• umami_wasabi
    link
    fedilink
    English
    11
    edit-2
    5 months ago

    What’s the point of having 1G on WAN and 2.5G on LAN? Traffic won’t hit the LAN port until it’s routed to the Internet, yet the WAN port is the bottleneck.

    Edit: Seems like I switch up the port speed but my point still holds as the bittleneck still exist.

    • Null User Object
      link
      fedilink
      English
      7
      edit-2
      5 months ago

      Tranfering between devices on the LAN.

      Edit: Wait, no, it’s the other way around. 2.5 on WAN, and just a single 1GB LAN port. That absolutely doesn’t make sense.

      • poVoq
        link
        fedilink
        English
        65 months ago

        This is a common setup for WiFi routers, where the idea is that most traffic will be on WiFi.

      • umami_wasabi
        link
        fedilink
        English
        15 months ago

        That’s the only use I can think of but I don’t know if OpenWRT support VLAN cuz I never used it directly.

    • Natanael
      link
      fedilink
      English
      3
      edit-2
      5 months ago

      Local NAS, local security cameras, in-house streaming, LAN multiplayer, local torrent-like data sharing (FYI, Windows Update and more uses the local network to share update between computers by default, so it gets downloaded once and then shared internally)

    • Otter
      link
      fedilink
      English
      25 months ago

      Could it help with internal tasks, like self-hosted services or a business that transfers files around a lot?

    • @tankplanker@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      25 months ago

      Does it have enough power to handle routing (not just switching) 2.5Gb + 2.5Gb + whatever the WiFi can support? My guess is it cannot and it would have pushed the price up signifcantly to do so.

      Does seem counter intuitive to me as this is squarely aimed at enthusiasts who would like to min max their home network.