FortiAP devices are thin wireless access points (AP) supporting the latest Wi-Fi technologies (multi-user MIMO 802.11ac Wave 1 and Wave 2, 4x4), as well as 802.11n, 802.11AX , and the demand for plug and play deployment.
This article describes the main differences between Ethernet and Mesh uplinks, providing guidance on when to use each.
Scope
FortiAP units managed by FortiGate Wireless Controller or FortiLAN Cloud.
FortiAP firmware versions supporting Mesh mode (v6.x, v7.x, and later).
Applies to both indoor and outdoor wireless deployments.
Solution
In Fortinet wireless deployments, FortiAPs ('FAPs') can operate with different uplink modes to connect to the FortiGate or wireless controller. Two of the most common are Ethernet uplink and Mesh uplink.
A common misconception is that Mesh uplink is inherently 'better' or 'more modern' than Ethernet uplink. This is not the case; each mode is designed for different deployment scenarios. Using Mesh uplink, where Ethernet cabling is already available, can introduce unnecessary overhead and performance limitations.
Ethernet Uplink (Recommended when cabling is available).
Connection: FortiAP is connected to the FortiGate or FortiSwitch via Ethernet cable.
Performance: Offers the highest throughput and lowest latency. Full-wired backhaul is available for client traffic.
Reliability: Less prone to interference or environmental factors, since the uplink is wired.
Use Case: Preferred in enterprise networks, offices, schools, and any environment where structured cabling exists.
Mesh Uplink.
Connection: FortiAP connects wirelessly to a 'Root AP' (which has an Ethernet uplink). Client traffic and management traffic share the same wireless medium.
Performance: Throughput is reduced because airtime is shared between backhaul and client access. Latency may increase compared to an Ethernet uplink.
Reliability: Subject to wireless interference, channel congestion, and distance limitations between APs.
Use Case: Ideal for environments where Ethernet cabling is not feasible, such as outdoor areas, temporary installations, or historical buildings where cabling is restricted.
Key Comparison.
Feature
Ethernet Uplink
Mesh Uplink
Medium
Wired (Ethernet)
Wireless
Throughput
Full (no overhead)
Reduced (shared medium)
Latency
Very low
Higher (due to wireless hops)
Stability
High (independent of RF conditions)
Variable (depends on RF environment)
Best Use Case
Permanent, wired deployments
Cabling not possible or temporary use
Conclusion:
If Ethernet cabling is available, always use Ethernet uplink for maximum performance and stability.
Mesh uplink should only be used as a secondary option when wired connectivity is not possible.
