ER7212PC | Omada Router, PoE Switch & Controller 3-in-1 Gigabit VPN Router | Up to 4 WAN | 8 PoE+ LAN Port @ 110W | Fanless | Easy Installation | Load Balance

The TP‑Link ER7212PC Omada router combines router, PoE+ switch, and Omada SDN controller into a clean compact appliance ideal for home or small business use. Setup felt intuitive and most features delivered reliable performance. The integrated PoE switch offers eight ports with a 110 W budget which simplifies powering cameras or access points. Multiple WAN options including SFP make it flexible for diverse networks. Performance wise it handled routine routing and VPN duties well. Strong support for VPN types including OpenVPN and Wireguard made it easy to configure secure remote access. The web interface is sluggish and reboot times are slow after firmware updates. Also performing complex tasks can take a while too due to the processor speed. Reliability hasn’t been ann issue. Mostly a set it and forget it router. Mine has been running for over eighty days without issue while continuing to fine tune settings. Pros • Clean all‑in‑one format combining router PoE+ switch and controller • Generous PoE power and WAN choices including SFP • Easy SDN management with cloud app • VPN friendly with strong multi protocol support Cons • Web UI and reboot can be slow • Controller CPU may struggle under heavy config • All‑in‑one failure impacts entire network In short, the ER7212PC offers a compelling space saving solution for small installations needing unified control. It is especially effective when simplicity and central management matter more than raw processing speed. With recent firmware maturing its feature set it stands closer to TP‑Link’s flagship gear. Just know it may not satisfy users requiring ultra fast UI or enterprise grade port control.

I love the Omada ecosysem. It's been improving steadily since it was released several years ago. I thought this 3-in-one device would replace the need for a separate controller, router, and POE switch in a new location. While it can, you won't likely be happy with the result. First off, it takes between 8 and 15 minutes to boot. And it has to reboot ALL THE TIME. Change a setting, reboot. And once in a while it just doesn't start back up. It starts blinking it's lights but you think "did I wait the full 15 minutes it might take?", so you wait 30 just to be sure and you find it's not responding to anything on the LAN ports. Reboot. Wait 30 minutes, "did it work this time?" - if not, hard reset. And when it does work the UI is slow as molasses. And now for the missing features. Sure, it's a router, but it doesn't have half of the features you get with the lowest-end ER605 that costs $65. No DPI, no bunch of other features. Then there is the controller: Stuck on the 5.8 feature set, a full 5 versions behind the $100 OC200 controller. Want to backup your config? Not enough memory onboard and no USB port, so you are going to have to fire up an FTP server just to be able to make a backup just in case your config goes bad. It's a POE switch too, but not in any sense a smart managed switch. It's just ports and while it *technically* supports VLANS, it is the most bare-bone implementation that is a nightmare to configure. Not even close to a the lowest end Jetstream. For less money you can get an OC200, ER605, basic POE switch and be far, far happier with the result.

Liked the fact that it has a gateway, router, POE switch and SDN controller, all built into a compact device. Didn't have any complex needs or VLAN requirements, which this supports obviously. All I needed were 4 POE ports, 2 for my EAP 610s and 2 for cameras, a router and a controller. Was going to buy discrete components , but this fit the bill perfectly in my small network closet. Like others mentioned, UI is slow sometimes, controller needs 4-5 mins to come up after reboot and the power brick is huge, which were not deal breakers. Tried using the SFP WAN port with my SFP+ ONT stick, but speeds were almost halved for my 1 Gbps symmetric internet. Now using a SFP+ switch in between as a media converter, connected to WAN3 ethernet port on this device and speeds are as they should be. So disappointed that I have to use 1 more device in between and can't use the SFP port. Edit: Reached out to support and have shared my test details with them. For the most part local iperf with base-T (ethernet) ports seem to be fine for 1 Gbps. But not so much if the SFP WAN ports are used, seems like there is performance degradation. Haven't heard back if anything needs to be tweaked to fix slower speeds on the SFP port. Noticed there are other complaints related to ER8411 and ER7206 products for slowness on SFP ports. So I have to ding another star.

Works really good. The only reason I didn't give this five stars is because it was a little complicated to install. I have a greadson who is in IT and he got it up and running within an hour. After that it has been great. Even so, i like this better than any Netgear product that I have had. I would definitely recommend this for your home internet system.

Edit (3/18/24): I read another review that said that the 1.1.0 firmware update allowed blocking of LAN->LAN ACLs. I have firmware version 1.1.1 and while LAN may be selected as the Source, the Destination still does not have Network LAN options available to select with a checkbox. However, you can create an IP group and make it the same IP range as the selected LAN you wish to block. It's not as straight forward as the option given for switches. If you can put it in the Source, why not in the Destination, too? And the built-in controller still takes 9 minutes to connect. IMO this is still beta firmware on a product sold as a finished product. I still have hopes for a good firmware upgrade. Original: Please forgive the long pre-description, but it is necessary to fully understand the review. I am a technology provider specializing in networks for small businesses. I typically provide TP-Link’s ER7206 router, a TL-SG2008P switch, an EAP610 access point and OC200 hardware controller for managing a network. The TL-SG2008P switch provides POE power for the access point and the hardware controller. In fact, the switch is required as the OC200 hardware controller using an alternate power supply will not connect to the Omada Cloud if plugged directly into the ER7206 router. The extra switch is also necessary if one needs to create different networks (subnets) using VLANs and there is a shared network device like a shared copier/scanner. TP-Link only allows Access Control Lists (ACLs) to be created at the switch level to allow network communication from all subnets (VLANs) to that shared printer. As a result, the switch is the only device that actually has network devices plugged into it. The router just feeds one cable to the switch that actually does the management of the network devices. I have previously used SonicWall, Watchguard or Datto firewalls. They have always provided an integrated router and switch with the ability to create different subnets and manage the sharing of a printer from the router. There is no limit to the number of access points or switches that can be connected to these routers. The routers made to connect to the cloud for control also do so within 2 minutes. All of this is a typical expectation. As I read the description of the ER7212PC being a “3-in-1 Router: Integrates Omada Router, PoE+ Switch, and Omada SDN Controller into one device (Up to 1 router, 2 switches, 10 EAPs)” I was anticipating that TP-Link had finally “gotten it” and made a typical router to compete with SonicWall, Watchguard and others. The exception is that they are allowing only 2 connected switches and 10 access points. That was a bad omen. As I set up a test network, I found that the ER7212PC does have an integrated controller, but it takes 9 minutes to connect to the cloud. After contacting tech support about this outrageously long delay, I was told to provide a video of the delay and they would bring in “senior engineers”. After providing the video, the senior engineer replied, “We will peform [sic] the test in our lab. But since it is a intergreted [sic] device, the reboot time would be longer. For OC200, it would also take about 5 minutes.” My response was 2 minutes is the typical expectation for connecting to the cloud by other brands of routers and the OC200 connect time of 5 minutes is abysmal (but the senior engineer is correct that it takes 5 minutes for an OC200 to connect). I also replied that well-made integrated devices are always expected to be more efficient and faster. Their final reply was, “We would report this issue to the R&D department. We would push them to optimize it.” Because the ER7212PC supposedly has an integrated POE switch, I also tested that. A connected EAP610 access point does power up as expected using POE. There are also up to 9 LAN ports, up from the typical 4 ports on other brands and even the ER7206. But that’s where the enhancements end. The Omada Cloud does not allow the ER7212PC “integrated switch” to be configured. You can’t manage each port. And while you can assign ports into subnets (VLANs), you can’t assign Access Control List rules to allow a printer to be shared with the different subnets. Each subnet (VLAN) is completely isolated. To allow sharing a printer, you would need to add another switch like a TL-S2008P and put all network devices on it, just like you would in the initial example using the ER7206 router. In other words, this router does not have a typical integrated switch. They just added more ports and POE power and incorrectly declared it an “integrated switch”, while hamstringing the unit by limiting it to 2 additional switches and 10 access points. I reached out to tech support again and here is their reply: “We are sorry for your inconvenience. For the time being, it is recommended that clients are connected to switch to implement the switch ACL. We apologize that the product doesn’t work as the performance it should be. Many thanks for your feedback about this product, the issue will be reported to our R&D department and they will do evaluate and see if there is way to improve it.” It is refreshing to hear support admit it is not working as advertised instead of making excuses. Finally, let’s look at typical pricing. The initially mentioned setup with an ER7206 router [$150] plus an OC-200 hardware controller [$100] costs a total of $250. An ER7212PC is $270. If you’re just using it for a simple small business setup, it might make sense to purchase the ER7212PC because it has more ports and POE for an access point. However, if you plan on using this unit for multiple subnets, you need to add a switch to either setup making the total cost less for the ER7206 setup. Because the integrated controller also takes 4 extra minutes to connect to the Omada Cloud and they hamstring the ER7212PC to allow only 2 switches and 10 access points, it makes sense to just get the ER7206 setup when configuring multiple subnets. In conclusion, the ER7212PC appears to be a beta version router being sold as a finished product. With future firmware updates, perhaps the integrated hardware controller will connect to the Omada Cloud in 5 minutes or less and perhaps they will actually integrate the switch and allow managing ports and Access Control Lists on it.