Who wants to use LEDE, and is still not using it? (and why)

@bladeoner Has this been reported as a bug? I assume you cannot reproduce it anymore since you'd need LEDE installed again, but it certainly would help if the devs aren't aware of it yet...

Installed the recent new build for the WR1043ND v4, but found that it had dropped my WAN speeds (Speedtesting) from 95 Mbps on the stock firmware, to 30-40 Mbps for no reason whatsoever. Although it improved Wi-Fi speeds by a lot in comparison to the TP-Link stock firmware, it's a bit of a shame to lose all the LAN speed, so waiting on it to become more stable.

I think you'll get more feedback if you ask this question in the "Using and Installing LEDE" category. (https://forum.openwrt.org/c/general)

It would also help to describe the exact build you used, and other tests you may have performed. Thanks.

@richb-hanover,

I really like those projects though they should be more integrated into the community.
The thing is this. their community is not really connected to openwrt / Lede. Just like GLi-net has it's own forum and thats all fine, though there is this gap between the endusers and the developers.

Personally i would prefer to share the configurations here in the community. A wild idea that then pops up:
Have some kind of sub-forum that can be synchronised That those projects can host on their site, and discussions that are also available here.
This can then also provide extra moderators? Ok, can of worms is now open :slight_smile: But maybe there is a better idea that can draw projects more into the community? (and promote those projects as a result)

I had no clue about IQrouter and Homenet (allthough homenet does ring a bell)

Maybe we should also make a ToP? Table of projects. Where projects can make a description page. And that endusers can search.... If a user wants a router that with VPN and NAS on a 71xx. check 3 boxes and all projects pop up in a list. This could actually be the bridge that i had in mind.

And it also could benefit the hardware manufacturers. But it will also draw in more (potential) end users with more question.

I am not using LEDE because i have not figured out how to build it for my boards yet.

I have been using openwrt for about 2 years now. My first use was with the Arduino yun. I have since flashed both of my dlink routers with openwrt.

I like the idea of using LEDE for micro controller boards that run linux such as the Yun, Vocore, and Mediatek 7688. All of these boards ship with openwrt. But I am currently trying to build LEDE for my mediatek smart7688 board.

I like the idea of LEDE and have been hopeful that this project will succeed. I would love to see a version of LEDE that is IoT focused. If LEDE offered real improvements over openwrt for IoT-centric boards, then the manufacturers would switch to using sources from LEDE when building their custom firmwares.

my $0.02

1 Like

@Borromini I didn't report it as a bug yet because I was trying to figure out what it can be. I'm also experimenting with porting Dnsmasq from LEDE (version 2.76) to Openwrt Chaos Calmer (uses 2.73) I experienced the same but it is working. The only problem that I have is this is my production router and I cannot experiment too much, I don't have a spare one.

@charcoal Thanks for the note. I agree that projects like IQrouter and Homenet can be welcomed to participate, but I'm not sure we need to work too hard to pull them in, or to "regulate" how they present themselves. For example:

  • IQrouter is still based on OpenWrt. They're looking hard at LEDE, and waiting forit to become a stable platform, at which point, they plan to switch over. I would welcome them to start a topic in the Community Builds, Packages, Projects category.

  • Homenet is good on development, but seems less concerned about deployment. They, too, could find a good home talking about their project in the Community Builds section.

But being aware of our "power" (or lack thereof, to tell the truth), I think the best path is to welcome all who care to add information to the LEDE site/forum/project, and let those groups drive the amount of their participation.

@tippy2k

What kind of improvements do you have in mind?
Could you name a few small and simple improvements?
Also an example of IoT utopia for instance?
And something in between for the near future whishes?
And the big question who should build them?

For sensors there is i2c
Serial communications with arduino can be done .

I assume the problem is that no two routers use the same GPIO's, nor breakout them all them on a easy reachable pin. Yun, DominoPi and a few others have this option and even they have their differences.

maybe a DEV could tell us what could be done with software and what actually is the most practical approach? Building it will most likely need someone with creative ideas.

Should the LEDE forum have a specific IoT corner? Or another kind of 'Bric-a-box' tinker section?

I hope to see your IoT creations one day! So please share and spark some ideas.

There should be no pressure, but only an option for people to list them in a table, just like we do with the routers. So that there is a list of devices that can run LEDE and a list of projects that are based on LEDE

Think 'connecting people' LEDE is the interface between the Hardware and the end user.
So if LEDE project can bring the hardware, the enduser , external projects, and the developers closer together that would be the glue. We also do not regulate how we present the routers, we just list the features in a way that users can make a better educated choice to what router options are available for them.

Evethough i hope that this will not destract or overtax the devs. Endusers arn't always aware of the workload. I have the feeling that the Devs are already busy enough with their own ideas and are not all that interested in ideas of people who don't have coding skills. Understandable. But what can we do to act as a filter? Endusers also like to share their ideas.

Do we need more people with specific teaching skills? (and with a lot of patience)

I also have Piratebox Librarybox Freifunk Gargoyle and many other projects in mind. Search engines like Google arn't all that helpful when someone seaches for "all LEDE based project" (Or OpenWRT for that matter since there are no LEDE based options available yet)

I try to figure out what could work but i'm also aware that any of my ideas could be an obstacle. I see it as growing pains, cell devision... LEDE is a cell devision of OpenWRT, It gives the room to expand the shared intelligence. Same DNA, and it brings the two in a natural balance again. A bit of competition, and room for opposite ideas and approaches.

Listing the LEDE based projects should promote those projects. Just by making then easy to discover and searchable for their main features.

@charcoal

What kind of improvements do you have in mind?
Could you name a few small and simple improvements?

  • Changes to the UI for things like:
  • GPIO,PWM,ADC,I2C dashboards and controls
  • Cloud servers, MQTT
  • IFTTT dashboard and editor
  • Pre-defined networking scenarios and scripts for failovers
    e.g.: try mesh first, if error start access point

Also an example of IoT utopia for instance?

  • If there is an on-off switch somewhere they can press, 90% of projects are good to go.
  • A framework to help customize and deploy:
  • networks
  • web interfaces
  • APIs
  • Cloud services
  • OTA updates

And something in between for the near future whishes?

  • Full driver support for common IoT boards:
  • completion of opensouce mt76 driver for linkit7688 and Vocore2 boards

For sensors there is i2c
Serial communications with arduino can be done .
I assume the problem is that no two routers use the same GPIO's, nor breakout them all them on a easy reachable pin. Yun, DominoPi and a few others have this option and even they have their differences.
maybe a DEV could tell us what could be done with software and what actually is the most practical approach?

  • For boards without a MCU
  • LibMRAA has a lot of promise.
    It has configurations files to map the pins.
  • For boards with an MCU
  • Firmatta is good choice
    pin mappings match standard Arduino pins
  • Serial communication
  • Arduino Yun Bridge (my least favorite)
  • Custom. Anything goes.

Building it will most likely need someone with creative ideas.
Should the LEDE forum have a specific IoT corner? Or another kind of 'Bric-a-box' tinker section?

I think that you will find makers to be very creative. If you give them space to talk about their projects using LEDE or openwrt, they will be able to help this community understand their needs and desires better. Build it and see what happens.

And the big question who should build them?

I think that should be decided by something like a LEDE IoT working group. But it would be nice to think that community members could step up and board manufacturers could contribute as well.

I hope to see your IoT creations one day! So please share and spark some ideas.

Sure, here is a picture of my garden water system. It is built with an old Arduino Yun and a solenoid driven valve . It has an ethernet uplink and spreads additional wifi to my back yard. But most importantly it waters my plants every other day.

1 Like

Yeah, I did that, such a strange issue. I've tracked it down to WAN to LAN connections that are synced to 100 Mbps Full Duplex only. Wifi and 1 Gbps LAN work just fine. This behaviour is not observed on the stock firmware even with HW NAT off.

Really a dealbreaker for me as my desktop is connected via a cable that doesn't support 1 Gbps. My connection is 100 Mbps either way.

GPIO,PWM,ADC,I2C dashboards and controls would indeed be very welcome
https://lede-project.org/packages/pkgdata/libmosquitto-nossl Just found it, never used it.
I wonder MQTT and IFTTT users there are here on the forum.
For pre-defined network scenario's have a look at Dirk's travelmate
https://forum.openwrt.org/viewtopic.php?id=66391 and
https://forum.openwrt.org/viewtopic.php?id=67697

I like your idea's, maybe a DEV could chip in and explain he challenges and how much work is involved?
I also like to tinker with electronics, but my coding skills are very limited. For me a few GUI widgets would make a big difference. I think it would be cool if router manufacturers would add a tiny widget to access GPIO pins. to pull them high and low or to drive PWM Maybe a framework would be an option?
As in: LEDE provides a basic framework and router manufactures then write a plugin style widget for the GPIO. Then we can tinker with those widgets etc., (and they can sell more routers)

BTW, how do you provide security on the sprinkle system?

How hackable is it? I can imagine a mudbath surprise in the morning. :slight_smile:

I don't have any ports open to the internet and it is behind an edge router running openwrt. It uses a cloud server provided by mediatek for a web interface. The Yun acts as a client and keeps an asynchronous connection to the server. The device can receive commands and post values to the server.

Mediatek Cloud Sandbox (mediatek products are not required for use.)
https://mcs.mediatek.com/

It's a fun toy, but you can't ship a product based on it. As to how hack-able those servers are, I have not tried. I think they are using MQTT but i am not sure.

Maybe Nextcloud is more convenient for MQTT?

I really want to use LEDE but installing packages just doesn't work. Starting from just a few builds maybe mid to late december I've been unable to opkg update without getting a wget 4 on my r8000 - so I've gone and flashed ddwrt. Today I've tried with a pi b+ and while connected with hdmi and a keyboard I was able to ping 192.168.1.1 successfully. Again opkg update just returns wget 4. Inconvenient, yeah. Stinks, yeah.
And I don't know if I will understand the imagebuilder stuff. Any idea when things will return to usual ??

no problem here but just to summarize what you said because I feel like it reflect most people that are non developers type orientated, which is important

have difficulty getting firmware to work "out of the box" (no luci? needs to use opkg to install || have no internet initially to install luci for easy wireless repeater setup (?)) --> Go to a firmware that is more *user friendly*

...and when that happens, users is unable to experience these points (On the homepage)
"People install LEDE because they believe it works better than the stock firmware from their vendor. They find it is more stable, offers more features, is more secure and has better support."

Most problems can be solve by building own image with luci but for most people, they don't want to go through the process (which is why there are many posting from various users in threads pertaining to custom builds (with luci)

EDIT: I've been following luci-ng | hopefully its incorporated in the LEDE builds as default once its done (because why not? :slight_smile: Personally I feel that its easier for those who are familiar with the cmdline interface to build a custom image without luci compared to the other way around

1 Like

Someone else had the same problem and solved it: Opkg update error (wget returned 4) - #6 by aleung

1 Like

This "famous" wget 4 error in opkg is just an general error from wget that says that your network settings are wrong. It has almost nothing to do with opkg itself.

https://www.gnu.org/software/wget/manual/wget.html

Wget may return one of several error codes if it encounters problems.
...
4 Network failure.

It simply means that the basic network connectivity is not ok, yet.

1 Like

I read that LEDE goes back to OpenWRT.
what happen with the Release 17.01.1 ?

The 17.01 release series will be continued as planned. The only thing that will change in the future wrt. release planning is the name, all processes remain the same.