this post was submitted on 02 Dec 2024
854 points (98.7% liked)

Technology

60090 readers
2281 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] randombullet@programming.dev 71 points 3 weeks ago (5 children)

I still don't understand why this isn't a 2.5G WAN and 2.5G LAN. Is it assuming that people are going to be using it as a router on a stick with a 1G WAN?

[–] nialv7@lemmy.world 13 points 3 weeks ago

most likely because this device is mainly for wifi use, and/or limitation of the SoC.

[–] ColeSloth@discuss.tchncs.de 10 points 3 weeks ago

You want your $90 wi-fi router to do what now?

[–] jagged_circle@feddit.nl 5 points 3 weeks ago (2 children)

I can't tell if WAN is Wireless Area Network or Wide Area Network.

[–] chM5tZ8zMp@lemmy.sdf.org 21 points 3 weeks ago (2 children)

WAN = Wide Area Network
WLAN = Wireless Area Network

[–] locuester@lemmy.zip 6 points 3 weeks ago

*Wireless Local Area Network

[–] FiskFisk33@startrek.website 5 points 3 weeks ago

*WLAN = Wireless local area network

[–] bamboo@lemm.ee 5 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Wide area network. It’s basically the “internet” side of the router.

[–] jagged_circle@feddit.nl -5 points 3 weeks ago (2 children)

I know what a Wide Area Network is. I'm just saying the acronym is ambiguous since the advent of WiFi

[–] MorphiusFaydal@lemmy.world 10 points 3 weeks ago

Not really. WAN has always been WAN. Wireless has always been WLAN.

[–] FiskFisk33@startrek.website 8 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

lan is local area network
wan is wide area network
wlan is wireless local
wwan is wireless wan

[–] rmuk@feddit.uk 1 points 3 weeks ago

Given the 2.5Gb port also supports PoE in, I think the idea is that you can plug this into a 2.5Gb PoE port on a seperate managed switch and that's the only connection you need; that's certainly how I would use it. WAN connections could be plugged into that switch, along with the APs, user devices, servers, etc, with them seperated using VLANs. Assuming everything was gigabit except for that 2.5Gb link to the OpenWRT Thing™, you'd be hard-pressed to saturate that 2.5Gb port and you'd still have the gigabit port completely free for... whatever.

[–] 7dev7random7@suppo.fi 0 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (2 children)

Nerd here. You confuse me:

WAN is some up-/downstream port connecting intranets remotely in my novice book. The measurement G doesn't refer to some advertisement-thingy in terms of wireless speed (but Gigabyte) - Maybe it's some form of Generation; But then I lack everything including my false base knowledge. Additionally I have never encountered "2.5G LAN" ever before: Would you be able to shed light on my shortcomings? 2.5 x 8 is 20 Gbit. I didn't read about that size yet.

Edit: Thanks guys!

[–] MorphiusFaydal@lemmy.world 6 points 3 weeks ago

WAN would be the Internet uplink port. A 2.5G WAN port is a 2.5 gigabit Ethernet port. 2.5 gigabit and o a lesser extent 5 gigabit Ethernet are a standard that's becoming rapidly available on a lot of hardware. OP is stating that for a device shipping near the end of 2024, a new router that is shipping with only 1 GbE instead of 2.5 GbE is a problem.