[System] You are a professional Wi-Fi router support assistant; I will provide forum posts as background material, and you should learn from them while remaining aware that forum content may be incomplete, outdated, or incorrect — when uncertain, explicitly note that you are uncertain and refer the user to official documentation or other authoritative sources for verification.

[User]
Title: Nothing shows in putty when trying to uboot Orbi

Hi, I do not see anything in the prompt for putty after i power on my router (orbi rbr40) and connect to my laptop via a usb to ttl adapter. I don't see any errors show when i click 'open' on putty - I saw an error once when i inputted the incorrect COM port number. Here's my settings and connection setup:

putty usb ttl setup

adapter I am using: https://a.co/d/bN1b88v

I am trying this because I am sure that my rbr40 is bricked. I've tried several resetting methods but the top light eventually changes to magenta and when I try going into the routers page I get error 404 (I am able to ping it and get an IP). I've tried flashing stockfirmwares via TFTP using CMD/TFTPD/NMRPkeeps but the router never reboots on its own it stays flashing white after 30+ minutes although the transfer says successful.

[Assistant]
UPDATE:
I confirmed the ttl to usb wasn't defective by running putty and testing each cable by connecting one end of the cable in the rx slot of the adapter and the other in the tx slot - when you open the putty terminal and type, your adapter is working if you can see what you type. I tested each cable that my adapter included.

My new setup worked after swapping the cables in the tx and rx slots of the adapter - and BOOM, a bunch of jibberish started showing.

here's a pic of new setup:


[System] You are a professional Wi-Fi router support assistant; I will provide forum posts as background material, and you should learn from them while remaining aware that forum content may be incomplete, outdated, or incorrect — when uncertain, explicitly note that you are uncertain and refer the user to official documentation or other authoritative sources for verification.

[User]
Title: RT-AX86U Unable to port-forward port 80 (others working)

On my Asus RT-AX86U, port-forwarding for port 80 does not work. All other ports work fine, it is just port 80 that has an issue...
Anyone know what can help?
I have tried disabling http for router web-ui. Only have HTTPS on 8443 now.
I have tried disabling Asus router DDNS lets encrypt (which works btw, so i guess that means my ISP has not blocked port 80).
I have tried disabling Asus router DDNS.
I have tried disabling Asus router Firewall.
It doesnt look like I have AiCloud enabled.

I dont know what else to do? Where else to look?
I have a web-server running on port 80 and 443 on my Synology NAS.
Both ports port-forwarded in Asus.
Inside my network both ports work fine. Outside my network only 443 works.
I need port 80 working in order to set up lets encrypt on my custom domain in synology...

Anyone know what might be going wrong?

[Assistant]
you need to setup local port too.

if this will not help please try, for testing, setup DMZ.

And what does this actually mean?
"When your network's firewall is disabled and you set 80 as the HTTP server's port range for your WAN setup, then your http server/web server would be in conflict with RT-AX86U's web user interface."
I cannot make any sense of it...

erkdahl said:
And what does this actually mean?
"When your network's firewall is disabled and you set 80 as the HTTP server's port range for your WAN setup, then your http server/web server would be in conflict with RT-AX86U's web user interface."
I cannot make any sense of it...

That shouldn't apply to you. The router succeeding at lets encrypt doesn't necessarily mean your ISP isn't blocking the port. Can you access using your IP on port 80, eliminating all DNS and certificate stuff?


[System] You are a professional Wi-Fi router support assistant; I will provide forum posts as background material, and you should learn from them while remaining aware that forum content may be incomplete, outdated, or incorrect — when uncertain, explicitly note that you are uncertain and refer the user to official documentation or other authoritative sources for verification.

[User]
Title: Not getting full speed with Asus AX11000

Hi There.

I have 1G internet and im not getting the full speed on my AX11000. Im getting half and some days 700.

Im running a CAT 6A cable from the basement to my Master bedroom and then to the switch where i have 2.5G asus mesh everywhere but if the master cant get 1G im sure the others wont.

The funny thing is that if i connect an ethernet cable to the modem i dont have problems to get the full speed, i tried to change the cable from 6 to 6a but that didnt help, i thought that maybe i screwed the past cable but nope.

Does anyone have a suggestion?

Yes, i do have a cable tester cheap but tester and it says that everything is fine.

[Assistant]
Need more information.

What are your actual ISP speeds (up/down)? How have you connected everything? Be specific. More details are better than less.

What size is the area you're covering? What type of construction are the walls/floors? How far are you from the router and with what device(s) are you testing with? Wired, or wireless testing?

What firmware are you running on the router?

What have you tried on the router to improve things (i.e. have you been toggling options on/off past their defaults)?

What additional information can you provide about your (complete) network?

My actual ISP is Mexican so I don’t think you’ll find much info about it. It’s called Totalplay. I have 1g down 200mb down.

The main node and the satellites are connected by Ethernet. I have 6 of them all around the house, all of them ASUS.

I’m doing the tests on a new Apple TV hardwired to the brain that is an AX11000. The gamer router.

Someone who works at the ISP told me that the ONT only guarantees the speed 5 meters. I don’t know if I should believe him because it’s cable. Don’t see the reason why should only be 5 meters.


[System] You are a professional Wi-Fi router support assistant; I will provide forum posts as background material, and you should learn from them while remaining aware that forum content may be incomplete, outdated, or incorrect — when uncertain, explicitly note that you are uncertain and refer the user to official documentation or other authoritative sources for verification.

[User]
Title: [RT-AX88U] WAN Lease time expires

Hi.
I'm facing a very irritating issue. My WAN Lease time continuously expires. The interesting thing is that even if I set Static IP - WAN loses IP and switches into the Cold-Standby.

My Network structure:
- Router: RT-AX88U.
- WAN: Bitdefender Box 2. Static IP for the Router.
- Ethernet WAN: 5G Modem. Static IP for the Router.

WAN Settings and Syslog attached.
I tried changing all WAN Settings - no results. WAN keeps losing IP.

I will be grateful for any advice on how it may be fixed on the stock firmware.
Thanks!

[Assistant]
A DHCP lease duration is dictated by the DHCP server, not the DHCP client.

In your case the device at 192.168.0.1 is issuing a lease of 43200 seconds and the device at 192.168.8.1 is issuing a lease of 86400 seconds.

ColinTaylor said:
A DHCP lease duration is dictated by the DHCP server, not the DHCP client.

In your case the device at 192.168.0.1 is issuing a lease of 43200 seconds and the device at 192.168.8.1 is issuing a lease of 86400 seconds.
That's obvious. But for some reason my router loses IP. Even if it is set to static on both "Server" and "Client".
Rebooting of the "Server" doesn't help.
From this I'm making an assumption that it's kinda bug in the AX88 FW or a conflicting setting elsewhere.

Edited. My reserve line (192.168.8.1) is working perfectly. The main channel (192.168.0.1) loses IP. Only WAN refresh helps.


[System] You are a professional Wi-Fi router support assistant; I will provide forum posts as background material, and you should learn from them while remaining aware that forum content may be incomplete, outdated, or incorrect — when uncertain, explicitly note that you are uncertain and refer the user to official documentation or other authoritative sources for verification.

[User]
Title: ASUS RT-AC68U different speeds from different tests

I purchased 500mbps plan (Spectrum)
I am wire connected using PC
When I run speedtest.net from browser it shows ~575mbps:
When I run "Internet Speed" from Adaptive QoS (not using) it shows ~183mbps
When I run spdMerlin it shows ~300mbps
see attached

Why are they different download speeds (upload speed is about the same) and which is correct? Why when I run the test through router (browser is running through router too) do I get lower download speeds?

[Assistant]
This is a limitation of the RT-AC68U (and similar models). The built-in speed test is restricted by the router's weak CPU and is therefore not accurate. The correct result would be from an ethernet connected LAN PC.

ColinTaylor said:
This is a limitation of the RT-AC68U (and similar models). The built-in speed test is restricted by the router's weak CPU and is therefore not accurate. The correct result would be from an ethernet connected LAN PC.

Ok great thanks. That's is what I found out in another forum but wanted to confirm. Do you know if the ASUS RT-AX88U Pro (AX6000) (2.0ghz processor) would perform better (500mbps)? Is there a way to tell which router can handle the throughput? Seems like router (RT-AC68U) is limiting potential speed from ISP. I just checked my wired PC and it's only getting 200-300mbps with 2gpbs NIC. I guess router limits that as well. What's the point of getting 500mbps ISP connection if router limits? Spectrum does offer AX router (Spectrum SAXV1V1S WiFi 6 Router) for $5 per month but reviews are awful. But maybe that would allow 500mpbs throughput?

The RT-AC68U can achieve >900 Mbps throughput in certain configurations. Your own test showed 579Mps. When I used my RT-AC68U I could max out my 660Mbps ISP connection. The problem comes when you enable certain features that disable hardware acceleration (e.g. QoS) or do packet inspection, like AiProtection.

If you want to enable those features without reducing the throughput below 500Mbps you'll need one of the current ax-class of routers. So that's something like the RT-AX68U/86S/86U, GT-AX6000, etc. Raw CPU speed isn't so much of a factor on those models because they use a different hardware platform to achieve their throughput. Where CPU speed would still be a factor is if you were using the router's built-in VPN.


[System] You are a professional Wi-Fi router support assistant; I will provide forum posts as background material, and you should learn from them while remaining aware that forum content may be incomplete, outdated, or incorrect — when uncertain, explicitly note that you are uncertain and refer the user to official documentation or other authoritative sources for verification.

[User]
Title: Upnp enabled by default

I’ve sort of asked this question elsewhere but…
I’ve just updated to the latest firmware as of today.
Why is upnp enabled by default in Merlin ?

[Assistant]
gotenks121 said:
Why is upnp enabled by default in Merlin ?
Because it's the same as stock firmware and how most people would want it set. Merlin's firmware pretty much keeps the same default settings as stock unless there's a specific reason not to.


[System] You are a professional Wi-Fi router support assistant; I will provide forum posts as background material, and you should learn from them while remaining aware that forum content may be incomplete, outdated, or incorrect — when uncertain, explicitly note that you are uncertain and refer the user to official documentation or other authoritative sources for verification.

[User]
Title: asus rt-ax86u pro slow speed after updating to merlin

hi
i have just bough this router,
i ran speed test just before updating to merlin and i was getting 800-900mb speeds.
after updating to merlin - no changes made apart from updating to merlin, im getting speed of 100-200 max.
any help would be appreciated.

[Assistant]
This is a common diagnostic question, but did you factory reset after flashing Merlin's firmware? Which version?

1. how shall I factory reset Merlin?
2. Latest firmware as of today

Ps why would I need to factory reset. The router is brand new. Opened today

Also. Is this a reset from within the firmware or do I have to press the button on the back of the router and a 30/30/30 as with ddwrt?


[System] You are a professional Wi-Fi router support assistant; I will provide forum posts as background material, and you should learn from them while remaining aware that forum content may be incomplete, outdated, or incorrect — when uncertain, explicitly note that you are uncertain and refer the user to official documentation or other authoritative sources for verification.

[User]
Title: Asus AX88U (388.2.2) vpn not turning on

Hi Guys
The VPN on my ax88u router has for some reason stopped working when manually trying to turn Client 1 on after connecting to router via Firefox browser the 'Error - Authertication failure appears' . I have checked the authertication details and they are correct as are the Nord vpn dns servers 1 and 2. The nord login details are correct as they allow access to their webpage. I have also uploaded a new udp server file to the router but no change. Would anyone have any suggestions please why this might be happening.

[Assistant]
See this post: https://www.snbforums.com/threads/a...available-for-select-models.84524/post-853483

You need to do a "Manual Setup" in your NordVPN account settings.

That worked great Colin thanks for that now I have to get it working on my samsung s23 Far Commander app which doesn't seem to want to work.


[System] You are a professional Wi-Fi router support assistant; I will provide forum posts as background material, and you should learn from them while remaining aware that forum content may be incomplete, outdated, or incorrect — when uncertain, explicitly note that you are uncertain and refer the user to official documentation or other authoritative sources for verification.

[User]
Title: Port forward to public ip

I have a Asus GT-AX6000 router with asuswrt-merlin frimware
The router WAN has a public static IP (x.x.x.x) via ISP (PPPOE)
My VPS has a public static IP too
(y.y.y.y) (outside of my local network)
The VPS has a webserver and it's running on port 80 (http://y.y.y.y:80)
I want to access the web page on my VPS via my router address (http://x.x.x.x:80)
How can I do this ??
(In most cases people asked for Public to Private address port forward but I want Public to Public)

[Assistant]
ArashT said:
I have a Asus GT-AX6000 router with asuswrt-merlin frimware
The router WAN has a public static IP (x.x.x.x) via ISP (PPPOE)
My VPS has a public static IP too
(y.y.y.y) (outside of my local network)
The VPS has a webserver and it's running on port 80 (http://y.y.y.y:80)
I want to access the web page on my VPS via my router address (http://x.x.x.x:80)
How can I do this ??
(In most cases people asked for Public to Private address port forward but I want Public to Public)
Click to expand...

Are the two static IPS in the same subnet? If so there is no port forwarding, it doesn't even hit the Asus, and that webserver is exposed to the internet with no protection.

drinkingbird said:
Are the two static IPS in the same subnet? If so there is no port forwarding, it doesn't even hit the Asus, and that webserver is exposed to the internet with no protection.
No bro
They are on completely different network

Can I ask why you would want to do this? I could understand if you were accessing the VPS by your router's DDNS name, but not if you're using IP addresses. Why not just use the IP address of the VPS, or setup a DDNS that points to the VPS?


[System] You are a professional Wi-Fi router support assistant; I will provide forum posts as background material, and you should learn from them while remaining aware that forum content may be incomplete, outdated, or incorrect — when uncertain, explicitly note that you are uncertain and refer the user to official documentation or other authoritative sources for verification.

[User]
Title: Set static IP and hostname for hosts

Hi,

Using LAN - DHCP-server I wanted to manually assign IP 192.168.x.x to printer device1 so that I can then ping it via hostname >> ping device1 instead of ping 192.168.x.x
How can I do that as adding "Host Name (Optional)" device1 does not work or I miss something?

Regards,

[Assistant]
It should work. There's no "trick" to it. But your client does need to be using the router as it's DNS server and not some other server (like 8.8.8.8).

1) clients are using router's DNS
2) it doesnt work:

3) any hints?

You don't need to hide private IP addresses (or MAC addresses) it just make things more difficult to diagnose.

Is this printer connected to main LAN's Wi-Fi or is it connected to a guest Wi-Fi network?

What output do you get from from nslookup drukarka_wifi ?


[System] You are a professional Wi-Fi router support assistant; I will provide forum posts as background material, and you should learn from them while remaining aware that forum content may be incomplete, outdated, or incorrect — when uncertain, explicitly note that you are uncertain and refer the user to official documentation or other authoritative sources for verification.

[User]
Title: Pfsense with newer CPUs

I wonder if I use a gen 6 Intel I3-6100T CPU vs a gen 4 i3-4130 will I notice a difference in performance? Is the instruction set different enough that it will make a difference? I am getting ready to try it. I want to see if encryption works better or anything else. I thought I had a i3-4130T cpu but I had a i3-4130 cpu which is 57 watts. The i3-6100T will be 35 watts and is a newer gen 6 cpu.

What is the difference between AES-NI based acceleration and AES-NI BSD crypto device in pfsense? Is one hardware and one software?

[Assistant]
Both are HW for AES support... BSD is fine with either.

I suppose it's more the support logic around the CPU - PCIe bamdwidth, etc...

IIRC - there's a bit of IPC uplift on the 6th Gen (Skylake) compared to the 4th Gen (Haswell), but for running PFSense, it won't really matter, IMHO...

While the power consumption will be greater with the 4130 at maximum load, at idle loads, they will be very similar.

As noted, the performance will be effectively the same.

L&LD said:
While the power consumption will be greater with the 4130 at maximum load, at idle loads, they will be very similar.

As noted, the performance will be effectively the same.

That was my thoughts as well - pfsense is fairly efficient in stock form without some of the add-ons (snort IDS can up the load for example) - watch the CPU loads, and for the most part, the CPU is not loaded very hard at all..


[System] You are a professional Wi-Fi router support assistant; I will provide forum posts as background material, and you should learn from them while remaining aware that forum content may be incomplete, outdated, or incorrect — when uncertain, explicitly note that you are uncertain and refer the user to official documentation or other authoritative sources for verification.

[User]
Title: Asus RT-AX88U (Merlin 388.2.2) how to scheduled reboot??!

Hello.

Is there a way to automatically reboot my router?
I can not find anything in the GUI..

Or maybe someone could explay where to store the script (and what coding lines I need...).

Asus RT-AX88U with Merlin 388.2.2

Thank U

[Assistant]
AHH...
Just found it in the Administration Section...

Sorry for that

[Wireless Router]How to set up an ASUS router to automatically restart at specific times | Official Support | ASUS Global
Scheduled tasks (cron jobs)
Third party firmware for Asus routers (newer codebase) - RMerl/asuswrt-merlin.ng
github.com

Why do you need to reboot the router indefinitely?

If you're using this as a workaround, you shouldn't. Find the core issue and fix that instead.

If you're doing this as a 'preventative' measure, don't. There is no good reason to do so. And may even be harmful to the equipment too (vs. just leaving it on).


[System] You are a professional Wi-Fi router support assistant; I will provide forum posts as background material, and you should learn from them while remaining aware that forum content may be incomplete, outdated, or incorrect — when uncertain, explicitly note that you are uncertain and refer the user to official documentation or other authoritative sources for verification.

[User]
Title: Asus Merlin Router / OpenVPN client / Port forwards how?

Hello

I am struggling to setup a port forward to my IP security camera, so I can view it in TinyCam Pro app on my phone when out the house etc.

I have a Torguard Open VPN client running on my router and everything is behind that VPN tunnel.

I don't know how to do NAT where the external port number is different to the actual internal port number ?

For example I wanted the external port to be 8098 and the camera's internal port for the rtsp stream is 554.

I am using a nat-start file and I tried adding this and rebooting the router, but I still cannot connect to the camera.

iptables -I FORWARD 8 -i tun11 -p tcp -d 192.168.1.14 --dport 8098 -j ACCEPT
iptables -t nat -I PREROUTING 8 -i tun11 -p tcp --dport 554 -j DNAT --to-destination 192.168.1.14

192.168.1.14 being the IP camera.

I also on the Torguard client area in Port Management added tcp:8098.

However on a port checker site like this one, it says port 8098 is closed for some reason.

I have used the nat-start file before for my Emby Media Server and that works fine, however the difference there, is that the external port number and the internal port number are the same.

Any tips?

Thanks

[Assistant]
cw-kid said:
iptables -I FORWARD 8 -i tun11 -p tcp -d 192.168.1.14 --dport 8098 -j ACCEPT
iptables -t nat -I PREROUTING 8 -i tun11 -p tcp --dport 554 -j DNAT --to-destination 192.168.1.14

This is the answer and its now working.

cw-kid said:
iptables -I FORWARD 8 -i tun11 -p tcp -d 192.168.1.14 --dport 8098 -j ACCEPT
iptables -t nat -I PREROUTING 8 -i tun11 -p tcp --dport 8098 -j DNAT --to-destination 192.168.1.14:554


[System] You are a professional Wi-Fi router support assistant; I will provide forum posts as background material, and you should learn from them while remaining aware that forum content may be incomplete, outdated, or incorrect — when uncertain, explicitly note that you are uncertain and refer the user to official documentation or other authoritative sources for verification.

[User]
Title: Alternative to pfsense/Opnsense

Was not sure where to exactly post this but lately I have been thinking of an alternative firewall router like OS alternative to pfsense and Opnsense. Now, I am not looking for the OMG comments of why I would be looking to do that, as there are some reasons, which I will explain in a moment. I am looking for some good suggestions and think this has potential to be educational to pros and newbies alike.

The reason for looking to possiblely switch, was brought on by hardware scaling issues and possible incompatibilities with the cable modem I ran into. I previously had Gigabyte G41M-USB3/Intel Core2 Q6600 2.4Ghz quad core CPU/board combo with 4GB DDR3 memory. I have since upgraded the hardware to an Asus B550M Tuf WiFi Plus with Ryzen 1700 3.0Ghz Base/3.7Ghz Boost 8C/16T CPU and 16GB DDR4-3200MHz running at 2667Mhz (Native memory clock of the Ryzen 1700). I moved over the 240G SATA SSD, Intel I350-T4 Quad 1G NIC, and a Dual Realtek 8125 2.5G NIC over.

The problem I was experiencing prior and after seems to be with the cable modem syncing up with Opnsense and prior Pfsense where I would get loss packets constantly and a reset of both the firewall and modem would usually do the trick for the most part, but not always guaranteed. Also recently when synced and I try a speed test, either during sustained speeds or once it begins the upload speed test, I would see packet loss both on IP4 and IP6 hit as high as 8-10+ % on the WAN. Also the WAN would get errors on occasion not too high but I did see as many as 28 in a 24-48hr span and every so often I might loose access to all Lans directly connected to the firewall causing a hard reboot to fix the issue. I have a CM1200 Netgear modem and plan on eventually upgrading to one with a single 2.5G port but at the moment trying to nip this issue in the butt.

In the meantime I have tested out Ipfire built on Linux, as it seems to for one scale with the multicore CPU I have and supports newer hardware much quicker, and 2, it looks like my issues have been resolved with the system remaining up and stable, a eat with a few less features but a more straight forward and easy approach and it scaled with my upgraded hardware. I have also thought about OpenWRT as it is also based on Linux Kernel and takes better advantage of the multicore CPU and architecture including the Realtek NICs (3x 2.5G including the onboard one). Ipfire seems to work well for a home network.

I really liked the features that pfsense/Opnsense offer as far as subnets and scale with multiple NICs, however I am not a fan of instability and scalability teething problems just add to it. Is there any free alternatives based on Linux that would be great for network security and scability? Or anyone else experience similar issues and figured out how to fix this? I don't think I overlooked anything but not ruling out possibilities or alternatives.

[Assistant]
The instability is not coming from pfSense/OPNsense software. It's somewhere else. You may try different software, but don't be surprised if you encounter the same compatibility issues between the same hardware used.

Tech9 said:
The instability is not coming from pfSense/OPNsense software. It's somewhere else. You may try different software, but don't be surprised if you encounter the same compatibility issues between the same hardware used.
Actually, after I posted this, I went back to the drawing board troubleshooting. I believe it may have been Opnsense as the drivers seemed to of been buggy and problematic, especially on the latest release. I had not used Pfsense since the early 2.5 release and decided to give it a 2nd go around. Behold, and once installed and put back in the rack with a modem reboot, everything started to come up and since configuring it, it is running nicely. I ran speed tests to saturate the WAN connection as that was where my issues were, and not a single sign of a loss packet or errors on that connection, which is where all this began escalating with.

I have the WAN now connected to the onboard Realtek RTL8125B, as I do eventually plan to upgrade the cable modem to a new model with a 2.5G jack on it as well. The rest of the connections are going through the Intel I350-T4 with 1 port connected to a dedicated L3 Managed switch and another connected to my main system. I also have a 2.5G RTL8125B port connected to the 2.5G Port of an Asus GT-AX11000 in AP AiMesh mode. All now working flawlessly and on separate subnets again.

Thanks for reading. I just could not figure it out at the beginning and tried IPFire but had not attempted Pfsense again since switching to Opnsense. I should of probably realized rapid features and updates is not always a good thing.

Oh, and also found out Pfsense is more multicore/multithreaded along with most app packages now, but there are still a few that are single threaded. That was another concern of mine as when I was searching, I saw the Linux Kernal is better with newer hardware and multithreading, but further searching showed BSD could be a tad more stable and better suited for enterprises on a large scale...The things you find out when searching for a solution to a problem....


[System] You are a professional Wi-Fi router support assistant; I will provide forum posts as background material, and you should learn from them while remaining aware that forum content may be incomplete, outdated, or incorrect — when uncertain, explicitly note that you are uncertain and refer the user to official documentation or other authoritative sources for verification.

[User]
Title: A very strange problem with GT-AX6000 and QNAP QSW-1105-5T switch

Hi guys. I got a new Asus ROG Rapture GT-AX6000 router. My network is the following:

GT-AX6000:
WAN: 1Gb/s download / 100Mb/s upload
eth2: Old NAS (1Gb/s)
eth5: Unmanaged QNAP QSW-1105-5T switch (2.5Gb/s)

QNAP QSW-1105-5T:
eth1: GT-AX6000 (2.5Gb/s)
eth2: New NAS (2.5Gb/s)
eth3: My PC (2.5Gb/s)

I noticed, that I can't get the full speed of 2.5Gb/s on My PC when I'm copying files from the Old NAS, New NAS and doing a speedtest at the same time. It maxes at ~1.6Gb/s, and either slows down the transfer of one of the NASes, or doesn't give the full speed on speedtest.
After trying dozens of different things, I noticed that the problem starts when I power cycle the QNAP QSW-1105-5T switch (unplug / plug the power). Then, data transfer from the New NAS to My PC goes by the GT-AX6000 router, instead of directly from the Switch.
Router restarts, PC restarts, multiple switch restarts, or executing ethctl eth5 phy-power down in Router SSH doesn't fix this issue.

I only managed to fix it by rebooting the New NAS. So after I reboot the new NAS, I am getting the full speed of 2.5Gb/s on my PC. Unplugging the New NAS ethernet for 1 minute doesn't fix this issue - only the full reboot.
Then, after the switch power cycle, after some GT-AX6000 reboot, or after some time - the bug starts occurring again, and the transfer from NAS 2 always goes by the router instead of Switch -> PC.

This was not happening on my old (bad) router: Xiaomi AX6000 with 2.5Gb/s LAN port.
I'm really confused and I don't know how to test it. Is it possible that it's some bug in the firmware? I'm using the newest Merlin: 388.2_2_rog.

I would very appreciate any help.

[Assistant]
Welcome to the forums @Moan.

Put the Old NAS on the QNAP QSW-1105-5T switch instead of on the router.

L&LD said:
Welcome to the forums @Moan.

Put the Old NAS on the QNAP QSW-1105-5T switch instead of on the router.

Thank you for the answer, but it's not a solution. I use two more ports of the QNAP switch for other devices. Since the old NAS is only 1Gb/s it would be a slot waste, and such an expensive router like GT-AX6000 should theoretically route from it with no issues. Putting the old NAS to the QNAP switch could workaround the speed issues, only in this rare scenario when I would be copying files from both NAS devices at the same time, but I still wouldn't be able to copy from the new NAS and download something from Internet with the full 1Gb/s speed at the same time.

Anyway, I found a workaround for this issue in my new NAS. The new NAS is a self-built Odroid device with an external USB3.0 2.5Gb ethernet. I noticed, that I can workaround this issue by re-building the realtek-r8152 drivers. Since ip link set eth1 down; sleep 5; ip link set eth1 up and other adapter restart commands didn't work, I noticed that when the realtek-r8152 drivers are being reinstalled, it unbinds the USB device. After hours of testing, I came up with a solution of monitoring the adapter status, and restarting it when the link is down:

Bash:
#!/bin/bash
LOOP_SLEEP_TIME=10
PRIMARY_INTERFACE="eth1"

b_ScheduledUSBReset=false
while true
do
    upSeconds="$(cat /proc/uptime | grep -o '^[0-9]\+')"
    #Reset USB device on disconnect to fix switch problems:
    ETH1UP=$(cat /sys/class/net/$PRIMARY_INTERFACE/operstate)
    if [ $ETH1UP == "up" ]; then
        if [ "$b_ScheduledUSBReset" = true ]; then
            b_ScheduledUSBReset=false
            echo "$PRIMARY_INTERFACE reconnected. Resetting the USB device to fix 2.5G switch routing...";
            USB_Device=$(ls /sys/class/net/eth1/device/driver | head -n 1)
            Module=$(readlink -f /sys/bus/usb/devices/$USB_Device/driver/module)
            Final_Link=$Module/drivers/usb:r8152
            echo $USB_Device > $Final_Link/unbind; sleep 5; echo $USB_Device > $Final_Link/bind
        fi

    else
    if [ $ETH1UP == "down" ]; then
            if [ "${upSeconds}" -gt "120" ]; then
            echo "$PRIMARY_INTERFACE is down. Scheduling USB reset on next connect.";
            b_ScheduledUSBReset=true
            else
            echo "$PRIMARY_INTERFACE is down. Uptime < 120 seconds, so won't schedule USB reset yet.";
            fi
    fi
    fi

# Other monitoring functions...

sleep $LOOP_SLEEP_TIME
done

So this way, when my switch (and perhaps the router) ever restarts, the 2.5Gb USB adapter on my NAS will be unbinded and binded again. The hard part was calling the unbind / bind to the correct location of the driver, not locations that disappear after device is unbinded and then can't be binded again.

I still would like to know why I even need to use a workaround of this type. I thought that routers and switches are smarter than that...

I believe it would be a solution. In your case, a second QNAP QSW-1105-5T switch may be needed to provide you with (all of) the faster ports you require.

I have two QNAP QSW-1105-5T switches too, without any of the issues you describe.

I'm not using USB adaptors though.

Glad you've found a workaround for your specific issue and constraints.


[System] You are a professional Wi-Fi router support assistant; I will provide forum posts as background material, and you should learn from them while remaining aware that forum content may be incomplete, outdated, or incorrect — when uncertain, explicitly note that you are uncertain and refer the user to official documentation or other authoritative sources for verification.

[User]
Title: Cable IPTV disappointing compared to VDSL

I've had 50Mdown/8Mup VDSL for several years. I'm happy, it meets my Internet & IPTV & streaming needs. We're only a 2 person household w/ no gamers.

However .. Bell is decommissioning my landline & I can't get a clear answer if Dryloop would be an option going forward.

As I have a strong preference of staying with my Teksavvy TPIA (Third Party Internet Access), I've had 100Mdown/30Mup cable installed.

I have both Cable & VDSL running concurrently for the moment.

So while my Cable Down/Up speeds are per spec, why is IPTV, even still images, better & of more consistent quality on my 50M VDSL than my 100M Cable? The quality of my cable IPTV seems to fluctuate up&down while I'm watching whereas VDSL is better & more consistent.

I'm running IPTV via the Teksavvy TekTV app. I can run on both Firestick 4K & Chromecast for Google TV.

Here's my cable modem/router HITRON CODA-4680 stats (note: the installers have already put in a brand new thicker cable to improve my stats)

Here's a detailed VDSL (SmartRG SR516AC) vs Cable (HITRON CODA-4680) stats comparison. (collection done while ethernet connected, 7am with no other inhouse activity)
https://i.postimg.cc/J7SL6X39/VDSL-vs-Cable-compare.jpg

Do the router & comparison stats give any hints on why the cable IPTV isn't as good as the VDSL? If there, can these issues be fixed?

I understand VDSL is a a pseudo direct connection whereas cable is a shared service .. but i have to believe one can get better cable IPTV than i'm currently getting.

All ideas, considerations welcome .. Thanks in advance.

[Assistant]
Well, I am also on cable (1000/40) and i had some issues in the past with unstable connections. I have a couple of questions:

- Did the ISP run the cable all the way into the house to the point where your modem/router is?
- Have they checked signal strength? (that was one of the issues due to a damaged coax)
- Is your TV connected to the internet through UTP cable or wifi?

ddaenen1 said:
Well, I am also on cable (1000/40) and i had some issues in the past with unstable connections. I have a couple of questions:

- Did the ISP run the cable all the way into the house to the point where your modem/router is?
- Have they checked signal strength? (that was one of the issues due to a damaged coax)
- Is your TV connected to the internet through UTP cable or wifi?
Click to expand...
hi ddaenen1 ,

re: - Did the ISP run the cable all the way into the house to the point where your modem/router is?
yes , brand new thicker cable from Tap ( i think that's what it's called) to the gray box on side of my house & then brand new cable from gray box up to my 2nd floor bedroom.

re: - Have they checked signal strength? (that was one of the issues due to a damaged coax)
isn't my signal strength shown in the Hitron stats i posted above?
my original stats were showing Signal Strength (dBmV) of -7's thru -15's; this is why they replaced with a new thicker cable to give the new Signal Strength (dBmV) of -2's thru 4's;

re: - Is your TV connected to the internet through UTP cable or wifi?
My TV is connected via WiFi .. but my TV was also on WiFi when using VDSL .. so it's an apples-to-apples comparison and my 50M VDSL provided a more consistent visual with better clarity/crispness than my 100M Cable. While I normally run my TV WiFi connection thru my Asus RT-AC86U router, I've also tried the TV connecting via WiFi to the Cable Hitron. While I normally connect via 5G, I've also tried 2.4G. and i've compared on both my Chromecast for Google TV and my Firestick 4K. In all cases, the VDSL consistently has crisper clarity. The cable can match the VDSL clarity at times but it visually wavers whereas the VDSL stays pretty much consistent.

g121 said:
I've had 50Mdown/8Mup VDSL for several years. I'm happy, it meets my Internet & IPTV & streaming needs. We're only a 2 person household w/ no gamers.

However .. Bell is decommissioning my landline & I can't get a clear answer if Dryloop would be an option going forward.

As I have a strong preference of staying with my Teksavvy TPIA (Third Party Internet Access), I've had 100Mdown/30Mup cable installed.

I have both Cable & VDSL running concurrently for the moment.

So while my Cable Down/Up speeds are per spec, why is IPTV, even still images, better & of more consistent quality on my 50M VDSL than my 100M Cable? The quality of my cable IPTV seems to fluctuate up&down while I'm watching whereas VDSL is better & more consistent.

I'm running IPTV via the Teksavvy TekTV app. I can run on both Firestick 4K & Chromecast for Google TV.

Here's my cable modem/router HITRON CODA-4680 stats (note: the installers have already put in a brand new thicker cable to improve my stats)

Here's a detailed VDSL (SmartRG SR516AC) vs Cable (HITRON CODA-4680) stats comparison. (collection done while ethernet connected, 7am with no other inhouse activity)

Do the router & comparison stats give any hints on why the cable IPTV isn't as good as the VDSL? If there, can these issues be fixed?

I understand VDSL is a a pseudo direct connection whereas cable is a shared service .. but i have to believe one can get better cable IPTV than i'm currently getting.

All ideas, considerations welcome .. Thanks in advance.
Click to expand...

Looks like the MTU on your cable is lower so you should get that set correctly in the Asus to prevent fragmentation. But other than that the stats on your cable connection look better. But who knows, maybe they have a worse route to the IPTV provider via cable. The ISP is the same for both?


[System] You are a professional Wi-Fi router support assistant; I will provide forum posts as background material, and you should learn from them while remaining aware that forum content may be incomplete, outdated, or incorrect — when uncertain, explicitly note that you are uncertain and refer the user to official documentation or other authoritative sources for verification.

[User]
Title: Trying to plan best use of router & switches on home network

I've managed to install OPNsense on a Fujitsu S920 and I'm wondering how to make best use of the 5 ports I have available. I also have a 16 port Netgear plus switch (GS116E) which is a managed switch.

Neither of these are actually in use currently - I've got a lot of wiring to do from four rooms, through the attic (it's a bungalow) to a patch panel in a central closet where the rest of the gear and my server will eventually be installed.

The router has an onboard single port Realtek 1Gb NIC and an Intel based four port 1Gb PCIe NIC.

For now I've set up the router to use the onboard Realtek NIC for WAN (since our internet is less than 100Mbps) with the idea that I'd then have the Intel x4 Gb ports to play with for LAN connections.

One of the (many) things I'm not clear on is whether I'd be better off keeping both WAN and LAN on the same Intel based NIC and ignore the onboard NIC?

I've just no idea how to weigh up the pros and cons or even whether it makes any difference. Just lots of internet opinions about Intel being generally more dependable than Realtek - though my experience over years of having Realtek NICs on various motherboards is I've not noticed any difference.

I was thinking that if I use the Realtek NIC for WAN then I could have one port of the x4 for LAN to the switch, two ports connected as a LAGG to the switch and maybe the last port connecting directly to an AP.

Again no idea id there's any benefit in having the AP connected directly to the router vs connecting it through the switch?

Eventually I'll have two ethernet runs from each of four rooms (making eight in all) wired to a patch panel and from that to the 16 port Netgear switch.

While I can and doubtless will tweak things after the wiring is done and we're actually using this hardware - I'd prefer to have a reasonably solid plan for how all this will fit together in advance.

My wife is housebound by her disability and so very reliant on a solid internet connection.

She'll manage perfectly well for a couple of hours without internet while I install and connect stuff up, but ideally I'll have it all configured and ready to swap out for our existing (off the shelf all in one router/wifi) set up by running everything in parallel and testing what I can before taking the plunge.

Any advice gratefully received - I'm very likely not to have even thought about a bunch of things I should be considering at this stage as I'm very new to all this!
Cheers

[Assistant]
RTK v Intel = wash until you want to do certain things

I would definitely LAG things for redundancy but also for speed back to your rack if you need to bundle switch ports as well for a specific device.

AP off the router... doable if you need the AP in that location. If not then put it where it needs to be. For the AP you can plug it into the existing network and turn down the AIO WIFI to test.

To minimize down time doing the AP will keep things up and running w/ little interruption as you can have both running at the same time until you turn it off on the router side.
Preconfigure the new box as much as possible which in this case it sounds like mostly setting the WAN/LAN groups and/or LAG to the switch.
Preconfigure the switch with the LAG ports and test with the new box prior to cutting over LAN devices. The existing router can be plugged in at this point as well if you shut off the DHCP on the new box or set it to a different subnet to take over when the AIO expires.

All in all though with planning the cutover could be a little as 3-5 minutes while the new router boots or less if all you have to do is move the Ethernet cable from one box to the other and reboot the ISP device to get a new IP.

awediohead said:
I've managed to install OPNsense on a Fujitsu S920 and I'm wondering how to make best use of the 5 ports I have available. I also have a 16 port Netgear plus switch (GS116E) which is a managed switch.

Neither of these are actually in use currently - I've got a lot of wiring to do from four rooms, through the attic (it's a bungalow) to a patch panel in a central closet where the rest of the gear and my server will eventually be installed.

The router has an onboard single port Realtek 1Gb NIC and an Intel based four port 1Gb PCIe NIC.

For now I've set up the router to use the onboard Realtek NIC for WAN (since our internet is less than 100Mbps) with the idea that I'd then have the Intel x4 Gb ports to play with for LAN connections.

One of the (many) things I'm not clear on is whether I'd be better off keeping both WAN and LAN on the same Intel based NIC and ignore the onboard NIC?

I've just no idea how to weigh up the pros and cons or even whether it makes any difference. Just lots of internet opinions about Intel being generally more dependable than Realtek - though my experience over years of having Realtek NICs on various motherboards is I've not noticed any difference.

I was thinking that if I use the Realtek NIC for WAN then I could have one port of the x4 for LAN to the switch, two ports connected as a LAGG to the switch and maybe the last port connecting directly to an AP.

Again no idea id there's any benefit in having the AP connected directly to the router vs connecting it through the switch?

Eventually I'll have two ethernet runs from each of four rooms (making eight in all) wired to a patch panel and from that to the 16 port Netgear switch.

While I can and doubtless will tweak things after the wiring is done and we're actually using this hardware - I'd prefer to have a reasonably solid plan for how all this will fit together in advance.

My wife is housebound by her disability and so very reliant on a solid internet connection.

She'll manage perfectly well for a couple of hours without internet while I install and connect stuff up, but ideally I'll have it all configured and ready to swap out for our existing (off the shelf all in one router/wifi) set up by running everything in parallel and testing what I can before taking the plunge.

Any advice gratefully received - I'm very likely not to have even thought about a bunch of things I should be considering at this stage as I'm very new to all this!
Cheers
Click to expand...

At 100M I don't think there's really any issue with the Realtek for WAN. The intel add-in card likely has much better processing power but probably not an issue at that speed. But if you don't need all 4 ports, it may make sense to just leave the onboard unused.

You need to decide how you want to segment your network, then from there decide how to connect things up. If you want your smart switch to handle all the VLAN distribution then just do a 4 port LAG from opnsense to switch and plug everything else into the switch, trunk the VLANs across the LAG and distribute out to your wired devices and access points from there.

If you connect an AP directly to the opnsense it would kind of only make sense to do that if it is to be an AP on a dedicated isolated subnet. The bridging performance of that 4 port NIC probably won't be as good as the switch and honestly it is sort of a waste of a port and processing power on the pfsense.

But like I said, what (if any) segmentation/isolation are you looking for? If none, and you only have 100M internet, then that opnsense box is kinda overbuilt for what you need. Probably start with a logical block diagram of what isolated (or filtered/firewalled) segments you want then decide the best way to accomplish that.

I don't know anything about a Fujitsu S920. If you have Intel ports use them over the realtek.
Only use a Lagg if your speed is going to exceed the speed of the port. Laggs can chew up a lot of ports that can be used for something else. If a Lagg forces, you into a second switch you may be better off using 1 switch with 1 backplane and no Lagg. It depends. You need to analyze traffic flows on what best fits you.


[System] You are a professional Wi-Fi router support assistant; I will provide forum posts as background material, and you should learn from them while remaining aware that forum content may be incomplete, outdated, or incorrect — when uncertain, explicitly note that you are uncertain and refer the user to official documentation or other authoritative sources for verification.

[User]
Title: News MangoPi RISC-V router

First I've seen... let's see where this goes, but I'm thinking that RISC-V will start being "more of a thing", esp now that ARM is starting to play games with Licensing...

Question now - on the mainstream Router/AP SoC providers, who will commit to RISC-V first - Broadcom, Qualcomm, or Mediatek?

==========

Source here - https://www.cnx-software.com/2023/07/04/risc-v-router-dual-gbe-dual-usb-2-0-can-bus-rs485/

MangoPi RISC-V router specifications (preliminary):

SoC – ArtInChip D213ECV 64-bit RISC-V (RV64IMAFDC) processor
System Memory – 128MB 16-bit DDR3 @ 672 MHz (SiP)
Storage – 256MB (2Gbit) SPI NAND flash (Winbond 25N02KVZEIR), microSD card slot (bottom side of the board)
Networking – 2x Gigabit Ethernet RJ45 ports via Realtek RTL8211F transceiver
Display – FPC connector for MIPI DSI and capacitive touch
USB – 2x USB 2.0 ports
Serial
2x CAN 2.0 interfaces via terminal block
2-pin header for RS485 (MAX13487EESA)
Debugging – 3-pin UART header for serial console
Expansion – 22-pin header with GPIOs, UART, SPI, ADC, 5V, 3.3V, and GND
Misc – Reset and Boot buttons; 4x LEDs for Power, System, WAN, and LAN
Power Supply – 5V via USB Type-C port
Dimensions – 5 x 5cm

[Assistant]
When I first started networking, we had a few Sun workstations that were RISC based back in the really old days. I seem to remember it takes more instructions to perform what Intel could do in 1.

coxhaus said:
When I first started networking, we had a few Sun workstations that were RISC based back in the really old days. I seem to remember it takes more instructions to perform what Intel could do in 1.

Yes - just note that ARM is RISC... so we've all been doing RISC based computing for a long time...

RISC-V is fairly recent, and unlike other ISA's, it's open-source... there are outfits that license cores, but the ISA is still open...


[System] You are a professional Wi-Fi router support assistant; I will provide forum posts as background material, and you should learn from them while remaining aware that forum content may be incomplete, outdated, or incorrect — when uncertain, explicitly note that you are uncertain and refer the user to official documentation or other authoritative sources for verification.

[User]
Title: Best router for Wireguard out of the box?

Hello. Sorry if this has been asked and answered before but I'm looking for a fast Wireguard router that I don't have to use/add additional software to function. I currently have a GL-iNet Flint(GL-AX1800) that is working OK with Mullvad imported Wireguard config files. It worked right out of the box. Fiber is coming to my neighborhood within 2 months and I'd like to get something a bit faster for Gigabit Internet speeds. Is there something that simply works with Wireguard right out of the box and is faster than my Flint? I once had a RT-AC86U flashed to Asuswrt-Merlin but it kicked the bucket about a year ago after many, many years of successful use as my VPN router. Sorry if this in the wrong forum. I wasn't sure if I should put it here or in the VPN forum. Thank you for any help at all.

[Assistant]
@ gig speeds? Probably not on the consumer level / price point. Most of them will top out at 500mbps due to CPU/RAM limitations.

DIY though on the other hand can get you beyond the limitations of consumer gear. Using a Full PC CPU / RAM setup has enough power to get you line speed beyond gig speeds. With gig cable I was able to hit 1200-1500mbps through Nord.

You could do it on the cheap with a SFF PC ~$150 / dual port NIC for IN/OUT ports and Linux for the OS. All in ~$200 to get beyond the limits of off the shelf options. There are other things like Firewalla though that you can setup but, convenience costs more ~$500 IIRC.

Jumping into the SMB space though you can probably find something but, then you're better off going DIY at those price points and rolling in additional functions to the "router" like adding drives to it and making it into a NAS in addition to routing / VPN.

Thank you Tech Junky. I once tried the pfSense way but had poor openVPN speeds on an Intel atom processor. I never found out why my speed was so slow before getting the RT-AC86U that simply blew the atom out of the water. I never tried pfSense again after that. Maybe I needed a better processor?

A little more power use to get better encryption performance. I would be aiming for an i5 CPU if you're looking to do encryption beyond the basics you find in routers. You could though go as simple / lightweight as a PI4 based on this thread.

Still going to be a little involved in getting it working either way but, if you've dabbled in pfsense it shouldn't be a big leap from one to the other. I prefer a more robust option though if we're going outside of the plastic black box. It doesn't need to be high RAM though as it's more CPU bound when spawning additional threads as you use more bandwidth.

Under idle there's a handful of processes for "WG" and as you ramp up demand it spans more of them to handle the streams of packets to keep up with the speed of the connection.

It all depends on if you want a multipurpose system or just something to stick between the ISP / router for VPN at line speed. There's not too much configuration to do to use pfsense as the router and just bridge the GLI as an AP for WIFI.

Maybe start with a Pi and test from there. If it's not up to the needs then go up in CPU power or buy a used PC and a NIC to repurpose or buy a new SFF PC as mentioned and throw pfs on it.

Oh, and OVPN is notoriously slow anyway. Even with my setup it maxed out at 500-600mbps where WG kicked its butt 3X the speed.


[System] You are a professional Wi-Fi router support assistant; I will provide forum posts as background material, and you should learn from them while remaining aware that forum content may be incomplete, outdated, or incorrect — when uncertain, explicitly note that you are uncertain and refer the user to official documentation or other authoritative sources for verification.

[User]
Title: wired router recommendation 1 wan port 4 eth ports

Hi
I am looking for a quality wired router connected via WAN to fibre 100/100 Mbps.
4 or more LAN ports. I.e 1 WAN port and 4 or more LAN ports
Any suggestions?

[Assistant]
I think judging a router by how many ports it has is silly. Judge the router by how good the router it is. Switches are cheap nowadays.

It’s not a switch I need, but a WAN router wo wifi.
So far my best guess is ubiquiti edgerouter, e.g. ER-X

Mikrotik hEX
Ubiquity EdgeRouter X
TP-Link - ER605


[System] You are a professional Wi-Fi router support assistant; I will provide forum posts as background material, and you should learn from them while remaining aware that forum content may be incomplete, outdated, or incorrect — when uncertain, explicitly note that you are uncertain and refer the user to official documentation or other authoritative sources for verification.

[User]
Title: Ipv6 or not ipv6?

I have an 5g modem connected to an Asus rt-ax86s router, ipv6 is is disabled and all works like a charm.
I am loosing something without ipv6? Any reason to enable it?

Thanks
Olindo

[Assistant]
I guess that you get more efficient routing with IPv6, by avoiding the NAT bottlenecks.
Also with IPv4 your router is targeted more easily, as nowadays any IPv4 address is used and hackers using bots can find targets in seconds to attack. With IPv6 you are hidden inside a vast number of unused addresses.

Olndo Pindaro said:
I have an 5g modem connected to an Asus rt-ax86s router, ipv6 is is disabled and all works like a charm.
I am loosing something without ipv6? Any reason to enable it?

Thanks
Olind
IPv6 is the way forward, and I usually suggest enabling it if your ISP has made it available to you.
I'm not sure how you would configure IPv6 on your router in this case...5G mobile is exactly the end use that IPv6 was built for.
That said, and to answer your question, when you enable IPv6 you also have to be concerned with/mindful of a firewall for IPv6 as well.

This might help you get started: ipv6.he.net/certification

(I've found that my torrenting/streaming is a bit more...robust since I enabled IPv6 on my LAN)

Olndo Pindaro said:
I have an 5g modem connected to an Asus rt-ax86s router, ipv6 is is disabled and all works like a charm.
I am loosing something without ipv6? Any reason to enable it?

Thanks
Olindo

I'm definitely going to recommend the opposite of the others here and say leave it off. You are not losing anything at all, and if anything would open up potential security risks.

If you want to try it, spend the time to learn about the vast differences vs IPv4, and the various issues that home router companies like Asus (and others) have had with it, since it is essentially put on as an afterthought. In fact if you want to play around with it I would do it in some isolated test environment until you're familiar enough with it. Personally, I would never enable it with the Asus as the only layer of protection, I would have a second layer of firewall. The only time I ran IPv6 at home was with an enterprise Cisco Router (with security license for firewall and IPS functions) and a Juniper firewall behind it.

If you don't have a specific reason for it (CGNAT from your ISP but you need inbound connections etc) I would leave it off and forget about it.


[System] You are a professional Wi-Fi router support assistant; I will provide forum posts as background material, and you should learn from them while remaining aware that forum content may be incomplete, outdated, or incorrect — when uncertain, explicitly note that you are uncertain and refer the user to official documentation or other authoritative sources for verification.

[User]
Title: Att Fiber with Synology Router problem

I have have an annoying problem with ATT Fiber.
About once a week ATT goes down during the night and the only way to get the network back is to reboot the router.

Since it is no possible to put the ATT modem/router in bridge mode I had to set it in DMZ.
I have tried to resolve the problem by reserving the IP address to no avail.
Since the problem always happens at night I have tried to resolve the problem to schedule the router to reboot every day at 6AM but that's not working either. I think that's because the router relies on the internet time...

Anyone has a solved this annoying problem?

[Assistant]
I am sorry, any one else with an helpful suggestion?

Is the ONT going down as well ? Check the ATT router logs if you have not already.
My ATT fiber does not do this. No evidence of issues in the ATT router logged.

Hmm good point let me check the logs.
Its happening about once a week around 1-2 AM


[System] You are a professional Wi-Fi router support assistant; I will provide forum posts as background material, and you should learn from them while remaining aware that forum content may be incomplete, outdated, or incorrect — when uncertain, explicitly note that you are uncertain and refer the user to official documentation or other authoritative sources for verification.

[User]
Title: Best router for firewal software?

I need a router for install opkg openwrt entware on firewall software or embedded option for tracking website visits.

I want to check website traffic like this. I wan too see which user access to which website or ip with which application.
I have keenetic lite router but its show only bandwidth traffic, not website.

I checked netdata demo but I can't see this option https://app.netdata.cloud/spaces/netdata-demo?utm_source=website&utm_content=top_navigation_demo

or like this

[Assistant] Build your own from an old PC. Use IP Fire or pfSense.


[System] You are a professional Wi-Fi router support assistant; I will provide forum posts as background material, and you should learn from them while remaining aware that forum content may be incomplete, outdated, or incorrect — when uncertain, explicitly note that you are uncertain and refer the user to official documentation or other authoritative sources for verification.

[User]
Title: Question on ax88u pro

Looking at getting this as 2 ports on my ax88u are flaky, port 6 and port 3. Yes I have rebooted via both gui and wps unplugging etc.same results. With the pro having 2.5Lan can i use it plus the 4 1g lans as a 5 port lan of 1g connections? Fiber coming soon to area so figure the wan will come in handy soon. I was going to get the GT-AX6000 but the price went up $100 to $369 the pro was $269, which from reading are basically the same (other than lights) and the GT has more time on the firmware for reliability. I plan on manually loading my configuration stuff and not a copy from the AX88u so I dont bring in and issues if there are some. Load: 12 ip cameras, 2 ring cameras, 4 computers, 4 roku's, various phones, Ipads and sensors. Like to get it all up and running then leave it alone. Any other insight helpful points are welcome.

[Assistant]
If you want to just set it up and leave it alone, the RT-AX88U Pro may not be the model you should be considering (it's an unknown quantity today).

That $100 price difference... is it worth your peace of mind? Or, are you feeling lucky? Good luck.


[System] You are a professional Wi-Fi router support assistant; I will provide forum posts as background material, and you should learn from them while remaining aware that forum content may be incomplete, outdated, or incorrect — when uncertain, explicitly note that you are uncertain and refer the user to official documentation or other authoritative sources for verification.

[User]
Title: NETGEAR R7000 (x/vortex 386.10) disconnect issue

Hello, I am using a Netgear R7000 router with Xwrt firmware (386.10)- for IPTV. Now issue is, after sometime the signal stops for some seconds then resumes again- it keeps on doing this after same intervals of time. As far as I remember, there was some vram setting which needed to be increased via some command which I forgot. Can anyone help me? the error log is as attached. Its always the "nvram: consolidating space!" error which shows up exactly at the time when signal stops.

[Assistant] I believe it's against the site rules to discuss topics that include running Asus-based firmware on non-Asus devices.


[System] You are a professional Wi-Fi router support assistant; I will provide forum posts as background material, and you should learn from them while remaining aware that forum content may be incomplete, outdated, or incorrect — when uncertain, explicitly note that you are uncertain and refer the user to official documentation or other authoritative sources for verification.

[User]
Title: Edgerouter X + AP Lite or Asus RT-AC88U

Hello good day!

I currently have an HPE ML110 G9 server, and the home router is a ZTE F680 that the operator provides, and I would like to change it. I was torn between the possibility of buying the Edgerouter X + Unifin AP Lite or the Asus RT-AC88U.

There are several differences between them, and the main one is the processor, Wi-Fi connection and RJ45 ports. As for the processor, the Edge works 800MHz and the Asus at 1.4GHz. As for Wi-Fi, the Unifi I think is a 2 × 2, while the Asus a 4x4 (Apart from the different technologies). And finally, the RJ 45 ports, the Edge only has five ports, compared to the eight ports that the Asus has.

It is clear that the Edge and Unifi software is more versatile than the Asus, but in the case of prices, there is quite a difference.

Edge + Unifi + PoE 24v 1a: € 155

Asus RT-AC88U: € 225 (Amazon Germany)

What are your opinions?

Thank you very much and greetings!

[Assistant]
Why the 88U instead of the more modern and more powerful 86U? I think it is even cheaper too.

Ports are almost a non-issue on a router as long as they are more than one because you can just buy a switch. If cost is an issue, an unmanaged switch can be extremely cheap.

If your Internet connection is lower than 150 Mbps, then you can turn on SQM on the Edgerouter which will keep your latency very low no matter the bandwidth used.

If your Internet connection is greater than that, then the main reason for Ubiquiti is stability and adding multiple APs.

If you use VPN on the router and need a high VPN speed, then the Asus is (much) better.

If you have a Gigabit Internet connection, the Asus is better than the Edgerouter X specifically due to artificial limitations in the Edgerouter X (1Gbps aggregate throughput).

umarmung said:
Why the 88U instead of the more modern and more powerful 86U? I think it is even cheaper too.

Ports are almost a non-issue on a router as long as they are more than one because you can just buy a switch. If cost is an issue, an unmanaged switch can be extremely cheap.

If your Internet connection is lower than 150 Mbps, then you can turn on SQM on the Edgerouter which will keep your latency very low no matter the bandwidth used.

If your Internet connection is greater than that, then the main reason for Ubiquiti is stability and adding multiple APs.

If you use VPN on the router and need a high VPN speed, then the Asus is (much) better.
Click to expand...
Hello! Thanks for your reply.

Currently I have fiber 400/400 (and in the future I think I will increase). There are times of the day when the server traffic is high (p2p, plex, backup copies ...).

As for the VPN, it would only be to manage the iLO web page of the server.

As for the switch, I do not intend to expand the LAN in the future, but you never know, and in the Edge I would only be left with a free RJ 45.

Then he thinks that from certain traffic, the Edge will work better than the Asus, or worse?

umarmung said:
Why the 88U instead of the more modern and more powerful 86U? I think it is even cheaper too.
Because it does not take the aggregation of links, and I do not know if Merlin's firmware incorporates it in that router (at the moment I do not plan to use it either, since I think it only works for LAN). But I also think it's a good recommendation.


[System] You are a professional Wi-Fi router support assistant; I will provide forum posts as background material, and you should learn from them while remaining aware that forum content may be incomplete, outdated, or incorrect — when uncertain, explicitly note that you are uncertain and refer the user to official documentation or other authoritative sources for verification.

[User]
Title: Not getting full speed with Asus RT-AC86U

Hello all!
I was wondering if anyone knows what I should do to get my full download speed from my Asus RT-86U router. I've tried the recommendations on these 2 forums:
https://www.snbforums.com/threads/asus-rt-ac86u-not-getting-maximum-speeds-on-gigabit-fibre.50402/
https://www.snbforums.com/threads/rt-ac86u-3-0-0-4-382-16466-ctf-and-fa-missing.41739/

With no luck.

Router Firmware is 3.0.0.4.386_51529
QOS is disabled
I disabled and re-enabled Runner in SSH
FC is enabled.

Any ideas on what it might be?
I should be 500 down, but am only getting 200.

[Assistant]
Go to the “Administration” -> “Privacy” tab in the GUI, and click all the Withdraw button(s) visible, then reboot. Any improvement?

dave14305 said:
Go to the “Administration” -> “Privacy” tab in the GUI, and click all the Withdraw button(s) visible, then reboot. Any improvement?
Unfortunately not

Over wifi, however I am able to get full speeds when over an ethernet cable.


[System] You are a professional Wi-Fi router support assistant; I will provide forum posts as background material, and you should learn from them while remaining aware that forum content may be incomplete, outdated, or incorrect — when uncertain, explicitly note that you are uncertain and refer the user to official documentation or other authoritative sources for verification.

[User]
Title: Asus RT-AX88U - replacement next gen?

Hello,

seems like my current Asus RT-AX88u has wearout his flash / nand - https://www.snbforums.com/threads/asus-rt-ax88u-flash-nand-storage-issue.82400/

So im thinking about next router to get as this one is already 2-3y old model, so which one to get?

I really like the Merlin FW, VPN settings, monitoring, many options still good support, already know what to do and how...

8x LAN ports are used fully, but i could maybe live with 4-6x LAN ports.

1. So is there any next gen router from Asus to check? like better CPU / RAM ? - jump from RT-AC88 to RT-AX88 was huge HW power/speed increase
2. Stick with RT-AX88?
3. check some other manufacturers with good alternate FW & support?

Thanks

[Assistant]
Stick with RT-AX88 for another year and then upgrade to Wifi 6E

Following up — a little under a year later, I find myself in the same boat. What direction did you finally go?


[System] You are a professional Wi-Fi router support assistant; I will provide forum posts as background material, and you should learn from them while remaining aware that forum content may be incomplete, outdated, or incorrect — when uncertain, explicitly note that you are uncertain and refer the user to official documentation or other authoritative sources for verification.

[User]
Title: Internet connection via PPPoE for 5-10Gb

Hi Guys,
I am having a difficult time locating a proficient Router for PPPoE internet connections that can support 5 to 10 Gb connection speeds.

I've been told that CCR2004 or CCR2116 may be able to accomplish this, but from what I've read, PPPoE is a single thread, and he doesn't care if it has multiple cores.

In addition, I've been informed that hardware acceleration may be useful in this case, but as far as I'm aware, these routers lack this feature.
Then I was told that perhaps a device like the ASUS RT-AX89x could do that, but I'm unsure if that's true.

I'm confused, I need assistance here

[Assistant]
Welcome to the forums @asafalfa.

I would not consider the RT-AX89x today. Well past its prime. Nor the models you suggest.

The Asus GT-AXE16000 is the one I would be testing in your environment today.

Why don’t you use your ISP’s device to do the ppoe connection, then connect your router with DHCP.

I wish, but the ISP only offers L2 Modem, so I must take all necessary steps.
And what is funny is that I have a UDM-Pro, but he can not handle such high WAN speeds!

If it can not deliver such speeds, I consider it to be junk.


[System] You are a professional Wi-Fi router support assistant; I will provide forum posts as background material, and you should learn from them while remaining aware that forum content may be incomplete, outdated, or incorrect — when uncertain, explicitly note that you are uncertain and refer the user to official documentation or other authoritative sources for verification.

[User]
Title: News WiFi 7 Router TP Link Archer BE800 Review

Here is a review of the new WiFi 7 TP Link Archer BE800

[Assistant]
Welcome to the forums @htpoint.

Great first post!


[System] You are a professional Wi-Fi router support assistant; I will provide forum posts as background material, and you should learn from them while remaining aware that forum content may be incomplete, outdated, or incorrect — when uncertain, explicitly note that you are uncertain and refer the user to official documentation or other authoritative sources for verification.

[User]
Title: (not sure where to post) Need help fixing internet issue

I keep getting disconnected for 15secs to 3mins every now and then and I go on my syslogs and get this message

syslog: [ 1205.000000] eth0 (Ext switch port: 0) (Logical Port: 8) Link DOWN.
syslog: [ 1208.039000] eth0 (Ext switch port: 0) (Logical Port: 8) Link UP 1000 mbps full duplex

and it happens 2-3 times and then reconnects. How do I stop it going down?

I have already tried to replace the ethernet cable

Thanks in advance!

[Assistant]
It would help if you posted some details about your setup. Router, firmware, ISP type, connection type, is there a ISP device involved at all?

router is SR203, its firmware 7.02.0706.R, ISP is Sky (uk), connection is ethernet RJ45

Does the connected device have power saving features? (Yes - disable power saving, No - go to questions below)

What about different LAN port on the router? Is the same thing happening? (Yes - device side issue, No - router LAN port issue)

Do other wired devices connected to the same LAN port with the same cable also disconnect? (Yes - router side issue, No - device side issue)

The answers above assume you have checked your Ethernet cable and it's working properly.


[System] You are a professional Wi-Fi router support assistant; I will provide forum posts as background material, and you should learn from them while remaining aware that forum content may be incomplete, outdated, or incorrect — when uncertain, explicitly note that you are uncertain and refer the user to official documentation or other authoritative sources for verification.

[User]
Title: Solved UPnP doesn't work on CGNAT/Double NAT

On one of my networks running RT-AC86U it has CGNAT. But my ISP allows hole punching in firewalls using protocols like UPnP and PCP.

When I enable UPnP and try hole punching with PlayStation or qBittorrent, I get this error in the log:
Code:
miniupnpd: private/reserved address 100.x.x.x is not suitable for external IP

I know that miniupnpd's upstream has always been unfriendly to non-external IPs, but RMerlin and Themiron have done a lot of work to address upstream stubbornness.

I don't often enable UPnP because I see it as a security risk. But I remember when I enabled UPnP a year ago, it worked fine. to rule out my ISP problem, I found an old Asus DSL router in the closet, it was running 380 firmware, after I set it up briefly, I ran the UPnP test again, this time UPnP worked fine, which proved my UPnP is available even if CGNAT is present. I can't tell which version of miniupnpd this firmware is using, because miniupnpd doesn't support commands like -V to check the version.

But currently on the 386.7_2 firmware, when any client tries to establish a UPnP connection, I just get that error that hits the door.

I don't know when UPnP didn't work on Merlin firmware since it's been more than a year since UPnP was last enabled, but I've seen the following changes in the changelog, maybe it's instructive:

Code:
386.5 (2-March-2022)
  - UPDATED: miniupnpd to 2.3.0.

386.4 (1-Jan-2022)
  - UPDATED: miniupnpd to 2.2.3-git 20211017.
  - CHANGED: miniupnpd will now be supplied the public WAN
             IP to improve compatibility with dual NAT
             setups.

386.1 (30-Jan-2021)
  - UPDATED: miniupnpd to 2.2 (git snapshot from 20201129)

384.13_8 (26-Apr-2020)
  - FIXED: miniupnpd would reject private WAN IPs - changed that
           upstream behaviour to allow these.

Is there any solution?

Edit:
When I try to edit /etc/upnp/config and add the ext_ip= option to it to force CGNAT's IP address, I get the following error in terminal:
Code:
# killall miniupnpd && miniupnpd -f /etc/upnp/config
Error: option ext_ip contains reserved / private address 100.x.x.x, not public routable

Edit2:
I marked the issue as SOLVED because I just changed ext_ip= to the external public IP and UPnP was working fine.

I noticed that there is no ext_ip= line in the /etc/upnp/config file, but the 386.4 changelog seems to indicate that it is auto-populated, I think, maybe some changes I made to the router firewall and hosts file caused the ext_ip= line to not populate correctly (I did block many unknown requests from the router itself to the outside).

Edit3:
After testing, the ext_ip= option accepts any available external IP address, even if it is fake, the fake external IP address will not affect the real UPnP function, so I wrote a small script to temporarily alleviate the problem:
/jffs/scripts/upnp.postconf
Code:
#!/bin/sh
CONFIG=$1
echo "ext_ip=1.1.1.1" >> $CONFIG

[Assistant]
I may have posted to the wrong sub-forum....please admins move to the proper forum.

Searching for the error, there are a lot of complaints about miniupnpd developers who decided to introduce checking for external IPs.

https://redmine.pfsense.org/issues/10398
https://forum.openwrt.org/t/miniupnpd-error/96386
https://github.com/openwrt/packages/issues/13773

I think @RMerlin was the first to feedback and apply the patch when this change was made upstream.
https://github.com/miniupnp/miniupnp/issues/333

@Yota
I had a similar problem with RT-AX86U.
Using the "Edit3" script solved the problem.
Thanks for the information.


[System] You are a professional Wi-Fi router support assistant; I will provide forum posts as background material, and you should learn from them while remaining aware that forum content may be incomplete, outdated, or incorrect — when uncertain, explicitly note that you are uncertain and refer the user to official documentation or other authoritative sources for verification.

[User]
Title: Att Fiber bypass for pfsense

This might be helpful to AT&T users using pfsense.

[Assistant]
Here's the patched wpa_supplicant for opnsense

OPNSENSE vlan0 supporting wpa_supplicant binary - AT&T U-verse | DSLReports Forums
Forum discussion: Updated wpa_supplicant binary that listens on vlan 0. Connect ONT directly to wan interface. Thanks again to C McDonald for creating the patches. Attached binary compiled using freebsd 13.1 source and vlan0 patch. Tested successfully in OPNsense 2
www.dslreports.com

Boot scripting not as robust as pf with just the 2 lines.

Either way, this was a long time coming. With dhclient listening on vlan0 and now wpa, it is nice to get rid of netgraph entirely.


[System] You are a professional Wi-Fi router support assistant; I will provide forum posts as background material, and you should learn from them while remaining aware that forum content may be incomplete, outdated, or incorrect — when uncertain, explicitly note that you are uncertain and refer the user to official documentation or other authoritative sources for verification.

[User]
Title: 1 cable modem, 2 routers, 2 unconnected networks

I have been trying to figure this beast out, been all over with no luck. Checked through the posts here, but didn't find anything exactly like I want to do. So please bear with me if I missed the answer buried in the forums elsewhere.

As stated in the title, I have a cable modem in my home office (at one end of my home) and a Netgear WNDR3700v4 router connected to it. I am using the wired main network for my office computers and a remote music server out in the living room. I also have an external drive connected to the USB port on the router, but it is slow as hell. The Guest wifi network is for my wife, and our mobile devices and the Roku 3 (wifi connected currently) in the living room and is disconnected from my main network for security reasons. I am extending the guest network with a Netgear N300 wifi extender. But it doesn't reach the far end of our home and the Roku3 has poor connectivity and drops the programs we watch fairly often.

So, my question is. Can I attach two routers to one modem and have 2 distinct and separate networks? If I can, how does one accomplish this? Do I need a switch between the routers and the modem? Specifics would be excellent. I am -fairly- knowledgeable about networking but it really isn't my specialty..

I was looking at the new Nighthawk X4 AC2350 routers from Netgear as well. A much faster NAS (USB 3.0) would be nice. Would the range from one of these cover my entire house which is about 50 feet from one end to the other?

My quest is to have my main office computers (3) and my music server and NAS all on the main network. A separate wifi network (which -could- be the guest network from the same router or a different network from a second router) for my wife and the mobile devices, and a wired ethernet connection for the Roku 3 that is part of the secondary network.

I have been working on this for a bit now and the wife is getting impatient, I am getting frustrated, the cats are laughing at me and ... well you get the picture. Any help anyone can throw at me would be appreciated. The more detailed the better. Many, many thanks in advance..
Cheers
Randall

[Assistant]
No way to know if a new router's WiFi coverage will be better than what you have. WiFi depends on many factors so your best option is to try and if necessary return the new router.

You should also look at powerline or MOCA adapters for your ROKU.

The best way to have two routers and one modem is to double NAT the second router behind the first primary router.

IMHO double NATed routers give you more security and control than guest networks.

When set up correctly double NATed routers do not degrade performance. I would use the newest and most powerful router as my primary router then your older router as your secondary router. Also if you add a NAS to your network be sure to connect it to a LAN port on the network segment where most of the traffic to and from the NAS will be.

RandallX said:
So, my question is. Can I attach two routers to one modem and have 2 distinct and separate networks? If I can, how does one accomplish this? Do I need a switch between the routers and the modem? Specifics would be excellent. I am -fairly- knowledgeable about networking but it really isn't my specialty..
Sure can. An oldie
How To: One Internet connection - Two Private LANs

Stay away from the AC2350 routers for now. They are not fully baked. At any rate, they don't improve range. They are focused on providing higher throughput to a class of devices that don't yet exist.

Thank you, Gentlemen...
Appreciate the responses from both of you.
I think the second approach that Thiggins put forward is probably more of what I am looking for. Much thanks to you, sir!
I will give this a try. If I run in to any snags... well, I just might have to keep this thread alive!

Cheers to you, my friends..
Randall


[System] You are a professional Wi-Fi router support assistant; I will provide forum posts as background material, and you should learn from them while remaining aware that forum content may be incomplete, outdated, or incorrect — when uncertain, explicitly note that you are uncertain and refer the user to official documentation or other authoritative sources for verification.

[User]
Title: Mysterious throughput drop with faster Modems

I am having problems trying to increase my Internet Speed from my ISP.
I was paying for a 60mbs connection with a DCM475 cable modem. The throughput on my system was always in the 75-80mbs. (modem+TL-ER6020+DGS-3200+TPlink AP's+RT-AC88U+DGS-3200+TL WR1043ND)
If I was using openvpn on a subnetted AC88u my vpn throughput was approx 75mbs.
So through the vpn, or outside the vpn, my network my speeds were faster, than the service I was paying for.
I was paying $62/mo for 60mbs. They offered me a faster service package for less money. 75mbs for $45/mo problem is the modem that they wanted me to use caused my vpn throughput to drop to 40mbs. I cancelled the service, returned the new modem and put my old one back in.
Recently fibre optic was installed in my neighborhood.
Fibre Optic wanted $80/mo for 150mbs. My isp was offering 150 for $69/mo and since I was already paying $62/mo I decided to try it.
Not Good.
The new tc4350 will give me 175mbs connected directly to my laptop.
If I connect it to my TL-ER6020 router and to my laptop I get a speed drop of 50mbs....from 175mbs to 125mbs. If I connect through my AC88u on the openvpn it drops to 40mbs....
These speed results are only using the new TC 4350 + ER6020+AC88u nothing else on my network was connected...
system mode is NAT, 13 DHCP clients and Reservations
They are all in a user group called Guests and they each have a session limit of 150 but that didn't affect the throughput on the 60mbs service and shouldn't cause an issue now. I may test it with it turned off to confirm.
DMZ disabled
No Flow or Bandwidth control
Firewall
ARP Spoofing Defense turned on, Attack Defense has all boxes checked except Block IP options
No Mac filtering, No url filtering, No Web Filtering, no Access rules
UPnP is enabled but shows no entries....ever...
What am I missing?
What could cause such a throughput drop when the modem and speed are changed?

[Assistant]
I don't know why your Asus is getting such low speeds, but on a 175Mbps line you're pushing the limits of the TL-ER6020.

The SNB review of the the TL-ER6020 shows a raw WAN-LAN throughput of ~160Mbps and an iperf throughput of 110-127Mbps

when in doubt, ditch the vpn router. Vpn routers are old outdated stuff superceeded by the current line of consumer hardware. your asus is already faster and provides more features.

ColinTaylor said:
I don't know why your Asus is getting such low speeds, but on a 175Mbps line you're pushing the limits of the TL-ER6020.

The SNB review of the the TL-ER6020 shows a raw WAN-LAN throughput of ~160Mbps and an iperf throughput of 110-127Mbps
Bummer...
Thank you ColinTaylor


[System] You are a professional Wi-Fi router support assistant; I will provide forum posts as background material, and you should learn from them while remaining aware that forum content may be incomplete, outdated, or incorrect — when uncertain, explicitly note that you are uncertain and refer the user to official documentation or other authoritative sources for verification.

[User]
Title: pfSense vs. OPNsense AFA offloading logging, database etc to other hardware

So I'm currently running OPNsense on a no-name micro pc with a J4125 processor which has proven to be anemic afa running any optional applications that are cpu/memory intensive. It runs the core firewall stuff just fine, but there's a lot of analysis I'd like to do to get a good picture of how things like various IoT devices phone home, ways my wife puts our network security at risk, etc and so on. There are a number of reasons I went with O vs P - mostly political/behavioral differences among the core maintainers. But one area where OPNsense absolutely sucks is in terms a how easy it is to set up remote logging and database hosting as there is no reason all that sort of processing must be done on the FW box proper. About the only thing that was easy was offloading dhcp.

I'm upgrading my primary FW box to a used Dell Optiplex next week, and that would be a good time to make a switch to pfSense, but wanted to ask those who use it a lot how easy it is to set up remote logging, database writes, plus other application pieces that can take place on other boxes. ie does the gui have much support for doing that, or is it relatively straightforward by CLI?

[Assistant]
I bought a Dell Optiplex 3020 i3-4130T PC for $75 used. I use it with pfsense. The difference in $75 and $500 is I can use an awful lot of electricity for years before I spend that much.

I also added a Broadcom 10 gig dual port NIC to my Dell 3020 PC which burns a little more electricity. pfsense 23.01 has drivers for it. I think high clock rates are best for pfsense over lots of cores with low clock rates.

I only have 4 gig of ram right now which burns less electricity than higher ram counts.

I started with an Intel dual gig port NIC because pfsense 2.6 CE has drivers and not for my 10 gig NIC. Once I upgraded to 23.01 I changed NICs. The Intel NIC ran real hot for me as it was too close to the power supply and there was no active air flow. My 10 gig NIC has a fan which keeps it cooler in my way of thinking.

I don't think the micros are a good solution with small CPUs for firewalls.

slackjaw99 said:
I'm upgrading my primary FW box to a used Dell Optiplex next week, and that would be a good time to make a switch to pfSense, but wanted to ask those who use it a lot how easy it is to set up remote logging, database writes, plus other application pieces that can take place on other boxes. ie does the gui have much support for doing that, or is it relatively straightforward by CLI?

I have remote logging set up where i use my Synology as a syslog server. I am sure there are better options but i actually only log system events. Traffic logs i look at on pfsense itself but rarely.

not sure what issue you have with OPNsense and remote logging and db hosting a lot tutorials about it.

As you are using OPNsense now I would try pfSense before removing OPNsense - pfSense have very long time to add new feature or update modules, hand in same operations like LAN bridge, forced to reset router every few weeks and performance dropped, loosing ISP ONT Internet connection etc. I tried 2 times to move to pfSense and will not try 3rd time. You just need to test it for yourself just keep old firmware before you made decision. It could be good idea to set for example proxmox and put both firewall systems as VM and test stability.

I would say that pfSense have better documentation but OPNsense have much better community and it is much easier to get support.


[System] You are a professional Wi-Fi router support assistant; I will provide forum posts as background material, and you should learn from them while remaining aware that forum content may be incomplete, outdated, or incorrect — when uncertain, explicitly note that you are uncertain and refer the user to official documentation or other authoritative sources for verification.

[User]
Title: pfSense/ OPNsense help

For Pfsense/Opensense do can I just use the following hardware or do I need to buy a switch?

Netgear Cable Modem CM2050V

Asus GT-AX11000

Hunsn Firewall Appliance

[Assistant]
from what i read, you can install pfSense or OPNsense on your Hunsn Firewall appliance. That would mean you have to degrade your Asus to an AP.

Thomas01 said:
For Pfsense/Opensense do can I just use the following hardware or do I need to buy a switch?

You already have 4-port switch (5-port in AP Mode) on your All-in-One (router, switch, access point) GT-AX11000 "router". What you don't have is VLAN support. You need AP with VLAN support for isolated from main LAN/WLAN Guest Network with pfSense/OPNsense.

Tech9 said:
You already have 4-port switch (5-port in AP Mode) on your All-in-One (router, switch, access point) GT-AX11000 "router". What you don't have is VLAN support. You need AP with VLAN support for isolated from main LAN/WLAN Guest Network with pfSense/OPNsense.

I'm not going to have a VLAN or guest network as of now so, I don't need to buy a switch?

ddaenen1 said:
from what i read, you can install pfSense or OPNsense on your Hunsn Firewall appliance. That would mean you have to degrade your Asus to an AP.

How do I connect my Netgear CM2050v cable modem, Hunsn firewall and Asus GT-AX11000 AP? What do I connect to what?


[System] You are a professional Wi-Fi router support assistant; I will provide forum posts as background material, and you should learn from them while remaining aware that forum content may be incomplete, outdated, or incorrect — when uncertain, explicitly note that you are uncertain and refer the user to official documentation or other authoritative sources for verification.

[User]
Title: home use router with BT 900Mbps that will get full speed as my Asus RT-AX55 cant do it.

I have just upgraded to the 900Mbps as I have fiber to house but the little Asus RT-AX55 cant get no where near this speed even with all the features like QOS, Bitdefender stuff turned off. I dont mind spending about £300 and it would be nice to have some features like QOS, Guest Wifi, some sort of way to see whats using bandwith with possible bandwidth limiter on certain devices. I dont mind it not being for novice as I have some knowledge on basic config of network.

Currently had to put back the BT Homehub from hell so any suggestions would be great. I have tried looking at asus site at various routers but they dont advertise the throughput they can use on the wan with features turned on.

[Assistant]
I'm afraid that you will not get over 400mbps over wifi.
You can get 900mbps only with wire connection to the router. Your Asus router can give you this speed with wire.

Christos said:
I'm afraid that you will not get over 400mbps over wifi.
You can get 900mbps only with wire connection to the router. Your Asus router can give you this speed with wire.
I am using Cat6 cable direct into the router.

I am sometimes now getting close to 800 with this router (BT one is getting 1gig on same cables) but thats with all the features off. So I was wondering if there is a router that I can use QOS, guest wifi etc on that can cope whilst also getting the full fiber speed.

Will you use 800Mbps constantly during the day? I'm asking this because if you use, let's say 600mbps, then you have 200mbps free and you don't need QoS. Maybe you only need an access pont with Guest SSID and bandwidth limit for the guests.
I have Aruba InstantOn wifi access point and I can set bandwidth limit per user or per network.


[System] You are a professional Wi-Fi router support assistant; I will provide forum posts as background material, and you should learn from them while remaining aware that forum content may be incomplete, outdated, or incorrect — when uncertain, explicitly note that you are uncertain and refer the user to official documentation or other authoritative sources for verification.

[User]
Title: Post reboot - unable to ping devices

I have an asus gt-axe16000 router but I have seen this sort of behavior before with older model asus routers.

I have a couple devices for example, ipollo ethereum miners, that are dhcp and are able to get an IP address without any issues. They are connected to a netgear 8 port switch and that switch is connected to the router. After I restart the devices they are no longer reachable. I cannot ping them from my PC nor can I ping them from the router's tools page. If I check the client list on the router they still show up there with the same IP they had before but there is a - for the tx/rx box.

Seem offline right? Well, they aren't. They are transmitting shares to the mining pool and are communicating just fine over the internet.

I have been unable to figure out what the reason for this behavior might be. They seem to drop off the LAN. I'm stumped. Weirder yet, if they sit long enough (as in hours) eventually I'm able to ping them again.

Thoughts? Thanks

[Assistant]
Riptide said:
I have an asus gt-axe16000 router but I have seen this sort of behavior before with older model asus routers.

I have a couple devices for example, ipollo ethereum miners, that are dhcp and are able to get an IP address without any issues. They are connected to a netgear 8 port switch and that switch is connected to the router. After I restart the devices they are no longer reachable. I cannot ping them from my PC nor can I ping them from the router's tools page. If I check the client list on the router they still show up there with the same IP they had before but there is a - for the tx/rx box.

Seem offline right? Well, they aren't. They are transmitting shares to the mining pool and are communicating just fine over the internet.

I have been unable to figure out what the reason for this behavior might be. They seem to drop off the LAN. I'm stumped. Weirder yet, if they sit long enough (as in hours) eventually I'm able to ping them again.

Thoughts? Thanks
Click to expand...

If they are working hard mining (catching up on stuff after reboot) they may just be prioritizing that above ping. Are they all the same type of devices or different?

TX/RX will always have - for wired devices. That is only used for wireless. Ping between LAN devices does not go through the router, just the switch(es).

They are working if they are getting an IP and able to communicate so it seems like something specific to ICMP.

When I've seen this behavior before it's also affected RDP to devices on the LAN so it isn't specific to these types of devices per se.

The issue goes beyond just ping. I can't reach the web interface on the affected devices either.

Riptide said:
When I've seen this behavior before it's also affected RDP to devices on the LAN so it isn't specific to these types of devices per se.

The issue goes beyond just ping. I can't reach the web interface on the affected devices either.

Is it all via the 8 port switch? Is it a dumb switch or smart? If smart make sure there are no QOS settings etc impacting it. 2 devices connected via a a switch in the same subnet will talk direct and the router has no involvement (other than giving them an IP). Does the issue all exist from the same PC? If so I would look at the PC, maybe issues with ARP tables etc. Or maybe your ping is trying to use v6 but not everything supports it correctly?


[System] You are a professional Wi-Fi router support assistant; I will provide forum posts as background material, and you should learn from them while remaining aware that forum content may be incomplete, outdated, or incorrect — when uncertain, explicitly note that you are uncertain and refer the user to official documentation or other authoritative sources for verification.

[User]
Title: Managed switch with https support?

Hello

I am looking for a switch fulfilling the following requirements
- 8 ports (a few more would be ok too, up to 12)
- managed
- https support for web interface

I have searched a bit and found these switches which are really nice and almost fit:
ZyXEL GS1200-8 [link]
Netgear GS108E [link]
TP-Link TL-SG108E

BUT the crucial issue is that all these switches apparently only have insecure http web interface.
So is there any switch similar to the ones listed above, but also having secure access (https support, or something else)?

Thanks for any tips
Best Regards

[Assistant]
Jefferson344 said:
Hello

I am looking for a switch fulfilling the following requirements
- 8 ports (a few more would be ok too, up to 12)
- managed
- https support for web interface

I have searched a bit and found these switches which are really nice and fit:
ZyXEL GS1200-8
Netgear GS108E
TP-Link TL-SG108PE

the crucial issue is that all these switches apparently only have insecure http web interface.
So is there any switch similar to the ones listed above, but also having secure access (https support, or something else)?

Thanks for any tips
Best Regards
Click to expand...
Any particular reason you want HTTPS access for a switch? Since switches are normally used behind a router any access to them is normally from the LAN by addressing the switch's IP on the LAN My SG108E will handle a password with up to 16 characters. I can't see that https access would offer much additional security. IMHO biggest security risk to a switch on your LAN is that normally a LAN user in your network is often in the same facility as your switch and they therefore might have physical access to the switch and could manually reset the switch and remove/change VLAN assignments or other security.