Jump to content
RESET Forums (homeservershow.com)

Amazon invests in Luma


awraynor

Recommended Posts

Hey guys...first time poster here. I stumbled upon the forum while doing some research on Luma.

I also pre-ordered a 3-pack after I saw that Amazon is a backer. I currently run a Sophos UTM and 2x R7000s in AP-mode. I'm hoping Luma can replace all of it.  I'm not overly concerned on the mesh-wireless benefits...but I am very interested in Luma's anti-malware/intrusion-prevention aspect. Maintaining the UTM can get a bit burdensome at times. The specifics on Luma's security features seems pretty sparse...so I decided to pre-order and see how it turns out. If it can replace my current set-up, selling the R7000s will recoup most of the Luma costs (at pre-order prices). If it doesn't, I should be able to sell the Luma with little/no loss. Seems like a low-risk venture.

 

Since I'm interested in the security aspects...I emailed Luma a couple of make-or-break questions. What I've found out is that it DOES support custom firewall rules...and it CAN use public DNS servers such as Google DNS/OpenDNS/etc. My concern was that Luma's "security" features were nothing but a hard-coded filtered-DNS service. But, that apparently isn't the case.

 

Looking forward to trying this thing out!

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 29
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • itGeeks

    10

  • schoondoggy

    6

  • JROrtiz

    4

  • essential

    3

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Funny that no one wrote a story when I invested in Luma. 

On one hand they are well funded, on the other hand big investor's can hinder the development of a tech start-up. One concern I have with any company like Luma is, how do you get your target market t

Hey guys...first time poster here. I stumbled upon the forum while doing some research on Luma. I also pre-ordered a 3-pack after I saw that Amazon is a backer. I currently run a Sophos UTM and 2x R7

itGeeks

Hey guys...first time poster here. I stumbled upon the forum while doing some research on Luma.

I also pre-ordered a 3-pack after I saw that Amazon is a backer. I currently run a Sophos UTM and 2x R7000s in AP-mode. I'm hoping Luma can replace all of it.  I'm not overly concerned on the mesh-wireless benefits...but I am very interested in Luma's anti-malware/intrusion-prevention aspect. Maintaining the UTM can get a bit burdensome at times. The specifics on Luma's security features seems pretty sparse...so I decided to pre-order and see how it turns out. If it can replace my current set-up, selling the R7000s will recoup most of the Luma costs (at pre-order prices). If it doesn't, I should be able to sell the Luma with little/no loss. Seems like a low-risk venture.

 

Since I'm interested in the security aspects...I emailed Luma a couple of make-or-break questions. What I've found out is that it DOES support custom firewall rules...and it CAN use public DNS servers such as Google DNS/OpenDNS/etc. My concern was that Luma's "security" features were nothing but a hard-coded filtered-DNS service. But, that apparently isn't the case.

 

Looking forward to trying this thing out!

Welcome to the forums!

I also pre-ordered a 3 pack and a single and that was even before it was anounced that Amazon had stakes in Luma. It sure does seem that Luma will be an awesome product when it released, the one thing I wish is that Luma supported at release time is 'Ethernet backhaul', It will only support 'wireless backhaul' at this time but support for Ethernet backhaul should come later threw a firmware update. I was also running Sophos UTM9 then Sophos XG but got tiered of XG breaking to much stuff here at home so now I am back on Untangle v12 and its working great. I also use Open Mesh for my WAPs and they are rock solid, The WAPs that I use are the MR1750. Like you I am hopping to simplify my setup with Luma if it works well. Very excited about Luma and can't wait to try it. One of the Luma's will go to my daughters apartment and one will go by my father-in-laws, The other 2 will stay by me and used in my new place. It will also be interesting to see how many devices we can pump threw Luma before she chokes.

 

Thanks for sharing your current setup. Stick around the HSS forums, Its a great place :)

Edited by itGeeks
Link to post
Share on other sites
LoneWolf

Marvel's Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D is already beta testing them.  I can see Luma sent them a ton.

 

SHIELD1.jpg

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
itGeeks

Marvel's Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D is already beta testing them.  I can see Luma sent them a ton.

 

SHIELD1.jpg

LOL :D I had to stop and try and figure out what you where saying and I was looking all over that picture for Luma till I got the joke, Good one.

Edited by itGeeks
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...
essential

Has there been any updates as to the possibility of Luma as an AP/bridge mode to only handle wireless?

 

Last I read about them (months ago) they required themselves to be the router, and I don't like that limitation.

 

This seems like my last chance to order before full price so I'm wondering if there have been any updates.

 

With my setup, requiring the Luma to be the router would mean I'd have to order an extra unit for my basement (where everything originates), so that cost and unit is wasted.  Also, that single Luma would have to feed a 24 port switch that feeds the entire house, whereas now only one of the four LANs on my Nighthawk feed the switch and the other three feed other devices directly.

 

Thanks.

Link to post
Share on other sites
schoondoggy

Has there been any updates as to the possibility of Luma as an AP/bridge mode to only handle wireless?

 

Last I read about them (months ago) they required themselves to be the router, and I don't like that limitation.

 

This seems like my last chance to order before full price so I'm wondering if there have been any updates.

 

With my setup, requiring the Luma to be the router would mean I'd have to order an extra unit for my basement (where everything originates), so that cost and unit is wasted. Also, that single Luma would have to feed a 24 port switch that feeds the entire house, whereas now only one of the four LANs on my Nighthawk feed the switch and the other three feed other devices directly.

 

Thanks.

No change as far as I have heard. If you have a 24 port switch why do you have anything plugged into your router, other than a single cable to your switch? Where is your router physically located today? How many Luma do you think you will need? How big is your home? If you want to mount your first Luma away from your modem and switch, just run two Ethernet cables. One to connect the modem to the Luma and one to connect the Luma to your switch. If WiFi coverage is the only issue you are trying to resolve, Open-Mesh WAP's may be a better solution.
Link to post
Share on other sites
itGeeks

No change as far as I have heard. If you have a 24 port switch why do you have anything plugged into your router, other than a single cable to your switch? Where is your router physically located today? How many Luma do you think you will need? How big is your home? If you want to mount your first Luma away from your modem and switch, just run two Ethernet cables. One to connect the modem to the Luma and one to connect the Luma to your switch. If WiFi coverage is the only issue you are trying to resolve, Open-Mesh WAP's may be a better solution.

I agree with schoondoggy, You should not be using any of the LAN ports on the router other then 1 going to the switch, That will give you the best performance. The only time you should be using anymore then one port on the router would be if your doing any DMZ's or VLANing. What problem are you trying to solve? as schoondoggy said if its wireless coverage only then Open-Mesh is a much better option for you. Kevin it would not surprise me if Luma makes a change to this either before release or after that would allow Luma to be put in "bridge mode" I just want to say I have no inside info on this, Its just a gut feeling as I am sure they now Eero can be setup in "bridge mode".

Edited by itGeeks
Link to post
Share on other sites
essential

No change as far as I have heard. If you have a 24 port switch why do you have anything plugged into your router, other than a single cable to your switch? Where is your router physically located today? How many Luma do you think you will need? How big is your home? If you want to mount your first Luma away from your modem and switch, just run two Ethernet cables. One to connect the modem to the Luma and one to connect the Luma to your switch. If WiFi coverage is the only issue you are trying to resolve, Open-Mesh WAP's may be a better solution.

 

 

I agree with schoondoggy, You should not be using any of the LAN ports on the router other then 1 going to the switch, That will give you the best performance. The only time you should be using anymore then one port on the router would be if your doing any DMZ's or VLANing. What problem are you trying to solve? as schoondoggy said if its wireless coverage only then Open-Mesh is a much better option for you. Kevin it would not surprise me if Luma makes a change to this either before release or after that would allow Luma to be put in "bridge mode" I just want to say I have no inside info on this, Its just a gut feeling as I am sure they now Eero can be setup in "bridge mode".

 

My router is physically located in my basement, with my modem, which is where the cable feed runs into the house.  I'm considering 2 3-packs of Lumas.  1 to go in the basement (if I have to have it function as my router), 2 on the main floor, 1 upstairs (possibly 2 since I'll have an extra), then I have a garage being fed with a cat6 line about 80 feet behind the house that would get 1 Luma.  Everything would be fed with a cat6 since the house already has wire running to every room.

 

My primary purpose for wanting this is the mesh wireless with the intelligent auto switching and one single SSID.  Right now I have a couple AP's (just cheap routers in AP mode) with different SSID's and it's a pain.

 

I did consider running two long cords as you suggest but all the current cat6 is in the walls and I don't want to open anything up again.

 

I was under the assumption that all bandwidth going to the switch was shared/split between the devices plugged into the switch?

 

On my router I have one out to my main comp, one out to my ps4, and one out to my server (the things I didn't want sharing bandwidth with everything else on the switch), then everything else is sharing the switch.  This is incorrect?

 

I imagine even if everything was plugged into the switch the difference (if any) might be imperceptible.

 

I looked at open-mesh but 3 of the mr1750's (first floor, second floor, garage) is already more than what 6 Luma's would cost (at least if I pre-order).

 

If you're confident a Luma could handle feeding a 24 port switch maybe I have to reconsider.  I would have already bought Eero's if they were a $299 price point for a 3 pack.

Edited by essential
Link to post
Share on other sites
schoondoggy

My router is physically located in my basement, with my modem, which is where the cable feed runs into the house.  I'm considering 2 3-packs of Lumas.  1 to go in the basement (if I have to have it function as my router), 2 on the main floor, 1 upstairs (possibly 2 since I'll have an extra), then I have a garage being fed with a cat6 line about 80 feet behind the house that would get 1 Luma.  Everything would be fed with a cat6 since the house already has wire running to every room.

 

My primary purpose for wanting this is the mesh wireless with the intelligent auto switching and one single SSID.  Right now I have a couple AP's (just cheap routers in AP mode) with different SSID's and it's a pain.

 

I did consider running two long cords as you suggest but all the current cat6 is in the walls and I don't want to open anything up again.

 

I was under the assumption that all bandwidth going to the switch was shared/split between the devices plugged into the switch?

 

On my router I have one out to my main comp, one out to my ps4, and one out to my server (the things I didn't want sharing bandwidth with everything else on the switch), then everything else is sharing the switch.  This is incorrect?

 

I imagine even if everything was plugged into the switch the difference (if any) might be imperceptible.

 

I looked at open-mesh but 3 of the mr1750's (first floor, second floor, garage) is already more than what 6 Luma's would cost (at least if I pre-order).

 

If you're confident a Luma could handle feeding a 24 port switch maybe I have to reconsider.  I would have already bought Eero's if they were a $299 price point for a 3 pack.

Luma will not support Ethernet back haul at launch. They will use the second radio for mesh. I had the same question on a free standing garage:

http://homeservershow.com/forums/index.php?/topic/10447-luma-wifi-security-and-eero/?p=110699

Luma are not WAP, at launch there is nothing to be gained by connecting each one via wired Ethernet.

As to your bandwidth question; if you are talking about Internet bandwidth then everything plugged into any port or connected via WiFi is sharing the Internet bandwidth. How fast is your Internet connection? 

The first Luma acts as a router and a WAP. The Gigabit Ethernet connection from the first Luma to your switch carries Internet to the devices connected to the switch and carries traffic from WiFi connected devices to devices on your switch. Other Luma devices mesh/talk to each other via the second radio in each device.

In your current configuration, the devices connected to your router do not have any priority over the devices on your switch. How many devices are plugged into the 24 port switch? Other than multiple SSID are you having any other network issues?

Link to post
Share on other sites
JROrtiz

...

Kevin it would not surprise me if Luma makes a change to this either before release or after that would allow Luma to be put in "bridge mode" I just want to say I have no inside info on this, Its just a gut feeling as I am sure they now Eero can be setup in "bridge mode".

I also think there will be an about face in this unless Luma is able to come up with something very clever to deal with double NAT. The reason being that there are certain setups out there that simply won't allow the ISP router to be replaced. In those cases, Luma will have to sit behind another router and let it handle DHCP duties. A DMZ would probably solve this but I believe they've taken a stance on that. Unless they provide some sort of solution to these types of scenarios, they'll have some pretty upset customers on their hands, especially with the limited 15-day return window.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...