Topic: Update on Linksys WRT1900AC support

The content of this topic has been archived between 16 Sep 2014 and 7 May 2018. Unfortunately there are posts – most likely complete pages – missing.

Page 391 of 598

Post #9751

dlang

28 Jan 2016, 23:45

davidc502 wrote:

I'm thinking maybe I didn't explain my thought well enough. The 4 antenna service both the 2.4 and 5ghz range, so one would figure the length of the antenna, is such, that it covers both bands. There should to be a sweet spot in there, and it's usually in the higher range of a multiple band antenna. (read-below)
I've used antenna that work on both 2 meter and 1.25 meter bands, and there's always a trade off in comparison to using 2 separate antennas at 1/2 wavelength for example.
But If I'm reading what you said, because of the really high frequencies used in Wifi, the gauge of the wire really has a direct impact on the frequency range the antenna will resonate at. This is interesting. It's been years since I've studied antennas, so I appreciate the information.

I wasn't clear enough in my answer (not uncommon :-)

because the wire size has such a large effect on the frequency range the antenna will work at, it's really easy to get something that will cover all of both bands well.

something optimized for 2.4 only will be a little long for 5GHz, so lower channels will have more gain (and something optimized for 5G will work best on higher 3.5G channels), but they are _so_ close together, and the wire dimensions have such a significant effect at this frequency that I would not expect any noticeable difference in practice.

Post #9752

shm0

29 Jan 2016, 05:44

On the weekend i would like to setup the vlans but i have one question left.
Currently i have two ethernet interfaces eth1 for the switch and eth0 for the wan.
But as fabbari shows in his example he is only using. eth0 as his interface.
Is this really the case when the vlan support is enabled? Or do i have to use
eth1.1 for the lan vlan and eth0.2 for wan vlan?

Post #9753

fabbari

29 Jan 2016, 06:15

@shm0

Once you enable VLANs you will create them as sub-interfaces of eth0. I think you may alias the WAN interface to eth1 --- but I never was bothered by eth0.2 as a name for an interface.

Also: remember to create the zones, firewall routes and eventually a DHCP server for your new VLAN.

Post #9754

Chadster766

29 Jan 2016, 09:34

Chadster766 wrote:

Anyone know why the standard Linux mtd-utils and u-boot-tools packages fail to work with the WRT1900\1200AC nand?

Debian Jessie u-boot-tools does work it was a CRC corruption in my /dev/mtd1 partition.

Post #9755

trustno1foxm

29 Jan 2016, 09:50

shm0 wrote:

On the weekend i would like to setup the vlans but i have one question left.
Currently i have two ethernet interfaces eth1 for the switch and eth0 for the wan.
But as fabbari shows in his example he is only using. eth0 as his interface.
Is this really the case when the vlan support is enabled? Or do i have to use
eth1.1 for the lan vlan and eth0.2 for wan vlan?

I had to use eth1.1 and so on.

Post #9756

leitec

29 Jan 2016, 14:27

shm0 wrote:

On the weekend i would like to setup the vlans but i have one question left.
Currently i have two ethernet interfaces eth1 for the switch and eth0 for the wan.
But as fabbari shows in his example he is only using. eth0 as his interface.
Is this really the case when the vlan support is enabled? Or do i have to use
eth1.1 for the lan vlan and eth0.2 for wan vlan?

You can configure the switch any way that you like, as long as the network interface configuration matches. The stock configuration with VLANs enabled on 1200AC and 1900ACv2 (not v1) looks like

config switch
        option name 'switch0'
        option reset '1'
        option enable_vlan '1'

config switch_vlan
        option device 'switch0'
        option vlan '1'
        option ports '0 1 2 3 6'

config switch_vlan
        option device 'switch0'
        option vlan '2'
        option ports '4 5'

with WAN on eth0 and LAN on eth1 (note: 1900ACv1 is the opposite).

If you want to add a new VLAN via tagging, then create a new switch_vlan, for example a single LAN port assigned to a separate VLAN 4. Traffic on the LAN port will be untagged, but the switch will send tagged packets for that VLAN to the CPU port.

config switch_vlan
        option device 'switch0'
        option vlan '4'
        option ports '0 6t'

and then create a configuration for that eth1.4.

Post #9757

mmcneil

29 Jan 2016, 19:05

kirkgbr wrote:

mmcneil wrote:
Hey everyone, quick question.. Can I still build / patch version .13 of the mwlwifi driver to work with the latest trunk snapshots? I "thought" read some pages back that .13 is fubar'd. I'm asking because I'm seeing degraded performance with the .16 driver, so needless to say, .13 still seems to give the best results.
Thanks,
Mike
You can still build it(.13) but from my experience, it doesn't perform nearly as well as it used to. I don't know what changed but something affects it negatively with latest trunk.

Which version would you recommend in that case?

Thanks,

Mike

Post #9758

Chadster766

29 Jan 2016, 19:13

mmcneil wrote:

kirkgbr wrote:
mmcneil wrote:
Hey everyone, quick question.. Can I still build / patch version .13 of the mwlwifi driver to work with the latest trunk snapshots? I "thought" read some pages back that .13 is fubar'd. I'm asking because I'm seeing degraded performance with the .16 driver, so needless to say, .13 still seems to give the best results.
Thanks,
Mike
You can still build it(.13) but from my experience, it doesn't perform nearly as well as it used to. I don't know what changed but something affects it negatively with latest trunk.
Which version would you recommend in that case?
Thanks,
Mike

I highly recommend .16

You should also checkout my customization recommendations in the below issue thread:
https://github.com/kaloz/mwlwifi/issues/41

Post #9759

mmcneil

29 Jan 2016, 19:22

Chadster766 wrote:

mmcneil wrote:
kirkgbr wrote:
You can still build it(.13) but from my experience, it doesn't perform nearly as well as it used to. I don't know what changed but something affects it negatively with latest trunk.
Which version would you recommend in that case?
Thanks,
Mike
I highly recommend .16
You should also checkout my customization recommendations in the below issue thread:
https://github.com/kaloz/mwlwifi/issues/41

Thanks Chadster. I took a look at your recommendations and I think I'll give it a shot. So, basically, I just rename those .txt files to .patch and toss them the the packages/kernel/mwlwifi/patches directory, right?

Thanks again,

Mike

Post #9760

Chadster766

29 Jan 2016, 19:34

mmcneil wrote:

Chadster766 wrote:
mmcneil wrote:
Which version would you recommend in that case?
Thanks,
Mike
I highly recommend .16
You should also checkout my customization recommendations in the below issue thread:
https://github.com/kaloz/mwlwifi/issues/41
Thanks Chadster. I took a look at your recommendations and I think I'll give it a shot. So, basically, I just rename those .txt files to .patch and toss them the the packages/kernel/mwlwifi/patches directory, right?
Thanks again,
Mike

They will also have to be name numbered for the end of the patch sequence.

Those patch files don't include the removal of the secondary check of "pcmd->cmd_hdr.result" from both check_ba and create_ba subs in "fwcmd.c".

Post #9761

gufus

30 Jan 2016, 00:55

Whats the Kernel Version in trunk now-a-days?

Post #9762

mmcneil

30 Jan 2016, 01:04

Chadster766 wrote:

mmcneil wrote:
Chadster766 wrote:
I highly recommend .16
You should also checkout my customization recommendations in the below issue thread:
https://github.com/kaloz/mwlwifi/issues/41
Thanks Chadster. I took a look at your recommendations and I think I'll give it a shot. So, basically, I just rename those .txt files to .patch and toss them the the packages/kernel/mwlwifi/patches directory, right?
Thanks again,
Mike
They will also have to be name numbered for the end of the patch sequence.
Those patch files don't include the removal of the secondary check of "pcmd->cmd_hdr.result" from both check_ba and create_ba subs in "fwcmd.c".

Thanks again for replying Chadster. I'm a bit of an openwrt noob, so would you mind giving me some idea as to how to number the patches? Can I do something like 120-blah.patch, 121-blahbah.patch, etc?

Post #9763

kirkgbr

30 Jan 2016, 01:40

gufus wrote:

Whats the Kernel Version in trunk now-a-days?

default is 4.1.16

Post #9764

gufus

30 Jan 2016, 01:43

kirkgbr wrote:

gufus wrote:
Whats the Kernel Version in trunk now-a-days?
default is 4.1.16

Thanks

Post #9765

Chadster766

30 Jan 2016, 02:54

mmcneil wrote:

Chadster766 wrote:
mmcneil wrote:
Thanks Chadster. I took a look at your recommendations and I think I'll give it a shot. So, basically, I just rename those .txt files to .patch and toss them the the packages/kernel/mwlwifi/patches directory, right?
Thanks again,
Mike
They will also have to be name numbered for the end of the patch sequence.
Those patch files don't include the removal of the secondary check of "pcmd->cmd_hdr.result" from both check_ba and create_ba subs in "fwcmd.c".
Thanks again for replying Chadster. I'm a bit of an openwrt noob, so would you mind giving me some idea as to how to number the patches? Can I do something like 120-blah.patch, 121-blahbah.patch, etc?

That should work but I only made those patch files to illustrate the changes I was recommending. Really i would have to do an OpenWRT module patch/quilt series to do it right.

Post #9766

mmcneil

30 Jan 2016, 03:03

Chadster766 wrote:

mmcneil wrote:
Chadster766 wrote:
They will also have to be name numbered for the end of the patch sequence.
Those patch files don't include the removal of the secondary check of "pcmd->cmd_hdr.result" from both check_ba and create_ba subs in "fwcmd.c".
Thanks again for replying Chadster. I'm a bit of an openwrt noob, so would you mind giving me some idea as to how to number the patches? Can I do something like 120-blah.patch, 121-blahbah.patch, etc?
That should work but I only made those patch files to illustrate the changes I was recommending. Really i would have to do an OpenWRT module patch/quilt series to do it right.

One last question for you; do you have a patch for the pcmd->cmd.hdr.result ?

Many thanks,

Mike

Post #9767

Huawei

30 Jan 2016, 08:23

JTAG and so for WRT1900ACS

BT-Console

Why no driver for Huawei E5786 ?

(Last edited by Huawei on 30 Jan 2016, 08:32)

Post #9768

trustno1foxm

30 Jan 2016, 15:04

I have a question about the wrt1900acs. does that device also have the wlan issues? I mean that issue about setting up 2 ssids on 1 radio. my wrt1200ac fails after some hours. there is no support so I am asking about the wrt1900acs.
thx!

so long

Post #9769

JohnnySL

30 Jan 2016, 15:47

trustno1foxm wrote:

I have a question about the wrt1900acs. does that device also have the wlan issues? I mean that issue about setting up 2 ssids on 1 radio. my wrt1200ac fails after some hours. there is no support so I am asking about the wrt1900acs.
thx!
so long

Same driver for the 1200, the 1900 AC V1, AC V2 and the ACS so you can count on having the same issue.

Post #9770

trustno1foxm

30 Jan 2016, 15:50

Ok thx, I thought it won't be a driver issue, because only some guys complain the wlan issue with 2 ssids.

Post #9771

Chadster766

30 Jan 2016, 17:23

mmcneil wrote:

Chadster766 wrote:
mmcneil wrote:
Thanks again for replying Chadster. I'm a bit of an openwrt noob, so would you mind giving me some idea as to how to number the patches? Can I do something like 120-blah.patch, 121-blahbah.patch, etc?
That should work but I only made those patch files to illustrate the changes I was recommending. Really i would have to do an OpenWRT module patch/quilt series to do it right.
One last question for you; do you have a patch for the pcmd->cmd.hdr.result ?
Many thanks,
Mike

The below patch should work for OpenWRT and includes everything I was recommending:
http://www.protechs-online.com/download … wifi.patch

Post #9772

Chadster766

30 Jan 2016, 17:24

trustno1foxm wrote:

Ok thx, I thought it won't be a driver issue, because only some guys complain the wlan issue with 2 ssids.

With the .16 patch I just posted I've run multiple BSSID for weeks without issue.

(Last edited by Chadster766 on 30 Jan 2016, 17:25)

Post #9773

davidc502

30 Jan 2016, 17:43

.16 is stable... I haven't had a crash in who knows how long.

Post #9774

kirkgbr

30 Jan 2016, 18:23

Chadster766 wrote:

trustno1foxm wrote:
Ok thx, I thought it won't be a driver issue, because only some guys complain the wlan issue with 2 ssids.
With the .16 patch I just posted I've run multiple BSSID for weeks without issue.

Correct me if I'm wrong but isn't there a difference between BSSID and SSID?

Post #9775

Chadster766

30 Jan 2016, 18:39

kirkgbr wrote:

Chadster766 wrote:
trustno1foxm wrote:
Ok thx, I thought it won't be a driver issue, because only some guys complain the wlan issue with 2 ssids.
With the .16 patch I just posted I've run multiple BSSID for weeks without issue.
Correct me if I'm wrong but isn't there a difference between BSSID and SSID?

AFAIK SSID is the first SSID on a radio and any additional SSIDs are labeled BSSID.

Sorry, posts 9776 to 9775 are missing from our archive.

Page 391 of 598