I klnow that in general one should not abuse switches as routers. Not what I plan, and it sort of would help me keeping this part isolated.
* I have asmallish office. Say half a dozen rooms. double that as employees.
* Central to that, outside our data center style setup, is a CRS328-24P-4S+RM that handles all the workstation style traffic. It is linked to our server room via 2 10g fiber lines.
* for reasons of consistency, I plan running that one with RouterOS in the next ugprade cycle.
Now, I also need CAPSMAN installed somewhere for the house. Half a dozen access points, Ethernet Termination is NOT required (I am totally ok with the access poitns doing their routing part).
Is it a decent ID - given I run RouterOS on that switch anyway - to use that for CapsMan? I see the following scenarios here:
* Controlling half a dozen AH2 dual radio access points
* Having a smallish list of access devices to authenticate
* Running a portal for guests, which seriously you can run on a hand - most of the time zero, max definitely in a 5 guests when we get guests for an inhose conversation style conference.
The office is likely to grow, but definitely will stay under two dozen employees with a max of the same EVER for presentations. And this is 2018, so most of the people visiting will use their phone internet anyway.
Generally nothing I would expect to put any load on the server.
It would mean the house network is totally isolated on that machine, no virtual server behind. This has a specific gain for me - makes maintenance easier than having yet another server just for CapsMan.
The other 2 thigns the switch does are:
* Pure switching (with VLAN tag playing so some ports see specific traffic untagged)
* POE for the access points.
Basically I expect the CPU's to be totally inactive anyway.
Anything against running access point control over that device?