@coliver said in Notorious Short-seller labels Ubiquiti Networks $UBNT as FRAUD:

@irj said in Notorious Short-seller labels Ubiquiti Networks $UBNT as FRAUD:

@mattspeller said in Notorious Short-seller labels Ubiquiti Networks $UBNT as FRAUD:

@rojoloco best have your wallet ready

Our roads are flooded, no traffic lights are working, gas and water are not available, but I damn sure want to focus on looking at a new security vendor.

I mean... she gave you the picture not much effort at that point.

huh?

@dustinb3403 Its a worth a try. The worse they could say is no. Best is that it could save you a couple bucks a month.

@jaredbusch said in Ubiquity new feature for AP that looks sweet.:

@travisdh1 said in Ubiquity new feature for AP that looks sweet.:

@scottalanmiller said in Ubiquity new feature for AP that looks sweet.:

Added tags

Bother, phone didn't cooperate with those then 😐

You have to have a topic selected prior to adding tags to make them stick.

Easy for me to miss on the small screen :(

@jaredbusch said in Trying the UNMS built in updater:

refreshed the browser and it shows 0.9.2 so the updater stalled visibly, but did finish.

Just like on prom night. . .

Youtube Video

@travisdh1 said in Ubiquiti Frontrow:

@scottalanmiller said in Ubiquiti Frontrow:

@travisdh1 said in Ubiquiti Frontrow:

@scottalanmiller said in Ubiquiti Frontrow:

@travisdh1 said in Ubiquiti Frontrow:

I NEEDED this around 2 months back :(

For MangoCon videos?

No, for the things that happened at work that should have been recorded.

That's how you get yourself beaten.

They actually got security camera footage of a government official shoving an employee.

Harder to beat up and intimidate a mounted camera in the corner.

@eddiejennings said in Just need a basic Switch - to act as a Hub:

@scottalanmiller said in Just need a basic Switch - to act as a Hub:

@dashrender said in Just need a basic Switch - to act as a Hub:

@eddiejennings said in Just need a basic Switch - to act as a Hub:

@dashrender said in Just need a basic Switch - to act as a Hub:

@coliver said in Just need a basic Switch - to act as a Hub:

@dustinb3403 said in Just need a basic Switch - to act as a Hub:

@fateknollogee said in Just need a basic Switch - to act as a Hub:

@DustinB3403 Why are you calling it a "hub"?

Because there is no switching taking place. The devices simply ask for a dhcp address, and go. All switches are hubs, so a basic unmanaged switch.

Wtf are you talking about?

My guess - a confusion between switching and routing.

Probably wants a switch, but is calling it a hub, not realizing that a hub is a specific thing that sends all traffic out all ports (layer 1).

In this case, either would probably work, but hubs are limited to 10/100,...

That's true, the GBit standard prohibits hubs.

@QuixoticJeremy Are you bored again? We need a hub that can get around Ethernet standards and pass traffic at gigabit speeds!

Ha, ha ha ha, ha.... pass. lol

@storageninja said in Ubiquiti Security Gateway:

Agent based network abstraction is an interesting alternative to traditional VPN.

It's still traditional VPN, though. Other than automating the configuration, it's all stuff you could have done with OpenVPN or whatever decades ago. It's nice that it auto-configures and it is a great product (or was, appears mostly abandoned now) but it's not an alternative or new VPN, it's just a mesh VPN setup.

SOLVED!!!!
Changed the router, firewall must of been blocking.

@jaredbusch said in Comparing Ubiquiti EdgeRouter and Cisco ASA PPS Performance and Cost:

@nashbrydges said in Comparing Ubiquiti EdgeRouter and Cisco ASA PPS Performance and Cost:

@jaredbusch said in Comparing Ubiquiti EdgeRouter and Cisco ASA PPS Performance and Cost:

@nashbrydges said in Comparing Ubiquiti EdgeRouter and Cisco ASA PPS Performance and Cost:

@brandon220 said in Comparing Ubiquiti EdgeRouter and Cisco ASA PPS Performance and Cost:

I've been using an ERL at home for a while and have them deployed at several business. Zero complaints and I recommend them all the time.

I wish I could use it at home. I'm on Bell Canada ftth and they use a different vlan for iptv and internet. All of the online guides I've seen haven't been able to get me to use my ERL and Bell won't give up which VLANs they use.

No one hasd figured this information out yet?

Sadly not yet, at least not that my Google-fu has allowed me to find.

I am a bit amazed because it should only take a mirrored switch port and wireshark to find VLAN tags.

This was my thinking as I was reading the posts. This is /should be pretty easy to figure out.

@dustinb3403 said in Hardware differences - what makes one less than enterprise:

@scottalanmiller said in Hardware differences - what makes one less than enterprise:

@dustinb3403 said in Hardware differences - what makes one less than enterprise:

@scottalanmiller said in Hardware differences - what makes one less than enterprise:

@jaredbusch said in Hardware differences - what makes one less than enterprise:

@scottalanmiller said in Hardware differences - what makes one less than enterprise:

@jaredbusch said in Hardware differences - what makes one less than enterprise:

@scottalanmiller said in [Hardware differences - what makes one less than enterprise]

The software. The hardware is about equal, sort of.

But a $95 Ubiquiti is faster than a $3,000 CIsco. So the hardware still matters. Cisco at $3,000 is "Maybe able to handle your house."

Prove this.

Don't bullshit or theorize. Prove it. Get a unit and run tests or stopping stating it like a fact and predicate these statements with "in my opinion" and such.

Granted I'll never buy Cisco in the SMB when Ubiquiti exists for the cost and performance that it currently exists with.

But none of that invalidates the quality or functionality of Cisco hardware and software.

Cost has nothing to do with that.

I'm not the one making the claim, it's based off of measured PPS between the two.

You are the one always making the claim and have never linked to source material to back up your claims.

I've never made the claim. I've repeated Ubiquiti's performance measurements. It's nothing to do with me. I just remember the number and repeat it as it is a critical guideline for understanding where Ubiquiti falls within the Cisco product range. When people are talking $10K Ciscos, we can't talk Ubiquiti, it just doesn't make sense. But at $3K and below, I've never had anyone come up with any value proposition to Cisco gear considering that Ubiquiti is measured at better throughput until that price point. Granted, Ubiquiti did the study, but Cisco has not disputed it or claimed any other performance of which I am aware.

If you're repeating it, find the source and post a link, FFS. I want to believe a lot of what you say, but I agree with @jaredbusch here. It comes out like another scott-ism.

It only sounds that way because you think I don't have sources for all of my stuff.

You can always go look up Cisco performance, too, and see what it is.

But you're the person spouting something off as a fact, so provide the source!

This is correct, it is not our job to do research when you are the one claiming a fact. It is the reader's job to verify, but the reader cannot do that without the initial facts.

Yes, I know you already answered. Just closing my part of the conversation.

@scottalanmiller said in Wanting to Dual boot to test KVM.. Where do i begin?:

Has this project been supplanted by the Fedora on the old desktop project?

Yes sir

@bigbear said in Ubiquiti UNMS - First impressions:

@marcinozga said in Ubiquiti UNMS - First impressions:

It doesn't support Toughswitches yet, no support for NVR or cameras, no support for Mfi devices. I wish it would replace Unifi controller too. At the moment it only picked up 2 nano stations, so just too limited for me. Perhaps in the future they add additional devices, firmware upgrades alone across the board would be huge.

Isnt mFi pretty much dead? Really sucks too but I think on ubnt forums the pressed and got leadership to admit they abandoned it in the vine...

I believe that is correct. It was in one of the threads about the ancient vulnerability in them not getting patched or something like that.

@JaredBusch not necessarily abnormal but surely a mix of 3 independent repos.

Just wanted to add @bj to this thread that I think a $100-ish Cloud Router from Mikrotik would blow most hardware away, including Ubiquiti, on pure performance. With the $50 and under models you are still getting 1 million PPS. The new cloud router series really has a crazy amount of power.

This still coming from a pure PPS (packets per second) point of view.

I think the cheapest cloud router has 12 to 16 cores That would only count for the core routers I am more familiar with (12 to 24 now) in the $500 range.

Very poor marketing in the states but very popular with western country WISPS.

Grandstream has an NVR unit as well.

http://www.grandstream.com/products/ip-video-surveillance/network-video-recorders/product/gvr3552

@Mike-Davis said in ubiquiti indoor wifi receiver, any?:

If it was just printers I wouldn't think twice about just using some APs in bridged mode. For PCs I would make sure their (the users) expectations are set correctly and make sure you don't have a some database application that is real sensitive to latency running on the link. As cheap as it is to try, I would try it for one set up and then do the rest if it meets their expectations.

Depending on the units, you can get really good latency on wireless links. but you need good ones. Some people argue that it beats wired. it doesn't, but it's good enough that people start to imagine that it does.

With T56 series here the 48s dropped down to $170 range, everything else has gotten even cheaper.

The t56a is the cost that Yealink 48s was a month ago, and it is android. About $199.

I got Ubiquiti phones in to test and have updated them a couple times. At last pass they still couldn't park or use BLF reliably.

I can't imagine leaving Yealink.

@stacksofplates said in Ubiquiti vulnerability:

@JaredBusch said in Ubiquiti vulnerability:

@stacksofplates said in Ubiquiti vulnerability:

@JaredBusch said in Ubiquiti vulnerability:

None of that is the EdgeMax series.

That is all the original wireless stuff before even the Unifi line.

Yes it is all still currently available, but not nearly as horrible as that article is trying to insinuate.

All that gear should be behind a router normally.

Ya I was looking through it and noticed that. The tough switch was in there, but that's the only non bridge type device I saw.

The tough switch has been a dead product for years.

Ah didn't realize that. I've seen it for sale a few places, but never noticed they weren't produced any more.

It might still be produced, but it has not been developed against at all.

@Dashrender said in Considering a New VPN:

@JaredBusch said in Considering a New VPN:

@scottalanmiller said in Considering a New VPN:

@JaredBusch said in Considering a New VPN:

@scottalanmiller said in Considering a New VPN:

@JaredBusch said in Considering a New VPN:

@scottalanmiller said in Considering a New VPN:

@Carnival-Boy said in Considering a New VPN:

Yeah, I need hub and spoke really. But that's not too difficult to setup on ZeroTier is it?

ZeroTier doesn't offer hub and spoke at all. It's pure SDN / mesh.

This is not true, ZeroTier has gateway functionality.
https://www.zerotier.com/community/topic/5/bridging-ethernet-to-zerotier-virtual-networks-on-linux

I was leaving that out for simplicity as he's not going to build custom Linux systems for this.

Why? Because a single VM setup as a gateway means that ZT now meets all needs also.

No different than replacing a router, etc.

I've not used it, does it require you to change your IP range or can you keep what you have?

The biggest recommendation is to make it inclusive of your LAN subnet so make life easier. I've not had the time to set it up on my lab yet.

I use ZT in a number of places, but not using the gateway anywhere yet.

Right, so being inclusive means that you did follow Scott's recommendation, only that you bent ZT to the current setup, instead of making a whole new IP setup with this in mind.

Did that solve all of the Windows DNS issues?

I have no idea WTF you are talking about. You are implying and inferring things that are not being discussed here.

Found it:
https://community.ubnt.com/t5/EdgeMAX/ERL-Performance-Testing-with-IPSec-VPN/m-p/1053799#M44593

@JaredBusch said in Unifi switch - tagged traffic issues:

@Dashrender said in Unifi switch - tagged traffic issues:

Found the problem - the uplink from my Unifi to my core switch, VLAN 2 wasn't allowed on the connection.

Enabled VLAN2, problem solved.

Aww the little things.

on which switch.

Also, reinforcing the issue with VLAN complicating things.

The core switch, in my case an HP 2824.

I don't disagree that VLANs can/do add complication. But in this case it was pre-existing complication that I had to work through, not remove at this point.

@JaredBusch said in Ubiquiti switches: UniFi vs EdgeMax:

@coliver said in Ubiquiti switches: UniFi vs EdgeMax:

@thwr said in Ubiquiti switches: UniFi vs EdgeMax:

Mh, is the EdgeSwitch able to run a VPN tunnel on its own? I need to connect a "remote" office to my server room. The office is in the 3rd floor, my server room in the basement and I need to run through a "public" patch room (primary cabling junction for the building).

Like:
3rd floor "remote" office -> fiber -> public patch room -> fiber -> my Serverroom (basement) -> Office

I doubt it has the ability to configure a VPN that seems like an edge device is needed for that.

It does not. That would be the router's job.

Yeah, could have been. Probably the same software behind the scenes etc.

@Breffni-Potter exactly. There is a clear market for this, why is there any question why they provide a product where there is demand?

I found these guys on Amazon a few months ago looking for something else. I have not used or tried the products but looks like what you need.
https://www.gl-inet.com/

Seems pretty clear that UBNT has gone public with this at this point.

I have 26 devices and no problems... I know JB has had some issue with updates but he can update it manually.

Yup, and cheap enough to swap while someone else is trying to fix something is huge. I'll take two devices that I can swap when one dies for a total price of $600 long before I'll take one of $3,000 that fails "a little less often" but can take a day for someone to repair!

@Kelly said in Ubiquiti now available retail:

Just so we're clear on terms, firewall vs UTM, the difference you all are noting is access rules vs packet inspection?

All firewalls do access rules and FAIAP packet inspection. Anything less and it is just a router.

@Dashrender I saw it before... I was prepared.