On snapshots they dynamically appear only when the default supplicant is replaced with wpad-mbedtls is installed; same with your build but in this case they don’t work, possibly because the default supplicant is not built as a module.
rikroe
471
Maybe it makes sense to use wpad-openssl instead? Openssl is available anyhow and we're not space-constrained.
I am using on my custom build based on pesa1234's amazing work and works without issue.
3 Likes
@alex.ntrn As suggested some post ago...
You have to use hostapd or wpad full package if you compile from source or wait next release.
I'll swap from wpad-basic-openssl to wpad
wpad-openssl (full) --> suggested (wpa3-wpa2)
Tested right now and it is working.
So, why are usuful that function mentioned by you if I can ask?
2 Likes
upload: 2024.06.19_r26771_6.6.33_next-r2.5.mtk.rc4
- wpad-basic-openssl replaced with wpad-openssl
- irqbalance disabled as default
- added irq_affinity script
- kernel update to 6.6.33
- mt76: refreshed and update patch
6 Likes
Thanks, yep, I had it in a couple of builds that I compiled from source earlier, but in the last build I prepared I started from scratch (your config) and that's why those options weren't supported.
BSS transition seems to help latency with my devices when they roam between 2.4 and 5 GHz (if I'm in a call on my phone, for example), whereas with WNM the battery of devices seems to last longer, although this last one could be a placebo effect.
Try to eable twt setting if your device is wifi6 it should be better
Testing twt as we speak, and I also took the chance to reset the router and restore from backup as otherwise the radios just wouldn't work, same issue as gssjshark had earlier.
wpad-openssl is also not compatible with those 4 options, right?
wpad-openssl works perfectly with the 802.11k and 802.11v settings
2 Likes
Got it, then there's something off with my config as I was still getting errors with those keys with this morning's build. I won't have access to the router for a few days, so I'll test some more later on to try and figure out what it is.
Other than that, everything works perfectly and the latency is excellent, only +3 ms on download and +0 ms on upload. Thanks for your great work.
1 Like
First time I've compiled from source.
When I use the make menuconfig and make download commands do I just exit the configuration or do I save and exit?
If you want to change some packages save.
Then make download
3 Likes
phinn
481
All - what's the latest 'best' AQL limits people are using? 2500 for both high/low? Just curious.
1 Like
These are the aql right now
4 Likes
uploaded
2024.06.21_26829_6.6.34_next-r2.6.mtk.v1
- curl use openssl
- libuclient use openssl
- kernel 6.6.34
7 Likes
I’m personally running 1500/1500 as it fits my desire for lower latency vs higher throughput.
3 Likes
SiXX
485
It's a balance between throughput and loaded latency. I think @pesa1234 has great settings for the mass majority, however some such as @_FailSafe may prefer ultimate latency reduction at whatever throughput expense it takes. Good news is, there's not necessarily any wrong answers... just personal preferences.
4 Likes
Over 2 months...3 initial builds, 2 WED testing builds, 4 RC builds...lands us at a v1! ...unless I'm looking too much into the naming convention, I'd say that's cause for celebration!
We've had great collaboration on this thread to achieve top notch performance that we all now get to enjoy. A sincere "thank you!" to @pesa1234 for his hard work to achieve this milestone!
9 Likes
Would I run into any issues building an image from @pesa1234 GitHub repo, but using a more standard .config (e.g. I use mostly default core packages but add Samba and some target optimizations). Hoping to take advantage of the AQL and WiFi latency improvements as my MT6000 acts as dumb AP, but don't need all the other bells and whistles 
You shouldn't run into any issues. I have my own build (customized .config), but build from Pesa's repos. It's quite solid at this point.
2 Likes
I upgraded to this and everything seems to be working nicely.
I'm a bit of a newbie to OpenWRT. I notice there are updated versions available for some modules - specifically a bunch of kernel modules but also openssl 3.0.14-r2 from openssl 3.0.14-r1. I don't have any reason to update them and I guess I shouldn't but I was wondering what the usual procedure is and why they are out of date, given this (excellent) build from @pesa1234 is pretty much brand new. Do people usually update or is it only if you have good reason?
1 Like
