ASUS RT-N66U - my review

[tonytoronto]

NJweb,
I had to up power to 80mw in .96/.100 to match the signal i was getting with .90 version. i was checking with inSSDIer and a laptop.
I've been up for 4 hours and still stable, maybe we got a winner-more time will tell.

 

[mrcom]

Bug still there

Same problem with usd drives and dns loopback with the new firmware. Sorry

 

[12darline]

No problem at all using NAT Loopback and having H/W Acceleration enabled. It took about 3 minutes to have the system sync everything up. FW .100 appears to have done the trick.

Thanks...

 

[mrcom]

No problem at all using NAT Loopback and having H/W Acceleration enabled. It took about 3 minutes to have the system sync everything up. FW .100 appears to have done the trick.

Thanks...

Have you got a usb drive connected and setup?? The HW/a trick never worked for me. Without a usb drive connected everything workes fine!!

 

[12darline]

Thanks I'll give 100 a try , 96 no way to many stories about crashes reboots
hope this is stable
ctf ?

Can someone please explan what CTF is (for us less informed), and how/where is it located in the new firmware (.100)?

Thank you very much...

 

[12darline]

Have you got a usb drive connected and setup?? The HW/a trick never worked for me. Without a usb drive connected everything workes fine!!

I am using a NAS via ethernet, so do not have anything connected to usb except a printer. Sorry.....

 

[mrcom]

I am using a NAS via ethernet, so do not have anything connected to usb except a printer. Sorry.....

Im using nas aswell, just connected a Usb drive just so i could to test it out. Beside that a connected printer workes without any problems.

 

[inroute]

Can someone please explan what CTF is (for us less informed), and how/where is it located in the new firmware (.100)?

Thank you very much...

CTF stands for "Cut-through forwarding", and refers to how the packets are handled between your local network and the Internet. Generally with it turned on you should see significant speed improvements in packet transfers, but I don't believe all routers support it. If I recall DD-WRT has this as a feature that can only be enabled on select routers.

I'm guessing they are turning it off for now because this may have been what was causing the crashes. So they are probably trying to investigate what's wrong with it, but at the same time want to get a functional build out to us. I don't think there is any setting available to turn it off from the GUI like there is in DD-WRT.

 

[12darline]

Now, that I can understand. I really do appreciate the education that I am getting from this forum...

Thank you very much.

 

[patrickgerry]

Im using nas aswell, just connected a Usb drive just so i could to test it out. Beside that a connected printer workes without any problems.

Exactly the same here. NAT loopback and port forward only works when no USB drive attached.

 

[patrickgerry]

I now get the error "This table only allow 4 items" when manually assigning IP around the DHCP list. I used to be able to list more than 4 with previous fws.

 

[G37x]

Exactly the same here. NAT loopback and port forward only works when no USB drive attached.

No problems for now with port fwd enabled NAT L and USB HDD attached...

 

[mrcom]

I now get the error "This table only allow 4 items" when manually assigning IP around the DHCP list. I used to be able to list more than 4 with previous fws.

Ahh now they`ve added a droplist with mac adresses in the dhcp/ip assign, so you dont have to wright down or copy paste mac adresses. Itried to assign a ip adress to a mac in the drop list with no problem, But i already have like 20 assigned. I dont have 4+ mac/ip to assign so i cant test it like you, I dont feel like erasing my assignments to test it if it doesn`t work. Anybody else??

 

[mrcom]

No problems for now with port fwd enabled NAT L and USB HDD attached...

Are you saying that you have connected to a server within your local network by the means of using a dns name like ex: no.way.nu:1234 and your router doesn`t loose connections??
Port forwarding has never been a problem for me just dns/loopback.

 

[patrickgerry]

Ahh now they`ve added a droplist with mac adresses in the dhcp/ip assign, so you dont have to wright down or copy paste mac adresses. Itried to assign a ip adress to a mac in the drop list with no problem, But i already have like 20 assigned. I dont have 4+ mac/ip to assign so i cant test it like you, I dont feel like erasing my assignments to test it if it doesn`t work. Anybody else??

I'm thinking Asus found a problem here without an immediate solution hence they pegged the limit to 4.

 

[njweb]

NJweb,
I had to up power to 80mw in .96/.100 to match the signal i was getting with .90 version. i was checking with inSSDIer and a laptop.
I've been up for 4 hours and still stable, maybe we got a winner-more time will tell.

Thanks for the feedback Tony.
I upped it to 80mW yesterday (on xxxx96) and I did not notice any difference in signal strength.

I will try version xxxxx100 and see how it works before deciding if I want to go back to version xxxxx90.
I wonder if 40mW on version 90 really is 40mW too since it never allowed you to go above 40mW and since signal strength was higher than with xxxxx96

 

[G37x]

Are you saying that you have connected to a server within your local network by the means of using a dns name like ex: no.way.nu:1234 and your router doesn`t loose connections??
Port forwarding has never been a problem for me just dns/loopback.

Yes and all is stable now.

One more thing they now allow other ports for web access:

Port of Web Access from WAN: HTTP:4040 <--tried this successfully

 

[zonly1]

I should be getting my RT-N66U router from Newegg by Thursday. Thanks for all of the information that you all have shared! This will make initial set up more enjoyable!

 

[mrcom]

Yes and all is stable now.

One more thing they now allow other ports for web access:

Port of Web Access from WAN: HTTP:4040 <--tried this successfully

Ahh mayby there is a difference in chipsets in the usb cases thats incompatible with the router' but it sounds a little far fetched. Anyway ill try a different case tomorrow after some sleep. Gn

 

[tonytoronto]

Thanks for the feedback Tony.
I upped it to 80mW yesterday (on xxxx96) and I did not notice any difference in signal strength.

I will try version xxxxx100 and see how it works before deciding if I want to go back to version xxxxx90.
I wonder if 40mW on version 90 really is 40mW too since it never allowed you to go above 40mW and since signal strength was higher than with xxxxx96

80mw worked for me, i did some more testing and checked the logs in inSSDIer, with .90 and .96/.100 at 80mw i get signal amplitude -58db, or 5 bars laptop, 4 on the phone, with stock 40mw i get around -70 and 4 bars laptop and 2 on the phone, if i bump it to 100 or 120mw db goes down and connection not as stable.. keep in mind this results will be different for everyone. to compare, netgear 3700 the phone was no longer able to keep a connection going.
7h35m on the meter and still going good