NETGEAR is aware of a growing number of phone and online scams. To learn how to stay safe click here.
Forum Discussion
Solved
Feature Request: Orbi Satellite Ethernet Backhaul
As good as Orbi looks on paper I don't understand Y you would cut yourself so short and not support Eithernet backhaul for the satellites, I have 5 locations needing a system like this but without su...
Let me acknowledge that our customer base has been clamoring for this feature for a while, and we are trying to be responsive to their needs. To provide context on why it's taking a while to get it out, during the first quarter, the Orbi Engineering team was focused on bringing out the two new products (RBK30 & RBK40) to market. Now that it's accomplished, we're actively working on bringing this feature and a couple of other interesting, market-requested features to you.
Orbi Product Team
According to the Orbi manual (very last page) the backhaul has a theoretical maximum of the following:
5 GHz Back haul: Max 1733 Mbps
I purchased the Orbi router with 2 satellites. Those three devices share one 1 gigabit ethernet port on my switch, since the satellites communicate only over the 5ghz backhaul (maxes out at 1733 mbps), which effectively limits the maximum throughput of the whole system to 1 gbps because everything ultimately communicates via the 1733 mbps 5ghz backhaul with the router. Remember the router is connected via 1Gbps ethernet port to the switch. So the limit is actually 1gbps for the whole system.
Now imagine if the 2 satellites, rather than communicating through the backhaul could each independentaly use their own 1 gig ethernet connections to my switch. I have effectively trippled the maximum throughput to 3 gbps (1 gbps for the router base station and 2 gbps for the satellites (1 gbps per satellite)).
Manuel is located here: http://www.downloads.netgear.com/files/GDC/RBK50/Orbi_UM_EN.pdf
So yes, the backhaul using dedicated switch port is far superior to current method employed.
xantari wrote:According to the Orbi manual (very last page) the backhaul has a theoretical maximum of the following:
5 GHz Back haul: Max 1733 Mbps
correct thats the sync maximum the backhauk will connect at
I purchased the Orbi router with 2 satellites. Those three devices share one 1 gigabit ethernet port on my switch, since the satellites communicate only over the 5ghz backhaul (maxes out at 1733 mbps), which effectively limits the maximum throughput of the whole system to 1 gbps because everything ultimately communicates via the 1733 mbps 5ghz backhaul with the router. Remember the router is connected via 1Gbps ethernet port to the switch. So the limit is actually 1gbps for the whole system.
Now imagine if the 2 satellites, rather than communicating through the backhaul could each independentaly use their own 1 gig ethernet connections to my switch. I have effectively trippled the maximum throughput to 3 gbps (1 gbps for the router base station and 2 gbps for the satellites (1 gbps per satellite)).
Manuel is located here: http://www.downloads.netgear.com/files/GDC/RBK50/Orbi_UM_EN.pdf
So yes, the backhaul using dedicated switch port is far superior to current method employed.
correct thats the sync maximum the backhauk will connect at 1733M
the 1733M is shared between the 2 sats you have connected
you do understand the the max sync of each sat to clients is 867M
your theory of trippling the signal is wrong
incorrect as the max client connection to each sat is 867M
yes, the satellites couldn't possibly use all the 1gbps ethernet port has to offer. So not techincally triple (3gbps), but rather 3 x 867 = 2,601 Mbps
Either way, ethernet backhaul is the best way to go.
Free up RF Spectrum, and allow much higher speeds for wireless clients.
Right now everything is limited to 1gbps, because they all end up back to the router, so all satellites and router share one 1gbps ethernet port :(
xantari wrote:yes, the satellites couldn't possibly use all the 1gbps ethernet port has to offer. So not techincally triple (3gbps), but rather 3 x 867 = 2,601 Mbps
Either way, ethernet backhaul is the best way to go.
Free up RF Spectrum, and allow much higher speeds for wireless clients.
Right now everything is limited to 1gbps, because they all end up back to the router, so all satellites and router share one 1gbps ethernet port :(
-----------------------
major problem with both is that the upstream from the router or switch is 1 gig as well so no matter what config it aint going to make the internet any faster
using ethernet wont free up any spectrum as you guys will want both the 5 gig upper and lower bands for client use and thus NO difference
There is no dispute that APs wired to an Ethernet backbone have the highest theoretical throughput. That's how my network is set up.
The Orbi is not designed to compete against this. It is built with a different purpose in mind: to outperform range extenders. While adding Ethernet backhaul would increase the performance, it doesn't really make sense to provide it. Why spend so much money on a system and not use its main differentiating factor, the 1733 Mbps wireless link? One would be better off buying a bunch of APs, for much less money.
BTW, that 1733 Mbps link will likely have no better than 800 Mbps real world throughput.
The main reason I could think of to provide it, is to make it user friendly.
I haven't set up the ubiquiti unifi AP's, but it looked like a lot of low level telnet sessions are required due to the UI not being very complete.
Also, ubiquiti's setup I believe requires a radius server to do roaming, and you have to do a lot of backdoor commands to get it to work.
I might take a stab at going that route and bring these orbi units back. Was just hoping to save time. Which the orbi definately does. And it works pretty good for what it does.
I'll probably go and purchase a set of unifi AC1300 AP's and set them around the house and see if I can set that up and do some wifi tests.
It looks like the Unifi 802.11AC AP's are $133 each, x 3 = $366, please cost of cloud key (83.95), plus cost of USG (108.99), for a total cost of $558.94 for enterprise grade equipment.
So the netgear stuff is cheaper, so if they could implement ethernet backhaul that would be AWESOME.
