I am not sure why they changed the VLAN configuration page, or if anyone else cares. But I would like to request that it is either changed back, or the ability to decide which vlans use which ports is added, rather than the current tagged, and untagged options. I also think any wireless vlans should be seperate as they were in the older firmwares.
Having spoken to support the changes were implemented to make it easier to configure. Personally it hasn't made things easier for me.
Old Configuration Pages:
New Configuration Pages:
Cheapers Cisco routers have these options (except they only allow 4 vlans) as do many other makes such as draytek.
I bought this router because it was intuative and simple to use and allowed me to specify which vlans used which ports, now that this feature has gone it's caused me all sorts of issues. Maybe I am alone on this one, but it seems like a step backwards to me. It just isn't as configurable.
Would anyone else like to see the old vlan config pages back?
Is this possible?
How does one go about officially putting in a feature request?
I have to agree with Michael. This use of the table thing, there is no other way to put it, confusing. Simply adding a port to a VLAN should be as easy as it was in the original version. I'm guessing that all of us trying to use it are unsure what tagged, untagged and excluded mean and what they have to do with setting the port to the VLAN.
After you create a VLAN and then go into this table to add a port to the VLAN, once initiated it locks the RV220W up. The only way to recover is to reset the device.
In the port-VLAN membership table, an "exclude" drop-down means that a given VLAN is not allowed to use a given port, tagged or untagged. A "tagged" drop-down means that a given VLAN is allowed to use a given port if it is tagged. A "untagged" entry means that a given VLAN is allowed to use a given port if it is untagged. Only one VLAN can use a port with the untagged option. I will pass your confusion onto the product team so the issue may be addressed in the future documentation.
After some serious wild guessing I assumed that was how the table worked.
Could also address the problem with the router locking up when the VLAN membership table is used to set a given port. It happened to me with the 18.104.22.168 Beta version firmware and it appears to have happened to Jean using 22.214.171.124
I'll give it another try but if it keeps locking up the router......
126.96.36.199 is not the latest beta. If you can wait for the released firmware, it may save you some frustration.
But if you insist to help testing the latest beta firmware, you could contact the SBSC to get the 188.8.131.52 firmware.
Thanks Simon, I figured they would be.
Does anyone know if Port VLAN worked at all in the 184.108.40.206 ????
If not, then it hasn't worked in any of the firmware versions. Your looking at 10 months since your original post, I'd say it's time to either fix it or start recalling devices. I'm about ready to go shopping for something that actually works. This problem is getting to be more of a distraction that it's worth.
I can confirm that port based vlans did work in 220.127.116.11.
Tekliu, thats a great screen shot. That is exactly what I wanted to see, the option to exluce a a vlan from a port. So it looks like port based vlans is back in You have made my day, I look forward to it being released.
Kevin, the tagged and untagged vlans are for 802.11q vlans which is a whole other kettle of fish.
I don't have the firmware. However I may call up tomorrow and see if I can get it. I can then spend some time at the weekend testing it when the network isn't in use.
I see Tekliu says that there is a newer Beta out there. 18.104.22.168
I'm going to try and get if from my support source I've been working with. I'll let you know how I do with the newer version.