I wish I'd come across the GL front end BEFORE I learned Luci/UCI commands. But... in all fairness, learning all that stuff was the entertainment and there is that good feeling you get when everything is working right with no errors and clean logs with good speed and reliability. Those good feelings don't come easy. Maybe that's why I was so impressed with it and said, "DOH!" while hitting my head like Homer Simpson. I could have had a V8. The GL-iNet Admin Panel is embarrassingly easy. All those mistakes. All that hair pulling. All the frustration. All the stupid and snarly comments in this forum to entertain myself. It all could have been avoided.
1 Like
Hi, what gl.inet device You have? Or eon't have yet but want to buy?
I have the GL-MT300N-V2 Mango travel router and the GL-MT6000 Flint 2.
If you are new to GL-iNet, I'd buy the router below. It's a new model with the latest WiFi 7. It's a "travel" router, but it's also an excellent router. Really nice design.
2 Likes
I'm happy for You to have gl.inet device, i have mt3000 as a travel fellow. I have also bpi r4 two pieces but those aren't good devices. Gl.inet web panel is the best one fore nice devices.
1 Like
Yeah, great device: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xa7ydxoPnM8
Is IPQ5312 supported in mainline ?
The official OpenWrt Table of Hardware and release notes do not explicitly list IPQ5312 devices as fully supported out-of-the-box just yet. Successful installs typically rely on community builds or custom feeds.
There are specialty forks and external feeds (such as feed-ipq) that allow you to build OpenWrt for IPQ devices, but these are not always fully merged into the official mainline OpenWrt release.
That would be a "no" then ? 
Mainline OpenWrt support for the IPQ5312 is limited and still maturing.
So it's not a given that it'll be implemented? For me to consider the Flint 3, I need the mainline/vanilla OpenWRT to fully support it. It's a shame that GL.iNet went with Qualcomm with both the Slate 7 and Flint 3. I don't understand why! Just standardize all of their products with Mediatek chipsets!
What's wrong with the BPI R4?
My understanding is that it's still early days with OpenWRT and WiFi 7. If you want stability and support, you're probably better off with WiFi 6. It's also cheaper too. The community here has steered me away from WiFi 7. I'm still researching and learning, but the plan is to finish building my wireless and wired network by the end of this year. The only thing I have set is that my house is wired with Cat5e cables.
I would stay away from any QCOM builds like this one even if it has great looks and actually vry appealing price… lots of command of control software beaming back
Can you provide a source for that claim? I do not doubt it, but at the same time I want to trust, but verify.
just download any firmware including the flint3 and browse the contents … or buy any and get root access… that was my experience with qnap/xiaomi/dynalink
1 Like
You guys see the Flint 3e announcement? It’s a cheaper dual band version of Flint 3. Unfortunately still a qualcommbe target:
[https://www.gl-inet.com/products/gl-be6500/]
Wireguard is still rated at 680Mbits placing the CPU slower than the Flint 2/Filogic 830 rated at 900.
Opinion from me is maybe MediaTek Filogic 880 is just isn’t not good enough (or too expensive?) for WiFi 7 since no one is really using it. Other than MLO being slightly compelling there’s no meaningful point to WiFi 7 anyway.
5 Likes
They need to make the Flint 4 more like the Flint 2. Maybe add a tiny touchscreen like the Slate 7 and add a toggle switch for turning the VPN off and on.
2 Likes
I agree only way to force companies to open up with open source drivers and Openwrt support is by voting with your wallet.
1 Like
More likely is that broadcom and qualcom both saw the threat of filogic and lowered their prices substantially to kneecap them for wifi7. Filogic 840/850/870 are still MIA.
Asus appears to have announced a filogic 850(??):
(https://www.asus.com/networking-iot-servers/wifi-routers/all-series/prt-be59/)
1 Like