Posted: Mon Feb 13, 2012 1:31 Post subject: DD-WRT vs. Tomato
We are a small WISP startup about to go online in a few weeks. We will be providing our customers with a wireless router, probably a mass-market model that is available refurbished for low cost. (We've tentatively chosen the Linksys WRT-160n.) We want to use custom firmware both for security, so we can lock the routers down so people can't use the master reset switch, and for enhanced QoS. We will be reselling VOIP and we want people to have clear phone calls so QoS is important.
We've tested both Tomato and DD-WRT and are having a little trouble deciding. The main criteria are QoS performance and future viability of the platform. We don't want to have to change firmware a few years down the road when we decide to change routers.
We have the following concerns about DD-WRT:
1. Community development process. How feasible is it for a community member to pull source code, fix a bug or add a feature, and then have their fix integrated in the main trunk of the application so all versions can share it? This appears to me to be very broken, as evidenced by the fact that the most recent recommended version is two and a half years old! (http://www.dd-wrt.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=52043). Can we expect dd-wrt to keep up with newer routers?
Another red flag is the numerous assertions in the forums (and even the Wiki) that the router database is broken. Most newcomers would go right to the database to assumedly find the right version for their router. So if it's broken, why doesn't it get fixed or at least taken offline?
2. Usefulness of QoS. Tomato has much more sophisticated support for QoS, especially recent builds. But even for simple use, I've seen a number of allegations that DD-WRT QoS simply doesn't work. Is this simply a matter of people not getting the settings right or does it really not work?
Joined: 31 Jul 2009 Posts: 492 Location: Toronto, ON, CA
Posted: Mon Feb 13, 2012 5:25 Post subject: Re: DD-WRT vs. Tomato
chetstone wrote:
We are a small WISP startup about to go online in a few weeks. We will be providing our customers with a wireless router, probably a mass-market model that is available refurbished for low cost. (We've tentatively chosen the Linksys WRT-160n.) We want to use custom firmware both for security, so we can lock the routers down so people can't use the master reset switch, and for enhanced QoS. We will be reselling VOIP and we want people to have clear phone calls so QoS is important.
We've tested both Tomato and DD-WRT and are having a little trouble deciding. The main criteria are QoS performance and future viability of the platform. We don't want to have to change firmware a few years down the road when we decide to change routers.
We have the following concerns about DD-WRT:
1. Community development process. How feasible is it for a community member to pull source code, fix a bug or add a feature, and then have their fix integrated in the main trunk of the application so all versions can share it? This appears to me to be very broken, as evidenced by the fact that the most recent recommended version is two and a half years old! (http://www.dd-wrt.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=52043). Can we expect dd-wrt to keep up with newer routers?
Another red flag is the numerous assertions in the forums (and even the Wiki) that the router database is broken. Most newcomers would go right to the database to assumedly find the right version for their router. So if it's broken, why doesn't it get fixed or at least taken offline?
2. Usefulness of QoS. Tomato has much more sophisticated support for QoS, especially recent builds. But even for simple use, I've seen a number of allegations that DD-WRT QoS simply doesn't work. Is this simply a matter of people not getting the settings right or does it really not work?
Thanks for any clarifications you can offer.
DD-Wrt is no longer community driven as it once was and bug fixes and obvious enhancements brought to developers attention takes a long time to implement if at all. If you find a obvious bug and point it out to the devs, depending on the dev that sees the bug report, they will either acknowledge it, fix it or completely ignore it.
As for QoS, it is very hit and miss and broken is most builds. Tomato QoS is also has more features and better statistics tracking.
The downfall of Tomato is it does not have all the advanced features as DD-WRT and not all newer routers are supported. _________________ Asus RT-N16 [Build King Kong 18050M NEWD-2 K2.6 + Optware + My Page]
changes don't do anyone any good unless you guys compile & post the builds
I tested Kong's Build 18050 and VLAN was broken. The GUI VLAN would not have Internet Access with build 18050. Using Kong's Build 18010 has worling VLAN with broken QoS. VLAN is more important to me but it would nice if both working on one build on the 18XXX series. _________________ Home Network on Telus 1Gb PureFibre - 10GbE Copper Backbone
2x R7800 - Gateway & WiFi & 3xWireGuard - DDWRT r53562 Std k4.9
Off Site 1
R7000 - Gateway & WiFi & WireGuard - DDWRT r54517 Std
E3000 - Station Bridge - DDWRT r49626 Mega K4.4
Off Site 2
R7000 - Gateway & WiFi - DDWRT r54517 Std
E2000 - Wired ISP IPTV PVR Blocker - DDWRT r35531