So I totally get why the cAPac comes with poe in on eth01 and poe out on eth02 but t doesn't make much sense for their default configuration, which is WAN on eth01 and eth02 bridged with the wireless LANs. It doesn't make sense if you want to use poe because you won't typically have the WAN port (i.e. eth01) connected to a poe switch but rather to a modem or router.
Any suggestions on a best practice to use the default confguration for the cAPac and power the unit with poe without having to use a separate injector with all the extra cables and available power point that requires?
Of course I can change the configuration to make eth02 the WAN and place eth01 on the bridge with the wireless but it would be good to just use the default setup without compromising on poe.

For most uses of CAP devices it is default to have them connected to a switch providing POE, so on eth1.
However I do understand if you want to connect directly to a router which requires POE, it makes more sense to have POE out on WAN port.

Of course I can change the configuration to make eth02 the WAN and place eth01 on the bridge with the wireless but it would be good to just use the default setup without compromising on poe.

Well then, that's the only viable option you have.
POE in is eth1. Nothing else.
POE out is eth2. Nothing else.

And guess what ? You CAN change it the way you want. A lot of other brands might not be so flexible.

As a matter of fact, it shouldn't be too difficult

• 2 interface lists to be changed to swap eth1 and eth 2 from WAN to LAN and vice versa
• change on bridge ports to remove eth2 and put eth1 instead
• review of firewall lists so only LAN or WAN is used, nowhere eth<x>
• possibly 1 routing rule to be changed but that should be covered automatically when changing itf on DHCP client
• possibly DHCP server on other eth port if needed, if it is not already on bridge

That should more or less be it, I think ?

To be honest, I fail to see the "problem" here. You CAN change it. So there is no problem ? Only an opportunity to do so.

A couple of reasons for having PoE in on ether1 which by default is WAN port:

• traditionally Mikrotik (and many other vendors') devices come configured for WAN on first wired port ... which is ether1
• all mikrotik devices will only perform netinstall (the ultimate unbricking procedure) via ether1
• traditionally Mikrotik devices without any configuration can only be configured initially when connecting through ether1
• many Mikrotik devices are used on some WISP towers and if backbone connection is wired, often ether1 will be used for it. Those are locations where using PoE makes a lot of sense (and using separate injector can be a very viable solution)
• etc.

So in order to make defaults usable for most people, the decision was made. But then, unlike many other vendors (in the same price range) Mikrotik allows you to (easily?) reconfigure your device in any way it suits you.

A couple of reasons for having PoE in on ether1 which by default is WAN port:

• traditionally Mikrotik (and many other vendors') devices come configured for WAN on first wired port ... which is ether1
• all mikrotik devices will only perform netinstall (the ultimate unbricking procedure) via ether1
• traditionally Mikrotik devices without any configuration can only be configured initially when connecting through ether1
• many Mikrotik devices are used on some WISP towers and if backbone connection is wired, often ether1 will be used for it. Those are locations where using PoE makes a lot of sense (and using separate injector can be a very viable solution)
• etc.

So in order to make defaults usable for most people, the decision was made. But then, unlike many other vendors (in the same price range) Mikrotik allows you to (easily?) reconfigure your device in any way it suits you.

I understand this and that decisions have to be made on the most common topologies and configurations.
I'm a fan of Mikrotik products not least because of their flexibility, configuration options and tools.
That said I still believe it would be better for the "Quick Set" wizard to include among its options the two ethernet ports where you can decide which will be WAN and which LAN.
Why? The cAPac device comes with a preconfiguration as a router/AP AND, most importantly, at the same time a device that is POE capable but if you choose that preconfiguration you have to sacrifice POE. I purchased this device for this reason. I don't want to compromise the POE (because I don't want to introduce unnecessary points of failure in my topology and because powering through a mains adaptor is not an option).
Yes, you can then configure it to use eth2 for WAN and eth1 for LAN so that you are able to power the cAPac with POE from your switch, but this configuration is not that simple.
Humble opinion. For the percentage of users that purchase the cAPac because they need POE and want to plug and play the device as a router/AP that plugs into their ISP then include an option in the Quick Set wizard to use either eth1 or eth2 as the WAN port.

Best practice is to try and run cables back to the start switch if you can. Less points of failure and more switching capacity overall.

In this way you are sharing your Wifi and everything after it on a single 1g connection and introducing more points of failure (Access point fails you loose internet on all devices after it). For home however your probably not going to saturate it anyway let alone have multiple devices saturating it at the same time.

I'd probably do the same at home if I couldn't easily run a new wire. For business I'd always run a new wire back. You do see some installs dropping off the access point if the WIfi is briding back because running a cable isn't easily doable (need to dig up a road for example).

Indeed, I agree with this best practice, and this was actually my point in the post. If you use the factory config you cannot employ this best practice because your "POE in" on the cAPac is for its WAN, which will not typically come from a POE port on a switch. For me, this is resolved by including the possibility to choose your ethernet port for the WAN in the "Quick Set" wizard.

Yes, you can then configure it to use eth2 for WAN and eth1 for LAN so that you are able to power the cAPac with POE from your switch, but this configuration is not that simple.

In my equal humble opinion and only having a year experience with Mikrotik, I don't see this as a complex change.
There are only 5 or 6 things to do which I already listed above (unless I missed some steps).

Yes, you can then configure it to use eth2 for WAN and eth1 for LAN so that you are able to power the cAPac with POE from your switch, but this configuration is not that simple.

It's a simple fact that "QuickSet" is just what it says ... a quick way of setting some completely trivial things. And as such it can't cover many different scenarios or else it would become too complex (because people wouldn't know which mode to select). So you're back to using "normal" GUI (advanced is probably not needed) to reconfigure device according to your wishes.

If that's over your head and you really want to power your router off the PoE switch, get somebody to do it for you.

Router switch what have you the pOE in on ether1 is the most practical application. One is lucky enough to get one cable to a remote access point.
If you dont have an electrical outlet close by POE (from router or switch) is the only other alternative. Even small MT routers like the hex have a POE out option.

As far as ether2, if you are able to pre-0wire ether2 so that the cable goes to somewhere accessible, then you have the ability to access the capac via an OFF BRIDGE connection for access to the config.
See items A & D here - viewtopic.php?t=182373

Even small MT routers like the hex have a POE out option.

Normal Hex has POE In, not Out.

Even small MT routers like the hex have a POE out option.

Normal Hex has POE In, not Out.

HEX S, for those with anal rententive issues...............

uh???

uh???

Anav doesn't like to be corrected

@anav:
when you say Hex you can mean the exact device itself (which doesn't have PoE Out) or the family line (for which 2 out of 5 don't have PoE Out: hex and hex lite).
So none of those interpretations is correct.
Has nothing to do with being anal, all with being accurate. Something you always point out to others ??