At that point, just for a few minutes, because I've rebooted it shortly before taking this screenshot. Current uptime is 20h45min and the reported upload on eth1 is up to 247.2 GiB (and still going up).
However, it looks like the WAN interface stats appear to be more or less correct - it's one of the Ethernet devices that's doing overtime on uploads. Stats for lan1/5 are far lower than expected, as the desktop on lan1 just pulled a few gigabytes of data from the NAS on lan5, and none of this is accounted for.
QUESTION -
When using 2.5GB Ethernet devices, should the device port MTU be increased to 9000?
Isn't this considered Jumbo Frame, or some such?
I guess this can be forced via ethtool?
It looks like someone created a bug report for the 2.4GHz issue, but they did exactly what I said shouldn't be done, which is to say "2.4 GHz does not deliver appropriate speeds" without actually providing any detailed information.
It'd help if someone could install the beta firmware, disable 5GHz, note down the WiFi settings and then perform speed tests from 2 or 3 devices. Then install an OpenWrt snapshot, apply the same WiFi settings (with WED enabled) and repeat the speed tests with the same devices. That way you're able to demonstrate just how severe the issue is.
The bug report also says that 2.4GHz is limited to 60Mbps, but I'm able to achieve anywhere from 60Mbps to 100Mbps with my Android phone. Although, I assume with the beta firmware I could consistently get 160Mbps or more? I just don't have the time to test it right now, otherwise I would of created the bug report myself.
Whenever 23.05.3 is released, which should be soon. Although the snapshots have been very stable too.
I just got this device early this week.
Did the initial sysupgrade load, didn't notice kernel version then.
Been doing auc attended sysupgrades since then.
I don't know if it's a bug, but the firmware selector will often serve outdated custom builds instead of building new images every day. So you need to add or remove a non-critical package to get it to build a new image.
Yeah, that's an option too. I only mentioned the firmware selector since that's what @tcp quoted and I figured that by mentioning it here someone might know if it's supposed to serve outdated custom images, or if that's a bug.
I would of thought that older snapshots are removed from the firmware selector when a new version becomes available, since the whole point in selecting a snapshot is to get a bleeding edge version.
