[Fork] Asuswrt-Merlin 374.43 LTS releases (Archive)

[andyg]

hammer on the nail! my AC68U (thanks TMO) is solid on John's fork

Sent from my A0001 using Tapatalk

 

[avi68]

Router: Asus rt-ac68u.

Still having the traffic monitor issue. I downgraded from V16 to V15 and still had the problem. I then went down to V13 still the same. I then turned off hardware acceleration and it started to work. Why does hardware acceleration affect the traffic monitor function? V16 is the worst as it gives incorrect daily values and hardly monitors any internet usage. V15 and V13 monitors the internet correctly but if I stream a channel from my Sat box (which is wired) from my iPad the data is shown on the internet monitor when this shouldn't be the case as this contributes to internet downloaded data. The wired monitor should show data being uploaded. Hopefully this will be fixed in the next issue.

 

[john9527]

Router: Asus rt-ac68u.

Still having the traffic monitor issue. I downgraded from V16 to V15 and still had the problem. I then went down to V13 still the same. I then turned off hardware acceleration and it started to work. Why does hardware acceleration affect the traffic monitor function? V16 is the worst as it gives incorrect daily values and hardly monitors any internet usage. V15 and V13 monitors the internet correctly but if I stream a channel from my Sat box (which is wired) from my iPad the data is shown on the internet monitor when this shouldn't be the case as this contributes to internet downloaded data. The wired monitor should show data being uploaded. Hopefully this will be fixed in the next issue.

Unfortunately, I don't think there is anything I can do about this. Hardware acceleration causes certain 'shortcuts' to be taken in passing packets, and one of those shortcuts involves not always going through the path for traffic monitor. There is nothing that changed in the fork levels that should result in different behavior between levels, but it may be influenced by the type of traffic you are testing. I think you're going to have to choose which function is more important for you.

 

[kanetaker]

What is the default user and pass when i flashed the router rt-ac68u with this firmware?, because the default user:ADMIN and password: password DON'T WORK!!!!!!

 

[ColinTaylor]

What is the default user and pass when i flashed the router rt-ac68u with this firmware?, because the default user:ADMIN and password: password DON'T WORK!!!!!!

Try lower case (admin/admin)

Like it says in the manual

 

[avi68]

Unfortunately, I don't think there is anything I can do about this. Hardware acceleration causes certain 'shortcuts' to be taken in passing packets, and one of those shortcuts involves not always going through the path for traffic monitor. There is nothing that changed in the fork levels that should result in different behavior between levels, but it may be influenced by the type of traffic you are testing. I think you're going to have to choose which function is more important for you.

Thank you for replying John. The funny thing is this wasn't the case with my old rt-n66u, that worked correctly.

I'm not sure why but I've found V16 recording incorrect internet data e.g. Download a movie from the net (4gb) and the monitor says 500mb? However like previously stated, I'm on V15 and it records the internet data correctly.

 

[punchsuckr]

Thank you for replying John. The funny thing is this wasn't the case with my old rt-n66u, that worked correctly.

I'm not sure why but I've found V16 recording incorrect internet data e.g. Download a movie from the net (4gb) and the monitor says 500mb? However like previously stated, I'm on V15 and it records the internet data correctly.

Weird how its working just fine for me on my n66u with HW acc enabled. I was to download around 75GB yesterday and the traffic manager is reporting around 74GB which is good enough.

 

[marnold]

One thing I noticed immediately after switching to this firmware from the latest Merlin version is that my 5.0 ghz range improved dramatically. Is there any reason that should be?

Sent from my XT1049 using Tapatalk

 

[Matthew Patrick]

Different region selected? So the tx power got improved?

 

[Nullity]

One thing I noticed immediately after switching to this firmware from the latest Merlin version is that my 5.0 ghz range improved dramatically. Is there any reason that should be?

Sent from my XT1049 using Tapatalk

Which Asus device?

The main reason why this fork was created was because older devices (particularly the RT-N66U) did not work as well with the newer wireless drivers.


How are you quantifying an improvement in range? Try running a stress test with iperf or simply send a file and see if your bitrate/reliability has actually improved in a useful way.

 

[jeff288]

I had some packet loss issues with Merlin stock lately on the N66u with two different devices and different locations. I just tried the latest v17 and it's working great, no packet loss to the router on any tests yet. Anyone notice any packet loss with this version? I already have ~5% through the ISP, I'd rather not have any more. I was getting bad issues with streaming videos sometimes.

 

[Nullity]

I had some packet loss issues with Merlin stock lately on the N66u with two different devices and different locations. I just tried the latest v17 and it's working great, no packet loss to the router on any tests yet. Anyone notice any packet loss with this version? I already have ~5% through the ISP, I'd rather not have any more. I was getting bad issues with streaming videos sometimes.

Wireless "packet" loss or IP packet loss?

How are you measuring?

 

[jeff288]

Wireless "packet" loss or IP packet loss?

How are you measuring?

I used Windows ping command as well as PingPlotter using various protocols. I had packet loss at a certain node at the ISP, never wireless loss in the casual testing that I did. But I recently did a test after getting slow down on youtube and I noticed wireless loss also to my AP (N66U) from my PC and running ping on another wifi bridge router to my AP. Is there a better way to measure packet loss for wifi and WAN?

 

[marnold]

Which Asus device?

The main reason why this fork was created was because older devices (particularly the RT-N66U) did not work as well with the newer wireless drivers.

Whoops! Should've mentioned that. It is, in fact, an RT-N66U. Quite frankly I was researching a replacement for it until I came across this firmware.

How are you quantifying an improvement in range? Try running a stress test with iperf or simply send a file and see if your bitrate/reliability has actually improved in a useful way.

It's pretty simple to quantify, actually. My router is in the basement. My bedroom is on the second floor. Not an ideal situation, I understand, but it's the best of many different solutions I tried for whole-house coverage. With the previous firmware I could not get a usable 5.0 Ghz connection in my bedroom. It might connect. It might work sporadically. But it wasn't usable. Now it works reliably.

Evidently we have 2.4 Ghz improvements too. We have a Chromecast in the bedroom. Previously, it wouldn't work very well at all. Usually I couldn't make it through a YouTube video without losing the signal (yes, I have it on the HDMI extender cable). With this firmware the Chromecast works perfectly.

I could grab iperf and run some tests, but to get an honest comparison I'd have to revert to the most recent Merlin. Given the improvements I've seen without seeing actual numbers, I'm not particularly inclined to do that

Another improvement I've noticed is that it seems with each new release from Asus/Merlin, my router was having a harder and harder time connecting to my modem after I had to power them both down. I'd have to go through the "power down the modem, wait a couple of minutes, power it up, try to connect" dance several times before it would work. With this firmware the router connects the first time, just like it used to.

 

[jeff288]

Whoops! Should've mentioned that. It is, in fact, an RT-N66U. Quite frankly I was researching a replacement for it until I came across this firmware.


It's pretty simple to quantify, actually. My router is in the basement. My bedroom is on the second floor. Not an ideal situation, I understand, but it's the best of many different solutions I tried for whole-house coverage. With the previous firmware I could not get a usable 5.0 Ghz connection in my bedroom. It might connect. It might work sporadically. But it wasn't usable. Now it works reliably.

Evidently we have 2.4 Ghz improvements too. We have a Chromecast in the bedroom. Previously, it wouldn't work very well at all. Usually I couldn't make it through a YouTube video without losing the signal (yes, I have it on the HDMI extender cable). With this firmware the Chromecast works perfectly.

I could grab iperf and run some tests, but to get an honest comparison I'd have to revert to the most recent Merlin. Given the improvements I've seen without seeing actual numbers, I'm not particularly inclined to do that

If you didn't know about it, there's also the HGG firmware that supposedly has helped people with range issues but there's no source code release with it if that means anything to you.

 

[Nullity]

I used Windows ping command as well as PingPlotter using various protocols. I had packet loss at a certain node at the ISP, never wireless loss in the casual testing that I did. But I recently did a test after getting slow down on youtube and I noticed wireless loss also to my AP (N66U) from my PC and running ping on another wifi bridge router to my AP. Is there a better way to measure packet loss for wifi and WAN?

You could log into the router and run "wl counters" for wireless info.

 

[jeff288]

You could log into the router and run "wl counters" for wireless info.

Thanks. Most of it's Greek to me. But I searched "error" after piping to a txt file and what stood out was "txretrans 2068 txerror 99", rxerror is 0. Is this an issue with the router transmitting or the client receiving?

 

[Nullity]

Thanks. Most of it's Greek to me. But I searched "error" after piping to a txt file and what stood out was "txretrans 2068 txerror 99", rxerror is 0. Is this an issue with the router transmitting or the client receiving?

Mostly greek to me as well. AFAIK, errors are to be expected. For reference, here's my stats. (Use "wl -a eth1 [command]" for 2.4Ghz and eth2 for 5Ghz.)
2.4Ghz

txframe 26753684 txbyte 2364404183 txretrans 21093 txerror 2516 rxframe 10843343 rxbyte 1525422880 rxerror 0

5Ghz

txframe 12735712 txbyte 3696043660 txretrans 2098 txerror 1196 rxframe 6143804 rxbyte 1245895109 rxerror 0

 

[avi68]

Weird how its working just fine for me on my n66u with HW acc enabled. I was to download around 75GB yesterday and the traffic manager is reporting around 74GB which is good enough.

My n66u used to give correct values too, its just this ac68u which doesnt. Which makes it even more confusing

 

[john9527]

Latest beta 17BA feedback:

Bandwidth Limiter seems to work properly nice addition!

However, I have a problem with System Log>Port Forwarding displaying correctly. I get an All under destination column or an AllAllAllAll... in sequence with no other column info such as Proto. Port range Redirect to Local port Chain.

I do have a custom post config script for upnp. Worked fine with 15E5.

Reverted to 15E5 to test and it displays correctly.

AC66U/ Google Chrome

Thanks for the report.....'fat fingers' at work in V17 Will be fixed for the final release.