At present, before you deploy each of these switches, you need to configure a computer to 192.168.88.0/24 to get the web UI, and use that to set the switch's address according to where it will be going. (And if you have pre-configured several switches for various locations, don't lose track of which one goes where!)

With DHCP, you could drop any switch into any location, and its web UI would be accessible straight out of the box. With static DHCP leases, you could even pre-configure the router to give it the desired address as soon as it appears--and if its role is a simple switch, it's up and running without even using its web UI. If DHCP times out (e.g., you aren't using it), it could always default to 192.168.88.1 as a fallback.

+1 We really do need this....

I agree, that may help in some deployment

I have the same problem but since I use mikrotik products, nobody from their team realy cares to add features that most of us need them. They have no support on forum. SwOs looks like the Dude, dead.

I have the same problem but since I use mikrotik products, nobody from their team realy cares to add features that most of us need them. They have no support on forum. SwOs looks like the Dude, dead.

unfortunately, you are right..

+1 on the feature

+1 for that feature.

i think sw os laks of L3 support, does not even supports a gateway to mange it from another subnets.

like the dude

i think sw os laks of L3 support, does not even supports a gateway to mange it from another subnets.

It supports "L3" enough to recognize its own IP. But when its storage is an embedded 96K SRAM*, maybe there just isn't enough room for the code required to do much more. And that's too bad, because 1) For some tasks, SwOS is much simpler to set up than RouterOS; and 2) There is (as yet) no RB750GUP.

* Although I have to say, I have seen (and written) some pretty neat code fit in 48K on an Apple ][...

like the dude

Too true.