Aimesh Client List not stable?

[bones20]

Hello!
I have an aimesh setup with 2 nodes - rt-ac68u (cough cough), firmware version *648.

The client list in the web portal keeps changing every second with clients disappearing and reappearing. I am presuming it is just a UI issue. Since I dont see connections dropping on the clients.

Is there any fix/workaround?

thanks!

 

[OzarkEdge]

Hello!
I have an aimesh setup with 2 nodes - rt-ac68u (cough cough), firmware version *648.

The client list in the web portal keeps changing every second with clients disappearing and reappearing. I am presuming it is just a UI issue. Since I dont see connections dropping on the clients.

Is there any fix/workaround?

thanks!

I saw more of this with earlier firmware and a 2x68U AiMesh. Now, the client list is more stable with the latest firmware and a 2x86U AiMesh. So, it's hard to know wherein lies the instability... is it:
o node location/WiFi overlap;
o finicky clients;
o 68Us without Smart Connect;
o firmware;
o lack of a standards-based mesh;
o (cough cough )...

OE

 

[bones20]

I saw more of this with earlier firmware and a 2x68U AiMesh. Now, the client list is more stable with the latest firmware and a 2x86U AiMesh. So, it's hard to know wherein lies the instability... is it:
o node location/WiFi overlap;
o finicky clients;
o 68Us without Smart Connect;
o firmware;
o lack of a standards-based mesh;
o (cough cough )...

OE

So I have 68U and not 86u.

The volatile client list seems contained to ui display. I dont see reconnects on client nor in System logs.

 

[OzarkEdge]

So I have 68U and not 86u.

The volatile client list seems contained to ui display. I dont see reconnects on client nor in System logs.

Understood.

You'd think that if the actual client connections are stable, then it ought to be rather straight forward to record same to the GUI.

OE

 

[bones20]

Understood.

You'd think that if the actual client connections are stable, then it ought to be rather straight forward to record same to the GUI.

OE

Well true. But if it were really reconnects, I would see them in the System logs, no? Something like this:
Apr 21 11:45:02 roamast: eth2: add client [88:b1:11:c4:xx:xx] to monitor list
Apr 21 12:05:30 roamast: discover candidate node [1C:B7:2C:C9:xx:xx](rssi: -61dbm) for weak signal strength client [00:AE:FA:71:xx:xx](rssi: -81dbm)
Apr 21 12:05:30 roamast: eth2: disconnect weak signal strength station [00:ae:fa:71:xx:xx]
Apr 21 12:05:30 roamast: eth2: remove client [00:ae:fa:71:xx:xx] from monitor list

 

[KevTech]

roamast

That would be a roaming assistant entry.

On stock firmware I set roaming assistant and airtime fairness to disabled.

 

[bones20]

That would be a roaming assistant entry.

On stock firmware I set roaming assistant and airtime fairness to disabled.

Are you guys saying that if I see a volatile client list in *648 its for real and not just a ui issue? That would be hard to believe since most of the time I have atleast 3-4 concurrent HD streaming devices without any interruption.

 

[KevTech]

Are you guys saying that if I see a volatile client list in *648 its for real and not just a ui issue? That would be hard to believe since most of the time I have atleast 3-4 concurrent HD streaming devices without any interruption.

These logs you posted are roaming assistant entries hence why they start with roamast.

Well true. But if it were really reconnects, I would see them in the System logs, no? Something like this:
Apr 21 11:45:02 roamast: eth2: add client [88:b1:11:c4:xx:xx] to monitor list
Apr 21 12:05:30 roamast: discover candidate node [1C:B7:2C:C9:xx:xx](rssi: -61dbm) for weak signal strength client [00:AE:FA:71:xx:xx](rssi: -81dbm)
Apr 21 12:05:30 roamast: eth2: disconnect weak signal strength station [00:ae:fa:71:xx:xx]
Apr 21 12:05:30 roamast: eth2: remove client [00:ae:fa:71:xx:xx] from monitor list

 

[bones20]

These logs you posted are roaming assistant entries hence why they start with roamast.

Back to the client list, it is volatile. The number of connected clients changes every second - so does the details when you open the list.

I just wanted to support the claim that it is just a UI issue since it is not observed on the connected clients and the internet access.

 

[KevTech]

I don't have this issue with the client list so have no idea what to tell you.

Can't diagnose an issue I do not have.

 

[Darren S]

Hello!
I have an aimesh setup with 2 nodes - rt-ac68u (cough cough), firmware version *648.

The client list in the web portal keeps changing every second with clients disappearing and reappearing. I am presuming it is just a UI issue. Since I dont see connections dropping on the clients.

Is there any fix/workaround?

thanks!

Just to say, you're not alone. I've got two AC-86U (one router, one node) both running 3.0.0.4.384_20648 with factory resets after the firmware upgrade and my client list in the UI is all over the shop. Best guess is that it keeps refreshing (to an empty-ish list) and then adds things in over the next 5-10 seconds. I'm also assuming it's just a UI thing but I have to say that family not best pleased since I moved from an 87u to a twin 86u aimesh system.

 

[bones20]

Thanks! Good (and bad) to know I am not alone. Fyi, this is not an issue when using their android app.

 

[bsholbrook]

this is UI based and not representative of the stability of client connections. I have a pair of 86u's in mesh and the web interface client list is extremely dynamic that is continuously repopulated. In terms of network performance I am seeing very strong connectivity speeds on both the 2.4 and 5 radios. Also perhaps against popularity I've chosen to operate with smart connect on. The goal a simplified single SSID where clients in theory find the best connection with the assistance of the Asus and options like roam assist.

With 35-40 network devices the downside I'm seeing roamasst put one specific client into a disconnect reconnect loop for hours on end and then stopping for 1-2 hours. At the client location connectivity and speeds test far greater than what I'm seeing in the system logs of the router which range from (rssi of -60 to -70dbm). Node is max 15feet from WAP through a single drywall wall. Support case filed, hope this single issue to be remedied very soon.

 

[alixvincent]

So I have 68U and not 86u.

The volatile client list seems contained to ui display. I dont see reconnects on client nor in System logs.

Hello- Besides the volatile client list, is your Aimesh system stable and decent? I am thinking of setting up a friend with two AC68U's in a 1400 sp ft apt. Thanks in advance.

 

[OzarkEdge]

Hello- Besides the volatile client list, is your Aimesh system stable and decent? I am thinking of setting up a friend with two AC68U's in a 1400 sp ft apt. Thanks in advance.

It's stable here with two RT-AC86Us.

It was not stable here with two 68Us... probably because the wireless backhaul was too far with obstacles.

One 68U or 86U may be sufficient for 1400 sq. ft. The 86U was a bit more coverage (~20%) so may work best standalone.

The 68U does not support Smart Connect node band steering, so if you put two in an AiMesh, you'll have to use separate SSIDs and rely on the client/user to band steer (not quite a mesh system)... which could be further complicated by too much coverage in a small area unless you decrease the radios.

If one can accept that Smart Connect works and/or can significantly aide client roaming and you do not want separate SSIDs, then I suggest you first deploy one 86U router. If you find that you need a second node for coverage (not likely), add any to form an AiMesh. The functionality of the router (i.e. Smart Connect in the 86U) will extend across the mesh.

In other words, if you go with all 68Us, you can't really achieve a full mesh system with one SSID and fully-assisted roaming. And, one 86U may be plenty of coverage for 1400 sq. ft.

Since you are setting this up for someone else, choose wisely... it may pay to spend up for the first/only 86U. I first went with a 2x68U AiMesh and it ended up costing me more... but then Grandma got an AC68U upgrade.

OE

 

[bones20]

Hello- Besides the volatile client list, is your Aimesh system stable and decent? I am thinking of setting up a friend with two AC68U's in a 1400 sp ft apt. Thanks in advance.

- It is awesome!! For less than 100$ its super awesome !
- Never ever had to reboot any of the nodes.
- My house is around 1050 sq ft. One router ought to be enough but I used to have dead spots in the corner bedroom. No more with mesh setup. In my opinion, if your house structure is such that the farthest corners are more than 35 feet apart, a mesh setup will make a big difference.
- I have the comcast 150mbps plan. I am able to get almost 135 mbps over wifi any corner of my house!! Most of the time, we have 3-5 devices streaming hd content - all this without any buffering or slow downs.
- band steering was never a requirement for me. I want to only use the 5 ghz band. 2.4 only for older devices that dont support 5 ghz. Actually this setup feels cleaner to me. I think 2.4 is only relevant for large public spaces (eg airport, lounges etc) where you can control and minimize interference and congestion. Else the band is too small for an apartment complex type neighbourhood.

Below is my wish list:
1. Client list ui stability
2. Smarter roaming - current design guarantees a minimum signal (disconnect weak clients). If I were to design, I would rather design for max signal (steer to the strongest signal for a client). I understand it is complicated and needs newer protocols - kvr
3. Seamless roaming with hop time small enough to not interrupt a voice call - again this is also too futuristic.

 

[arthurlien]

3. Seamless roaming with hop time small enough to not interrupt a voice call - again this is also too futuristic.

If you are using RT-AC68U as AiMesh Node, could you try to disable NAT Acceleration ?

LAN>Switch Control>NAT Acceleration disabled

 

[bones20]

If you are using RT-AC68U as AiMesh Node, could you try to disable NAT Acceleration ?

LAN>Switch Control>NAT Acceleration disabled

I will try that and report back.

From what I read on the internet, it seems NAT acceleration is needed if you have speeds greater than 100 mbps. Will disabling nat acceleration impact my speeds or any other side effects?

 

[bones20]

^I tried your suggested change. A quick whatsapp call walking around the house triggering node hopping was successful (no call drop)! - Very impressed (though did not test it rigorously).

Is this a permanent fix or a work around till a new update?

 

[bones20]

I tried a few more times and the device does roam seamlessly during a voice call!! This is brilliant! very impressed.

Hope this can somehow be fixed without having to give up on Nat acceleration which is kind of helpful and needed at higher speeds (150-200 mbps+)