I've bought an Archer C7 v2 router and I'll try to install/configure LEDE firmware.
I've read a lot (more or less) on OpenWRT/LEDE forum/wiki, and I think I understand all the steps I have to do for having sucess on it.
But, I have one doubt, about the Wifi on that router.
Is the LEDE firmware working fine in that router with 5 Ghz. band?
I've read many people (using OpenWRT, not LEDE) talking about problems and speed lost on 5 Ghz. band.
I have read something about a bug on the driver (ath10k). It's solved in LEDE firmware?
Which version on LEDE version do you recommend me, EU, Standard?
My router is from EU.
I have two Archer C7 v2 units, one as my main router, another as an access point. I'm not aware of any known bug with ath10k...can you perhaps expand on that?
There's no real difference between the US & EU LEDE firmware versions, they're just to get past a check on stock firmware which requires firmware from the correct region, once you're on LEDE it doesn't matter.
I skimmed that thread and the reality is that my use case doesn't have a need for screaming edge/theoretical bandwidth chasing so I don't feel able to advise.
How the wireless driver backports to LEDE's linux 4.4 kernel is a mystery to me also.
Personally, if I were purely interested in headline bandwidth then I'd steer clear of any 3rd party firmware.
Hmm, thats a quick test with an early archer c7 v2. One site is comuter connected with a cable and the other (target) is a laptop on wifew. 5 and 2.4Ghz capale
I'm not an expert, but it looks great.
It's supposed the max speed for Archer C7 on AC+N (5 Ghz.+2,4 Ghz) is 218 MBytes, and your tests are about 187 MBytes.
It's not the top, but almost the top of wifi's router.
Finally saturday I installed LEDE firmware in my Archer C7 v2.
Rigth now everything seems to work fine, but the wifi gave me more speed in the official TP-Link firm that in the LEDE firmware.
I tested the wifi speed before changing to LEDE, and now it's just a little slower than before.
I'll continue testing my wifi over the week to be sure of that "lost" of speed.
For me it's not a problem, but I think is good no know it.
On the 2.4 Ghz. wifi interface I had to add the option noscan '1' to make it work at 40 Mhz.
By default was working at 20 Mhz. instead of 40 Mhz. I had configured on the interface.
On the 2.4 Ghz. wifi interface I had to add the option noscan '1' to make it work at 40 Mhz.
By default was working at 20 Mhz. instead of 40 Mhz. I had configured on the interface.
I think that's and old bug reported.
It's not a bug.
According to the IEEE 802.11 specification, one has to scan for neighbouring Access Points prior to enabling 40 MHz channel width. If a neighbouring Access Point is found which might be negative affected by using 40 MHz width channels, it will not be enabled.
With noscan you are disable this check. Might give you more speed but most likely cause issues for surrounding wireless networks. Long story short: Don't do this, don't be a d***head!
Already with HT20 only four 2.4GHz channels can be used without having overlapping issues. With HT40 only two channels are left. Head to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_WLAN_channels for a more detailed explanation.
What i do not understand atm. 70Mbit on 2.4Ghz are ???good??? I did not get more - tested with iperf3 and 2 Wlan clients. If start 2 oder Option "P" i stand at 70Mbit as max.
My computers on the 20 Mhz. were connected to 65 Mb., and changing to 40 Mhz. now are connecting to 150 Mb.
Tecnhically maybe is better to be on the 20 Mhz., I can't discuss that (I'm not an expert), but, if have a computer/mobile... capable to be working at 150 Mb. by wifi, is "stupid" going at 65 Mb.
Forcing HT40 in the presence of other overlapping networks is not only creating problems for those networks, but also for yourself. HT40 is more fragile than normal 20 MHz wide channels, so the interference you inevitably receive from your environment has a much higher chance to introduce link disruptions than without it.