Need New DavidC502 Thread

Thank you for the information. Do we have to tell dnsmasq to forward requests to it?

That is no different than the original, other than you don't run multiple instances of the proxy. You configure multiple servers in the .toml configuration file and listen on a single port. The proxy then picks the best server from the list.

I only mentioned it because if you previously had multiple servers configured, dnsmasq would listen for each on a different port. Thus, dnsmasq should be reconfigured to no longer listen on the now unused additional ports.

How are people finding the 2018-05-18 build? Any majors to report.. Current build (r6781) i am running has been solid for the past 30 days...

WOW - what ever happened between r6781 and r6952 - what a huge performance jump - did quick and dirty speedtest.net (all the same target) - r6781 - 680mbps, stock - 720mbps, r6952 - 890mbps to WAN...wireless to the note 8 is sitting around the 500mbps over 5Ghz to WAN...for the testing I do multiple runs and average out..

1 Like

That's great news. Maybe the fastpath implementation added in kernel 4.14 is now running by default? That has a big affect on NAT throughput, finally getting close to stock hw NAT speed.

(Can't wait for the first OpenWrt 2018 release. Been missing LEDE's timely releases, thought that was the whole point of recombining efforts. Last official release was LEDE like 10 months ago. Dunno what we'd do without Davidc502.)

@davidc502 can miniupnpd be compiled with IGDv2 disabled in future builds. I have been using r6565 and IGDv1 miniupnpd from this thread. My WRT1200ACv2 has been running your builds since r2695 with no other problems.

r6781 has resulted in reboots, however I have loaded the older miniupnpd IGDv1 module immediately, so there may have been compatibility issues.

No need for that (assuming that the build has up-to-date miniupnpd).
IGDv1/2 selection is now a run-time option. So, just update your config file.

https://github.com/openwrt/packages/blob/master/net/miniupnpd/files/upnpd.config#L14
option igdv1 0

OK, got a bit of an issue. I have a samba server running and before I moved to Lede, I was moving large files at about 30-50MB/s (on dd-wrt, depending on file compression). I'm currently locked down at exactly 11.6MB/s. I've gone thru my server's and client's smb.conf and both of my linux boxes network settings (both server and client are Arch Linux). I've tested using both cifs and nfs protocols.
Is there some sort of limiter on DavidC's Lede? Am I missing a setting somewhere?
Prolly help if I tell you that I have a rango v1 and I'm running Lede SNAPSHOT r6952-5399de754d

No Samba limiting going on.. Samba is built from same sources as LEDE/Openwrt, and assuming dd-wrt. However, dd-wrt is very finely honed in areas, so there may additional configurations going on in dd-wrt that's helping you out - Unknown.

1 Like

What I meant by limiting was, not necessarily SMB or NFS, just traffic speeds between boxes on my network? Probably helps if I ask the right questions, eh?

oh look, an edit button!

I should point out that this is just an annoyance. Your builds are much more... Stable? than others. Way too many crashes on dd-wrt and stock

the new dnscrypt-proxy binary file is 6.39mb. there is an option to compress the file down to 1.67mb with upx. Link to Installation Instruction what is the best way to approach the big file size?

Hi Everyone its been a while since I've used the Forum but I'm Back to ask for advice regarding which build to use,
I've been using David502 Custom Build for over a year as it was the recommended build at the time on the OpenWrt Forum and had very few problems with the WiFi. I understand the WiFi issues are completely fixed on the most recent builds?

Honestly I've had very few problems with the build, it's fairly stable and I've only had the occasion hiccup, however I understand a lot has changed over the last year and honestly I haven't kept up with what has changed.

I'm really a noob when it comes to which build to choose and really could do with the advice from more experienced people.

Is Davids build still a recommended build for relative stability and WiFi performance ?

For all intents and purposes, all builds in the WRT AC Series wiki are stable and fine to use.

While the Development Branch has a Warning Wrap that the branch "should not be considered stable", this is only because it's built daily by BuildBot, so there is a chance some random commit could cause an issue.

  • With that being said, I've been running the Development Branch exclusively for the last 2 years across all 4 WRT AC Series routers I maintain and have never had an issue with instability.

  • The Warning Wrap has never been removed from the Development Branch because it's common knowledge Linux distro Development Branches [aka "Trunk"] should never be considered 100% stable, however this does not mean any one is unstable on any arbitrary day.
3 Likes

it shows how long I've been out the loop I didn't realise that the AC series have been focused in to only 3 available builds , Stable , Development and Davids build . This simplifies things, which is good. It would appear that Davids build is still the Best build for me, development build with added customisation.

Thanks for your help @JW0914

@Linuxmarvel It's not so much that it's been focused down to three builds, but that the only user who's maintained a working repo, willing to troubleshoot issues in their builds if anything goes wrong, is @davidc502 (of the original three that were listed).

  • We used to have 3 users who offered complete 3rd party builds, however one simply disappeared ~2yrs ago, and after ~6 months of no updates to their repo, their section was removed as it was no longer maintained.

  • The other user @arokh (OpenWrt forum) was gone for ~1yr, and upon returning to the forum (before it crashed), stated he was no longer going to be creating community builds.
    • His section is still in the wiki under 3rd party builds, however I removed the image links and added a warning wrap, as users will find the config files in his builds of interest since he offered a complete OOBE image... One of the most highly customized builds I've ever come across.

  • I believe @hnyman and @stangri may offer custom build repos, but can't recall for sure.

  • @sera (OpenWrt forum) worked on custom kernels for the Series, however I'm not sure if they ever came over to the LEDE forum.

The Third Party Builds section was mainly an effort to consolidate disparate info of trusted users/devs who maintained their own repos, in an effort to ensure users knew which ones the community trusted.

I personally recommend WRT AC Series users compile their own firmware if they want a customized image, as then one can choose the exact packages they want installed and have their own configs built into the compiled image.

  • A simple VM solution like VirtualBox is all one needs to create a Linux VM
    • I personally prefer Ubuntu and created a script a while back to automate the entire buildroot setup and image compile process
2 Likes

arokh is here with a build, but under the guise of a new moniker

2 Likes

Flashed to r6952, switched "option igdv1" to 1 and rebooted. However, it did not have an effect, as I have tested it in game and received NAT Type strict. Using my older setup results in NAT Type open. Also flashed to DD-WRT briefly, and had no NAT problems.

Also, r6952 rebooted the router on it's own. Fresh flash and only changed the upnpd.config. Anything after r6565 causes my WRT1200ACv2 to reboot.

Awesome =] His builds really are some of the most highly customized builds I've ever come across, intended to offer the end user a complete OOBE.

I'll work on getting his info updated in the wiki over the next days then.

Well, I have compiled every now and then a test build for WRT3200ACM for the CPU frequency scaling feature, but I have kept that build rather low-key (although it is quite stable up-to-date build with full source of the changes made):


1 Like

Very cool hnyman. Would be great to see this incorporated into Master or 18.06 for the range of WRT devices up to the WRT3200ACM / WRT32X. Would help optimize heat / power consumption / SoC lifespan.

Would be great to see radio power output scaling someday too, but I know that's unlikely. I've heard it's pegged at 100mW in OpenWrt due to drivers, which is absurd. I run my R7800 RF on low because I have smaller place.