Help us make the Firewalla Switch
Pinned
We are getting closer to building our first Firewalla Switch! To get us moving faster, please fill out this survey: https://forms.gle/iuCZGmchSshjsTkb7
(By answering this survey, you will be automatically subscribed to Firewalla Newsletters)
Firewalla Switch 10G
- 8x10G RJ45 With POE++
- 4x10G SFP+
- Rack mountable
Firewalla Switch 2.5G
- 8x2.5G RJ45 with PoE+
- 2x10G SFP+
- Not rack mountable
These are FCC Class A products. This equipment is designed for use in commercial, industrial, or business environments. It is not intended for residential use.
Other certifications: CE / Canada Class A
-
will the FCC class A ensure that the device continues receiving firmware updates past the FCC 2027 router deadline? Are switches affected by the FCC router ban? Something to possibly consider seeing that the FCC's language as to what classifies "a router" as being a router; is awfully broad. Per their definition, basically everything is a router and if this switch has any Layer3 capabilities, I'm assuming it would/or could, be classified as a router; "technically" .. Anyways I don't think that classification matters much to most people, unless said classification would help it bypass these stupid FCC rules (if even applicable).
-
https://help.firewalla.com/hc/en-us/community/posts/28643907379091/comments/51541925385747
I understand this is a switch. My question pertains to how the FCC defines what "a router is" ; which is as follows. "a router is any device that routes packets" ... therefore per FCC definition, if the switch has layer 3 functionality, then it "routes packets" ... now saying that ... if the FCC therefore would classify said "switch" as a router, due to the functionality of a layer 3 switch , my question is then, would obtaining the CLASS A FCC certification, help circumvent the aforementioned issue by certifying the device as "for business, enterprise, industrial, commercial... etc... " then it wouldn't even fall within the FCC residential shenanigans... again, this question is based solely upon the FCC classification of what exactly a "router" is, as per their own definition...
-
If the FCC classifies a switch as a router ... then we have a much bigger problem.
As for the certification part, as I said, we white-label devices; the certification is already done by the company we white-label units from (no different from the AP7) a while back. It is not something we can control. Well, at least not until we get a bit bigger, otherwise, it is more like, take it ...
-
Router is necessary, however if I end up in a place where my fiber drop isn't in an ideal place (e.g. garage instead of wiring closet) I might have the router elsewhere and set it up on it's own VLAN and use router-on-a-stick. If I have to use the FWGP to setup the module then move it to the switch I can live with that.
Consider this request lower priority as I could use the ONT and then a simple patch cable with on a VLAN.
-
what id really like to see from firewalla brand is a modem/router combo + Poe
thats compatible with tfiber isp , and spectrum isp hi split services with both fiber
optic or optional Coax inputs model options that both have1x10gb rj45 & 1x2.5gb rj45 Poe for use with Switches & AP under 400$
such a unit would solve many headaches for my network
& be theSweet spot for my setup that would also reduce
How much gear i need
what do you think ?
fiber optic with 2x2.5gb rj45 non-Poe $300
fiber optic with 1x2.5gb non-Poe 1x2.5gb rj45 Poe $375
fiber optic with 1x10gb non-Poe x2.5gb Poe rj45 $425
coax/fiber optic with 1x2.5gb non-Poe 1x2.5gb rj45 Poe $450
coax/fiber optic with 1x10gb non-Poe 1x2.5gb rj45 Poe $485
coax/fiber optic with 1x10gb rj45 non-Poe & 1x10gb rj45 Poe $600
-
Please correct me if I am wrong, but I don't believe Firewalla routers support router on a stick, which I've been calling a virtual WAN (Peplink terminology) which uses a VLAN from the router to a switch port. This would allow multiple WAN's on a switch too. I believe this should be part of Firewalla functionality, so if it isn't a currently available, then I believe it is time to submit a Feature Request.
-
Mark9, I think you're right I don't see a way to do it in the app...
I guess I'd still need to use another switch to convert the VLAN to a "physical LAN" assuming that the switches support VLAN tagging and that VLAN doesn't cause a problem on router. Well I guess that means I'd put the programmable GPON modules on the same request as "router from a VLAN".
-
Spinj, I created a new Feature Request, Multi-WAN connections on any port using VLAN's which you and others are welcome to vote on. It says:
Add a new “Virtual WAN” (WVLAN) network type, designating a WAN using a VLAN ID, which can be assigned to any Firewalla router port, be it WAN or LAN. The intent is to connect the router port to a managed switch port that will split the Virtual WAN’s out into individual ports connected to modems. Or to the Firewalla WiFi SD. It expands the number of WAN’s Firewalla will support and allows customers to overcome physical port limitations of 2 on the Purple and Orange, 4 on Gold’s. Being able to assign to any physical port will assist in balancing the bandwidth demands on the physical ports.
Configuration should be straightforward with the forthcoming Firewalla switch and with more configuration effort, should be able to work with any managed switch.
Note: This is the same functionality found in “Router on a Stick” which has only one port.
-
Spinj, Router on a Stick is possible on a WAN port!
I was able to add a VLAN network to my WAN network port, and then I had Router on a Stick working with a Netgear managed switch! It appears that the Firewalla will support defining one WAN port with one or more VLAN’s. Firewalla does have a Virtual WAN (WVLAN) that is configured by setting a VLAN ID on the WAN network. So you can have more than one WAN on a physical port. However, Firewalla still limits WAN's to a total of 2.
Edit on 5/16/26
Please sign in to leave a comment.
Comments
351 comments