Beta ASUSWRT 386 RC2 public beta with full functions AiMesh 2.0

[tallytr]

I have a Ubiquiti access point connected to RT-AX88U via CAT6 cable at my office. So no fancy mesh setup. So all wireless devices that are connected to Ubiquiti show up as wired devices in RT-AX88U’s GUI. In this case, it may not be a bug but some limitation. However at home where I have 2 RT-AX88Us in mesh mode, GUI shows wired and wireless devices with great accuracy.

Exactly same thing for me with TP Link EAP225 Access Point. All clients connect wirelessly to the wired Access Point show as wired on the RT-AX86U client list. If I want further connection detail I simply connect to the AP interface and can check signal strength etc... no big deal but
for sure a limitation related to using Access Point mode vs,. AiMesh 2.0...

 

[cybrnook]

Exactly same thing for me with TP Link EAP225 Access Point. All clients connect wirelessly to the wired Access Point show as wired on the RT-AX86U client list. If I want further connection detail I simply connect to the AP interface and can check signal strength etc... no big deal but
for sure a limitation related to using Access Point mode vs,. AiMesh 2.0...

How are you guys thinking this is a limitation/bug? If you have a third party external ap that has clients connected to it and you are connecting that ap to your router over a wired lan connection, then your router is seeing that traffic as lan over whatever port your ap is plugged into. That's normal, standard behavior. Would be the same if you had a switch for example.

 

[davekstl]

In my case I am using 2 zenwifi nodes, one as the router plus an ax3000. All asus nodes. And the devices that I once was able ro bind because they are wifi devices, now show as wired.

 

[tallytr]

How are you guys thinking this is a limitation/bug? If you have a third party external ap that has clients connected to it and you are connecting that ap to your router over a wired lan connection, then your router is seeing that traffic as lan over whatever port your ap is plugged into. That's normal, standard behavior. Would be the same if you had a switch for example.

Not seeing that as a bug of course. Limitation only when you compare with AiMesh 2.0 setup where the wireless clients connected to a wired AiMesh node will/should show as wireless clients in the router list....

 

[cybrnook]

Not seeing that as a bug of course. Limitation only when you compare with AiMesh 2.0 setup where the wireless clients connected to a wired AiMesh node will/should show as wireless clients in the router list....

But that's all within Asus's own custom implementation/ecosystem. I would think it should be expected that when you go outside of that bubble, things like lan/wifi tagging wouldn't work the same.

I got the impression you two were discussing this as some type of limitation, so wanted to chime in that I believe it's working as designed.

 

[tallytr]

But that's all within Asus's own custom implementation/ecosystem. I would think it should be expected that when you go outside of that bubble, things like lan/wifi tagging wouldn't work the same.

I got the impression you two were discussing this as some type of limitation, so wanted to chime in that I believe it's working as designed.

You are right. Just getting back into AiMesh but for the last year(s) it was not an option for me, the AP mode solved this for me, router can run for weeks/months without any intervention, I am sure with AiMesh 2.0 we will get there as well, then I will switch back and will buy more nodes...
My goal on a 1 Gigabit Internet connection would be a TX/Rx Rate of >600 for all devices, 5GHz and mainly iOS clients in our case and in all rooms of our large 3 floor house...

 

[cybrnook]

You are right. Just getting back into AiMesh but for the last year(s) it was not an option for me, the AP mode solved this for me, router can run for weeks/months without any intervention, I am sure with AiMesh 2.0 we will get there as well, then I will switch back and will buy more nodes...
My goal on a 1 Gigabit Internet connection would be a TX/Rx Rate of >600 for all devices, 5GHz and mainly iOS clients in our case and in all rooms of our large 3 floor house...

My Intel 6E adapters arrived today getting prepped for the AXE11000 to hopefully release soon.

With the AX11000 I am already seeing 800~ on my wifi clients. I normally have gigabit, but am using a 500/50 link at the moment. Hence the lower latest number.

 

[sanke1]

My Intel 6E adapters arrived today getting prepped for the AXE11000 to hopefully release soon.

With the AX11000 I am already seeing 800~ on my wifi clients. I normally have gigabit, but am using a 500/50 link at the moment. Hence the lower latest number.

How much advantage do you expect for using an overpriced AXE11000 ? Maybe for half the price it lists at but definitely not at full list price of $450 (Saw it on some random Chinese site)
Since we are not going over 1 Gbps connections soon.... at least 99% of the world, the only tangible benefit I see is if you want to stream from your home NAS to LAN which is on 10Gbe to 6E wireless clients.

PS: I also have Intel AX210 ordered from ebay for $20 but since I am buying for the first time, it made sense to skip AX200 and make the jump directly to AX210 to slightly future proof myself. The upgrade itch is strong.

BTW dongknowstech had earlier claimed that current models like RT-AX88U, GT-AX11000 SOC already supported 6E frequencies and internal hardware was in place. Asus would be offering free 6E upgrade to these models. But later he backtracked.

 

[cybrnook]

How much advantage do you expect for using an overpriced AXE11000 ? Maybe for half the price it lists at but definitely not at full list price of $450 (Saw it on some random Chinese site)
Since we are not going over 1 Gbps connections soon.... at least 99% of the world, the only tangible benefit I see is if you want to stream from your home NAS to LAN which is on 10Gbe to 6E wireless clients.

PS: I also have Intel AX210 ordered from ebay for $20 but since I am buying for the first time, it made sense to skip AX200 and make the jump directly to AX210 to slightly future proof myself. The upgrade itch is strong.

BTW dongknowstech had earlier claimed that current models like RT-AX88U, GT-AX11000 SOC already supported 6E frequencies and internal hardware was in place. Asus would be offering free 6E upgrade to these models. But later he backtracked.

No major advantage, I just enjoy early adopting (and the AXE looks a bit better than the current model). And technically I run dual wan at home with a combined 1.5 Gb down and 90Gb up. But there is some feature request / bug reports I have not gotten around to reporting with Fusion VPN and dual wan, so I'm just using dual wan in fail over at the moment.

 

[VANT]

RC2-9 dirty upgrade from RC2-8
RT-AC86U + RT-AC68u.
QoS - WAN/LAN Bandwidth Monitor not work

Traffic Monitor is also broken (the scale is wrong)

Maybe restore default is needed ? Anyone tried, and can confirm that factory default can fix Traffic Monitor and QoS - WAN/LAN Bandwidth Monitor ?

 

[sanke1]

Traffic Monitor is also broken (the scale is wrong)

Maybe restore default is needed ? Anyone tried, and can confirm that factory default can fix Traffic Monitor and QoS - WAN/LAN Bandwidth Monitor ?

Running fine here on RC2-B9.5 Scale is correct.
Build 9.0.0.4.386_41180

I have performed factory reset btw.

@ASUSWRT_2020 When does Asus intend to fix (or remove?) these GUI messages?
Almost everyone has reported this entry wlceventd: wlceventd_proc_event filling up their logs.

Dec  6 10:24:16 miniupnpd[27243]: upnp_event_process_notify: connect(192.168.1.250:2869): Connection timed out
Dec  6 10:24:16 miniupnpd[27243]: upnp_event_process_notify: connect(192.168.1.250:2869): Connection timed out
Dec  6 10:24:29 miniupnpd[27243]: upnp_event_process_notify: connect(192.168.1.250:2869): Connection timed out
Dec  6 10:24:29 miniupnpd[27243]: upnp_event_process_notify: connect(192.168.1.250:2869): Connection timed out
Dec  6 10:24:42 miniupnpd[27243]: upnp_event_process_notify: connect(192.168.1.250:2869): Connection timed out
Dec  6 10:24:42 miniupnpd[27243]: upnp_event_process_notify: connect(192.168.1.250:2869): Connection timed out
Dec  6 10:24:44 miniupnpd[27243]: upnp_event_process_notify: connect(192.168.1.250:2869): Connection timed out
Dec  6 10:24:44 miniupnpd[27243]: upnp_event_process_notify: connect(192.168.1.250:2869): Connection timed out
Dec  6 10:24:44 miniupnpd[27243]: upnpevents_processfds: 0x5660b0, remove subscriber uuid:3ddcd1d3-2380-45f5-b069-0c9d9203ed47 after an ERROR cb: http://192.168.1.250:2869/upnp/eventing/rgbwkxibxa
Dec  6 11:56:45 wlceventd: wlceventd_proc_event(510): eth7: Auth E4:9A:DC:A3:D3:87, status: Successful (0)
Dec  6 11:56:45 wlceventd: wlceventd_proc_event(539): eth7: Assoc E4:9A:DC:A3:D3:87, status: Successful (0)
Dec  6 11:57:07 wlceventd: wlceventd_proc_event(510): eth7: Auth 48:01:C5:26:8E:EC, status: Successful (0)
Dec  6 11:57:07 wlceventd: wlceventd_proc_event(539): eth7: Assoc 48:01:C5:26:8E:EC, status: Successful (0)
Dec  6 13:08:06 miniupnpd[27243]: upnp_event_process_notify: connect(192.168.1.250:2869): Connection timed out
Dec  6 13:08:10 miniupnpd[27243]: upnp_event_process_notify: connect(192.168.1.250:2869): Connection timed out
Dec  6 13:08:10 miniupnpd[27243]: upnpevents_processfds: 0x55aef0, remove subscriber uuid:3ddcd1d3-2380-45f5-b069-0c9d920353f2 after an ERROR cb: http://192.168.1.250:2869/upnp/eventing/ryyqskvmik
Dec  6 13:08:25 miniupnpd[27243]: upnp_event_process_notify: connect(192.168.1.250:2869): Connection timed out
Dec  6 13:08:25 miniupnpd[27243]: upnp_event_process_notify: connect(192.168.1.250:2869): Connection timed out
Dec  6 13:08:25 miniupnpd[27243]: upnpevents_processfds: 0x563fa8, remove subscriber uuid:3ddcd1d3-2380-45f5-b069-0c9d92036959 after an ERROR cb: http://192.168.1.250:2869/upnp/eventing/isfakqohwf
Dec  6 13:08:40 miniupnpd[27243]: upnp_event_process_notify: connect(192.168.1.250:2869): Connection timed out
Dec  6 13:08:40 miniupnpd[27243]: upnp_event_process_notify: connect(192.168.1.250:2869): Connection timed out
Dec  6 13:08:40 miniupnpd[27243]: upnpevents_processfds: 0x557750, remove subscriber uuid:3ddcd1d3-2380-45f5-b069-0c9d9203c94d after an ERROR cb: http://192.168.1.250:2869/upnp/eventing/ysblpncpdc
Dec  6 13:58:35 wlceventd: wlceventd_proc_event(510): eth6: Auth 90:CD:B6:51:E0:A2, status: Successful (0)
Dec  6 13:58:35 wlceventd: wlceventd_proc_event(539): eth6: Assoc 90:CD:B6:51:E0:A2, status: Successful (0)
Dec  6 14:22:50 wlceventd: wlceventd_proc_event(474): eth6: Deauth_ind 90:CD:B6:51:E0:A2, status: 0, reason: Disassociated due to inactivity (4)
Dec  6 14:59:22 wlceventd: wlceventd_proc_event(474): eth7: Deauth_ind E4:9A:DC:A3:D3:87, status: 0, reason: Disassociated due to inactivity (4)
Dec  6 16:24:58 wlceventd: wlceventd_proc_event(474): eth7: Deauth_ind 48:01:C5:26:8E:EC, status: 0, reason: Deauthenticated because sending station is leaving (or has left) IBSS or ESS (3)
Dec  6 16:36:36 wlceventd: wlceventd_proc_event(510): eth7: Auth E4:9A:DC:A3:D3:87, status: Successful (0)
Dec  6 16:36:36 wlceventd: wlceventd_proc_event(539): eth7: Assoc E4:9A:DC:A3:D3:87, status: Successful (0)

 

[JoWa]

Running fine here on RC2-B9.5 Scale is correct.
Build 9.0.0.4.386_41180

[/CODE]

41180??

 

[sanke1]

41180??

Dropbox - File Deleted - Simplify your life

www.dropbox.com

Nothing fancy in this RC2-B9.5
Just fixes log spamming issue present in RC2-B9

 

[VANT]

Anyone tried, and can confirm that factory default can fix Traffic Monitor and QoS - WAN/LAN Bandwidth Monitor ?

For information, a factory default does not fix QoS - WAN/LAN Bandwidth Monitor and Traffic Monitor (I checked)

 

[crkpot]

Is the ookla speedtest going to be added to RT-AX58U gui?

 

[Sjekke]

Dropbox - File Deleted - Simplify your life

www.dropbox.com

Nothing fancy in this RC2-B9.5
Just fixes log spamming issue present in RC2-B9

Is there also a RC2-B9 for the AX11000?

 

[OzarkEdge]

Is there also a RC2-B9 for the AX11000?

No. The AX88U special RC2-9 +patch firmware was offered here:

Beta - ASUSWRT 386 RC2 public beta with full functions AiMesh 2.0 | Page 95 | SmallNetBuilder Forums (snbforums.com)

OE

 

[Sjekke]

Ok thx for the info.

 

[Kingp1n]

@LimJK do you use roaming assistance (RA) for 2.4ghz? I noticed you disabled it for 5ghz. What the recommendation with RA on aimesh 2.0? I currently have RA disabled on both bands without issues. Just curious what everyone is using now.

I get random disconnects on 2.4ghz while using 2 nodes. I cant figure out what's causing the temporary disconnect in 2.4. Someone stated to try RA at -55 and test.
Thanks

 

[LimJK]

@LimJK do you use roaming assistance (RA) for 2.4ghz? I noticed you disabled it for 5ghz. What the recommendation with RA on aimesh 2.0? I currently have RA disabled on both bands without issues. Just curious what everyone is using now.

I get random disconnects on 2.4ghz while using 2 nodes. I cant figure out what's causing the temporary disconnect in 2.4. Someone stated to try RA at -55 and test.
Thanks

Kingp1n,

Mileage for WiFi stability for each of us may defer broadly, depending on our respective region, environment, AiMesh configuration, Router/Nodes, end devices, settings, etc, etc.

For my case I find Roaming Assistant (RA) hardly get featured in my environment (devices get steered and roam fairly quickly, I validate that with my iOS Wifi Analyser App). We basically only use Apple's iPhones, iPads, MacBookPros that are mobile in nature. . So I decided to disable RA for some time now. I also decided to use Fixed Control Channel and Fixed Bandwidth. For 2.4GHz I also disabled Explicit and Universal beamforming. I hardly have WiFi problem, including iPhone at our Condo Swimming pool that is 10 floor down.

I left AiMesh 2.0 settings as DEFAULT with Cat 6 cable connected between Router to Nodes, I do not understand AiMesh enough to intelligently configure it