You might want to downgrade your version to r22118 and set the settings:
What is the evidence that r22118 is better for wireless settings?
That build is almost 3 years old.
It's not about network settings. It's about linux kernel, modules and CPU optimization. I've been building Linux servers, and dealing with SCO, Solaris, and BSD servers since early 90's. Stability and security is more important than staying up to date. There is no need to use newer kernel and modules in newer DD-WRT revisions on older CPU like the Atheros AR9344. _________________ Linksys 54G v2
Linksys 54G v6
Linksys 54GS v6
Linksys 120N
Linksys Valet-M10 Tomato v132
Linksys Valet-M20 Tomato V132
Netgear WNR3400 Advanced Tomato
Netgear WNR3400 Advanced Tomato
TRENDNet TEW-632BRP DD-WRT r22118
TRENDNet TEW-632BRP DD-WRT r22118
Buffalo G300NH DD-WRT r22118
TPLINK WNDR1043ND DD-WRT r22118
TPLINK WNDR1042ND Stock
TPLINK WNDR841ND r22118
DLINK DIR-835 A1 r22118
DLINK DIR-835 A1 r22118
DLINK DIR-835 A1 r22118
DLINK DIR-501 Stock firmware
DLINK WBR-2310 Stock firmware
Linksys E3000 Shibby Tomato
Linksys E2500 Advanced Tomato
Netis WF-2404 Stock
Netis WF-2404 Stcck
Belkin N600 Extender (Bricked on its own)
[
It's not about network settings. It's about linux kernel, modules and CPU optimization.
It's also about changes to ath0 and ath1 since 2013.
Personaly, I think the change from Ath9 to Ath10 starting with Linux 3.11 when it was released on 2013-09-02 is not for the better. There are more known bugs in Ath10 than in Ath9.
DD-WRT r22118 was compiled from Linux 3.10.2 sources (Linux DD-WRT 3.10.2 #245 Wed Jul 24 05:58:00 CEST 2013), so it still contains Ath9 module, which I think is the reason why it is more stable than DD-WRT revisions (with ath10) ever since. _________________ Linksys 54G v2
Linksys 54G v6
Linksys 54GS v6
Linksys 120N
Linksys Valet-M10 Tomato v132
Linksys Valet-M20 Tomato V132
Netgear WNR3400 Advanced Tomato
Netgear WNR3400 Advanced Tomato
TRENDNet TEW-632BRP DD-WRT r22118
TRENDNet TEW-632BRP DD-WRT r22118
Buffalo G300NH DD-WRT r22118
TPLINK WNDR1043ND DD-WRT r22118
TPLINK WNDR1042ND Stock
TPLINK WNDR841ND r22118
DLINK DIR-835 A1 r22118
DLINK DIR-835 A1 r22118
DLINK DIR-835 A1 r22118
DLINK DIR-501 Stock firmware
DLINK WBR-2310 Stock firmware
Linksys E3000 Shibby Tomato
Linksys E2500 Advanced Tomato
Netis WF-2404 Stock
Netis WF-2404 Stcck
Belkin N600 Extender (Bricked on its own)
Personaly, I think the change from Ath9 to Ath10 starting with Linux 3.11 when it was released on 2013-09-02 is not for the better. There are more known bugs in Ath10 than in Ath9.
DD-WRT r22118 was compiled from Linux 3.10.2 sources (Linux DD-WRT 3.10.2 #245 Wed Jul 24 05:58:00 CEST 2013), so it still contains Ath9 module, which I think is the reason why it is more stable than DD-WRT revisions (with ath10) ever since.
You haven't posted anything to support your assertion that r22118 is a better choice, other than your opinion.
Maybe one of the site gurus will weigh in with some facts, but recommending a build that's almost 3 years old, without any concrete evidence, is irresponsible IMO.
It could open someone up to old bugs that have long since been fixed, and in some cases, security issues.
You haven't posted anything to support your assertion that r22118 is a better choice, other than your opinion.
Maybe one of the site gurus will weigh in with some facts, but recommending a build that's almost 3 years old, without any concrete evidence, is irresponsible IMO.
I have noticed your confrontational attitude in 2 of your postings. Let see, you are a high school or an undergrad kid? You weren't even born in the early 90's, I have already been dealing with Unix while taking grad program.
Since it seems you have a high school level of analytical proficiency, let me open up your mind, I have attached above a screenshot of Wireless status of DD-WRT running on r22118. It shows max connections of TX/RX 300M/300M and 450M/450M. I will add with this posting another screenshot which shows the clients being connected to the router running on r22118 constantly for about 1.5 days without being disconnected. On top of that the rates are maxed up TX/RX 450M/450MB for 5Ghz clients and TX/RX 300M/300M for 2,4 GHz. _________________ Linksys 54G v2
Linksys 54G v6
Linksys 54GS v6
Linksys 120N
Linksys Valet-M10 Tomato v132
Linksys Valet-M20 Tomato V132
Netgear WNR3400 Advanced Tomato
Netgear WNR3400 Advanced Tomato
TRENDNet TEW-632BRP DD-WRT r22118
TRENDNet TEW-632BRP DD-WRT r22118
Buffalo G300NH DD-WRT r22118
TPLINK WNDR1043ND DD-WRT r22118
TPLINK WNDR1042ND Stock
TPLINK WNDR841ND r22118
DLINK DIR-835 A1 r22118
DLINK DIR-835 A1 r22118
DLINK DIR-835 A1 r22118
DLINK DIR-501 Stock firmware
DLINK WBR-2310 Stock firmware
Linksys E3000 Shibby Tomato
Linksys E2500 Advanced Tomato
Netis WF-2404 Stock
Netis WF-2404 Stcck
Belkin N600 Extender (Bricked on its own)
I have noticed your confrontational attitude in 2 of your posts. Let see, you are a high school or an undergrad kid? You weren't even born in the early 90's, I have already been dealing with Unix while taking grad program.
More wrong assertions...fits your pattern.
Interesting that DD-WRT continues to develop solid firmware builds (this router make/model included) without your help. Maybe they know something you don't...
It's OK if you can't provide anything other than anecdotal evidence.
Just stop advising people to use old builds that could possibly jeopardize their functionality and security.