[Asus RT-AX88U] Experiences & Discussion

[lilstone87]

LOL Don't you know it's all a marketing game. There are features they just put on the box to make you buy the product don't matter if it actually works. It's not just Asus they are all guilty of this.

Not to be mean... or rude. However what exactly is the point in this post? I understand what you're saying, however this thread was created for this kind of stuff, and discussion. So I am posting, to make others aware of what I'm seeing with this router currently. I expected bugs on a newer router, and I can manage things till they're fixed. However... If people like me don't mention such issue's, things stay hidden/on the back burner to be fixed. At least with me mentioning this, if Asus does happen to have any of their staff looking over the forums here, from time to time. They can see this type of stuff, so they can look into it, and try fixing such issues.

 

[Deleted member 22229]

Sorry no disrespect intended. My point is Aggregation has been a mess for a very long time. I doubt there will be a fix anytime soon.

 

[lilstone87]

Sorry no disrespect intended. My point is Aggregation has been a mess for a very long time. I doubt there will be a fix anytime soon.

Okay I understand. I know what you're talking about, but that's in regards to its support on the LAN side only though. I'm talking WAN Aggregation, which was just recently added to this router, with the latest firmware. The feature seems like it's working.. It's just the system log becomes useless due to errors being spammed.

I actually brought this to the attention of one of my ISP's docsis guys who works at their HQ. However Asus still hasn't sent them any routers to use for testing. So trying to figure this issue out currently, is a no go from my ISP side at least. So it sounds to me Asus needs to work on their communication with some of the bigger US Cable ISP's. Especially for features like this, which requires both the modem, and router to work well together for the feature to work as intended.

I did contact Asus chat support today, which was a mess, with a lot of wasted motions. However at the end, the chat rep mentioned having their software support team reach out to me via email. Which I said okay to, and I will see if they get back to me within 24-48 hours. Starting Monday, since today is friday.

 

[RMerlin]

Well after 12 hours of the router log staying clean. I decided to give "WAN Aggregation" another try.

Are you *sure* the modem you are connecting to does support 802.03ad/LACP, and that it is enabled? If it doesn't, then your router will receive unexpected types of packets, which would result in such error messages.

Make sure to review Asus's documentation on that feature: https://www.asus.com/support/FAQ/1039053

 

[lilstone87]

Are you *sure* the modem you are connecting to does support 802.03ad/LACP, and that it is enabled? If it doesn't, then your router will receive unexpected types of packets, which would result in such error messages.

Make sure to review Asus's documentation on that feature: https://www.asus.com/support/FAQ/1039053

Hey Merlin,

I ended up flashing their latest build again, I even did a full factory reset on the router, and manually reconfigured everything. After doing so, just a little bit ago. I enabled LAG on my modem, which requires a reset, when enabling, or disabling the feature. I also did the same on the router, during that time I only had the WAN port on the router connected to WAN port 1 on the modem. After they were both fully rebooted. I waited another 2-3 minutes, then connected LAN port 4 to WAN port 2 on the modem. Network map page shows "WAN Aggregation" with a 2Gbps rate, so it seems the feature is working.. Just this error is a PITA, flooding the system log. My modem is a Arris SB8200, and I have the latest build for it, which includes LAG. I will attach a screenshot of the LAG option on the modem. Also I will include a 10 minute log period, after I connected LAN port 4 to the modem. You will see a entry of the link being connected at the top. Then you will see how often the one error is repeatedly logged. Something isn't right, and I honestly expect it being on Asus side of things.

Almost forgot to mention during the 10 minute log I posted below, I did enable SSH on the router, and applied @RamGuy code from the other thread to see if it would help. The error started before I changed that setting, so the setting change did not cause this issue. I just tried it, to see if maybe it could help. I'm open to any other suggestions, but I have literally tried everything I can think of, and the issue is still happening. I 100% feel this issue isn't a "user" error. I feel Its more of a software issue on the router side. Last thing... The more data being used via WAN, the more callbacks per error.

May 10 20:00:49 disk_monitor: Got SIGALRM...
May 10 20:01:02 kernel: eth1 (Ext switch port: 0) (Logical Port: 8) (phyId: 8) Link UP at 1000 mbps full duplex
May 10 20:01:38 kernel: net_ratelimit: 1 callbacks suppressed
May 10 20:01:43 kernel: net_ratelimit: 60 callbacks suppressed
May 10 20:01:48 kernel: net_ratelimit: 1164 callbacks suppressed
May 10 20:01:54 kernel: net_ratelimit: 4 callbacks suppressed
May 10 20:02:00 kernel: net_ratelimit: 4 callbacks suppressed
May 10 20:02:06 kernel: net_ratelimit: 1 callbacks suppressed
May 10 20:02:11 kernel: net_ratelimit: 6 callbacks suppressed
May 10 20:02:14 rc_service: cfg_server 1227:notify_rc restart_time;restart_upnp;restart_usb_idle;
May 10 20:02:14 kernel: klogd started: BusyBox v1.24.1 (2019-03-26 16:41:29 CST)
May 10 20:02:17 miniupnpd[7555]: shutting down MiniUPnPd
May 10 20:02:17 nat: apply nat rules (/tmp/nat_rules_bond1_bond1)
May 10 20:02:17 miniupnpd[8814]: version 1.9 started
May 10 20:02:17 miniupnpd[8814]: HTTP listening on port 54415
May 10 20:02:17 miniupnpd[8814]: Listening for NAT-PMP/PCP traffic on port 5351
May 10 20:02:17 miniupnpd[8814]: shutting down MiniUPnPd
May 10 20:02:17 hour monitor: daemon is starting
May 10 20:02:17 miniupnpd[8817]: version 1.9 started
May 10 20:02:17 miniupnpd[8817]: HTTP listening on port 55739
May 10 20:02:17 miniupnpd[8817]: Listening for NAT-PMP/PCP traffic on port 5351
May 10 20:02:18 kernel: net_ratelimit: 12 callbacks suppressed
May 10 20:02:23 kernel: net_ratelimit: 14 callbacks suppressed
May 10 20:02:30 kernel: net_ratelimit: 6 callbacks suppressed
May 10 20:02:36 kernel: net_ratelimit: 31 callbacks suppressed
May 10 20:02:42 kernel: net_ratelimit: 1 callbacks suppressed
May 10 20:02:48 kernel: net_ratelimit: 1 callbacks suppressed
May 10 20:02:54 kernel: net_ratelimit: 5 callbacks suppressed
May 10 20:02:57 dropbear[8827]: Password auth succeeded for 'lilstone87' from 88.88.88.213:59744
May 10 20:03:05 kernel: net_ratelimit: 17 callbacks suppressed
May 10 20:03:10 kernel: net_ratelimit: 14 callbacks suppressed
May 10 20:03:16 kernel: net_ratelimit: 12 callbacks suppressed
May 10 20:03:22 kernel: net_ratelimit: 14 callbacks suppressed
May 10 20:03:29 kernel: net_ratelimit: 19 callbacks suppressed
May 10 20:03:35 kernel: net_ratelimit: 4 callbacks suppressed
May 10 20:03:35 rc_service: service 8860:notify_rc restart_conntrack
May 10 20:03:40 kernel: net_ratelimit: 2 callbacks suppressed
May 10 20:03:47 kernel: net_ratelimit: 4 callbacks suppressed
May 10 20:03:53 kernel: net_ratelimit: 5 callbacks suppressed
May 10 20:03:58 kernel: net_ratelimit: 8 callbacks suppressed
May 10 20:04:04 kernel: net_ratelimit: 8 callbacks suppressed
May 10 20:04:11 kernel: net_ratelimit: 5 callbacks suppressed
May 10 20:04:16 kernel: net_ratelimit: 10 callbacks suppressed
May 10 20:04:22 kernel: net_ratelimit: 5 callbacks suppressed
May 10 20:04:28 kernel: net_ratelimit: 11 callbacks suppressed
May 10 20:04:34 kernel: net_ratelimit: 3 callbacks suppressed
May 10 20:04:40 kernel: net_ratelimit: 6 callbacks suppressed
May 10 20:04:46 kernel: net_ratelimit: 6 callbacks suppressed
May 10 20:04:52 kernel: net_ratelimit: 11 callbacks suppressed
May 10 20:04:57 kernel: net_ratelimit: 642 callbacks suppressed
May 10 20:05:02 kernel: net_ratelimit: 557 callbacks suppressed
May 10 20:05:07 kernel: net_ratelimit: 564 callbacks suppressed
May 10 20:05:12 kernel: net_ratelimit: 563 callbacks suppressed
May 10 20:05:17 kernel: net_ratelimit: 531 callbacks suppressed
May 10 20:05:22 kernel: net_ratelimit: 572 callbacks suppressed
May 10 20:05:27 kernel: net_ratelimit: 553 callbacks suppressed
May 10 20:05:32 kernel: net_ratelimit: 627 callbacks suppressed
May 10 20:05:37 kernel: net_ratelimit: 577 callbacks suppressed
May 10 20:05:42 kernel: net_ratelimit: 591 callbacks suppressed
May 10 20:05:47 kernel: net_ratelimit: 592 callbacks suppressed
May 10 20:05:52 kernel: net_ratelimit: 613 callbacks suppressed
May 10 20:05:57 kernel: net_ratelimit: 568 callbacks suppressed
May 10 20:06:02 kernel: net_ratelimit: 568 callbacks suppressed
May 10 20:06:07 kernel: net_ratelimit: 601 callbacks suppressed
May 10 20:06:12 kernel: net_ratelimit: 515 callbacks suppressed
May 10 20:06:17 kernel: net_ratelimit: 640 callbacks suppressed
May 10 20:06:23 kernel: net_ratelimit: 559 callbacks suppressed
May 10 20:06:28 kernel: net_ratelimit: 541 callbacks suppressed
May 10 20:06:33 kernel: net_ratelimit: 592 callbacks suppressed
May 10 20:06:38 kernel: net_ratelimit: 523 callbacks suppressed
May 10 20:06:43 kernel: net_ratelimit: 613 callbacks suppressed
May 10 20:06:48 kernel: net_ratelimit: 559 callbacks suppressed
May 10 20:06:53 kernel: net_ratelimit: 588 callbacks suppressed
May 10 20:06:58 kernel: net_ratelimit: 592 callbacks suppressed
May 10 20:07:03 kernel: net_ratelimit: 566 callbacks suppressed
May 10 20:07:08 kernel: net_ratelimit: 613 callbacks suppressed
May 10 20:07:13 kernel: net_ratelimit: 561 callbacks suppressed
May 10 20:07:18 kernel: net_ratelimit: 622 callbacks suppressed
May 10 20:07:23 kernel: net_ratelimit: 555 callbacks suppressed
May 10 20:07:28 kernel: net_ratelimit: 793 callbacks suppressed
May 10 20:07:33 kernel: net_ratelimit: 835 callbacks suppressed
May 10 20:07:38 kernel: net_ratelimit: 626 callbacks suppressed
May 10 20:07:43 kernel: net_ratelimit: 575 callbacks suppressed
May 10 20:07:48 kernel: net_ratelimit: 573 callbacks suppressed
May 10 20:07:53 kernel: net_ratelimit: 591 callbacks suppressed
May 10 20:07:58 kernel: net_ratelimit: 598 callbacks suppressed
May 10 20:08:03 kernel: net_ratelimit: 587 callbacks suppressed
May 10 20:08:08 kernel: net_ratelimit: 607 callbacks suppressed
May 10 20:08:13 kernel: net_ratelimit: 507 callbacks suppressed
May 10 20:08:18 kernel: net_ratelimit: 596 callbacks suppressed
May 10 20:08:23 kernel: net_ratelimit: 604 callbacks suppressed
May 10 20:08:28 kernel: net_ratelimit: 541 callbacks suppressed
May 10 20:08:33 kernel: net_ratelimit: 615 callbacks suppressed
May 10 20:08:38 kernel: net_ratelimit: 608 callbacks suppressed
May 10 20:08:43 kernel: net_ratelimit: 599 callbacks suppressed
May 10 20:08:48 kernel: net_ratelimit: 698 callbacks suppressed
May 10 20:08:54 kernel: net_ratelimit: 526 callbacks suppressed
May 10 20:08:59 kernel: net_ratelimit: 561 callbacks suppressed
May 10 20:09:04 kernel: net_ratelimit: 573 callbacks suppressed
May 10 20:09:09 kernel: net_ratelimit: 532 callbacks suppressed
May 10 20:09:14 kernel: net_ratelimit: 576 callbacks suppressed
May 10 20:09:19 kernel: net_ratelimit: 570 callbacks suppressed
May 10 20:09:24 kernel: net_ratelimit: 535 callbacks suppressed
May 10 20:09:29 kernel: net_ratelimit: 575 callbacks suppressed
May 10 20:09:34 kernel: net_ratelimit: 579 callbacks suppressed
May 10 20:09:39 kernel: net_ratelimit: 538 callbacks suppressed
May 10 20:09:44 kernel: net_ratelimit: 599 callbacks suppressed
May 10 20:09:49 kernel: net_ratelimit: 600 callbacks suppressed
May 10 20:09:54 kernel: net_ratelimit: 562 callbacks suppressed
May 10 20:09:59 kernel: net_ratelimit: 586 callbacks suppressed
May 10 20:10:04 kernel: net_ratelimit: 557 callbacks suppressed
May 10 20:10:09 kernel: net_ratelimit: 489 callbacks suppressed
May 10 20:10:14 kernel: net_ratelimit: 566 callbacks suppressed
May 10 20:10:19 kernel: net_ratelimit: 609 callbacks suppressed
May 10 20:10:24 kernel: net_ratelimit: 483 callbacks suppressed
May 10 20:10:29 kernel: net_ratelimit: 589 callbacks suppressed
May 10 20:10:34 kernel: net_ratelimit: 531 callbacks suppressed
May 10 20:10:39 kernel: net_ratelimit: 585 callbacks suppressed
May 10 20:10:44 kernel: net_ratelimit: 517 callbacks suppressed
May 10 20:10:49 kernel: net_ratelimit: 618 callbacks suppressed
May 10 20:10:54 kernel: net_ratelimit: 596 callbacks suppressed

 

[avtella]

Are you *sure* the modem you are connecting to does support 802.03ad/LACP, and that it is enabled? If it doesn't, then your router will receive unexpected types of packets, which would result in such error messages.

Make sure to review Asus's documentation on that feature: https://www.asus.com/support/FAQ/1039053

From Arris:
NOTE: The SB8200 LAG feature is available with the fixed (default) settings:

Mode 802.3ad
XmitHashPolicy layer3+4
LacpRate fast
SelectionLogic bandwidth
InterfaceList eth0;eth1


It could also be an issue with the SB8200 itself, there were two people on DSLReports Forums with pFsense units that had WAN side errors when link aggregation was enabled on the SB8200.

 

[Marin]

From Arris:
NOTE: The SB8200 LAG feature is available with the fixed (default) settings:

Mode 802.3ad
XmitHashPolicy layer3+4
LacpRate fast
SelectionLogic bandwidth
InterfaceList eth0;eth1


It could also be an issue with the SB8200 itself, there were two people on DSLReports Forums with a pFsense units that had WAN side errors when link aggregation was enabled on the SB8200.

Yes, apparently there was a software upgrade in February that brought LAN aggregation in SB8200. Unfortunately, it has not arrived on my side do the world.

https://www.dslreports.com/forum/r3...0-Firmware-Update-now-allows-link-aggregation


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[lilstone87]

From Arris:
NOTE: The SB8200 LAG feature is available with the fixed (default) settings:

Mode 802.3ad
XmitHashPolicy layer3+4
LacpRate fast
SelectionLogic bandwidth
InterfaceList eth0;eth1


It could also be an issue with the SB8200 itself, there were two people on DSLReports Forums with a pFsense units that had WAN side errors when link aggregation was enabled on the SB8200.

I appreciate the reply, and I actually messaged with one of the docsis guys for my ISP, who works at their HQ, about this issue. He mentioned to me I guess Asus told them they would send them some units for testing, however they still haven't received anything from them. So overall I could of likely had this issue looked into further already... But in this case, my contact has no unit to test, and figure out why this is happening. Oh my ISP is Cox, which they're a decent sized Cable ISP in the US. So it's not a matter of a small ISP asking Asus for units for testing.

Overall hearing this from my ISP contact, wasn't good. Because unless Asus has employee's with cable internet, using a SB8200 with the latest firmware. I feel getting this issue resolved, will be a slow process. As there needs to be communication between the modem/router companies... or at least the isp/router companies. I'm not here to place blame on either side directly... I just wanted to point out the issue, as it's very annoying the amount of errors it spams the log with. Plus I wouldn't be shocked the feature itself isn't "fully" working as it should, especially with the rate of errors logged, when it's active.

 

[FTC]

Hi,

I installed a RT-AX88U this past weekend to replace an RT-AC3200 that had the misfortune of losing 2 bands last thursday during a thunderstorm and had given me much satisfaction during the last 4 years. I an writing this to share a bit of my experience with this router so far.

First of all, why I choosed this model :
1) I wanted to do a step forward in terms of power (better CPU+Memory) for my VPNs / Samba and multimedia sharing, and in general wifi transfer speeds (better standards and faster protocols).
2) I had been a bit limited with only 4 cabled ports in the back, plus the form factor (the place where I have the router is well suited for horizontal units, not vertical ones).
3) I required a router which supported the 'Movistar IPTV' triple vlan profile (most but not all asus old gen routers do, but right now only the AX88 of new generation routers do support it).
4) I wanted Merlin support. I am used to incorporate my own scripts and the improvements that Merlin fw brings, including SMB2 support are crucial for me (My laptop is a corportate one that has policy-blocked smb1, so it can not be enabled under this win10)
All in all, the only router that fulfilled these requirements on paper was the AX88 as of today.

Now, what I gave up : My concession was the third band (5Ghz2) It was *very* practical for talking to my repeater, but I assumed that with QoS and the improved (faster) communication provided by a 4x4 instead of 3x3 5Ghz band I could overcome this.

Regarding how the upgrade went I have to say that it went well, however I faced 2 problems (already documented in this forum) when switching to the merlin firmware : 1) The mistery of the wifi bands dissapearing after a hard/button reset.. that can be bypassed by doing a full electrical reset (disconnecting from power and swiching the unit on/off while disconnected) before restarting, and 2) The mistery of the 'no wan connection' after a reboot IF an OpenVPN is configured to start after power on. This one can be bypassed by disabling OpenVPN before reboot/reset OR by waiting 15 minutes until the WAN connection 'comes back'. These 2 errors made me spend a couple of hours testing / investigating.. until I got the knowledge for these bypasses.

And finally, what is the outcome and situation compared to previous router : I have to say I am very happy with the results. Now I have to wait a few days to 'certify' reliability, but so far so good.. the router has passed its first 24h of hard usage and working very well :

- I get now almost double the USB hdd transfer speeds with samba (112MB/sec vs 55MB7sec before)
- I get in general much better wifi speeds in 5Ghz (500+ mbps connections at short range, 200+ mbps at a distance of 15 meters or so)
- I get more or less same wifi speeds at 2.4Ghz.
- VPN is so much faster now (I've seen now 50+mbps transfers vs 20mbps max I was experiencing before, and I am sure I am still not being limited by the router)
- Having 8 eth ports at the back well .. I am already using 5 and feel free to add further hardware...
- My 'Movistar' IPTV and VoIP services seem like working properly (same as before)
- Merlin 384.11_2 seems very stable so far, and in general the admin GUI has a several goodies I did not have before...
- My media server and other functions are working same as before (i.e ddns, dns filtering, traffic analyzing...)
- .. and all of this without a single script yet.

Well. these were my first Impressions.. I will post further when I gain some more experience in a couple of weeks...

 

[sfx2000]

I just turned MU-MIMO off on my RT-AC3100 (I already turn off Universal/Implicit Beamforming and the other settings RMerlin suggests) and on a 2.4GHz client (N2230 default driver settings), laptop plugged into AC power) I got 10Mbps faster download (to 95Mbps) and 25Mbps faster upload (to 88Mbps) from 2 walls and about 40' away from the router. Oh, and 1ms ping (down from 2ms ping time) on speedtest.net.

On an AC client (AC8260 with Throughput Booster disabled, in Device Properties), from the same location, the ping times stayed the same (2ms) but the download speeds increased by 18Mbps (to 266Mbps) and the uploads increased by a more modest 9Mbps (to 214Mbps).

This is my new 'default' install tweak, right after a full M&M Config, going forward.

FWIW - I think much of the MU performance concerns are related to the first issue of the Broadcom Wave2 capable chipsets...

I've recently been looking at Wave2 on QCA on the AP side (QCA IPQ8065 and IPQ4018 with their closed source ath10k Wave2 drivers) - looking at Wave1 clients (Intel, Broadcom, Realtek, Atheros), it's fairly transparent when turning things up on the feature side.

 

[Rexo]

Hi guys,

I have just purchased AX88U for my router and its only 2 days and im already facing some issues.
- The WAN LED on the router seems like to be either blank out or turned red after every hour and then returning back to normal, can anyone advice me to fix this? It kinda looks like some sort of reboot? The LAN is also connected to my TV so when this happens all my internet stops for 1 minute before it returns back to normal
- I have already updated to the latest version of firmware 384_5951

This is very worrisome as I keep getting dc in the middle of something and I am not sure whether its the firmware or hardware faulty? Just only purchased 2 days ago.

Help needed!

 

[Jayce Ooi]

Hi guys,

I have just purchased AX88U for my router and its only 2 days and im already facing some issues.
- The WAN LED on the router seems like to be either blank out or turned red after every hour and then returning back to normal, can anyone advice me to fix this? It kinda looks like some sort of reboot? The LAN is also connected to my TV so when this happens all my internet stops for 1 minute before it returns back to normal
- I have already updated to the latest version of firmware 384_5951

This is very worrisome as I keep getting dc in the middle of something and I am not sure whether its the firmware or hardware faulty? Just only purchased 2 days ago.

Help needed!

Try factory reset. And monitor again. If still have issue, return it.

 

[Rexo]

Try factory reset. And monitor again. If still have issue, return it.

Yeah I did factory reset few times and this still happens, guess ill have to return it

 

[Celeras]

Hi everyone,

How are we feeling about the AX88U in June 2019? Would you say the typical Asus early adopter problems are generally over yet?

I've been sitting on my RT-N56U for a long time now and I think it is finally time. My research indicates the main options should be either the AC5300 or the AX88U. Maybe even the AC86/88U. Obviously going AX is the most appealing for the "future", even if AX isn't ratified yet... but I don't want to step into a hornets nest.

My main concern is stability, and I look forward to any increased range on my 5ghz band. Not that these new routers are magic or anything, but I find it hard to believe they won't be significantly better than my N56U given those humongous antennas (feel free to set me straight if this is a dumb assumption). Mine are all internal and quite limited if memory serves me correctly. I basically have to be in the same room as the router currently otherwise I'm back on 2.4.

Thanks in advance for your opinions.

 

[FTC]

Hi, my ax88 is just 3 weeks old and I am very happy with it. Currently doing stability testing, to see how long it stays up (or at least if it will go on for several weeks without requiring a reboot). So far so good.. and besides very small nits that can be overcomed easily with the help of this forum during configuration, it is a very solid machine, and very powerful too.

 

[JemTheWire]

I really like my AX88U. However, I have found the 5GHz band to be slightly weaker then my AC88U. I don’t believe it is faulty, just that my AC88U is more powerful on 5GHz than the AX out of the box.

So much so that I have set up my AC88U as an AP and use that for all my 5GHz devices.

The AX88U is a beast when it come to my VPN though.

 

[FTC]

I really like my AX88U. However, I have found the 5GHz band to be slightly weaker then my AC88U. I don’t believe it is faulty, just that my AC88U is more powerful on 5GHz than the AX out of the box.

So much so that I have set up my AC88U as an AP and use that for all my 5GHz devices.

The AX88U is a beast when it come to my VPN though.

Hi, this is not my experience. The 5Ghz band on my ax88 is stronger than it was in my 3200 previously.. do you have the same settings in both ? (basically mode, channel, beanforming, tx power..) and are they both tested in the same place with the antennas firmly screwed and pointing equally ? have you measured objectively with clients from the same place (RSSI) ? it could also be caused by unit variability. In this case, then it is just a bit of bad luck.

 

[Grisu]

take a much cheaper RT-AC86U for about 150$ next time they are sold for this price again.
Then wait 2 years and you get good AX routers for the same price.
At the end you have 2 very good routers for what you have to pay right now for only one AX routers.

And then you will know which routers will get Merlin support, are reliable and AX will be well defined and implemented in chips.

 

[Broken Hope]

How likely is it that the AX88 will support the final version of WiFi 6, or is Asus likely to release a newer router later down the line?

 

[Celeras]

take a much cheaper RT-AC86U for about 150$ next time they are sold for this price again.
Then wait 2 years and you get good AX routers for the same price.
At the end you have 2 very good routers for what you have to pay right now for only one AX routers.

And then you will know which routers will get Merlin support, are reliable and AX will be well defined and implemented in chips.

Not bad advice but let's be real. I'm using a N56U currently... if I buy a router I'm probably using it for a decade. Would the AC86U still be your recommendation if that is the case?