The code to standardize the port usage on the NS M2 XW and NS M5 XW has been committed to the git repository. This means these changes will be available in the morning Nov 15, 2018 in nightly build images.
What specifically has changed?
Before: LAN was only on primary port, DtDLink and WAN on secondary port only. This is inconsistent with other AREDN devices
After: LAN/DtDlink/WAN all correctly function on main port with a single cat5 network cable like all other AREDN devices.
Additional benefit added but with limitations:
The mesh node can be powered on main port and an ipCam or other device can be plugged directly into the secondary port. In advanced config options, the POE 'pass though' option can be turned on to power the device on the secondary port. Thus, one cat5 up to the roof, to power 2 devices.
The secondary port is also functional same as the main port. A single cable could be plugged into ether port to power the device and function like any other AREDN device. However, it is always recommended to use the main port as this is the vendor designed port to power the device (not back flow power in secondary port).
Both ports can be used simultaneously, but there are limitations. LAN devices across both ports can not directly communicate with one another. However, devices on the greater mesh can communicate to a LAN device, e.g. ipcams, on both ports. This means a laptop on the main port can not directly access an ipCam plugged in to the secondary port.
Also, if a 2nd mesh node is plugged into the secondary port, e.g. another node on a different band, this can cause issues with LAN devices obtaining IP addresses. This configuration will munge together the LAN of both nodes and it is indeterminate which node will issue IP Address. If doing this, turn the LAN dhcp off on the node attached to the secondary port to avoid LAN devices failing to function.
Joe AE6XE
What specifically has changed?
Before: LAN was only on primary port, DtDLink and WAN on secondary port only. This is inconsistent with other AREDN devices
After: LAN/DtDlink/WAN all correctly function on main port with a single cat5 network cable like all other AREDN devices.
Additional benefit added but with limitations:
The mesh node can be powered on main port and an ipCam or other device can be plugged directly into the secondary port. In advanced config options, the POE 'pass though' option can be turned on to power the device on the secondary port. Thus, one cat5 up to the roof, to power 2 devices.
The secondary port is also functional same as the main port. A single cable could be plugged into ether port to power the device and function like any other AREDN device. However, it is always recommended to use the main port as this is the vendor designed port to power the device (not back flow power in secondary port).
Both ports can be used simultaneously, but there are limitations. LAN devices across both ports can not directly communicate with one another. However, devices on the greater mesh can communicate to a LAN device, e.g. ipcams, on both ports. This means a laptop on the main port can not directly access an ipCam plugged in to the secondary port.
Also, if a 2nd mesh node is plugged into the secondary port, e.g. another node on a different band, this can cause issues with LAN devices obtaining IP addresses. This configuration will munge together the LAN of both nodes and it is indeterminate which node will issue IP Address. If doing this, turn the LAN dhcp off on the node attached to the secondary port to avoid LAN devices failing to function.
Joe AE6XE
thanks a lot for the update and the info. This really will save me a lot of trouble with the non-standard switch configuration and running extra cat5 cables.
But, can I "suggest" the pass-throught POE from Main to Secondary port to be disabled by default? to prevent summoning the black smoke if that is to be connected to a non-poe device?
I will actually also go an extra step and say, maybe disable it after every reboot? or when the "secondary" port is disconnected? so it has to be manually enabled after a device has been connected to the secondary port?
Just a thought.
Joe AE6XE
This POE pass-though setting does not affect powering of the node itself. The device will always power on regardless of this setting, no matter which port the POE power is supplied.
Note, on Ubiquiti, the POE pass-though is 'off' until after the node boots, then this setting is applied. On Mikrotik hAP ac lite, it is booting with POE pass-though 'on', then after linux has started up, the setting is applied -- a ~25 second window of being on, then the setting is applied. If we can find a way to change the behavior on Mikrotik to be like Ubiquiti (boots with pass-though 'off'), we will change it. Probably some code to change buried in the initialization of a chip in a driver somewhere.
It is not necessarily a problem that the Mikrotik boots with POE pass-though 'on'. The circuit will not supply the pass-though power unless the resistance or load is in the proper range to normally function. It's not going to smoke as long as one doesn't try to plug a cat5 into the wall 120vac socket :).
Joe AE6XE
I have not tested this combination to know if something would smoke on Ubiquiti devices. If someone does accidentally test this combination, please post your result, and confess ;) .
Joe AE6XE
I found a way to remove the limitations noted above in this thread. Both Ethernet ports on the Nanostation M2/M5 devices are now configured and working without limitations. This code will be available after tonight's build on Nov 22, 2018. Now in the README:
The following devices have enhanced Ethernet port usage. A single cat5 to the device could be plugged into ether the 'main' or 'secondary' port with standard port functionality. Both ports can be used interchangeably and simultaneously with LAN devices on both ports at the same time. POE PassThough can be turned on in Advanced Settings to power ipCams or other mesh nodes.
Wow! :-)
"POE PassThough can be turned on in Advanced Settings to power ipCams or other mesh nodes."
...and DtD connected?
Could a 2/5 GHz node be 'seamlessly' inserted in series with an existing ethernet 'cable to node'
providing power and a DtD connection?
Chuck
Got Nightly Build '465'.
Tried to upgrade a NS-M5-XW from 458 to 465
Got:
"This filename is NOT appropriate for this device!
This device expects a file such as aredn-458-440fb3b-nanostation-m-xw-sysupgrade.bin
Click OK to continue if you are CERTAIN that the file is correct."
I tried to upload
aredn-465-f062021-ubnt-nano-m-xw-sysupgrade.bin which is barely different than
aredn-458-440fb3b-ubnt-nano-m-xw-sysupgrade.bin, but the warning uses
aredn-458-440fb3b-ubnt-nanostation-m-xw-sysupgrade.bin
Is the extra 'station' the comparison failure?
Am I CERTAIN that aredn-465-f062021-ubnt-nano-m-xw-sysupgrade.bin is the correct file
for a
<quote>
Firmware Update
current version: 458-440fb3b
hardware type: ubnt (nanostation-m-xw)
</quote>
?
:-|
Chuck
"Click OK to continue if you are CERTAIN that the file is correct."
...
"Am I CERTAIN that aredn-465-f062021-ubnt-nano-m-xw-sysupgrade.bin is the correct file"
Worked fine on my NS-M5-XW. Click OK
Using Nightly Build 458, I have 3 nodes daisy chained from a 'Node' port on a NetGear GS108E.
I can see the 1st NS-M5-XW in the Current Neighbors column and can click on the link and view the
http://nc8q-loaner-nsm5-27.local.mesh:8080/cgi-bin/status page.
The next daisy chained node appears in the Current Neighbors column, but I cannot click the link
and view its /status page.
From another node on the GS108E I see the 2nd and 3rd nodes on the daisy chain
in the Remote Nodes column, but cannot click the links and view their /status pages:
NC8Q-Loaner-NS-M5-123.local.mesh 0.20 Mesh Conference x1093 Tuesdays 845pm
NC8Q-NS-M3-180.local.mesh 0.30
Does Nightly Build 465 fix this issue?
Chuck
POE PassThough can be turned on in Advanced Settings to power ipCams or other mesh nodes.
I have 3 nodes daisy chained with one 24V 1A Ubiquiti POE using Nightly Build 465 on the first 2 nodes:
NS-M5-XW <> NS-M5-XW <> NS-M3-XM
Marvelous work by the AREDN Team. Thanks Joe/Darryl:-)
NS-M5-XWs are no longer a liability...now they are an asset.
A NS-M5-XW can be added to an AREDN node switch without an additional (2)long run(s) of ethernet cable to the node's location.
Only a short patch cable between the nodes is needed.
Well, maybe add a 24V 1A 24W Ubiquiti POE.
Model:GP-B240-100
SKU POE-24-24W-G
Happy, happy, happy!
Chuck
We appreciate the excellent work to standardize the NanoStation ports! And support PassThru PoE as desired!
However, these discussions seem to focus on only the _XW_ NS, with no mention of _XM_. Many of us have _XM_ units too.
Can a Guru Please provide a Summary of these Port and PoE features for both XM and XW?
For example, as an unmentioned issue, can these nightly builds (and hopefully future releases) be applied to _XM_ NS, with featured standardized Port and PoE, same as provided for _XW_? OR are we still stuck with the awkward split Port issues? I have successfully _loaded_ 458 on both XM and XW, but have not yet been able to _test_ to verify actual performance....
Please advise, and Thanks All for great work!!
Gene :)
N3EV
There are also tplink dual port devices v1 and v1.1 hardware rev on the list too.
Joe AE6XE