Managed or unmanaged switch for home network

[Kolmogorov]

I've wired up my home with Cat6 cables and need to complete my setup by adding a switch.

Question is, should I go for a managed or unmanaged switch? I have very little knowledge of networking, but keen to google and teach myself.

I probably won't need managed functions in the immediate future, but there are a couple of scenarios that I suspect a managed switch may be helpful, e.g.:
- connecting IP security cameras
- managing video streaming to connected TV's, etc.
- distributing e.g. DSTV via HDMI extenders to all TV's (instead of coax)

Will an unmanaged switch be able to handle the above or not?

There are 13 cables that I need to connect at the moment, so looking at a 24 port switch to leave room for expansion.

For an unmanaged switch I'm looking at:
TP-Link TL-SG1024D Unmanaged Gigabit Desktop Rackmountable Switch (24 Ports) for R1,133 at Loot

For a managed (or "smart") switch the following seem like decent options:
TP-LINK TL-SG1024DE Gigabit Easy Smart Switch (smart version of the unmanaged switch above) for R1,750 at FirstShop
Dell Networking X1026 Smart Web Managed Switch for R2,283 at Geewiz
Mikrotik Cloud Smart Switch CSS326-24G-2S+RM for R2,428 at Geewiz

Any recommendations between the above choices? The Dell is on the list mostly because of its small form factor - the switch will mounted in a cabinet with just enough space for a standard sized switch.

(I know a lot of people swear by Ubiquiti equipment, but it just seems too expensive for my needs)

 

[flamevector]

You could look at the Dlink DGS-1210-20 simple to use pricing not bad either having some smart capabilities always helps you may not use all of the features straight away but at least you know if you ever want to do anything on your network you have the capabilities to do so without now buying another switch in my opinion.

 

[infscrtyrisk]

Personally, I'd go with the TPLink Jetream, because it has all the capabilities that I would need (port mirroring and QoS amongst others like SNMP etc.) but I'd also look at other TP-Link retailers. For example dbg.co.za has it at R1366.86 (including VAT) for registered dealers. Being a vaalie, I'm not sure of distributors in CT.

 

[Kolmogorov]

Personally, I'd go with the TPLink Jetream, because it has all the capabilities that I would need (port mirroring and QoS amongst others like SNMP etc.) but I'd also look at other TP-Link retailers. For example dbg.co.za has it at R1366.86 (including VAT) for registered dealers. Being a vaalie, I'm not sure of distributors in CT.

Thanks, had a look at dbg (they have a branch in the Cape as well). The one for R1366 is the unmanaged version - same as in my post (only Loot has it on special for R200 less)

 

[infscrtyrisk]

Thanks, had a look at dbg (they have a branch in the Cape as well). The one for R1366 is the unmanaged version - same as in my post (only Loot has it on special for R200 less)

What exactly do you mean (technically) by "managed"? The reason why I ask is because in my vocab anything that can be made to respond to SNMP requests, as well as to generate their own, could be considered "managed". Obviously the term has been exploited by marketing folk, hence my question. Let me rephrase it: "What capabilities does a switch need for it to be considered a "Managed Switch"".

 

[RoganDawes]

"What capabilities does a switch need for it to be considered a "Managed Switch"".

I suspect that the main thing would be VLAN's, and possibly per-port controls such as limiting a port to only a single MAC address, etc. VLAN's may be useful in a home context, but I doubt the latter would be much use in the average home.

 

[Thor]

You don't need managed for a home.

That said I will never again in my life be able to live without managed switches.

I am biased towards ubiquiti which is what I run in my home, but at my parents place I installed a Mikrotik setup either will do.

But to come back to the point, you don't need it for home use.

 

[gregmcc]

Depends what you want out of your switch? All my devices are monitored by snmp and I've configured vlans/speed etc, but that's just me. Most users do not need this for normally household use.

If you don't want to setup QoS/vlans/speed etc then go for non managed.

 

[Thor]

Depends what you want out of your switch? All my devices are monitored by snmp and I've configured vlans/speed etc, but that's just me. Most users do not need this for normally household use.

If you don't want to setup QoS/vlans/speed etc then go for non managed.

Pretty much this, also most routers these days can implement QoS even Vlans, Vlans i doubt any home user needs and the QoS on a router might not be as good as the queues on Mikrotik, but I think they'll be good enough for home usage.

 

[Gnome]

With unmanaged you get low power fanless switches all the way up to 24 ports which is a big appeal to me (eg. stick it in the back of a cupboard)
Managed switches come with higher power usage, higher heat output and a higher price.

In exchange they allow some options on layer 2 to be configured.
Really the only thing on layer 2 worth manipulating is VLANs, IMO.

//Thinking out loud
Some vastly more expensive switches operate on "layer 3" I believe.
Layer 3 is where IP/ICMP/IGMP happens so IMO a "layer 3" switch is probably a crappy router with lots of ports.
Else they would just call it a router I would think.
The difference in complexity between a layer 2 vs layer 3 device is huge.
//End of thinking out loud

If you need serious features on your LAN, I would rather opt for a good router running PfSense, netmask 255.255.255.255 and then let the gateway deal with it.

Everything outside your netmask is going to the gateway first anyway, so you really have to need those features on the local lan for them to make sense.

//More thinking out loud
Devices in your netmask pretty much have to be able to respond to ARP broadcasts or be unreachable, so it limits the usefulness of these sort of managed "features"
But perhaps I don't setup enough networks to truly understand the "power" of it.
//The end

 

[Kolmogorov]

Hey guys, thanks for all the great feedback. Think I'll go with the unmanaged switch then. If I ever need something more advanced I'll see what I can get done with my router.

 

[infscrtyrisk]

I suspect that the main thing would be VLAN's, and possibly per-port controls such as limiting a port to only a single MAC address, etc. VLAN's may be useful in a home context, but I doubt the latter would be much use in the average home.

Maybe, but VLANs fall within the functional networking characteristics (such as QoS, port mirroring etc.). Not something that allows "Management", which IMHO is using a tool such as Open NMS (no doubt with SNMP). Here's Cisco's answer, some fuzziness and possibly some truth: https://www.cisco.com/c/dam/en/us/p...s_products_genericcontent0900aecd806c7afe.pdf

 

[syntax]

What exactly do you mean (technically) by "managed"? The reason why I ask is because in my vocab anything that can be made to respond to SNMP requests, as well as to generate their own, could be considered "managed". Obviously the term has been exploited by marketing folk, hence my question. Let me rephrase it: "What capabilities does a switch need for it to be considered a "Managed Switch"".

A managed switch usually means a switch that can be accessed via an IP or console port. Hence, it can be managed, as opposed to an unmanaged switch which simply switches packets and cannot have configuration changed.

The features and functionality will vary from managed switch to managed switch, the defining factor is can you actually connect to it to "manage" it