So RB4011 is quite polarizing topic. There's a lot of excitement and happiness but also a lot of disappointment. Now let's imagine that MikroTik could make revision of RB4011 that would add ONE feature that you miss the most - what would it be?

Let's make some poll, shall we? What is YOUR most missed feature that is gone from RB4011.

Note: I think this poll relates a bit more to SOHO wifi variant because a lot of those features have really limited use in racmount environment.

If anyone has any other idea for change, please leave suggestions in comments

Proper switching would be crucial for Home and Small business use, at least the same level as models with AR8327 currently provide.

Whatever we request it is too late I guess...

Whatever we request it is too late I guess...

For HW changes yes, for parts fixable via RouterOS, we can at least try...

Whatever we request it is too late I guess...

Note that RB2011 had multiple versions and they didn't come out all at once. More "full" versions with more bells and whistles came later, after most basic 2011L variant.

Also this post is not only about telling what we don't like about RB4011 in particular. It's about what we don't like in general design direction shift. It's to tell that we want those features that are being removed. Switch chips in hEX and RB1100. Screens in all switches. USB in all switches. MikroTik is taking more and more features away from more and more devices. If we just take it as it is, soon most of devices may come without switch chips, without USB, without programmable LEDs, without beepers, without SD card slots and other features. Just bare, raw routers like this one and bare switches without any more advanced functionality. It's not future we were fighting for

Well, I'm completely fine with two switch chips and port groups, but switch without vlan support?
Come on?

I cannot even use it on my ISP network, unless I'll buy that extra (expensive) copper SFP+ and assign uplink to that 10G port.

Aaand necrobump

Because it's still hot topic until RB4011 actually comes out.

Not an option but a HUGE one for me would be POE out on every port.

I have so many sites where a 10 port MT with POE would be my only device at the base. I Currently run a mix of 2011 and a Netonix or hEX POE on smaller sites

Backhaul and uplink to 2 or 3 other hops plus a few sectors, all back to one device and I can remotely log in and kick ports if the radio freezes. makes perfect sense to me

At a bare minimum it would have another 10G port or all LAN would be 2.5G (one switch).

The sweet spot would be 2x SFP+, 2x 10GBase-T, 10x 2.5GBase-T.

At a bare minimum it would have another 10G port or all LAN would be 2.5G (one switch).

The sweet spot would be 2x SFP+, 2x 10GBase-T, 10x 2.5GBase-T.

For 199$, fries included

Such ports config would place it between CCR1036 and CCR1072 (or actually above CCR1072 because it'd give 85G theoretical throughput) and wouldn't even fit this form factor, maybe 2x SFP+, 2x 10GBase-T and 5x 2.5GBase-T could fit but still... Almost definitely couldn't be passively cooled xD

Especially that 10GBase-T requires a lot of power and gets hot af. Plus gigabit copper is quite expensive. Reason for it in consumer gear is ease of use but that's pretty much the only advantage over SFP+ cage/optics.

Unless you listed it as alternatives then maybe. Actually... 10x 2.5G device would be incredibly interesting and one of a kind. Really useful for connecting less populated switches uplinks where you just need a bit over gigabit to route several connections at decent speed. But I guess it's quite niche port type so it'd be probably more expensive than 10G ports.

The same about all ports PoE - I think it'd affect thermals quite badly. But maybe 5 ports PoE (eg. on one switch) would be more doable technically... idk.

The sweet spot would be 2x SFP+, 2x 10GBase-T, 10x 2.5GBase-T.

Such ports config would place it between CCR1036 and CCR1072 (or actually above CCR1072 because it'd give 85G theoretical throughput)

Not that it really matters, but 2x10G + 2x10G + 10x2,5G = 65G

It would not need to route more than it can route now, just switch at 10G and 2.5G.

Realtek released 2.5G transceivers recently. And it seems Asrock will be the first to use their PCIe x1 controller (on value motherboards). They have another controller for USB, so it will be possible to cheaply add 2.5G to USB3 computers.

Consumers are not going to use LAN fibre when motherboards and many NAS come with copper (already 5GbE and 10GbE).

The 5GbE USB adapters should arrive before the end of the year.

i don't understand the outrage about the switch chip functional.
with the recent (6.41) bridge changes you can easily do whatever you require on these "more router-ish" devices.
stuff will be done in hw, whenever it is possible, and here we have a quite beefy CPU to deal with.
yes, it would give more flexible traffic flow to have all ports on a switch, but that way you'd lose wireless completely.
right now you can get 2.5Gbps out from each 5 port switches to the SOC. that is 5Gbps bandwidth, and the unit can route/bridge it easily.

another 10G port makes only sense if you can do something with the traffic. and by something i mean "routing". switches with 2x10G and Nx1G are out there for a while at more or less the same price-point. you just can't have them all at the same: decent sw ecosystem, loads of non-blocking ports, very low price

You would be able to route at more than 1G with another 10G port.

Making a bridge between the 2 switches on the 2011 would severely impact routing performance.

@doneware: if the device is intended as router, then it has too many interfaces for it's CPU power ... I strongly doubt it is capable of routing 20Gbps ...which is what one could assume seeing its 10 1Gbps RJ45 ports and a SFP+ port. As a router (even as s router on a stick) it would need 5 ethrr ports + SFP+ port. And all of that not considering weak switch-CPU interconnection which actually limits theoretical routing speed even further (not considering CPU power).
I don't think MT intended RB4011 to be in line with CCRs ... not with the WiFi model.

If the device is intended to be switch (in addition to being router), then the interconnection is not that important if it features decent switch chip which can do everything in hardware. And that includes VLAN. If all-in-switch is not possible, then the interconnection prevents from wirespeed switching (not considering CPU power).
I think MT intended RB4011 to be top of the line SOHO router/switch ... but then absolute maximum performance as indicated by all peripherial specs (10x gigabit ethernet, 10G SFP, quad chain wireless) can not be achieved due to some compromises done in design and hardware.

Not an option but a HUGE one for me would be POE out on every port.

I have so many sites where a 10 port MT with POE would be my only device at the base. I Currently run a mix of 2011 and a Netonix or hEX POE on smaller sites

Backhaul and uplink to 2 or 3 other hops plus a few sectors, all back to one device and I can remotely log in and kick ports if the radio freezes. makes perfect sense to me

Agree!!

is it reasonable for me to avoid nand storage for the hotspot's landing page and wait for the usb support for external storage ?
I'm thinking about extending the unit's lifetime, afraid of the nand memory will get damaged if I put the hotspot's landing page in there.

I upgraded to this new team recently and I'm not happy with it Immediately solve ---- >>> switch chip (or make current one functional)

It is a half or interrupted orgasm