't really make sense. But for me, then the ERL has the WiFI db and all that is needed is any browswer.
How often are you needing to manage your Unifi from outside of the network? What's the benefit to having fewer IPs?
He was not saying from outside the network for himself. just that he has to use 2 IP addresses locally to manage everything.
Oh, that seems odd as two IPs or two URLs is the same amount of effort. Not sure how it would lower the effort.
-
@gjacobse said:
@JaredBusch said:
They make a product for that. The USG
Okay - so it's NOT so far fetched.. Since there is a product.
I'm good with leaving what I have running.
There is a product that allows them to be managed as one. The key difference is that the USG uses the Unifi interface, the ERL does not.
-
@gjacobse said:
@scottalanmiller said:
@gjacobse said:
@scottalanmiller said:
The code is GPL'd, so in theory you could compile it for MIPS if you wanted. But you would never want that controller running on your firewall. What's the end goal?
Mainly a curious thought. Like any one with the ERL and the UniFI controller, I use two IPs to manage my network. It was a wondering if you could combine and use the single IP and the right port.
For myself since I only have / need one site to manage that all was in one place. for a multi site company it doesn't really make sense. But for me, then the ERL has the WiFI db and all that is needed is any browswer.
How often are you needing to manage your Unifi from outside of the network? What's the benefit to having fewer IPs?
Not so much for management as monitoring.. what devices are connected, did either of the APs drop out, who's dogging the network..
how would it aid in monitoring? Wouldn't it make it slightly harder?
-
@Jason said:
@gjacobse said:
@JaredBusch said:
They make a product for that. The USG
Okay - so it's NOT so far fetched.. Since there is a product.
I'm good with leaving what I have running.
Likely not MIPS based though.
My guess is that it is, otherwise they would have to maintain more hardware.
-
@scottalanmiller said:
@Jason said:
@gjacobse said:
@JaredBusch said:
They make a product for that. The USG
Okay - so it's NOT so far fetched.. Since there is a product.
I'm good with leaving what I have running.
Likely not MIPS based though.
My guess is that it is, otherwise they would have to maintain more hardware.
Yeah apperenlty it has the exact same MIPS processor as the ERL. Now I'm surpised someone hasn't pulled the unifi packages off of it and moved it to the ERL then.
-
@Jason said:
@scottalanmiller said:
@Jason said:
@gjacobse said:
@JaredBusch said:
They make a product for that. The USG
Okay - so it's NOT so far fetched.. Since there is a product.
I'm good with leaving what I have running.
Likely not MIPS based though.
My guess is that it is, otherwise they would have to maintain more hardware.
Yeah apperenlty it has the exact same MIPS processor as the ERL. Now I'm surpised someone hasn't pulled the unifi packages off of it and moved it to the ERL then.
Not sure if it has the same amount of memory, but I would guess that it does. Seems pretty likely that you could do it, it's all GPL.
-
@scottalanmiller said:
@Jason said:
@scottalanmiller said:
@Jason said:
@gjacobse said:
@JaredBusch said:
They make a product for that. The USG
Okay - so it's NOT so far fetched.. Since there is a product.
I'm good with leaving what I have running.
Likely not MIPS based though.
My guess is that it is, otherwise they would have to maintain more hardware.
Yeah apperenlty it has the exact same MIPS processor as the ERL. Now I'm surpised someone hasn't pulled the unifi packages off of it and moved it to the ERL then.
Not sure if it has the same amount of memory.
Nope. 512MB for ERL, 2GB for the USG.
-
@Jason said:
@scottalanmiller said:
@Jason said:
@scottalanmiller said:
@Jason said:
@gjacobse said:
@JaredBusch said:
They make a product for that. The USG
Okay - so it's NOT so far fetched.. Since there is a product.
I'm good with leaving what I have running.
Likely not MIPS based though.
My guess is that it is, otherwise they would have to maintain more hardware.
Yeah apperenlty it has the exact same MIPS processor as the ERL. Now I'm surpised someone hasn't pulled the unifi packages off of it and moved it to the ERL then.
Not sure if it has the same amount of memory.
Nope. 512MB for ERL, 2GB for the USG.
That makes sense. The Unifi system uses a ton more overhead.
-
@scottalanmiller said:
The code is GPL'd, so in theory you could compile it for MIPS if you wanted. But you would never want that controller running on your firewall. What's the end goal?
One end goal would be for home use. Most home users use a router/AP all in one device. It would be nice to have the same for them, but with the AP external.
-
@Jason said:
@scottalanmiller said:
@Jason said:
@scottalanmiller said:
@Jason said:
@gjacobse said:
@JaredBusch said:
They make a product for that. The USG
Okay - so it's NOT so far fetched.. Since there is a product.
I'm good with leaving what I have running.
Likely not MIPS based though.
My guess is that it is, otherwise they would have to maintain more hardware.
Yeah apperenlty it has the exact same MIPS processor as the ERL. Now I'm surpised someone hasn't pulled the unifi packages off of it and moved it to the ERL then.
Not sure if it has the same amount of memory.
Nope. 512MB for ERL, 2GB for the USG.
Welp.. so much for that idea.
-
@Dashrender said:
@scottalanmiller said:
The code is GPL'd, so in theory you could compile it for MIPS if you wanted. But you would never want that controller running on your firewall. What's the end goal?
One end goal would be for home use. Most home users use a router/AP all in one device. It would be nice to have the same for them, but with the AP external.
That's very different than what was asked, though. It would be all the effort of two devices if you just loaded the tool into the ERL as it would not be part of the main interface. So it would be exactly the same to an end user as if they had two IP addresses because they'd have two URLs. So that can't be a reason for going down this path.
The UGS approach is different because that merges the managed into one. What the OP is doing here is not reducing the effort (and no home user is going to be custom compiling for MIPS and overburdoning their firewalls with extra tools) but just trading a second IP for a second URL. No win from a useability perspective.
-
@scottalanmiller said:
@Dashrender said:
@scottalanmiller said:
The code is GPL'd, so in theory you could compile it for MIPS if you wanted. But you would never want that controller running on your firewall. What's the end goal?
One end goal would be for home use. Most home users use a router/AP all in one device. It would be nice to have the same for them, but with the AP external.
That's very different than what was asked, though. It would be all the effort of two devices if you just loaded the tool into the ERL as it would not be part of the main interface. So it would be exactly the same to an end user as if they had two IP addresses because they'd have two URLs. So that can't be a reason for going down this path.
The UGS approach is different because that merges the managed into one. What the OP is doing here is not reducing the effort (and no home user is going to be custom compiling for MIPS and overburdoning their firewalls with extra tools) but just trading a second IP for a second URL. No win from a useability perspective.
Oh I agree no home user will do that.
It would be nice if the Unifi security gateway device had the controller software built in (does anyone know? maybe it does?). -
@Dashrender said:
It would be nice if the Unifi security gateway device had the controller software built in (does anyone know? maybe it does?).
I think that it does.
-
@scottalanmiller said:
@Dashrender said:
It would be nice if the Unifi security gateway device had the controller software built in (does anyone know? maybe it does?).
I think that it does.
SHIT! really? I have a friend who has a USG, but has no wired devices so he didn't install it because he was waiting for his Controller Stick, thinking that the USG didn't have that built in.
Something to try tonight!
-
@Dashrender said:
@scottalanmiller said:
@Dashrender said:
It would be nice if the Unifi security gateway device had the controller software built in (does anyone know? maybe it does?).
I think that it does.
SHIT! really? I have a friend who has a USG, but has no wired devices so he didn't install it because he was waiting for his Controller Stick, thinking that the USG didn't have that built in.
Something to try tonight!
That might be correct, I don't have one (they are quite expensive and we don't use Unifi switches either so I don't see any value to it unless we embrace it end to end) so I can't test.
Why did he get the stick? Why not just control it from his desktop?
-
@scottalanmiller said:
@Dashrender said:
@scottalanmiller said:
@Dashrender said:
It would be nice if the Unifi security gateway device had the controller software built in (does anyone know? maybe it does?).
I think that it does.
SHIT! really? I have a friend who has a USG, but has no wired devices so he didn't install it because he was waiting for his Controller Stick, thinking that the USG didn't have that built in.
Something to try tonight!
That might be correct, I don't have one (they are quite expensive and we don't use Unifi switches either so I don't see any value to it unless we embrace it end to end) so I can't test.
Why did he get the stick? Why not just control it from his desktop?
You can't control an AP over wireless. He has no wired computers in the entire network.
-
@Dashrender said:
You can't control an AP over wireless. He has no wired computers in the entire network.
I don't think the controller has a check built in for this..
-
@Dashrender said:
@scottalanmiller said:
@Dashrender said:
@scottalanmiller said:
@Dashrender said:
It would be nice if the Unifi security gateway device had the controller software built in (does anyone know? maybe it does?).
I think that it does.
SHIT! really? I have a friend who has a USG, but has no wired devices so he didn't install it because he was waiting for his Controller Stick, thinking that the USG didn't have that built in.
Something to try tonight!
That might be correct, I don't have one (they are quite expensive and we don't use Unifi switches either so I don't see any value to it unless we embrace it end to end) so I can't test.
Why did he get the stick? Why not just control it from his desktop?
You can't control an AP over wireless. He has no wired computers in the entire network.
Why would this matter? The controller doe snot care how you access it. Obviously, for initial setup you need to plug something in to configure, but once you have the wireless network up, there is no reason that you cannot manage the unit from any device.
