310 5G & 310 Fiber 5G

These two products are, in my opinion, oddly placed.

In comparison ato the 310 5G, the 310 Fiber 5G:

  • Loses an SFP LAN port, which becomes a second WAN port
  • Loses the 2nd cellular modem (the 4G one) and gains wifi instead.

Would it not make more sense to call it the 310 Fiber 5G the “310 5G WIFI” & make the SFP port WAN/LAN selectable on both the 310 5G & the Fiber 5G/310 5G WIFI?

This is of particular note in Australia, where the 310 Fiber 5G is not RCMd… but that second WAN port would really come in useful.