Ubiquiti Beta US-16-XG $299

tby

Active Member
Aug 22, 2013
209
95
28
Snellville, GA
set-inform.com
I have both. If noise and power consumption isn't an issue for you then Quanta is a great switch and by far the cheapest per port. However, the EdgeSwitch is quieter and uses half the power.
Way less than half. The LB6M draws about 100w idle, nothing connected. 129w in my usage. My XGs have been holding steady at 19w and I believe Patrick's review of the ES version had it hitting 40w in a stress test.

Is there any ubiquiti layer 3 switch to complement this switch? So I can get rid of my dell 6224.
Update Firmware to Give Unifi Switches Layer 3 Routing - Ubiquiti Networks Community

Somewhere in that thread Ubiquiti explains the SoC used on the US/ES-16-XG has an ARP cache limit of 493 entries and that's why they're not enabling L3 on the UniFi switch. From what I can tell in the CLI they've removed most of the L3 commands.

The ES version will route.
 
  • Like
Reactions: warlockedyou

warlockedyou

Member
Sep 4, 2016
217
18
18
I have both. If noise and power consumption isn't an issue for you then Quanta is a great switch and by far the cheapest per port. However, the EdgeSwitch is quieter and uses half the power.

Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk
That much of a difference, huh? I remember another user here also mentioned this when I was debating if I should get this switch or not - mostly because it's a beta version and I needed something more reliable.
 

warlockedyou

Member
Sep 4, 2016
217
18
18
Way less than half. The LB6M draws about 100w idle, nothing connected. 129w in my usage. My XGs have been holding steady at 19w and I believe Patrick's review of the ES version had it hitting 40w in a stress test.
Other than the Noice/Power Consumption, what are your thoughts on the stability of this "beta" device? I wouldn't mind having it for lab/testing, but to support the core backbone of my home network...I am not so sure.
 

c6100

Member
Oct 22, 2013
163
1
18
USA
Other than the Noice/Power Consumption, what are your thoughts on the stability of this "beta" device? I wouldn't mind having it for lab/testing, but to support the core backbone of my home network...I am not so sure.
I personally am not a fan of not being able to control the switch locally. All configurations have to be done with their controller. If your controller loses connection or you lose your controller then you have no method to manage it. You would need to install a new controller which requires a reset of the switch.



Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk
 

c6100

Member
Oct 22, 2013
163
1
18
USA
I personally am not a fan of not being able to control the switch locally. All configurations have to be done with their controller. If your controller loses connection or you lose your controller then you have no method to manage it. You would need to install a new controller which requires a reset of the switch.



Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk
To add, they have a layer 3 EdgeSwitch which appears to be the same hardware. The EdgeSwitch does not use the controller

Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk
 

wildchild

Active Member
Feb 4, 2014
394
57
28
To add, they have a layer 3 EdgeSwitch which appears to be the same hardware. The EdgeSwitch does not use the controller

Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk
Being very limited at best.. 493 mac and you're done switch.
These are l2 switches.. full stop
 

wildchild

Active Member
Feb 4, 2014
394
57
28
I personally am not a fan of not being able to control the switch locally. All configurations have to be done with their controller. If your controller loses connection or you lose your controller then you have no method to manage it. You would need to install a new controller which requires a reset of the switch.



Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk
Well , you actually have ssh/telnet access.
This thing will keep running fine without the controller.

If you loose your controller, it is very simple to restore an automatic backup.
If using dns names, or returning the controller to the same ip and restoring the backup, shouldnt have to result in a reboot, i'll be testing that tomorrow on my 10g beta.
 

wildchild

Active Member
Feb 4, 2014
394
57
28
What?

Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk
Have you bothered to read the whole threat.
The soc is limited to a 493 arp table.
This is the same for both the edgeswitch and unfiswitch.
Effectively these are l2 devices.

Btw sg300-10 ( which i have and use) have a 100 arp table soc limit
 

c6100

Member
Oct 22, 2013
163
1
18
USA
Have you bothered to read the whole threat.
The soc is limited to a 493 arp table.
This is the same for both the edgeswitch and unfiswitch.
Effectively these are l2 devices.

Btw sg300-10 ( which i have and use) have a 100 arp table soc limit
I didn't know what you meant by "493 mac" but since you clarified I understand you were referring to the ARP table.

As far as it effectively being a l2 device, I suppose that depends on if "493 mac" is a limiting factor for your use case. If you need l3 features then it supports them whereas the unfiswitch doesn't, that was my point.

Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk
 

c6100

Member
Oct 22, 2013
163
1
18
USA
Well , you actually have ssh/telnet access.
This thing will keep running fine without the controller.

If you loose your controller, it is very simple to restore an automatic backup.
If using dns names, or returning the controller to the same ip and restoring the backup, shouldnt have to result in a reboot, i'll be testing that tomorrow on my 10g beta.
I believe once you have a controller manage the device that you can no longer SSH to it or at least when I tried the default password no longer worked. Although, even when I could SSH to it, I didn't see anywhere to see or configure it. If you know of a way then I'd be interested in knowing how.

Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk
 

Antonio

Member
Dec 20, 2015
42
13
8
for ssh into the switch - the user is admin and the password is the same as what you use on the controller to login.
then telnet localhost and you have full access to the unit.
 

tby

Active Member
Aug 22, 2013
209
95
28
Snellville, GA
set-inform.com
The switch will retain the controller settings between reboots if the controller is unavailable. And you can still SSH to it using the Site credentials that you configured in the controller (and then you have to 'telnet localhost' to get into the EdgeOS CLI). It won't persist CLI changes between reboots and the L3 stuff isn't there so there's not much point in getting at the CLI anyways.

If you don't like the controller concept, by all means, UniFi ain't for you and that's why they have the two product lines for switching and routing. I never touched the UniFi stuff before coming across this deal but I've gone all-in since -- USG Pro, APs, and I'll snag a couple of US-8s as soon as they hit retail. Single-pane-of-glass management for my whole network and not having to muck with switch CLIs was too great to resist.

As to reliability... I've had the XGs at the core of my home network since I got them and they haven't let me down yet. I work remote and pretty much my whole world revolves around the network and my servers staying up. So far, so good.

 
Last edited:

wildchild

Active Member
Feb 4, 2014
394
57
28
The switch will retain the controller settings between reboots if the controller is unavailable. And you can still SSH to it using the Site credentials that you configured in the controller (and then you have to 'telnet localhost' to get into the EdgeOS CLI). It won't persist CLI changes between reboots and the L3 stuff isn't there so there's not much point in getting at the CLI anyways.

If you don't like the controller concept, by all means, UniFi ain't for you and that's why they have the two product lines for switching and routing. I never touched the UniFi stuff before coming across this deal but I've gone all-in since -- USG Pro, APs, and I'll snag a couple of US-8s as soon as they hit retail. Single-pane-of-glass management for my whole network and not having to muck with switch CLIs was too great to resist.

As to reliability... I've had the XGs at the core of my home network since I got them and they haven't let me down yet. I work remote and pretty much my whole world revolves around the network and my servers staying up. So far, so good.

Agreed.. although mine are setup for seperated fabrics for iscsi..
Getting ready to put some serious hurt on them.
Got the ac-pro's

Have been a headache , but since running the last beta's smooth as a babybutt :)
 

RyC

Active Member
Oct 17, 2013
359
91
28
Agreed.. although mine are setup for seperated fabrics for iscsi..
Getting ready to put some serious hurt on them.
Got the ac-pro's

Have been a headache , but since running the last beta's smooth as a babybutt :)
Let us know how iSCSI and storage works on these...I'm ready to pull the trigger next week if they hold up in a storage setting.
 

tby

Active Member
Aug 22, 2013
209
95
28
Snellville, GA
set-inform.com
I'm doing iSCSI on mine, don't have local storage at all on my R210s and only enough in the MicroServer to keep AD / DNS / DHCP / Plex* up when the storage server needs patching or the switches get a firmware update.

* Video streaming is mission critical around here.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RyC

wardtj

Member
Jan 23, 2015
91
28
18
45
Let us know how iSCSI and storage works on these...I'm ready to pull the trigger next week if they hold up in a storage setting.
iSCSI with VMware works just fine. Vmotion works fine too. Pretty straight forward L2 access switches:) As long as you treat them as such you'll be fine. I'd use the ES version if I need core network or sg300 style networking.

Biggest challenge will be your DAC and SFP+ module compatibility. My Arista 2M DACs work fine others with Cisco 3M hit and miss on DACs.

And you can save configs if you use write memory. I have also tested moving between controllers, it's fine. Just need to repoint the switch at the new controller and you are good.. but make sure you have a controller backup applied before hand.

Hth
 
  • Like
Reactions: RyC