Why not run the 2 domes of your SIM injector? That way you power both and you have them running on a single LAN, and you are able to place SIM & spares as you wish. All you need to configure (and match) the SIMs to each dome.
For your core switch I would use a balance router that enables you to handle multiple WANs. Configure vlans from the Domes to distinguish between the routes.
The core switch would enable you to manage the traffic as required including policies and also would enable failover/bonding/speed fusion etc if you like.
You would also be able to prioritise for guest/owner etc onboard ensuring traffic is not used by crew or non essential devices.
All can then be managed by single interface IC2, incl. your APs
There are other more sophisticated routers/firewall gateways if you need more granular control, but from what I understand above, this should work for you.
And on the comment about the Domes in marine environments, they are perfectly good, the failure normally lies in where they are mounted. They have to be high with a clear view, which thanks to the Ethernet wiring (6a with tough cladding) has made this oh so much easier! (Note caveat with the word “high” … be careful when it’s a sailing boat that heels a lot…)
@stevemitchell, actually we have discussed this then only come into this suggestion. Below are the suggestions we discussed:
Option 1
Using HD2 MBX (CAT 18). This will meet all your requirements which support 2 x CAT 18 cellular modules, Wifi WAN, and RemoteSIM support. This option dropped since the purpose here is using 2 x HD1 Domes.
Option 2
This is what Sit Loong proposed to you. You have pointed out the right thing here - HD1 Domes will loss the POE source. So, you may change the Balance router to SDX or remain using Balance router (e.g. Balance 305) + 2 x PoE Injectors for the HD1 Domes. Balance router + 2 x PoE Injectors will be cost-effectiveness.
Option 3
This is the last option if both suggestions above is not accepted. Please find the diagram below. It is similar to your design.
I think this has pointed out a gap in the product line. I’m not trying to save costs or re-use something - I’m trying to design a solution that uses two or more HD1 domes + WiFi WAN as WAN sources and takes advantage of the Peplink features. Having a core router that can provide PoE to various sources, or works with the SIM Injector more dynamically would be a great solution for this setup.
For Option 1, I appreciate the suggestions of an MBX but the whole point of what I’m trying to do is avoid running antenna cables on boats. Folks seem to think that it’s easy to do this, and it’s not. Not only is it very difficult on most vessels, it usually requires 20+ feet of cable alone just to get to a suitable antenna location, usually more, even on smaller vessels. And those antenna cables are running near other interference sources, so by the time you run the cabling, you’ve negated a large portion of the antenna gain!
An alternative is to have very short cable runs and place the router near the antennas. This requires custom enclosures in most cases, and they are hard to reach, difficult to maintain, and have very high temperatures. It can be done, but it usually scares people away when you start talking about custom enclosures or fiberglass work.
The Dome is a perfect product for a boat - all of the radios and antennas are self contained, it has an amazing mounting solution, and it only needs a single ethernet cable which really cannot be that affected by distance or interference if done correctly.
For Option 2, both the Balance 305 and SDX require AC power and have very low high temp thresholds. It is always preferred to use DC power on boats since it is already likely being converted internally in the product, and is inefficient to use AC. I’m also going to guess that the SDX is going to be very expensive, given the other products it is listed with, and will likely push this solution out of the realm of reasonable.
For Option 3 - it looks like you’re proposing two cables from the SIM injector to the Balance? Or are you suggesting this is using VLAN tags? This is a bit different than the previous suggestion. Can you have the SIM injector connected to two different WAN ports on a Balance, even with the same subnet? Or are you suggesting some sort of VLAN tag situation?
I revert to what I mentioned earlier and @TK_Liew please shout me wrong if the Balance is not able to do this.
In other setups where a device is multiple modem (like the Transit Duo) I create VLANs for each modem back to the router. On most vessels we have the GFI Kerio installed as it is a traditional favourite. The Kerio can handle multiple WAN connection on a single port via VLANs. I still have to trial this setup with a Balance router.
You are quite right about the Dome being ideal because of the cable, more expressively because it reduces cable loss (on the RF domain). And there is nothing like running a single ethernet CAT6a versus 4 x LM400 think stiff RF cable where every meter counts, connectors create losses and adaptors, pigtails etc have to be used as well.
There are a lot of manufacturers now coming out on the market with their version of the Dome antenna and it will be a very hotly debated product in the coming years.
The antenna (gain) performance is still not as good as the traditional whip setup, but I am looking forward to great improvement on this front.
So in my mind you have your central router (your WAN/firewall router) with a single cable to the SIM injector and then the SIM injector with a single to the first Dome and using the supplied passthrough to the 2nd Dome, or two separate cables from the SIM injector to the Domes if they are located in different masts or otherwise separate locations where running two runs is more convenient.
If you use a router has POE WAN ports, then I would put the SIM injector behind the router and use the remote setup accordingly, still using VLANs for the WAN path.
This way you also use your firewall router for any VPN tunnelling if required or attached caching servers for internet acceleration.
Thanks, I stand corrected. If, the antenna arrangement in the dome is good for marine use, then I do see the value.
@Peplink team, is the thread on the mount 1x14? I.e. can this be screwed onto a standard 1x14 marine mount?
Is there a dome product that includes WiFi as WAN?
I can see a strong use case for deploying domes so as other posters have said you don’t worry about antenna cable runs, interference, pig tails, many unsightly antennas, etc.
The Dome has an M35 screw mount, if you use the Ethernet splitter (supplied with the Dome) directly attached, the screw fitting is covered and the mount is thus no longer pole mount. (You can see this in the pictures on the product page https://www.peplink.com/products/max-hd1-dome/)
Currently, the Dome does not have a Wi-Fi modem/antenna and this is in the already requested in the forum here Max HD2 Dome -WiFi WAN feature- (add your voice to promote it up their to-do list )
I agree. I ended up mounting mine using the included bracket because I wanted to use the passthrough both for weatherproofing and for a second future dome. When you do this, you are almost required to use the mounting bracket or come up with some custom setup. Having a marine mount threaded bracket would have been slightly better, but with the weight of the entire setup, I can understand why the included bracket is preferred.
Yes this sounds great. I don’t believe a Peplink product exists to do this now that doesn’t have a missing piece - either doesn’t run off of DC power, doesn’t have WiFi as WAN, or isn’t a 3rd party product that doesn’t include SpeedFusion and other Peplink features I want to use.
Yes, I suggest 2 cables from SIM Injector to WAN2 and WAN3 of the Balance router. Balance router supports same subnet for different WAN interfaces. So, LAN of both HD1 Domes, WAN2 and WAN3 of Balance router are in the same subnet. WAN2 of Balance router will point HD1#1 as a gateway and WAN3 of Balance router will point HD1#2 as a gateway.
By the way, your guys (@stevemitchell and @tgorter) provided a good idea below which using VLAN Tagging!
Based on my suggestion from option 3, you may tag WAN2 as VLAN10 and WAN3 as VLAN 20 (we support 1 tagged VLAN per WAN port). Then configure VLAN10 and VLAN20 respectively in both HD1 Dome. This helps to avoid using same broadcast domain within HD1 Domes and Balance router.
Ok I am resurrecting this because I still never really got an answer as to the best Peplink product to use as the main router.
Is there a 3x WAN Peplink product that has DC power and supports SpeedFusion and the other core features in the Balance/MAX line, as well as has decent SpeedFusion performance?
The Balance 305 looks promising, but it is AC only and a very low max temp rating (40C/104F), plus very low SpeedFusion throughput compared to other products in that range (150Mbps?)
The MBX product line has been proposed, but that is overkill - not only in terms of price, but it has tons of LTE modems that won’t be used in this situation.
The Balance 210 can have a 3rd WAN port activated on it, and has a DC wall wart power supply for 12v, so that seems like the best candidate. It’s SpeedFusion throughput is the same as the 305 if unencrypted.
Let me know if I’ve missed a particular model that doesn’t require AC power, have limited temp requirements, or isn’t $5000+ in cost.
Seems like a good opportunity for a new product - one with WiFi as WAN ports (doesn’t need local AP), a couple of PoE ports to run the HD1/HD2 domes, a couple of LAN ports, and remote SIM management. I know a whole host of boaters that would pay for a nice indoor router like that, one or two outdoor domes, simplified ethernet cabling to the domes, and a couple of indoor APs. It would be a fantastic marine/mobile solution that eliminates costly antenna cabling, antenna challenges, signal loss, etc.
Hi @stevemitchell
I’m listening! Ive taken all your previous comments and they align with my personal experience.
The Balance 301X could be an option. Similar throughput as the MBX (and same physical design) but different WAN setup
-2x Ethernet WAN
-1x Cellular modem
-2x USB WAN
SpeedFusion throughput - No Encryption: 600 Mbps / 256-bit AES: 500
Power input - 12-30V DC
-Operating Temperature -40° to 149°F / -40° to 65°C
@stevemitchellIs there a 3x WAN Peplink product that has DC power and supports SpeedFusion and the other core features in the Balance/MAX line, as well as has decent SpeedFusion performance?
Have you taken a look at the Max HD2 yet? It is capable of 2 WAN + 1 USB WAN inputs, POE output, the throughput for SF falls in between the Balance 210 and 305, and its powered by DC 12-48V.
Unfortunately this only has 2x WAN ports. Unless you can use a single WAN port to the SIM injector and VLAN tags for 2x HD1/HD2 domes, it won’t work. It also has LTE radios which I don’t need if I have HD1/HD2 domes on the roof, so I’m paying for those (probably quite a bit).
Maybe if it had a license option for a 3rd WAN port it would be slightly better. Not sure what the pricing is, but if it is too high up there, that could be a barrier too…
I considered it, and have one in a box somewhere, but the MAX HD2 also has LTE radios I don’t need, which increases the price quite a bit. A MAX HD2 without LTE would be perfect.
The 700 looks pretty good, but it is pretty old. I can’t even find it in the normal navigation on Peplink’s site without searching for it manually, and I see reviews as far back as 2011… It also has about the same performance as a MAX Transit for SpeedFusion. Would love to get past that 100Mbps limit…
So Peplink, any thoughts adding a dome that has dual band/radio WiFi as WAN 2.4 & 5ghz? How would the antennas work if the dome is mounted high up on a mast and connecting to an AP for WiFi as WAN that is low, i.e. on a dock? For cellular, I don’t see it being much of an issue because cell towers are high. I usually mount high up on masts.
)