Release ASUS RT-AX86U Firmware version 3.0.0.4.386_49447 (2022/06/20)

[Paliv]

Doesn't the router GUI "System Log"->"Routing Table" show you what actual DNS is being applied?

So, yes it shows the WAN DNS here. However it does not show the DNS being applied to the individual device through the app, which is how they are applying their "Safe Browsing".

You can see it in the connections, but you'd have to know you are looking for the IP of the device hitting an external IP on port 53. Not something the average user is going to know.

 

[Paliv]

Even stranger, if you use either adblock option you just hit a Digital Ocean IP, in my case across the country. Seems they set up their own pi-hole and will point your router at it. I was expecting it to just send you to an AdGuard server.

 

[grzewo]

Hi,
do you know if non-functionning TrendMicro features like Traffic Analyzer - Statistic, QoS - WAN/LAN Bandwidth Monitor, etc have been fixed with this firmware? I saw that due to that issue Merlin rolled back
kernel components to the previous version in 386.5 (2-March-2022) build (see https://www.asuswrt-merlin.net/changelog).

 

[OzarkEdge]

Confirming that 160MHz, ch 36 is holding good here with my one Win10 client, 2402/2402 Mbps. We will see if it drops to 80MHz like the previous firmware 46061 did, presumably due to DFS (this time I'll examine the Wireless Log for DFS action... my one ax client is also wired, so pretty much a don't care how I connect at this time).

OE

 

[neil0311]

Confirming that 160MHz, ch 36 is holding good here with my one Win10 client, 2402/2402 Mbps. We will see if it drops to 80MHz like the previous firmware 46061 did, presumably due to DFS (this time I'll examine the Wireless Log for DFS action... my one ax client is also wired, so pretty much a don't care how I connect at this time).

OE

So for you, 46061 wouldn’t hold 160 MHz? But 49447 does?

For me it’s exactly the opposite. Wish I knew the secret handshake.

 

[OzarkEdge]

So for you, 46061 wouldn’t hold 160 MHz? But 49447 does?

For me it’s exactly the opposite. Wish I knew the secret handshake.

Not exactly... 46061 held 160MHz for about a week. When I discovered it at 80MHz, I went back to using my wired connection. I live 8 miles from an airport, and EMS copters are always passing over to a regional hospital. And I now notice 49447 is back to 80MHz. I'll leave it as is to see what it does... may try 20-40-80-160, but I doubt that will matter. 1200Mbps ax is still usable.

49447 has fixed the issue I had with using DoT and losing Internet access from guest1 WLANs... that is more important to me.

OE

 

[Tech9]

@OzarkEdge, you have both AC86U and AX86U. See this:

My experience with the RT-AC86U

Just wanted to say thanks to @eibgrad for the PoC and the concept code, and for @SomeWhereOverTheRainBow for the heavy testing and implementation... it's fantastic how you overcame this serious flaw using this method. Raising a glass in your honor! And serious thanks to @Oracle for his...

www.snbforums.com

In relation to this firmware thread, have you noticed any Wi-Fi performance difference between 46061 and 49447?

 

[OzarkEdge]

In relation to this firmware thread, have you noticed any Wi-Fi performance difference between 46061 and 49447?

Nothing quantitative in particular since I have not actually measured things. After getting the AX86U, I switched to using Smart Connect... you know, changed more than one thing at a time. The AX86U signals 'looked' a touch less strong than what I recall for the AC86U in the same role/position. But I recently reverted to not using Smart Connect (and not using forced Wireless Mode Auto) and it 'felt' like the AX86U signals recovered to equal and top strength... before installing 49447... or was it at the same time(?)

Connection-wise, my clients are connecting equally well and as good as they get, including at distance... always feels 'best' without Smart Connect and Roaming Assistant. My 2.4 mobile stays connected while mowing the perimeter of a 2 acre lot... upwards of 300+' in some directions, and circling/passing the 2-node AiMesh.

The connection details in the Wireless Log seem similar to the AC86U. It's hard to remember previous numbers and to judge right now because I'm pretty sure hot humid summer conditions are attenuating signals... neighboring WiFi has all but disappeared (leaves ON, too)... in particular, my 77' wireless backhaul is at its weakest but still 'Good to Great'... winter with snow on the ground will be a test point for best.

2.4 numbers (backhaul is NSS 3):

5.0 numbers (backhaul is NSS 4):

Performance-wise, the AX86U is steady and strong. I recently tried to formulate an approach to setting bandwidth and channel with emphasis on fixed first vs auto to better understand the options presented and what they might be doing (to apply them knowingly... to prepare for even more with WiFi6e). And now I'm using this 'formula' to better evaluate 160MHz and DFS with my only ax client... where to best fit it into the available/limited spectrum for all conditions and how long will it hold 160MHz. My notes show my current configuration. I just unwired my ax client yesterday... my PC and router are in my study together.

THE LEDS ARE TOO BRIGHT!

The AX86U may one day compete with the AC68U on longevity, which would be timely since it has enough to hold most home users until the next 'time to upgrade'. I support a few other family networks and don't want to drag them and me through the AC86U's 24-months-and-it's-over cycle (I just moved two of them to the AX86U), not to mention the AiMesh firmware turnover we've been going through at the same time.

OE

 

[Tech9]

I'm running the new Asuswrt-Merlin 386.7 on the AX86U at the moment, but will test Asuswrt 49447 very soon. So far not very impressed with Wi-Fi performance to AC clients. It seems worse than AC86U. With some tuning can be made equal at best. Hopefully AX86U lasts longer for you.

 

[tallytr]

I updated yesterday by uploading the file via Ethernet, went fast, did nothing else otherwise, everything just like before and very stable...I like.

 

[Paliv]

Moved to merlin 386.7. If Asus can just implement DNS Filter (which obviously needs renaming) I would go with stock.

 

[SAL9K]

160Mhz channels much more stable for me on this 49447. When my lone AX/160MHz capable laptop (Intel AX201) connects, the router immediately switches to 36/160 (well almost, within 1-2 minutes). And then when the laptop disconnects, it drops down to 36/80 (this happens pretty quickly, like 10 sec).

The system log has an (obvious) entry for when it drops to 36/80 (see below clip), but I don't see something for when it goes to 160MHz. The wireless log, however, does show the b/w transitions.

Jun 24 13:03:54 acsd: eth7: NONACSD channel switching to channel spec: 0xe02a (36/80)

I'm really liking this new behavior, only when a client is capable it boosts b/w, and 160M seems to be holding as long as the client is up. I do live within 10mi of a major airport, so we'll see over time.

 

[neil0311]

160Mhz channels much more stable for me on this 49447.

what is your channel bandwidth setting value?

 

[SAL9K]

what is your channel bandwidth setting value?

I use the factory reset defaults, 20/40/80/160 MHz, no DFS.

I did get the below after router switched from 36/80 to 36/160 (when I reconnected AX201 client), but the router is still staying at 36/160, so not sure how to interpret the log here, as it seems to indicate 36/160 is not good, idk.

Jun 24 13:19:31 acsd: acs_candidate_score_intf(1108): eth7: intf check failed for chanspec: 0xe832 (36/160)
Jun 24 13:19:31 acsd: acs_candidate_score_bgnoise(1573): eth7: bgnoise check failed for chanspec: 0xe832 (36/160)
Jun 24 13:19:31 acsd: acs_candidate_score_txop(1831): eth7: txop check failed for chanspec: 0xe832 (36/160)
Jun 24 13:19:31 acsd: acs_candidate_score_intf(1108): eth7: intf check failed for chanspec: 0xe932 (40/160)
Jun 24 13:19:31 acsd: acs_candidate_score_bgnoise(1573): eth7: bgnoise check failed for chanspec: 0xe932 (40/160)
Jun 24 13:19:31 acsd: acs_candidate_score_txop(1831): eth7: txop check failed for chanspec: 0xe932 (40/160)
Jun 24 13:19:31 acsd: acs_candidate_score_intf(1108): eth7: intf check failed for chanspec: 0xea32 (44/160)
Jun 24 13:19:31 acsd: acs_candidate_score_bgnoise(1573): eth7: bgnoise check failed for chanspec: 0xea32 (44/160)
Jun 24 13:19:31 acsd: acs_candidate_score_txop(1831): eth7: txop check failed for chanspec: 0xea32 (44/160)
Jun 24 13:19:31 acsd: acs_candidate_score_intf(1108): eth7: intf check failed for chanspec: 0xeb32 (48/160)
Jun 24 13:19:31 acsd: acs_candidate_score_bgnoise(1573): eth7: bgnoise check failed for chanspec: 0xeb32 (48/160)
Jun 24 13:19:31 acsd: acs_candidate_score_txop(1831): eth7: txop check failed for chanspec: 0xeb32 (48/160)

 

[OzarkEdge]

I use the factory reset defaults, 20/40/80/160 MHz, no DFS.

Same here and it has stayed at 160MHz for the last 24 hours:

5.0 auto, low DFS - 20-40-80-160MHz bw; ch Auto, excluding DFS channels (36-48,149-165)
160MHz bw uses DFS ch 52-64.

And no Smart Connect... Wireless Mode is N-AC-AX mixed.

OE

 

[SAL9K]

If you've changed the defaults and didn't take note of what you changed, here are the 49447 wireless defaults.

 

[Tech9]

Moved to merlin 386.7

For single router is okay, but breaks AiMesh wireless node discovery for unknown reasons. Only wired works. My router is in double NAT behind my firewall and UPNP is not working as well, also LED on/off from AiMesh Management menu or Asus App. Testing Asuswrt 49447 now and all good. Wi-Fi also feels a bit faster on Asuswrt to my further test client with 2 walls in between, but the drivers are perhaps newer in this release. I need to do more testing.

 

[Paliv]

For single router is okay, but breaks AiMesh wireless node discovery for unknown reasons. Only wired works. My router is in double NAT behind my firewall and UPNP is not working as well, also LED on/off from AiMesh Management menu or Asus App. Testing Asuswrt 49447 now and all good. Wi-Fi also feels a bit faster on Asuswrt to my further test client with 2 walls in between, but the drivers are perhaps newer in this release. I need to do more testing.

No AiMesh here, so no problem. Odd with UPNP. I haven't had to use it yet so I haven't noticed, but I'm not behind a double NAT.

 

[SteverinoLA]

Why am I no longer able to select DFS channels for 5G anymore? Auto is the only option when I force 160Mhz. If I select other Mhz then I just see the list of non-DFS channels?

 

[Tech9]

What region? Here is North American version: