I've not seen stock anywhere. No one has one to test yet.Someone to share test from wireless version or not come yet to anyone?
Stock expected 7-Dec-2018
For MikroTik devices with SFP+ interface that support both 10G and 1G link rate following settings are needed to be set on both linked devices for required interfaces. These settings only relate when optical SFP transceivers are used. In order to get them working in 1G link rate, use the following configuration:
Devices which SFP+ ports support 1G links:
- auto-negotiation disabled
- port speed 1G
- FD
- RB4011 series - SFP+1 interface can be used in 1G mode if required.
No wonder - it's beefy yet passive. CCR1009-PC can give you actual burns if you touch heatsink while it's powered on. Even if idling (there's actually not that huge difference in thermals between idle and stress)first quick opinion - it's running hot. really hot, without any serious load.
This SFP mess is really annoying! Why can't it just work? If I connect cheap TP-Link switch to Cisco, auto negotiation on SFP works. Same with even cheaper Realtek cards, various Dell servers and other equipment. But no, for Mikrotik, you have to manually set the speeds on both ends.
Where's the problem? Some hardware issue on used chipset/cpu on Mikrotik side? Bad implementation? Incompatibility of some SFPs? Or just laziness to do it right?
And "Just disable auto negotiation and set rate manually" is NOT the solution. What if you can't set other side of the link? Often any administrative change of parameters of upstream link costs extra money. This needs to be either fixed or have warning written on all Mikrotik product pages that SFP port doesn't support auto negotiation. It's 2018 and you expect these things to just work. If there was a list of verified SFPs that do work, that would be fine. But so far it seems auto negotiation on SFP port just doesn't work, no matter what SFP or DAC you use.
Fix it or say clearly it's not supported and will never work!
I don't think it's "secret" anymore. More and more distributors have wifi version available. Eg. CDR in Poland already has them. I randomly checked few days ago. Probably plenty of distributors already have them.Personally I am replacing a rb2011uias-2hnd-in, I never used LCD, USB or speaker, so this is not a big deal for me with the cpu power available. The upgrade on the wireless side is much more a thing for me.
Ordered today the wifi version, found exactly one distributor who has like 40 on stock according their website so seems they are finally in stock. Not sure if I could post which, but it’s one from Latvia with inernational shipping that was in the first results when doing a google search after the full device name.
Just to be sure, during these tests, you didn't use bandwidth server or testing tools on the Routerboards themselves correct? Only using clients (PC's) that are in front and behind the routers mentioned? If not, and your results seem to suggest this, you are only testing the CPU's in the Routerboards in how well they can generate traffic, not how much traffic they can handle while it's running through the boards, like in a real-world scenario.some tests made with RB4011iGS+5HacQ2HnD and CCR1009-7G-1C-1S+, using bandwidth server, default mtu.
this is what i intended to do. ccr will do better, for sure, but i was intrigued about that fixed line on 2gbps. again, 2.5gbps = pcie 1.0 x.1The built-in testing tools are only intended to be used to test line bandwidth from one routerboard to another, if you have above a few hundred Mbit's of bandwidth, other factors become the limiting factor and they are useless.
Sorry, but I don't think you quite understand. What you have tested is CPU performance, not bandwidth. And in that regard, the RB4011 would actually preform better then a CCR because of higher single threaded performance (The newest newest beta version introduces some multi-threaded performance testing).this is what i intended to do. ccr will do better, for sure, but i was intrigued about that fixed line on 2gbps. again, 2.5gbps = pcie 1.0 x.1The built-in testing tools are only intended to be used to test line bandwidth from one routerboard to another, if you have above a few hundred Mbit's of bandwidth, other factors become the limiting factor and they are useless.
i'll do some more tests these days, in a live 10gbps enviroment
Yes, it is , seems the board is mounted upside-down too (the SFP+ cage and LAN ports are aligned to up side), the LAN ports are upside-down too, "release handle" (don't know how to name it in english ) on rj45 plug is up too, not down - this also indicating that the PCB is upside-down .And... Is it just me or is SPF+ port mounted upside down?
So yes, main board is flipped over (or the CPU is only on top side, connectors, leds, etc. are on bottom side) so the CPU can touch a metal top cover which work as heat sink for CPU.3. The case is close to full-metal design (I know the bottom half case is plastic), the CPU is directly using thermal pad to touch metal case to cooling. The CPU temperature is not over 45C since started using.
It appears that having autonegotiation on one end and not the other is not a problem on SFP.In my configuration disabling autonegotiation is not availible option because Im replace ISP Iskratel Innbox V60-U modem with mikrotik and put fibre and SFP module direct on mikrotik, that I don't need 2 devices, can send IPTV&VOIP&INTERNET on same UTP cable(Instead runing each cable for each device) and in this case I don't have access to ISP side to disable autonegotiation.
Well... I didn't have such experience. For me disabling autoneg on S+RJ10 and connecting it to onboard NIC of device that doesn't support disabling autoneg simply resulted in "no-link" reported by that device and no connectivity at all. Lack of connectivity whatsoever is quite serious issue in networkIt appears that having autonegotiation on one end and not the other is not a problem on SFP.
Of course on copper ethernet this is a definite no-no as it will end up in one side halfduplex and the other fullduplex.
But on SFP it appears to work different.
Did you actually try setting autonegotiation off and the correct speed and fullduplex, and what happens then?
Yeah it really sucks because S+RJ10 doesn't autoneg to gigabit. Even if there's 1G on the other end it still autonegs to 10G. It's terrible module like I said bilion times. Objectively. The only thing that saves its name is price.You should not do it with copper ethernet, as I already wrote.
But with fiber it appears to work OK.
Maybe because it cannot work in halfduplex anyway and the speed can be selected to match.
Im not shure. When Im uncheck "Auto Negotation" I think Im together with checking "1000M full" also check "1000M half"(My mistake) and didn't work. It is on remote location and can't test this weekend... I will try again next week...It appears that having autonegotiation on one end and not the other is not a problem on SFP.In my configuration disabling autonegotiation is not availible option because Im replace ISP Iskratel Innbox V60-U modem with mikrotik and put fibre and SFP module direct on mikrotik, that I don't need 2 devices, can send IPTV&VOIP&INTERNET on same UTP cable(Instead runing each cable for each device) and in this case I don't have access to ISP side to disable autonegotiation.
Of course on copper ethernet this is a definite no-no as it will end up in one side halfduplex and the other fullduplex.
But on SFP it appears to work different.
Did you actually try setting autonegotiation off and the correct speed and fullduplex, and what happens then?
The autonegotiation problem only affects SFP+ ports, with 1 Gbit modules - the SFP ones are ok.We have a link between an RB2011 and an RB260 using two Net Insight NPA0022-LJ11 SFP fiber modules and it works
fine no matter if it is configured for autonegotiation or fixed 1G/Fulldup at either end...
(before it was configured for autoneg but I have disabled it because we plan to change to a bidir SFP which works only
without autoneg and wanted to prepare the config for that. so first disabled it at one end, expecting a link failure, but no.
and it was transporting traffic at that time!)
Yes but problem is only on RB4011 model. On CRS326-24G-2S+RM(RouterOS mode) same 1Gbit module in SFP+ port work without problem...The autonegotiation problem only affects SFP+ ports, with 1 Gbit modules - the SFP ones are ok.We have a link between an RB2011 and an RB260 using two Net Insight NPA0022-LJ11 SFP fiber modules and it works
fine no matter if it is configured for autonegotiation or fixed 1G/Fulldup at either end...
(before it was configured for autoneg but I have disabled it because we plan to change to a bidir SFP which works only
without autoneg and wanted to prepare the config for that. so first disabled it at one end, expecting a link failure, but no.
and it was transporting traffic at that time!)
Not quiteYes but problem is only on RB4011 model. On CRS326-24G-2S+RM(RouterOS mode) same 1Gbit module in SFP+ port work without problem...The autonegotiation problem only affects SFP+ ports, with 1 Gbit modules - the SFP ones are ok.We have a link between an RB2011 and an RB260 using two Net Insight NPA0022-LJ11 SFP fiber modules and it works
fine no matter if it is configured for autonegotiation or fixed 1G/Fulldup at either end...
(before it was configured for autoneg but I have disabled it because we plan to change to a bidir SFP which works only
without autoneg and wanted to prepare the config for that. so first disabled it at one end, expecting a link failure, but no.
and it was transporting traffic at that time!)
I can confirm 1G in SFP+ on 3xx series switches requires disabling autoneg. My 1G copper doesn't even detect link until autoneg is disabled.Not quiteYes but problem is only on RB4011 model. On CRS326-24G-2S+RM(RouterOS mode) same 1Gbit module in SFP+ port work without problem...The autonegotiation problem only affects SFP+ ports, with 1 Gbit modules - the SFP ones are ok.We have a link between an RB2011 and an RB260 using two Net Insight NPA0022-LJ11 SFP fiber modules and it works
fine no matter if it is configured for autonegotiation or fixed 1G/Fulldup at either end...
(before it was configured for autoneg but I have disabled it because we plan to change to a bidir SFP which works only
without autoneg and wanted to prepare the config for that. so first disabled it at one end, expecting a link failure, but no.
and it was transporting traffic at that time!)
https://wiki.mikrotik.com/wiki/MikroTik ... ansceivers
iirc MikroTik said that some kind of error correction that is technically required for passive DACs is not supported on 4011 but I guess if you don't have much of em noise in your environment and cable is short (like MikroTik ones) then probably it's not big deal thus "usually" it will work. In average environment.Fun fact... According to https://wiki.mikrotik.com/wiki/MikroTik ... lity_table S+DA0001/S+DA0003 aren't supported but... Just tested S+DA0001 (SFP+DAC1M) with a Zyxel XGS 2210 the other side and using autoneg off, 10g fdx, and it seems to work (link up, data flow ok)
model: RB4011iGS+
factory-firmware: 6.43
current-firmware: 6.43.4
pgrade-firmware: 6.43.4
auto-negotiation disabled
port speed 1G
FD
dec/12 20:54:36 interface,info sfp-sfpplus1 link up (speed 1G, half duplex)
dec/12 20:54:37 interface,info sfp-sfpplus1 link down
dec/12 20:54:39 interface,info sfp-sfpplus1 link up (speed 1G, half duplex)
dec/12 20:54:40 interface,info sfp-sfpplus1 link down
dec/12 20:54:42 interface,info sfp-sfpplus1 link up (speed 1G, half duplex)
dec/12 20:54:43 interface,info sfp-sfpplus1 link down
dec/12 20:54:45 interface,info sfp-sfpplus1 link up (speed 1G, half duplex)
dec/12 20:54:46 interface,info sfp-sfpplus1 link down
dec/12 20:54:48 interface,info sfp-sfpplus1 link up (speed 1G, half duplex)
dec/12 20:54:49 interface,info sfp-sfpplus1 link down
dec/12 20:54:51 interface,info sfp-sfpplus1 link up (speed 1G, half duplex)
dec/12 20:54:52 interface,info sfp-sfpplus1 link down
dec/12 20:54:54 interface,info sfp-sfpplus1 link up (speed 1G, half duplex)
dec/12 20:54:55 interface,info sfp-sfpplus1 link down
dec/12 20:54:57 interface,info sfp-sfpplus1 link up (speed 1G, half duplex)
dec/12 20:54:58 interface,info sfp-sfpplus1 link down
dec/12 20:55:00 interface,info sfp-sfpplus1 link up (speed 1G, half duplex)
dec/12 20:55:01 interface,info sfp-sfpplus1 link down
dec/12 20:55:03 interface,info sfp-sfpplus1 link up (speed 1G, half duplex)
dec/12 20:55:04 interface,info sfp-sfpplus1 link down
dec/12 20:55:06 interface,info sfp-sfpplus1 link up (speed 1G, half duplex)
What's the cable length between those SingleMode transceivers? Rough estimate works. 500m? 1km? 2km? 5km? 10km? 15? 20km?I have instaled SFP module S-53LC20D in SFP+ port of the router. The port has the following settings:
.............
Where is issue?
I think it is between 2-5 kmWhat's the cable length between those SingleMode transceivers? Rough estimate works. 500m? 1km? 2km? 5km? 10km? 15? 20km?I have instaled SFP module S-53LC20D in SFP+ port of the router. The port has the following settings:
.............
Where is issue?
I'm pretty sure we're looking at a dampening issue here.
Weird... maybe try a 2 dB damper anyways? Then again, pretty sure you already tried that.I think it is between 2-5 km
But i forgot notice that transceiver work as normal in a switch CSS106-5G-1S from my side. So the link has not issues.
Same goes for me - I could only get the link to work with an SFP module after asking the provider to turn off autonegotiation on their end as well.https://wiki.mikrotik.com/wiki/MikroTik ... ansceivers
Disable auto negotiation on both ends of link and the flapping will stop (tested and confirmed S-53LC20D @ RB4011)[..] settings are needed to be set on both linked devices for required interfaces
You could try different Transmit Hash Policyofftopic a bit - could someone point me to a topic discussing LACP? i haven't succeeded to obtain more than 1gbps ... one of lacp members stays relaxed, doing nothing
also, wins server / master browser? thanks in advance!
tested layer 2 and layer2+layer3, same result.You could try different Transmit Hash Policyofftopic a bit - could someone point me to a topic discussing LACP? i haven't succeeded to obtain more than 1gbps ... one of lacp members stays relaxed, doing nothing
also, wins server / master browser? thanks in advance!
so which will be the appropriate choice in case of smb (i'll say smbv3 with multichannel enabled by default)?There's no hashing algorithm that would allow all bonded interfaces to be used by a single connection (e.g. single TCP or UDP stream running, say, iperf). However, different hashing algorithms mean different probability that two connections will use distinct bond members. The only standard hash algorithm that makes probable use of distinct bond members for connections between same server and client (i.e. multi-stream iperf test) is layer-3-and-4.
The highest layer acceptable for both sides. You might want to experiment with settings not being the same on both sides. After all, receiver will probably accept whatever arrives at any bond interfaces, most of the time all of them use same MAC address. The hash algorithm is important when transmiting to spread utilization of all interfaces as evenly as possible.so which will be the appropriate choice in case of smb (i'll say smbv3 with multichannel enabled by default)?There's no hashing algorithm that would allow all bonded interfaces to be used by a single connection (e.g. single TCP or UDP stream running, say, iperf). However, different hashing algorithms mean different probability that two connections will use distinct bond members. The only standard hash algorithm that makes probable use of distinct bond members for connections between same server and client (i.e. multi-stream iperf test) is layer-3-and-4.
on the other hand, not every client [i.e. NAS] will accept layer-3-and-4
CCR1009 works. You just cheaped out xPGezz, this flapping issue is getting anyyoying as hek.
I have this same issue and i've spent lot of hours into research , it came up " disable autonegotiation on both end" on every topic. Are you kidding me, i dont have access on that part. ISP stuff work everywhere but Mikrotik.
Im using RB4011.
Moving on to EdgeRouter.
So I also have issue with SFP not working in SFP+ port... it was working fine in rb2011 but no luck with rb4011... Im using it to connect to computer that has pcie sfp card in it with mikrotik sfps on both ends... tried turning auto neg. off on both sides but no luck... whatever option I try rb4011 always says its connected but on computer side network card is flaping on/off constantly... damn it mikrotik cant you fix this
edit: on computer side I have Planet gigabit card PLT-ENW-9701 with Mikrotik S-85DLC05D in it, and same Mikrotik SFP modul in RB4011... cant get it to work, and it worked perfectly with RB2011...
I'm having the exact same issue I have 2 Mikrotik devices. I was upgrading one device RB2011UiAS-2HnD-IN to the RB4011iGS+5HacQ2HnD-IN, and my SFP device ( S-85DLC05D ) can't keep the link/interface up as it does on the original routerboard. It's interfacing with another RB2011UiAS-2HnD-IN with another S-85DLC05D.
Has anyone found a workaround yet?
So I also have issue with SFP not working in SFP+ port... it was working fine in rb2011 but no luck with rb4011... Im using it to connect to computer that has pcie sfp card in it with mikrotik sfps on both ends... tried turning auto neg. off on both sides but no luck... whatever option I try rb4011 always says its connected but on computer side network card is flaping on/off constantly... damn it mikrotik cant you fix this
edit: on computer side I have Planet gigabit card PLT-ENW-9701 with Mikrotik S-85DLC05D in it, and same Mikrotik SFP modul in RB4011... cant get it to work, and it worked perfectly with RB2011...
And user LEDToday I received my new rb4011 with wifi. Apart from the previously mentioned subjects (usb and lcd) it does not have a beeper either
I'm all for bright leds - sometimes they are a life saver. But it would be great if we got these torches with a "mute" option. Something like "/system leds all dim|bright". THAT would be great.But it *does* have the signature MikroTik built-in torch light!
Issue reproduced between 2x RB4011, will be fixed in upcoming beta versions.The problem persist with disabled auto negotiation, even between two RB4011 devices.
I do not want to promise it, but we will look forward to add 1Gbps transceiver support withI unfortunately can't turn off autoneg on my provider's side, so I hope a software-side fix is possible.
auto-negotiation=on
Hi, if you manage to make it works this would be terrific [emoji16], not only for 4011 but others RB/CRS/CCRs with 10G SFP+ too.I do not want to promise it, but we will look forward to add 1Gbps transceiver support withI unfortunately can't turn off autoneg on my provider's side, so I hope a software-side fix is possible.on both sides. Generally in RouterOS it is necessary to force 1Gbps mode on SFP+(10G) interfaces.Code: Select allauto-negotiation=on
It's actually really interesting because this particular 1G module:Issue reproduced between 2x RB4011, will be fixed in upcoming beta versions.The problem persist with disabled auto negotiation, even between two RB4011 devices.
I do not want to promise it, but we will look forward to add 1Gbps transceiver support withI unfortunately can't turn off autoneg on my provider's side, so I hope a software-side fix is possible.on both sides. Generally in RouterOS it is necessary to force 1Gbps mode on SFP+(10G) interfaces.Code: Select allauto-negotiation=on
Try and update to latest stable first, if the problem then still occurs, open a support ticket and run a support out file so they can diagnose the problem."router rebooted because some critical program crashed"
RB4011 doing NAT ~500mbps, cpu 20-30%
reboots every few days. Routeros 6.43.4
What this critical program issue means?
What could be solution ?
I know the Ohm's law, just forgot about the Watt to Amp relationship...and switching power supplies related stuff...Why is the current becoming less when the voltage increases? Isn't the current increasing due to Ohms law? (U = I * R)
It's a SW issue.My RB4011 wlan1 disabling itself.
RouterOS version 6.43.8
Is this a software issue or a hardware issue?
Hello, I just want to report I am having this same issue as well. The 5ghz is dropping frequently. I enabled the logging to echo but didn't see anything of value, the interface just stays in "initializing".Hello,
I'm having exactly the same issue on my 4011.
2.4GHz WIFI works, but 5GHz wifi disappears every 1-3 days. Interface is up but other clients cannot detect the AP. I need to completely reboot the device to get it back online.
I've opened support case with Mikrotik but so far no luck.
Thanks for the tip. I found the same out on my own, and things were working better for a while, but today the 5g started acting up again. The router says it's enabled, but it doesn't show up in my list of wifi networks on android. Have you found any other tweaks that work?To those having bad 5Ghz problems, do not choose auto. It may be that MikroTik is choosing a dFS channel and not all modern devices support DFS channels properly.
I don't believe I did anything to trigger this, other than disconnect leaving nothing connected to the AP. The next time I went to use it, hours later, the AP was gone.We are trying to reproduce your mentioned 5ghz wireless issue, currently everything works for us as expected. We will appreciate information which could help us to reproduce the issue, maybe someone can provide us step by step guide how to trigger this glitch?
Same problem here..Has anyone notice one and the same mac address on sfp+ and wlan1 interfaces???
Just after upgrade and reset-config:
Ouch. Any particular reason to go with such setup? Existing, long cabling? 10G-SR modules cost like 16$ plus few bucks for LC optical patchcords comparing to 65$ for S+RJ10. 10G copper seems to be insanely expensiive. Especially non-mikrotik modules which go for like 150$.Yes, i am using S+RJ10 modules between RB4011 and CRS328.
So I assume you use longer copper cables if replacement would be problematic? What cable length do you use? I was always interested in actual maximum cable length for 10G copper modules. Because declared 30m sounds like rather "better safe than sorry" requirement. Not real limit where transfare rates start to significantly struggle.I can not use fiber because of my existing cables. The only one problem with RB4011 is the high working temperature of the SFP+ module.
It is less than 10 meters CAT5E without shild.
Most likely not. Waiting for a new device. I hope it will work immediately without any problems.The 802.11ax is knocking on the door.
So Im wondering if its possible to replace the existing rb4011igs+5hacq2hnd-in mpcie card with a newer 802.11ax generation when its available ?
Will it be possible such a feature to be implemented in a near future ?
Would support for GPON ever change (firmware) or is this a hardware issue? If we want GPON should we stick to RB3011?Note: The RB4011 does not support Passive DAC modules, 1GB copper SFP modules and SFP GPON modules.
Depending on load characteristics RB4011 will outperform CCR1009. It will easily pull off 10G, just like CCR1009 (providing you use fasttrack in firewall, otherwise not rly but CCR1009 won't either). RB4011 will be better at handling fewer high throughput connections while CCR1009 will be better at handling thousands of smaller connections saturating 10G interconnect. It makes RB4011 great router if you're streaming or routing storage, hosting big files etc. - scenarios where CCR1009 sometimes struggles to hit 10G. Those devices are similar in overal performance - they're just optimized for different load characteristics.Can anyone tell me what I might expect routing between 10 subnets using just the sfp+ connected to CCS326 might give me? Currently, I have a FortiGate 200b as my Firewall/router and it will remain the firewall to the internet, but when I am running test on some of my esx hosts that are 10G capable its maxing my CPU on my FortiGate. The fortage currently has 22 inter VLAN rules to allow traffic to pass there rules are mostly whole subnet to whole subnet on one port. Some rules are a few ips to a few ips, seems pretty simple.
I don't expect 10gbps and I don't need it, would be nice for the testing but I am realistic person its a 190.00 router. I just want to be able to run my test and not take down my network. If you say I need to save my pennies maybe I just need the 1009.
-Fred
I agree the RB4011 has lots of grunt. I have just set up a site with 17 CAPACs and am using non-local forwarding CAPSMAN configurations running off some bridges in an RB4011. The RB4011 is connected to a CRS328 switch using only a 10Gbit SFP+. Given my experience using 12 CAPAC/WAPACs in a similar setup using a hEX (amazingly it copes very well with the load) I don't anticipate any problems.TL;DR RB4011 is really capable router and my friend uses it for 10G inter VLAN routing with CRS317. It pulls off 10G without a sweat in most scenarios (except large scale with thousands of tiny connections).
I have to say, RB4011 DO work with passive DAC modules.Note: The RB4011 does not support Passive DAC modules, 1GB copper SFP modules and SFP GPON modules.
interface ethernet monitor sfp-sfpplus1
name: sfp-sfpplus1
status: link-ok
auto-negotiation: done
rate: 10Gbps
full-duplex: yes
tx-flow-control: no
rx-flow-control: no
advertising:
link-partner-advertising:
sfp-module-present: yes
sfp-rx-loss: no
sfp-tx-fault: no
sfp-type: SFP-or-SFP+
sfp-connector-type: copper-pigtail
sfp-link-length-copper: 1m
sfp-vendor-name: FS
sfp-vendor-part-number: SFPP-PC01
sfp-vendor-revision: A
sfp-vendor-serial: C2006174143-2
sfp-manufacturing-date: 20-06-08
eeprom-checksum: good
I would be careful until they officially come back with word that it's fixed in prod.Just got my RB4011, and I can confirm that SFP+ works very well with passive DAC. Of course I didn't use the Mikrotik cable. iperf shows around 800 MB/s against my NAS, so I'd say it actually works. Also, I didn't see any flapping.
Same question here. Plus I see it is discontinued. There will be a replacement device? Some store has discontinued modules but if it is not supported in 4011 then I don't want to loose 90$.Hello! Does anyone know if Mikrotik GPON ONU SFP can be used with this device?
44 W is while powering another device, through PoE. Without attachments the max power usage is 23 WHi, can anybody please measure real power consumption of RB4011iGS+5HacQ2HnD-IN when running both wireless APs and mild traffic (or no traffic - just idle)?
By the spec sheet is max power consumption 44 W but I am wondering how much it draws in real when just sitting moreless idle or under mild load. Because having let's say 40W constant load would be pretty significant. Thanks
I'm also interested in real-world measurement.Hi, can anybody please measure real power consumption of RB4011iGS+5HacQ2HnD-IN when running both wireless APs and mild traffic (or no traffic - just idle)?
By the spec sheet is max power consumption 44 W but I am wondering how much it draws in real when just sitting moreless idle or under mild load. Because having let's say 40W constant load would be pretty significant. Thanks
My RB4011 (no WiFi) pulls 8.7 watts when in normal use. As measured from the port health of a CRS328 powering it via PoE for the purpose of doing exactly what you asked.Well that sounds better but I still wonder what is the real power draw - how much it depends on the load etc...can somebody please measure it? Thanks
Well, a bit of necro bump but CarlitoxxPro GPON ONU working fine here in a RB4011.Note: The RB4011 does not support Passive DAC modules, 1GB copper SFP modules and SFP GPON modules.
I found a datasheet for the RTL8367 that verifies it does have a vlan table. Why couldn't we use it with ROS?Hummm ... used switch chip RTL8367 seems not to support VLAN in hardware. So usability of those 10 ethernet ports will be limited as switched ports when VLANs are in use ... as all the traffic will hit CPU.
It seems like I won't have to defend the level of sex appeal of this unit from my better half after all.