Creating a new user group?


Hi everyone,

I am studying Peplink Balance. I would like to know whether we can create a new user group since three default groups (Manager, Staff and Guest) is not enough. But I cannot find a button to “create” a new user group.

Does it say that we cannot create a new user group in the current model? We only can divide our subnets into 3 groups?

If yes, does peplink development team have a roadmap for this function? Thank you!


You are correct, Edwin. Currently User Groups Bandwidth Control provides three groups.

We will look into allowing users creating new groups in addition to the existing ones - if you don’t mind me asking how many groups do we look to have and what classes are they?


Thank you!
You mean that we can create a new user group. How to do that?
Actually, we are planning how many groups we need. For example, Manager, Staff, Department A, Department B, …, Department N, and Guest.


Not today, Edwin. Currently User Groups Bandwidth Control provides three groups - Manager, Staff and Guest.

But we will study the need of extra group, gather requirements and will put this new feature on the development roadmap if it is a valid request.

Thank you for bringing this feature request to us.



This is also a feature I would very much like to see !
It would be amazing to create new groups. In my case I would like to have 3 more groups on top on the 3 originals.



Hello Guys ,

We also vote for the ability to add extra user groups for bandwidth management :slight_smile:



We have also heard several requests for this function. Another function that has been requested to us is top be able to have the ability to choose the percentage each user group gets per WAN.




I see this request was created over 4 years ago and I have just purchased two BPL-305 and it still does not have the option to create additional user groups. I’d like to purchase additional 305’s for my other offices, but without the ability to create groups I may have to reconsider other vendors. Was it decided that this feature would not be programmed?



I believe this is still on our road map (just not high on the priority list). Engineering will follow-up with specifics.