I am getting the crs310 to my existing network consisting of a hap ax3 and a managed old 3com.
I have a Synology 1525+ which will use 2 link aggregated ports with the crs and 3 other computers that have 2.5g LAN ports. This leaves 3 vacant ports on the crs.
Today the hap ax3 has is first port connected as a wan port with 3 other ports attached to 1 g devices.
The 3 com is almost fully utilized with 1000 and 100 devices. When the crs is introduced, there will be 5 vacant ports
Most of the devices on the 3com will communicate with computers on the crs.
2.5G port, to ETHER1 -CRS (2.5gig port) ( TRUNK Port carrying all vlans )
ether2,ether3,ether4 to 1gig devices
-ether 5 OffBridge port
CRS
-ether1 to HAPAX3 Trunk
-ether2 to SYNOLOGY AGG single trunk interface combined with ether3
-ether3 to SYNOLOGY AGG single trunk interface combined with ether2
-ether4 to PC
-ether5 to PC
-ether6 to PC
-ether7 to 3COM
-ether8 OffBridge port
Note: If most of the 3COM connected devices will have their traffic will be out the internet and not to other devices behind the switch, consider placing the 3COM on ether4 of hapax.
Ether1 on the hap ax3 is connected to the wan link (2gps connection).
Most of the devices on the 3com (except 2 smart TVs) speak to the pcs.
What does offbridge mean and what function would it serve? If not critical I could create a lacp connection to the 3com using ether7 and ether8 thereby improving bandwidth between the 3com and crs.
If I read your explanation correctly, the crs would link the hap ax3 and 3com. I wasn't sure whether each device should link to the other two, but reading your schematic makes sence
Well that is new information isnt it. No mention of 2gig wan in first post.
My first inclination is to state you need to replace the hapax3 with a router that has at least one 2.5gig port and one sfp+port for example.
In your situation you need to decide priority. If the majority of traffic and speed required should be directed between PCs and Synology aka traffic within the network, then use ETHER1 to the CRS, if however your priority is throughput of internet ( note one connection will only be as fast as one gig, as traffic needs to come through 1 gig ports on the router, in this example,) what I mean is ensuring there is less chance of a bottleneck in terms of many users using the internet at the same time.......
IMHO I would probably use ether1 to the switch.
. If I added an RJ45 SPF+ module would that be managed like a regular RJ45 port?