Hi:
Mikrotik can you think in release a switch like netPower 16p into a rackmount eclosure?
Maybe you need something like this in your portfolio, between the small CRS112-8P-4S-IN and the big CRS328-24P-4S+RM.
I think it’s easy to do with low production costs. 
Best regards.
+1, If MikroTik produe that device, for sure I buy that.
+1 good idea
I’ll buy 2
Yes, need it.
Having device like CRS318-16P-2S+RM will be great but it must support 802.3af/at and not only passive poe…
I will also vote for powerfull home lab device like CRS318-8P-4C-4S+2Q+RM so 8x 1g poe, 4x 1g eth/SFP combo, 4x SFP+, 2x QSFP+ this will full fill many home installations where users use NAS as storage and need fast access(more than 10g) to it…
Hi!
This is a very good equipment but i think the main improvement tha we need is a 16 port 1Gb poe.
I link with netPower 16p beacouse it support 802.3af/at has two very good uplink ports SFP+ and Mikrotik now has the routerboard, only need put it into rackmount box.
But yes, it always can be better 
Best regards.
I requested one but named it incorrectly.
Is unapproved because you do not use two C14, one for low, and one for high voltage… 
:-p
Basically a CCR2004-16G-2S+ but as a pure switch.
Not quite. The CCR2004-16G-2S+ does not have PoE Ports.
But I, too, would welcome a device like this though I would prefer it in a desktop form factor with optional rack ears and passively cooled. Essentially like a Cisco Catalyst WS-C3560CX-12PD-S.
I would also prefer this variant. But I my case passive cooled and desktop housing would be prefered.
I’m still waiting for something like this.
Either this or a 8P-8G-2S+ device that wouldn’t be as big and expensive as the CRS418. A lot of its price seems to come from its routing power, which would be completely unused in my case (switching results seem to be only marginally better than a CRS318), so I can’t justify buying it to replace a SG2016P just so that I can mount it in a rack properly and have a 10G link to the RB5009.
I think nowaday all switches should be PoE by default, stop.
At least in commercial/production environment where it is a nonsense to skimp for cheaper non-PoE devices and i.e. buy and install a mess of PoE injectors...
Where I work, most RJ45 ports don't need PoE. We only need PoE for connecting desktop IP phones ... and we need 100Mbps ports for that since we don't daisy-chain desktop computers off the phones. Reason being that VoIP is provided by telephony company and we don't want to mix their traffic with our on same physical infrastructure.
As to home environment: in my house, I have around 20 RJ45 ports active. Of those, 4 would benefit of being PoE.
So considering large difference in price between PoE and non-PoE gear and higher current draw (even when PoE is not fully utilized) this means higher TCO per port for PoE gear I'm not willing to bear.
So I strongly disagree with "nowaday all switches should be PoE by default".
Agree with your point of view for that scenario
Mostly here in small-mediun companies a switch ( or switches groups ) are used ad “all-in-one” for pc, access points, network cameras, ip phones etc by vlans benefit
Is not uncommon to see tons of injectors because “poe switches cost too much”
That is no more true by now…
You have an option today, MikroTik · CRS320-8P-8B-4S+RM
Deleted previous post because sometimes a reponse isn’t marked properly when writing on phone.
This is just as big and just as expensive as a CRS418. I also don’t have any devices that would need PoE++.
I was thinking of an indoor CSS318-sized device (compatible with the RMK-2x10/19 bracket for future expansion), with the functionality and price of the NetPower 16P, or maybe something even cheaper with PoE+ on only half the ports.
There are currently two locations where such a device would be perfect. Both use RB5009 as the main router. One has 5 PoE+ devices and currently uses the SG2016P. The other has 4 and currently uses two separate switches. In both locations, the networking equipment has been recently moved into a rack and the current switches are not rack-mountable, resulting in a bit of a mess especially in the second location.