Do you really need router with 10 ports and wifi? Wouldn't it be easier to have stuff nicely separated? i.e. have router for routing, switch for switching, AP for wifi?
For example
- router will be probably hidden somewhere. It will never be positioned properly to utilize wifi coverage as much as possible. AP can be placed anywhere (ideally on ceiling, it is really big difference!)
- router usually have limited switching abilities so you will likely hit some unexpected issue.
To be specific:
- RB2011 has 5 ports limited to 100Mbit ethernet, other 5 ports
and SFP cage share single 1Gbit line to CPU. That means any non-switched forwarding between two 1Gbit ports will be always limited to 1Gbit half-duplex speed! (Yes, I know it was not issue many years ago but now it is simply outdated)
-
RB3011 still has port-flapping issue when you use 100Mbit device (for example printer) in group with 1Gbit devices.
- RB4011 has each group of 5 ports shared 2.5Gbit line. Not bad, but if you expect to utilize all ports, you will hit the limit. And you can't do wire-speed switching between separate groups of ports. In addition, RB4011 currently can't use switch chip for VLAN filtering.
It would be lovely to have some "universal" device but as far as I can see, every model from RBx011 range has some issues