Asus RT-N56U Reviewed

[antsh]

5GHz Channel

Do you guys use the lower (36) or upper (149+) channels for your 5GHz band? Which gives you better throughput?

Thanks in advance.

 

[Starrbuck]

Yeah, the only thing is that my gut tells me that the firmware developers for this may not be as seasoned as older device manufactuers like Linksys/Cisco, D-link, etc. which was the primary reason for me returning the router. Do they have a promising future, I think so but I can't wait. I will probably re-visit Asus later on after I see better reports of stability but for now I gotta stick with what works as my livelihood is at stake.

I think you have a very intelligent and quite correct gut. I may try out their next router which I believe will be the RT-N66U due out later this year to see if they make any improvements by then. DD-WRT and possibly Tomato should also be available for it, since it uses the Broadcom processor, and this will no doubt give us further options and features.

 

[klas]

I ordered and trialed this thing for a week and just couldn't fall in love with it. I think Asus still has more work to do on this 56 model with firmware before it can be given as good a review at least from my point of view. Below are some of the caveats that I think ruins this device at least for my use.
1) DHCP - limit of 8 reservations
2) Hardware NAT - may be good for folks not needing/using different VPN technologies but the fact that HW NAT has to be pretty much disabled to be able to use IPSec clients such as Cisco, etc. is a killer for me.
3) Router seems to hang transmission-wise fairly often. You don't lose socket, the data just seems to stall for a little while then resumes.
4) Wireless coverage compared to my DIR-655 is much better but issue 3 above kills the benefit.
5) Odd naming of Port Forwarding to Virtual Server is odd.
6) Inability to allow ISP DNS Servers to pass through to router's DHCP Server assigned IP addresses is silly to be missing. I think a lot of the Web Page pausing found when opening web pages through this device is due to it's DNS caching/serving client.

I think this would be a great router if Asus get's the bugs fixed with the firmware but I can't wait for them to do it and who knows if they even can enable VPN IPSec support over hardware NAT on this device. So now, I am going back to my trusty Dlink DIR-655 rev.A4 and currently ordering hopefully a DIR-655 Rev. B that I will receive tomorrow.

1 - Incorrect. Limit is 16 with latest firmware
2. - Don't know, don't use it
3. - Might have defective one or running old firmware because of #1
4. Wireless coverage is the best out of all routers I've tried (WNDR3700, E4200, DIR-655)
5. Yes, but how is it a negative?
6. Don't need this.

I found DIR-655 to be a crappy router that I gave up using years ago, maybe they've fixed the firmware, but I don't want to go back to non dual bands.

 

[oldthor]

Sigh

1 - Incorrect. Limit is 16 with latest firmware
2. - Don't know, don't use it
3. - Might have defective one or running old firmware because of #1
4. Wireless coverage is the best out of all routers I've tried (WNDR3700, E4200, DIR-655)
5. Yes, but how is it a negative?
6. Don't need this.

I found DIR-655 to be a crappy router that I gave up using years ago, maybe they've fixed the firmware, but I don't want to go back to non dual bands.

The DIR-655 router is and has been the best most reliable router I've ever had. It's been operating flawlessly with no down time for years and supplies wireless access thru-out both floors of my house. I just ordered the Asus RT56u and if it's even half as good as the DIR-655 has been I'll be pretty satisfied! After weeks of reading reviews and forum comments I've come to the conclusion there is just so perfect router solution. Reading all the negative reviews for just about every model is enough to scare any casual information seeker to death. I suspect that most negative reviews for any model are more the product of the inexperienced experts than bad hardware, if that wasn't the case then the only other conclusion would have to be all personal/home routers on the market are really junk which my own D-Link proves is not the case. All said and done the N56u I'm sure is going to be a solid addition to my home network

 

[kk22]

Spent quite sometime going through this thread since I'm interested in the RT-N56U.

I do use the Cisco VPN client a lot on my computer. Specifically it's the Cisco AnyConnect VPN client and I require it to connect to my work network remotely.

From what I've read, the RT-N56U will not work for my scenario unless I disable hardware NAT? What kind of performance implications do people see when disabling hardware NAT? If there are little or no performance implications, why do folks make it a big deal?

I'm a network novice obviously but I just want to understand what I'm giving up if I get this router and disable hardware NAT in order to get VPN working.

 

[EricJH]

1) DHCP - limit of 8 reservations

1 - Incorrect. Limit is 16 with latest firmware

What does the limit of reservations mean? The amount of addresses it can hand out? Which does not make sense. Or does it mean something else?

 

[RogerSC]

I'll be finding out, I just got this router, and I also have a Cisco VPN (AnyConnect is one of our VPN client choices)...Plannning to use 1.0.1.4 firmware, and I'll see what happens.

 

[kk22]

I'll be finding out, I just got this router, and I also have a Cisco VPN (AnyConnect is one of our VPN client choices)...Plannning to use 1.0.1.4 firmware, and I'll see what happens.

Perfect! Please do keep us posted!

 

[RogerSC]

Okay, using 1.0.1.4 firmware, and my Cisco VPN seems to be working. I didn't see any IPsec passthrough settings, so I just tried it and it is working. Haven't used it for a day yet, just about 15 minutes, but no problems.

Can anyone tell me how I can verify with this firmware whether the HW NAT is enabled (or not)?

Thanks.

 

[RogerSC]

Ah, okay, I see when I go into the Log area, and look at Port Forwarding, I see:

Hardware NAT: Enabled
Software QoS: Disabled

There was no change in this when I logged out and back into my VPN, so if this is always accurate, both the hardware NAT and VPN seem to be working at the same time.

Interesting. Looks good at this point. Not using any of the non-core wireless router features though, no QoS, no USB devices, no media server, no FTP, etc. Just routing and wireless networking.

The only thing that I'm really missing is a guest network.

 

[oldthor]

Never Again

Well! After doing what I thought was appropriate research and reading all the reviews I picked up an Asus RT-n56u router. What a mistake! This thing was a nightmare! First Auto set-up just didn't work, no problem don't really need it. Then hardwired clients would just disappear and finally after numerous re-boots and updating to the latest firmware I ended up after hours of playing with it a "NEW" router that would not connect any client connected to port 2
(cat5 port) to the Internet, Attaching a drive to the USB port worked when it wanted to and after all this didn't have nowhere near the same wireless 2.4g signal strength an my old D-Link DIR-655 it was going to replace. I bought it at Newegg and they were more than happy to RMA it charging me 10% and return shipping on to of that. Things I've learned. It really is true most of the dual band routers being sold today really are junk, cruddy antennas bad firmware and terrible quality. I'm sticking with my tried and true Dir-655 as after the Cisco E-4200 and now the Asus RT-n56U it appears to be the best of the lot and it just works and works. Oh Yeah I won't be buying from Newegg again when Amazon.com or Best Buy have better return policies

 

[RogerSC]

Interesting...almost the total opposite experience that I just had...I have a Dlink DIR-655 router for backup, and it's range isn't as good as the Asus, nor have I had any problem with disconnects or ports, etc. The router connected immediately, once I had set the MAC address so that the cable modem felt at home...I've never used any quick setup, I like to go through the settings so that I understand the features better. Everything just seemed to work right off, the firmware upgrade worked the first time...4 hardwire clients (counting the Roku box as one), and 3 wireless clients all working fine.

Although the web GUI interface is different from any router I've had, I like it a lot now that I've used it. Pretty easy to get to the settings that I need. Took a minute to get used to it, but it is structured and can be used much more like a web page than the rest that I've seen (Dlink, Linksys, Netgear), that are more like a collection of text pages.

Personally, I'd be exchanging the one that you have, but that's just me. I like to give something that's clearly defective a second chance (but not a third *smile*). Reliability is a whole other thing, only time will tell.

 

[taedan]

Does anyone know how to turn off the 2.4 GHz radio on this router? My old WNR3500L works a lot better with my devices like the PS3 and iPod, so I want to use the WNR3500L as an access point. At least I don't get the severe stuttering and disconnects with my Netgear like I do with the RT-n56U.

 

[stevech]

Does anyone know how to turn off the 2.4 GHz radio on this router? .

Another option is to give your (pseudo) Access Point a different SSID (and perhaps choose a different channel among 1, 6 or 11). Then clients simply prefer this SSID.

 

[kk22]

Ah, okay, I see when I go into the Log area, and look at Port Forwarding, I see:

Hardware NAT: Enabled
Software QoS: Disabled

There was no change in this when I logged out and back into my VPN, so if this is always accurate, both the hardware NAT and VPN seem to be working at the same time.

Interesting. Looks good at this point. Not using any of the non-core wireless router features though, no QoS, no USB devices, no media server, no FTP, etc. Just routing and wireless networking.

The only thing that I'm really missing is a guest network.

That's great news! Thanks for reporting back RogerSC! Now I can confidently buy one without worrying.

 

[oldthor]

Security Issue

Security Alert just published for U.S. users for this modem , see following link

http://www.kb.cert.org/vuls/id/200814

 

[GregN]

Important points of CERT Warning:

RT-N56U contains a vulnerability which may allow a remote unauthenticated attacker to recover the device's administrator password.[/B]

The default configuration for this device is to only allow clients connected to the Local Area Network (LAN) to access the system web interface.

This vulnerability has been addressed in ASUS's Wireless-N Gigabit Router RT-N56U firmware version 1.0.1.4o.

 

[RogerSC]

Okay, well, as it turns out, I'm sending my router back to Amazon...took a couple of days to really get a feel for this router, and it seems that I have two choices, neither of which I like:

1. Firmware 1.0.1.4, which allows the Cisco VPN to work fine with hardware NAT enabled, but makes web page loading (or DNS, I couldn't easily tell) slow on desktops other than the one that I use. Throughput is great on speed tests and downloads, but web pages load too slow. My wife is more patient than I am, and was able to tolerate the slowness, but when I looked at it, it was too slow for me to live with. Tried OpenDNS as well as my ISP's DNS to see if that was the problem, and while OpenDNS feels faster, it is still too slow.

I also had another problem where my iPhone and other wireless devices could see the wireless network, but could not create a connection. I got through that by rebooting the router, don't know what that was about, but just one more thing to think about. If I'm having to reboot the router after just a day, that's not a real good sign, I've found.

2. Firmware 1.0.1.4o. On this one, when I turn on IPSec passthrough, which is required by the Cisco VPN, it turns off hardware NAT, which was a big feature of this router for me. It was the feature that made me feel okay about giving up a guest network. So I didn't use this firmware very long, but it did speed up web page loading on other desktop systems.

So I'm back to my Linksys E4200, which doesn't seems to have quite the wireless range or throughput, but is very consistent, web pages load acceptably fast on all the systems we use, has a guest wireless network, etc. No problems with basic functionality over a period of months.

I may buy another rt-n56u if and when Asus gets on top of their firmware issues, but for the moment, I'll take my lumps with Linksys firmware, a little less kinky.

 

[taedan]

Another option is to give your (pseudo) Access Point a different SSID (and perhaps choose a different channel among 1, 6 or 11). Then clients simply prefer this SSID.

I thought about doing this, but I would be over-hogging the channels from my neighbors and possibly cause undue interference on others.

 

[stevech]

Don't worry about that. Remember that your WiFi transmits packets only on demand, and you don't have a hoard of people streaming simultaneously.