Release ASUS RT-AX86 Series(RT-AX86U/RT-AX86S) Firmware version 3.0.0.4.388.22525

[Dr Mono]

Having a strange issue with AX86U on 22525. The client list seems to be stuck to the status as of a couple days ago. It's not showing any of the new devices that have connected since that time. I'm seeing the issue in:

• Client Status on main web GUI page
• View List link from main web GUI page
• Devices list in the Android app

However, I do see the new devices on the System Log - DHCP Leases tab. Also noteworthy, the Android app has been alerting me when new devices connect to the network, but the new devices don't show up on any of the above 3 lists.

I have not rebooted the router. I suspect a reboot would probably temporarily clear the issue, but how long before it shows up again? I'm mostly wondering - is anyone else having this issue? And is there any way I can poke at this list to force it to refresh without rebooting?

Everything else on the router seems to be functioning properly, so this is mostly a nuisance, but I really would like a way to reliably see the devices on my network. I am willing to reboot and/or reset my router if that's my only recourse, just checking to see if this is widespread and if there are any workarounds.

Thanks for any feedback.

Network Map sometimes does that. Old problem, not sure there's a solution since it is random.

 

[bitsbytes]

is traffic analyzer working for anyone? it's not working for me.

 

[bbunge]

is traffic analyzer working for anyone? it's not working for me.

Yes, it is working fine here. Network Map is also working for me.

It is possible the files in the /jffs are corrupt. Do a factory reset, from the GUI and not a hard factory reset, and manually reconfigure.

 

[tallytr]

I think I have (had) a similar issue with some clients (5 GHz) iPhone's, iPad's not showing in the client list but they were connected (wireless log), reboot resolved it...
Also when I enable 160 MHz, at times the bandwidth goes to 20 MHz (slow), disabled 160 MHz and all good (80MHz)... did a factory reset but that issue is not resolved, I guess 160 MHz isn't that critical, only one of my clients (notebook) can use it...

 

[neil0311]

I think I have (had) a similar issue with some clients (5 GHz) iPhone's, iPad's not showing in the client list but they were connected (wireless log), reboot resolved it...
Also when I enable 160 MHz, at times the bandwidth goes to 20 MHz (slow), disabled 160 MHz and all good (80MHz)... did a factory reset but that issue is not resolved, I guess 160 MHz isn't that critical, only one of my clients (notebook) can use it...

View attachment 48189

So 160 MHz is borked on this rev too?

 

[bitsbytes]

Yes, it is working fine here. Network Map is also working for me.

It is possible the files in the /jffs are corrupt. Do a factory reset, from the GUI and not a hard factory reset, and manually reconfigure.

just to confirm a factory reset did solve the issue. it's working fine now and I noticed a huge improvement in network map performance as well. the last factory reset i did was the first time I installed the first 388 firmware.

 

[tallytr]

So 160 MHz is borked on this rev too?

It doesn’t work for me but 160 MHz in general is not a sure thing, right? DFS channels, radar… probably really depends where you are, we are close to an airport… so not sure if this is related to this firmware, having said that, Merlin FW made 160 MHz more available…

 

[neil0311]

It doesn’t work for me but 160 MHz in general is not a sure thing, right? DFS channels, radar… probably really depends where you are, we are close to an airport… so not sure if this is related to this firmware, having said that, Merlin FW made 160 MHz more available…

I won’t rehash my comments on previous threads. I’m comparing between firmware revisions, so if it works well in one version, but not another, that’s an issue with the firmware.

No one built a new airport, changed DFS, etc in the last year. 160MHz has been broken since last January, so I’ve stuck with that version that works well. I’ll stick to it forever if never works in other versions.

 

[bbunge]

So 160 MHz is borked on this rev too?

No, working just fine here. Just do not try to force it. Use default WIFI settings.

 

[tallytr]

I won’t rehash my comments on previous threads. I’m comparing between firmware revisions, so if it works well in one version, but not another, that’s an issue with the firmware.

No one built a new airport, changed DFS, etc in the last year. 160MHz has been broken since last January, so I’ve stuck with that version that works well. I’ll stick to it forever if never works in other versions.

Forever? Respect! To me 160MHz is not critical at all, but in some use cases it might be useful I suppose.
Right now I get great speed using DFS channels but not 160MHz, I have no clue to be honest...
To me its more like I want it to work but I also respect the realities of airport radar, weather radar and DFS channel complexities...
In my case (simple setup, no AiMesh) I will always use the latest Firmware.

I read this somewhere, and I tend to agree:
"Remember the wider you stretch your signal, the more interference you'll have to contend with. The only reason you should ever want to do 160MHz is because a.) you have little interference and few other neighboring APs, b.) you are close to your APs, and C.) you have to deal with large amounts of data transfer.
Basically speaking, moving to 160 when you are not dealing with huge data transfers is a waste of time. Think of it as a highway in the winter. If you are primarily doing low impact stuff on your computer, then it is like having to plow a 3 lane highway to keep it clear for a single car to drive on it.
I generally recommend against 160 because the risk of interference is high and the reward of more bandwidth only plays out a few times"

 

[Tech9]

I’ll stick to it forever if never works in other versions.

You may have to stick to it forever because seems like it wasn't following properly DFS regulations on earlier firmware versions and it is fixed now.

 

[neil0311]

You may have to stick to it forever because seems like it wasn't following properly DFS regulations on earlier firmware versions and it is fixed now.

Or until I get a new router which may not be an Asus. Been using Asus routers for almost 15 years, and getting tired of the crap shoot after every firmware version.

 

[Tech9]

Or until I get a new router which may not be an Asus.

Yes, but your life will be boring.

 

[neil0311]

Forever? Respect! To me 160MHz is not critical at all, but in some use cases it might be useful I suppose.
Right now I get great speed using DFS channels but not 160MHz, I have no clue to be honest...
To me its more like I want it to work but I also respect the realities of airport radar, weather radar and DFS channel complexities...
In my case (simple setup, no AiMesh) I will always use the latest Firmware.

I read this somewhere, and I tend to agree:
"Remember the wider you stretch your signal, the more interference you'll have to contend with. The only reason you should ever want to do 160MHz is because a.) you have little interference and few other neighboring APs, b.) you are close to your APs, and C.) you have to deal with large amounts of data transfer.
Basically speaking, moving to 160 when you are not dealing with huge data transfers is a waste of time. Think of it as a highway in the winter. If you are primarily doing low impact stuff on your computer, then it is like having to plow a 3 lane highway to keep it clear for a single car to drive on it.
I generally recommend against 160 because the risk of interference is high and the reward of more bandwidth only plays out a few times"

View attachment 48212

It’s working fine for me now with older firmware, so all of those variables aren’t a factor for me now.

And yes, I have large files to download from the Internet but also data on the LAN. It’s not all about the Internet connection.

 

[bbunge]

It’s working fine for me now with older firmware, so all of those variables aren’t a factor for me now.

And yes, I have large files to download from the Internet but also data on the LAN. It’s not all about the Internet connection.

Well, I guess I could double dare you to try this firmware without earning a time out from Tim. I could use other words but I feel you are not too smart using older firmware especially with the vulnerabilities that have been fixed...

 

[tallytr]

It’s working fine for me now with older firmware, so all of those variables aren’t a factor for me now.

And yes, I have large files to download from the Internet but also data on the LAN. It’s not all about the Internet connection.

Got it, for me, only using Wi-Fi for mobile devices, speed not that important, one notebook mainly for email and other work related activities, for that even 20MHz is OK...
Everything else is wired up, don't like to use PC's with Wi-Fi, just a large resort...

 

[neil0311]

I feel you are not too smart using older firmware especially with the vulnerabilities that have been fixed...

or you could just keep your insults to yourself. I won’t respond because I don’t want to get banned, but feel free to put me on ignore.

 

[neil0311]

Got it, for me, only using Wi-Fi for mobile devices, speed not that important, one notebook mainly for email and other work related activities, for that even 20MHz is OK...
Everything else is wired up, don't like to use PC's with Wi-Fi, just a large resort...

Thanks. I may end up having to try this firmware. Wanted to have some degree of confidence that 160MHz works, but looks like it will be a continuing trade off.

And I get the risk of known vulnerabilities, and the risk is acceptable based on where I live and my use cases.

 

[iFrogMac]

Thanks. I may end up having to try this firmware. Wanted to have some degree of confidence that 160MHz works, but looks like it will be a continuing trade off.

And I get the risk of known vulnerabilities, and the risk is acceptable based on where I live and my use cases.

I don't have any devices that support 160Mhz, or I would test here to give you feedback. If I need something more reliable than 80Mhz WiFi, I use Ethernet.

 

[bbunge]

Thanks. I may end up having to try this firmware. Wanted to have some degree of confidence that 160MHz works, but looks like it will be a continuing trade off.

And I get the risk of known vulnerabilities, and the risk is acceptable based on where I live and my use cases.

To back off just a bit...
The 160 MHz working well here. I use the WIFI defaults except I turn off WPS and set the 2.4 GHz to 20 MHz. I have two AX and two AC clients that use 160 MHz. The router runs at 80 MHz most of the time but switches to 160 MHz when one of the 160 MHz clients connects. True, I do not need that high bandwidth but use it anyway because I can.
If you decide to try this firmware I would recommend a factory reset and manual reconfigure and a power cycle to clear old drivers from memory. Just give it a try. Really is good firmware.