Hi KevinDB,
Take a look here: https://forum.openwrt.org/viewtopic.php?id=53703
Thanks a lot,
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.
Speeds have been pretty good with OpenWRT trunk snapshots, i don't think you will miss original TP-Link firmware.
Ok!!!
Thanks a lot,
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
root@Archer-Lede:~# iwinfo
wlan0 ESSID: "just2confuse5"
Access Point: E8:DE:27:*******
Mode: Master Channel: 40 (5.200 GHz)
Tx-Power: 23 dBm Link Quality: 62/70
Signal: -48 dBm Noise: -105 dBm
Bit Rate: 6.0 MBit/s
Encryption: WPA2 PSK (CCMP)
Type: nl80211 HW Mode(s): 802.11nac
Hardware: 168C:003C 0000:0000 [Qualcomm Atheros QCA9880]
TX power offset: none
Frequency offset: none
Supports VAPs: yes PHY name: phy0
wlan1 ESSID: "just2confuse5"
Access Point: E8:DE:27*********
Mode: Master Channel: 1 (2.412 GHz)
Tx-Power: 23 dBm Link Quality: unknown/70
Signal: unknown Noise: -89 dBm
Bit Rate: unknown
Encryption: WPA2 PSK (CCMP)
Type: nl80211 HW Mode(s): 802.11bgn
Hardware: unknown [Generic MAC80211]
TX power offset: unknown
Frequency offset: unknown
Supports VAPs: yes PHY name: phy1
root@Archer-Lede:~#
root@Archer-Lede:~# uname -a
Linux Archer-Lede 4.4.30 #0 Wed Nov 9 11:17:52 2016 mips GNU/Linux
root@Archer-Lede:~#
C:\Users\mee\Desktop\iperf-3.1.3-win64>iperf3.exe -c 192.168.1.104 -i 1 -w 1M -l 4K -b 850M
Connecting to host 192.168.1.104, port 5201
[ 4] local 192.168.1.106 port 50771 connected to 192.168.1.104 port 5201
[ ID] Interval Transfer Bandwidth
[ 4] 0.00-1.01 sec 8.50 MBytes 70.5 Mbits/sec
[ 4] 1.01-2.00 sec 8.70 MBytes 73.8 Mbits/sec
[ 4] 2.00-3.00 sec 9.16 MBytes 76.9 Mbits/sec
[ 4] 3.00-4.00 sec 8.77 MBytes 73.5 Mbits/sec
[ 4] 4.00-5.00 sec 9.20 MBytes 76.9 Mbits/sec
[ 4] 5.00-6.00 sec 9.15 MBytes 77.1 Mbits/sec
[ 4] 6.00-7.00 sec 8.93 MBytes 74.9 Mbits/sec
[ 4] 7.00-8.00 sec 8.92 MBytes 74.8 Mbits/sec
[ 4] 8.00-9.00 sec 8.85 MBytes 74.2 Mbits/sec
[ 4] 9.00-10.00 sec 8.55 MBytes 71.6 Mbits/sec
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
[ ID] Interval Transfer Bandwidth
[ 4] 0.00-10.00 sec 88.7 MBytes 74.4 Mbits/sec sender
[ 4] 0.00-10.00 sec 87.9 MBytes 73.8 Mbits/sec receiver
iperf Done.
------------------------------------------------------------
5Ghz Network
C:\Users\mee\Desktop\iperf-3.1.3-win64>iperf3.exe -c 192.168.1.104 -i 1 -w 1M -l 4K -b 850M
Connecting to host 192.168.1.104, port 5201
[ 4] local 192.168.1.106 port 50780 connected to 192.168.1.104 port 5201
[ ID] Interval Transfer Bandwidth
[ 4] 0.00-1.00 sec 19.2 MBytes 161 Mbits/sec
[ 4] 1.00-2.00 sec 19.5 MBytes 164 Mbits/sec
[ 4] 2.00-3.00 sec 19.9 MBytes 166 Mbits/sec
[ 4] 3.00-4.00 sec 19.1 MBytes 160 Mbits/sec
[ 4] 4.00-5.00 sec 19.1 MBytes 161 Mbits/sec
[ 4] 5.00-6.00 sec 19.0 MBytes 159 Mbits/sec
[ 4] 6.00-7.00 sec 17.7 MBytes 149 Mbits/sec
[ 4] 7.00-8.00 sec 17.9 MBytes 150 Mbits/sec
[ 4] 8.00-9.00 sec 17.7 MBytes 149 Mbits/sec
[ 4] 9.00-10.00 sec 17.7 MBytes 149 Mbits/sec
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
[ ID] Interval Transfer Bandwidth
[ 4] 0.00-10.00 sec 187 MBytes 157 Mbits/sec sender
[ 4] 0.00-10.00 sec 187 MBytes 157 Mbits/sec receiver
iperf Done.
C:\Users\mee\Desktop\iperf-3.1.3-win64>
Same test without any option
5Ghz Net
C:\Users\meee\Desktop\iperf-3.1.3-win64>iperf3.exe -c 192.168.1.104
Connecting to host 192.168.1.104, port 5201
[ 4] local 192.168.1.106 port 50814 connected to 192.168.1.104 port 5201
[ ID] Interval Transfer Bandwidth
[ 4] 0.00-1.00 sec 13.1 MBytes 110 Mbits/sec
[ 4] 1.00-2.00 sec 13.2 MBytes 111 Mbits/sec
[ 4] 2.00-3.01 sec 13.0 MBytes 108 Mbits/sec
[ 4] 3.01-4.00 sec 13.2 MBytes 112 Mbits/sec
[ 4] 4.00-5.00 sec 13.2 MBytes 111 Mbits/sec
[ 4] 5.00-6.00 sec 13.0 MBytes 109 Mbits/sec
[ 4] 6.00-7.00 sec 13.2 MBytes 112 Mbits/sec
[ 4] 7.00-8.00 sec 13.4 MBytes 112 Mbits/sec
[ 4] 8.00-9.00 sec 13.4 MBytes 112 Mbits/sec
[ 4] 9.00-10.00 sec 13.6 MBytes 114 Mbits/sec
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
[ ID] Interval Transfer Bandwidth
[ 4] 0.00-10.00 sec 132 MBytes 111 Mbits/sec sender
[ 4] 0.00-10.00 sec 132 MBytes 111 Mbits/sec receiver
iperf Done.
C:\Users\mee\Desktop\iperf-3.1.3-win64>iperf3.exe -c 192.168.1.104
Connecting to host 192.168.1.104, port 5201
[ 4] local 192.168.1.106 port 50821 connected to 192.168.1.104 port 5201
[ ID] Interval Transfer Bandwidth
[ 4] 0.00-1.01 sec 8.12 MBytes 67.6 Mbits/sec
[ 4] 1.01-2.00 sec 8.50 MBytes 71.8 Mbits/sec
[ 4] 2.00-3.01 sec 8.62 MBytes 71.5 Mbits/sec
[ 4] 3.01-4.02 sec 8.62 MBytes 72.2 Mbits/sec
[ 4] 4.02-5.00 sec 8.50 MBytes 72.4 Mbits/sec
[ 4] 5.00-6.00 sec 8.25 MBytes 69.1 Mbits/sec
[ 4] 6.00-7.00 sec 8.25 MBytes 69.2 Mbits/sec
[ 4] 7.00-8.00 sec 8.88 MBytes 74.3 Mbits/sec
[ 4] 8.00-9.01 sec 8.25 MBytes 69.1 Mbits/sec
[ 4] 9.01-10.01 sec 7.62 MBytes 64.0 Mbits/sec
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
[ ID] Interval Transfer Bandwidth
[ 4] 0.00-10.01 sec 83.6 MBytes 70.1 Mbits/sec sender
[ 4] 0.00-10.01 sec 83.6 MBytes 70.1 Mbits/sec receiver
iperf Done.
C:\Users\Jens\Desktop\iperf-3.1.3-win64>
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.
Im not sure. On 2.4Ghz it is, in iperf, half of 5ghz net. But if i try do download from a fast FTP i get 200Mbit down, dosent matter 5 or 2.4Ghz.
Hi,
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.
Thanks a lot,
The "lost" of speed it was about a bad configuration on my router (my mistake).
Now AC Wifi is on 80 Mhz. and working like a charm!!!
Thank,s
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.
Thanks,
Hmmm, we have to set this noscan option? Anything else?
Thats what i see with noscan 1. Without there are no changes??
root@Archer-Lede:/etc/config# iwinfo wlan1 info
wlan1 ESSID: "just2confuse"
Access Point: E8:DE:**********
Mode: Master Channel: 6 (2.437 GHz)
Tx-Power: 23 dBm Link Quality: 70/70
Signal: -38 dBm Noise: -92 dBm
Bit Rate: 41.1 MBit/s
Encryption: WPA2 PSK (CCMP)
Type: nl80211 HW Mode(s): 802.11bgn
Hardware: unknown [Generic MAC80211]
TX power offset: unknown
Frequency offset: unknown
Supports VAPs: yes PHY name: phy1
root@Archer-Lede:/etc/config#
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.
That's my opinion, of course.
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.
Every device working at 150 Mb. seems to be working fine right now (48 hours later).
If I detect some problems I'll post it here.
You need to be aware of the RF environment surrounding you. I live in a rural area, so there are no adjacent access points. If you live in town/city, you'll have neighbors whose access points may interfere.
My favorite tool for an RF survey is WiFi Analyzer from farproc. Free install from Android store. (Regrettably, iOS doesn't appear to allow the low-level access to the RF hardware to produce a similar tool without jailbreaking...)
Still working like a charm in the 40 Mhz. channels.
I will stay in the 40 Mhz. channels, no problems after more than a week on it.