If you want to be protected then this needs to be enabled (on). There could be devices that have issues to connect but it was not may case... all my devices connected without problems.
Got it.
Doing 90 MBit P2P test download.
Approx. 1.5-3 MB memory free. Seems (not sure) it's significantly less than I had with 27506.
Switched to 33555 today, for the security update.
"undefined" it said. But the fix is simple. Had to write down my settings, load factory defaults, and then put my settings back in.
After that, it works well (so far).
40% free memory, 1% cpu load,
Joined: 23 Sep 2017 Posts: 229 Location: Swindon, UK
Posted: Mon Oct 23, 2017 9:59 Post subject: Re: 33555
danielwritesback wrote:
Switched to 33555 today, for the security update.
"undefined" it said. But the fix is simple. Had to write down my settings, load factory defaults, and then put my settings back in.
After that, it works well (so far).
40% free memory, 1% cpu load,
Just making a backup of settings fixes the undefined bug. No need to wipe settings. _________________ Router Model: Netgear R8000
Firmware: DD-WRT v3.0-r41813 std (12/29/19)
Modem: Super Hub 3.0
ISP: Virgin Media 350/35 Mbps
Never used 33006. Can compare with good old 27506 only, which was fast and reliable for me. The same high wi-fi throughput.
Thanks!!!
Edit:
What happened is that windows update for wpa2 krack had made windows less compatible with the dd-wrt krack patch. Functionality was restored by turning off the redundant dd-wrt krack patch. After all, it is a client issue, not a router issue.
Last edited by danielwritesback on Wed Jul 25, 2018 22:02; edited 5 times in total
So which firmware is best? we need voting poll or something :P Im routing on r31899 without any problem and newer firmwares (like drk mentioned) have more requirements for memory which make router less stable.
Will be newer firmwares still usable? because we hitting HW limits of this device 4/32MB. Official LEDE (not mod) firmware not supporting devices with these parameters :(
Posted: Sun Nov 19, 2017 18:53 Post subject: Make it pretend to be a faster model?
Startup script
Code:
echo 1000 > /proc/sys/net/core/netdev_max_backlog
nvram set et_dispatch_mode=1
echo 30 > /proc/sys/net/ipv4/netfilter/ip_conntrack_udp_timeout
echo 60 > /proc/sys/net/ipv4/netfilter/ip_conntrack_udp_timeout_stream
swconfig dev switch0 set enable_vlan 1
swconfig dev switch0 set apply
The first 4 lines are WAN speedup, for use with fast ISP connections. The 1000 can go as low as 360, if needed. The last 2 lines are a patch to make the 4 port switch work normally with newer versions of DD-WRT.
Did I miss anything?
P.S.
However, I did not find out how to correct the severe under-utilization of the 750MHz CPU design (max is 800MHz) and the DDR400 memory chip as well. It is noticeable that the v9 runs at 550MHz and the v11 runs at 650MHz, with the same CPU. Is the difference from lower voltage (thermal) or is it from product differentiation (marketing)?
hoping someone can help me with this problem, it's getting really frustrating...
lately on my wr841 v9 i've been having issues with wifi - i have wan disabled and am only using this as a wireless access point. it's in my guest room near my front door proving wifi to the front yard and front of the house...i've also added a separate SSID to allow my ring doorbell to connect only to that AP and not have to worry about it trying to bounce around to the other two AP on my main network (and end up dropping the connection because the signal isn't as strong).
randomly, i'll have the AP allow connections but i'll notice my doorbell has gone offline. if i check my phone and see that it is connected to the wr841 when this happens, my internet speed is at a crawl if i can access anything at all (lots of timeouts). whenever this happens a reboot fixes the problem for a while, but it always ends up coming back.
this all started about two months ago (sadly i can't remember what version i was on at the time). over the last few weeks i've gone to 33772 (trying to make sure i have the krack patch installed), this didn't help...same issue. today i installed 33986 hoping that'll help, but i've only had it running for about 20 minutes so far.
now that i think about it, the issues probably started around when i created the second SSID for my doorbell. is there a known issue as far as multiple SSID goes? if not, any ideas where i can look to try to fix this? there doesn't seem to be any rhyme or reason as to when it happens...sometimes i'll go days without issue, this morning my wifi went down after only being up after reboot for a few hours.
Posted: Tue Mar 13, 2018 16:29 Post subject: TL-841ND v9 setup as "wireless switch"?
Hi there,
I have a TL-841ND v9 on ver 34777. Which seems pretty much the same as previous versions I've tested.
Anyways, I need to set one of these up so that any client connecting via wifi would see this router as a dumb switch. I am okay with losing the ability to manage it.
This is for use with an IPTV network where I have a wireless set top box that needs to communicate layer 2 through the router out to the IPTV uplink. I want the ARP from a wifi client to be forwarded straight out the ethernet port to my IPTV uplink so that the IPTV uplink only sees my set top boxes (wired or wireless).
Can this happen? I would definately appreciate any help!
I managed to tune this router to perform well at both "ends", just not all the way from wan to wifi.
I can get 100megabit download on some speedtests, not all but some if I pick a specific server and only when wired.
I can get 100megabit lan to wifi SMB copies
I cannot get 100megabit wan to wifi, max is around 60
I believe this is due to NAT and Wifi requiring each more than 50% of the available cpu to do their jobs at 100megabit.
Anyone gotten it to work better?
My notable settings:
40mhz channel 6
network set to N-Only (NG Mixed had significantly lower speed)
short preamble and short gi
wpa2 aes
spi firewall disabled
SFE Enabled
Also investigate wifi settings like frame-burst and fairness. Possibly, conflict between the dd-wrt krack patch and client OS krack patch, if Both used, may limit speed.
I put that in the startup and restarted, so now I have this there:
echo 1000 > /proc/sys/net/core/netdev_max_backlog
nvram set et_dispatch_mode=1
echo 30 > /proc/sys/net/ipv4/netfilter/ip_conntrack_udp_timeout
echo 60 > /proc/sys/net/ipv4/netfilter/ip_conntrack_udp_timeout_stream
swconfig dev eth0 set enable_vlan 1
swconfig dev eth0 set apply
No change in download speeds, I have SFE enabled, I did more testing this weekend and SFE only gives me about 5% improvement. I think perhaps some of those settings are old and dont change things perhaps on the newer builds. I'm on 35898. I can see that sfe is loaded, but says used by 0?? Is that normal?
I put that in the startup and restarted, so now I have this there:
echo 1000 > /proc/sys/net/core/netdev_max_backlog
nvram set et_dispatch_mode=1
echo 30 > /proc/sys/net/ipv4/netfilter/ip_conntrack_udp_timeout
echo 60 > /proc/sys/net/ipv4/netfilter/ip_conntrack_udp_timeout_stream
swconfig dev eth0 set enable_vlan 1
swconfig dev eth0 set apply
Try cutting that list down to only:
nvram set et_dispatch_mode=1
And, have only 2 total ethernet cords plugged in:
Input from cable modem
Output to gigabit switch
So, cut-through-forwarding, spi off, upnp off, and only 1 client (can be 1 pc or an external switch), are the test conditions where this hardware should meet specs.
If that isn't working, try 33006 for its wifi speed.