Router: Netgear WNDR3800
Firmware: DD-WRT v24-sp2 (05/31/15) std - build 27143
Kernel: Linux 3.10.79 #2293 Sun May 31 16:43:43 CEST 2015 mips
Status: OK
Reset: Restore to Factory Defaults before and after update from 27096
Errors: running OK for 10 days straight; some rare dropouts on WiFi 2.4G
Notes:
- this report is for test build 27143 http://svn.dd-wrt.com/ticket/3414#comment:106 , which doesn't have the WebGUI timeout bug http://svn.dd-wrt.com/ticket/4141
- the "Failed to stop TX DMA" errors are gone since build 27086 http://svn.dd-wrt.com/ticket/2952 _________________ THERE ARE NO STRANGERS HERE; ONLY FRIENDS YOU HAVEN'T YET MET.
________________________________________________________________________________________________________
DD-WRT CHANGELOG | DEVICES | DD-WRT BUILDS | KONG BUILDS | UNOFFICIAL BUILDS | DD-WRT in VIRTUALBOX
Can a 300mbps wireless router make two 300mbps connections? ie, 1) as a client with public hotspot(WAN) and simultaneously 2) a VAP transmit @ 300mbps(LAN)
Doesn't the above make it a 600mbps router?
Are there any non-atheros routers out there that do it?
Can a 300mbps wireless router make two 300mbps connections? ie, 1) as a client with public hotspot(WAN) and simultaneously 2) a VAP transmit @ 300mbps(LAN)
Doesn't the above make it a 600mbps router?
If the Client side and the VAP work on the same band, then no, it doesn't make it a 600Mbps router. It's 300Mb/s halved over the 2 interfaces.
tatsuya46 wrote:
yes it can its just broken still, idk why its posted there as "fix"
Please stop always bashing the inputs to my changelog.
*Fix means it's "partially fixed". There's a star in front of Fix. I've said this a number of times and you know it very well. _________________ THERE ARE NO STRANGERS HERE; ONLY FRIENDS YOU HAVEN'T YET MET.
________________________________________________________________________________________________________
DD-WRT CHANGELOG | DEVICES | DD-WRT BUILDS | KONG BUILDS | UNOFFICIAL BUILDS | DD-WRT in VIRTUALBOX
Last edited by KrypteX on Sat Jun 13, 2015 6:26; edited 1 time in total
Joined: 03 Jan 2010 Posts: 7568 Location: YWG, Canada
Posted: Sat Jun 13, 2015 6:24 Post subject:
KrypteX wrote:
tatsuya46 wrote:
yes it can its just broken still, idk why its posted there as "fix"
Please stop always bashing the inputs to my changelog.
*Fix means it's "partially fixed". There's a star in front of Fix. I've said this a number of times and you know it very well.
bashing? i hardly commented in this thread or others about it (any questions answered for someone about it isnt bashing)
u said it many times & i know it very well? NOW i know, now it was said. maybe how u say things about something thats possibly or supposed to be fixed should be reworded? its confusing
my post above isnt bashing, stating an answer to someones question & saying "i dont know why something was posted about a issue, appearing that its stating its fixed, when its not" is not bashing _________________ LATEST FIRMWARE(S)
BrainSlayer wrote:
we just do it since we do not like any restrictions enforced by stupid cocaine snorting managers
bashing? i hardly commented in this thread or others about it (any questions answered for someone about it isnt bashing)
u said it many times & i know it very well? NOW i know, now it was said.
What about this ?
http://www.dd-wrt.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?p=965632#965632
I said I updated the input. If you'd look above in the changelog, you'd see how I corrected it. And you didn't say nothing to that, I thought you acknowledged it.
Quote:
maybe how u say things about something thats possibly or supposed to be fixed should be reworded? its confusing
Joined: 03 Jan 2010 Posts: 7568 Location: YWG, Canada
Posted: Sat Jun 13, 2015 6:42 Post subject:
KrypteX wrote:
tatsuya46 wrote:
bashing? i hardly commented in this thread or others about it (any questions answered for someone about it isnt bashing)
u said it many times & i know it very well? NOW i know, now it was said.
What about this ?
http://www.dd-wrt.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?p=965632#965632
I said I updated the input. If you'd look above in the changelog, you'd see how I corrected it. And you didn't say nothing to that, I thought you acknowledged it.
Quote:
maybe how u say things about something thats possibly or supposed to be fixed should be reworded? its confusing
OK. Then how would YOU do it ? Teach me
shouldnt list XYZ issue as "fixed" (even with a *) if u are able to 100% verify its broken, (ie current issues, atheros client+ht40 vap, qos, etc). with this project a lot of the time when something had commits done for it & if brainslayer says its fixed or worksforme, its not (ie ht40 intolerance at first). someone sees "fixed" theyll think its fixed, not attempted to be fixed or partial fix for certain routers then wonder why they still have the issue.
if a issue is certainly fixed for a specific set of hardware ie ar92xx but not others, list it as so. only list fixes as fixes, things like new router support would probably be better listed as an addition or change ie "addition: dir-862L support" instead of "fix: dir-862L support".
and i seen that change, now that u posted it, i just took ur word for it back then, but u just have it listed as others with "*fix", but its not fixed or even altered in the slightest, hw_mode=a/g in ath1 or ath0_hotap.conf. brainslayer said the hw reports that info, but n hw reporting a/g is..a bug. _________________ LATEST FIRMWARE(S)
BrainSlayer wrote:
we just do it since we do not like any restrictions enforced by stupid cocaine snorting managers
Interesting, but I don't understand the context to that "troubleshooting" issue. Is it for a VAP or just generally ? I have no clue.
Also it says "This violates regulatory requirements". What ? That must be a crazy thing to say. _________________ THERE ARE NO STRANGERS HERE; ONLY FRIENDS YOU HAVEN'T YET MET.
________________________________________________________________________________________________________
DD-WRT CHANGELOG | DEVICES | DD-WRT BUILDS | KONG BUILDS | UNOFFICIAL BUILDS | DD-WRT in VIRTUALBOX
Last edited by KrypteX on Sat Jun 13, 2015 6:48; edited 2 times in total
that looks like something else, just for regular single ap mode, some openwrt specific? bug. the atheros client+vap is different, its using ath0 or ath1 in client mode, client bridge, or wds station, then making ath0.1 or ath1.1 vap, the vap is always using ht20 _________________ LATEST FIRMWARE(S)
BrainSlayer wrote:
we just do it since we do not like any restrictions enforced by stupid cocaine snorting managers
only list fixes as fixes, things like new router support would probably be better listed as an addition or change ie "addition: dir-862L support" instead of "fix: dir-862L support".
Now you put words in my mouth. What you say it's simply not true, there's no "fix: dir-862L support" in the changelog. It's "[765-772,786,917] Add: DIR-862L/866L support"
If it's an addition, I put "Add:...". If it's a fix to something, I put "Fix:...". Honestly, what's so difficult to understand ?
Quote:
and i seen that change, now that u posted it, i just took ur word for it back then, but u just have it listed as others with "*fix", but its not fixed or even altered in the slightest
It's a "partial fix", ok ? It's work that has been done on that particular topic, but it's not a final fix. I want to add important "partial fixes" (shortened as *Fix) to the changelog, well, because I want to. It's my choice to do so since I deem it important to document.
You still haven't given me any concrete solution to how to add a "partial fix", other than the method I've been using: *Fix: ...
ie., I connect WAN to a 300mbps public wifi(internet)
Then I connect my laptop to the routers VAT @ 300mbps
Now I start a torrent download and imagine it's a torrent with massive seeds.
My question is, does the torrent download @ ~300mbps or @ ~150mbps
First of all, you'll never get the max interface speed of 300Mb/s even in regular AP mode. You'll get around 160Mb/s out of it, practically.
So Regular AP @300Mb/s connection -> practical 160Mb/s
Repeater (Client+VAP) on the same band -> practical 80 Mb/s (half of it). It's because the radio has to use, on average, half the time on one interface (Client) and the other half on the other interface (VAP).
I was confused about the RX and TX bandwidth rails of the router
I don't know the software manages these rails but if it maxes out @300(theoretically) then a client mode with 150 each for RX and TX makes sense.
I maybe entirely wrong also.
Yes you are, because the Client side connects @300Mb/s (HT40, 2 streams) to the Host AP. It's only the VAP that broadcasts @144Mb/s (HT20, 2 streams)), due to the bug, instead of @300Mb/s (HT40, 2 streams) as it should do. _________________ THERE ARE NO STRANGERS HERE; ONLY FRIENDS YOU HAVEN'T YET MET.
________________________________________________________________________________________________________
DD-WRT CHANGELOG | DEVICES | DD-WRT BUILDS | KONG BUILDS | UNOFFICIAL BUILDS | DD-WRT in VIRTUALBOX
