OpenWrt One - celebrating 20 years of OpenWrt

There is no 2042 M.2 type. I assume, this was a mistake and @blogic actually meant M.2 2242.

I guess, that the most common M.2 length of 2280 is too long, so 2242 was chosen. That's fine. But there's an even shorter length of 2230(mm) and interestingly, this length is much more common than 2242. If you look out for SSDs to buy, you'll find more offerings for 2230 than for 2242.

So... can you design the router PCB in a way, that both 2242 and 2230 can be used?

2242 --> 2230 adapters are very inexpensive and work well.

2242 --> 2230 adapters are not necessary at all. They wouldn't even make sense.
Just another spacer/standoff for the screw is necessary.


Don't those MediaTek chips need big phat heatsinks?


Major brain fart, I said GL.iNet 6000 but meant 3000, which does not have particularly large heatsinks...

Seeing that OpenWrt logo on the PCB :star_struck:


GL-MT3000 is built with active fan cooling, please see the teardown:

So, yes, a cooling solution is needed. If it should be passive cooling then a large heatsink may be necessary. With active fan based cooling the heatsink can be smaller but a fan will need to be installed for forced air flow.


... and I thought that the "o" in the "MediaTek Filogic" is just an easter egg ... as it's like the OpenWrt logo! :see_no_evil: :sweat_smile:

1 Like

Is there a case that is more WAP like and can fit internal antennas? Example Teklager

Don't think so just yet. But you can design one to be 3d printed and share it with this community. Or wait until some brave soul does it for you :wink:

There will be a metal case for the beginning and once we find someone that can 3D design a case for wall mounting we will create tooling to produce it.


And don't forget the 3D-printer fanatics that could print their own 'box'.
I do not have the real measurements, but starting with something like this:

Wall-mounting can be done easy, although you have to know the screw-height to PCB. This design also needs much more openings for air-flow and all other openings, I know.



A good idea was expressed by the user "mihaibuba" if you think logically: what will the user choose - a set of devices or all in one? Why do I need an openvrt router - there's another router behind it? Why are there only two RJ 45 ports? many people need 6 pcs.? If this is a SOC limitation, let's take a more modern one!? Why cut the main part? there is no wired connection, but disks are attached? M2 SD USB.....
and there is a draft scheme? in which CAD? Where can I see it?
The idea is to make the rasberi-PI size. Good. But the power supply? Cooling? As a result, the media server on AMD and Intel will be more functional, and there are much more RJ45 ports. Please increase the number of ports.
TP-link Archer AX80 AX6000....

So respectfully, that ship has sailed, even before this thread was started. The question to the community was less 'brain storm desirables/requirements' and more 'would this combination attract your interest/ would you want one'. The first boards are already being tested, so I would guess the only changes to expect are those forced by some external factor (like component availability).

That said, people needing 6 wired PCs typically already need an external switch, since typical all-in-one home routers often only come with 4 LAN ports... I also question the basis for the claim "many people need 6 pcs", I do not claim to know how the needs are distributed, but 6 devices that need to be connected over wires seems like a high number to me. (With a family of 5 we have 8 wired devices connected, but I consider this the exception not the rule, for both head count per household and used wired ports...)

1 Like


You don't have to continue :slight_smile: A family of 5 people. Sometimes you have to connect more devices. You can look at it from the other side: in the example I gave - 5 ports - the device is there - it is for sale - there is a need! In early publications, the characteristics are different. There are mentions of a large number of ports. I think we need to return, an open community - that's why it's open - in order to accept the idea in time. The idea has already been there - it needs to be activated. Perhaps you need a SOC where you can connect another SOC with ports. Perhaps by a module. Technically, this is possible. Maybe M2 or 2.54 pins - it doesn't matter.
You can look at it from another angle: High-rise apartment buildings (putting aside the debate about the dangers of WI-FI) twisting the power does not always give results. There are a lot of devices, a lot of them, the addition of wave scattering and so on - for a stable signal it is easier to take a wire, the result will always be stable. :slight_smile:
Why cut the device


The OpenWRT specification also included a larger number of ports.
I'm talking about this message. The idea is also good. Can I get a link to the project itself, the details? I don't see a link to development/testing?!

Whether that post/idea is good or not is a bit besides the point, this is not what the OpenWrt One is. For better or worse a taxonomy of routers and use-cases was not what this thread was asking. Sure we are free to discuss that, but as interesting as such a discussion might be, I do not expect it to feed back into the One's design, which was pretty much fixed when the post was made...

1 Like

A link, please?

See here:

"I am expecting that the first 15 PCBA samples will be produced shortly
and be shipped by end of march."

And here:

for something that looks like a modified photograph of a board.

Respectfully, have you actually read this thread to its end yet?


Here too: