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

[JLL]

Maybe you were too quick. The 5GHz band won't come online until about 60 seconds after the 2.4GHz band.
Maybe it could be clearer. "may use" means you may use his utility to restore your settings from backup, but if you don't you will have to re-enter them manually. With this release you cannot use the GUI's "Restore setting (NVRAM)".

I see. Well I'm off to bed for tonight, I will try again later
Thanks for the help !

 

[john9527]

After that I uploaded my settings using the web interface -

Can't do this...it 'un-does' the factory reset. A set of saved settings from within the gui is only good for the firmware on which it was taken (you were able to get away with it across fork levels up to now because none of the key components had changed - with V27 there was a change).

 

[Builder71]

26E4->27E5 on my RT-N66U.
So far so good, thx!

(Port forward description now works for the first time.)

 

[binarydad]

Is there any change to the wireless drivers for the N66U from 26E4? Thanks.

 

[john9527]

Is there any change to the wireless drivers for the N66U from 26E4? Thanks.

No, no change in any of the drivers for the MIPs based routers.

 

[Andi P]

Hi John,

just upgraded successfully to 27E5 coming from 26E4 (with factory settings reset + loading my configuration again with nvram tool r26).
So far so good, everything really vital works just fine.

However I just noticed something not working anymore which was fine before always (using your fork since 25E1):

I have a cable modem which the router connects to via the WAN port in "automatic IP" mode.
In the past, whenever I entered http://192.168.100.1, my RT-AC68U somehow channelled this request to the web interface of my cable modem, so I could see the configuration and status interface of it. (and this although my LAN was never configured to 192.168.x.x at all, my LAN works on 10.x.x.x, but it just always worked).

Now a call to 192.168.100.1 just times out, so this is not working anymore.

Question is: Is this known? Intended? Or a regression due to the new frameworks?

Many thanks
Andi

 

[ColinTaylor]

@Andi P Like you I can access my cable modem on 192.168.100.1 without any special procedures, it's designed to work that way. I've just double-checked and I can still access it with V27E5. My subnet is 192.168.1.x though.

Do you have any non-defaults configurations (apart from your 10.x.x.x network), like cloning MAC addresses or VPNs?

 

[john9527]

I have a cable modem which the router connects to via the WAN port in "automatic IP" mode.
In the past, whenever I entered http://192.168.100.1, my RT-AC68U somehow channelled this request to the web interface of my cable modem, so I could see the configuration and status interface of it. (and this although my LAN was never configured to 192.168.x.x at all, my LAN works on 10.x.x.x, but it just always worked).

Now a call to 192.168.100.1 just times out, so this is not working anymore.

Question is: Is this known? Intended? Or a regression due to the new frameworks?

This is one that has always bewildered me....I've always had to add an interface and an iptables rule to make my modem interface accessible. I can't understand how those that are accessing it without them can have it work, since it's a different Class C subnet outside of the normal netmask for the router. Maybe a function of the modem, but it's been the same for me on both a Motorola Surfboard and now on my Netgear.

I add the following lines.....

to wan-start (and yes, the 192.168.100.2 is correct)
ifconfig `nvram get wan0_ifname`:0 192.168.100.2 netmask 255.255.255.0

and to nat-start
iptables -t nat -I POSTROUTING -o `nvram get wan0_ifname` -j MASQUERADE

 

[jrmwvu04]

I've had three modems (asus and two arris surfboard) over my time with asuswrt routers and never had any issue accessing any of them on 192.168.100.1 without any setup on my part. The ip address range hasn't made any difference. Currently my LAN is 172.x.x.x and the modem is reachable at 192.168.100.1 - I actually looked into whether or not you could change that because I was curious but it seems hard coded.

 

[ColinTaylor]

I can't understand how those that are accessing it without them can have it work, since it's a different Class C subnet outside of the normal netmask for the router. Maybe a function of the modem, but it's been the same for me on both a Motorola Surfboard and now on my Netgear.

Conversely, I'm surprised people find this so unusual (but then that's how all cable modems are in the UK). In fact I'm more surprised that some people have to mess around setting up dedicated interfaces.

Yes, it's entirely down to how it's been implemented within the cable modem. But I think some people think that just because the IP address is 192.168.x.x it is somehow a magic address that can't be routed. Sure it's an address that's been reserved for private address spaces, but from the router's perspective it's just another address that isn't part of it's LAN and therefore with be routed out of the WAN port. It could well have been 123.123.123.123 for all the router cares.

I think people automatically and subconsciously assume that because it's a 192.168 address that it's impossible to access it from "outside" the device, which is not the case.

 

[john9527]

I think people automatically and subconsciously assume that because it's a 192.168 address that it's impossible to access it from "outside" the device, which is not the case.

I stand corrected Somewhere I came under the assumption that Class C was not route-able.

But, the cobwebs finally cleared and I did figure it out. I run with nearly all my clients routed through a VPN. When you do this, then you need to set up the alternate interface.

@Andi P - Have you started using a VPN client?

EDIT: I had put this in place before the days of VPN Policy based routing.....now an alternative solution (just tested) is to define a WAN rule with the modem address as the destination in the policy rules.

 

[Gravityz]

decided today to up the protection with lastpass plugin for Chrome.
Guess what. when you login the asus router homepage it does not generate a message to store the password.

tried it again and again, googled and found this is a 1 year old bug (probably caused by google to favor their own lock)

man, lastpass is a really lousy tool if it can not even save the info of a standard login page.
tried a simple website and indeed that one generated a store message.

deinstalled it instantly.
Will stick with the google password manager. at least that one works always. also you can not look into the stored passwords without typing in your windows password so save enough for me.

how can it be that this lastpass is so popular but can not even perform a simple task?

 

[JLL]

Can't do this...it 'un-does' the factory reset. A set of saved settings from within the gui is only good for the firmware on which it was taken (you were able to get away with it across fork levels up to now because none of the key components had changed - with V27 there was a change).

I tried updating to 27E5 again and this time, made sure to:
- save my settings with nvram-save (r26)
- reset to factory defaults
- update to 27E5
- reset to factory defaults
- clean restore nvram settings
along with reboots whenever asked.

However, still the same results: 5ghz wifi not broadcasting (also made sure to wait long enough for the signal to pop up, it didn't)
I reverted back to 26E4 for the time being.

Can anyone with a RT-AC68U Rev. A1 confirm that the new firmware is working correctly for them (particularly the 5ghz wifi) ?

 

[john9527]

However, still the same results: 5ghz wifi not broadcasting (also made sure to wait long enough for the signal to pop up, it didn't)

What region are you in? Are you using any 'custom' mods like trying to enable all channels/unlimited power?

 

[JLL]

What region are you in? Are you using any 'custom' mods like trying to enable all channels/unlimited power?

I live in Japan and the router was bought in Japan as well.
I haven't modified the router either: simply running the custom firmware.

 

[john9527]

I live in Japan and the router was bought in Japan as well.

On the Wireless > Professional page, in the very lower right hand corner is a set of characters in ( )...like (US/0) What are they?

 

[fink.nottle]

Will it be easy to build the firmware with the older sdk/drivers ? Is it a simple config change, or will it need major surgery in the code base ? I commented in the other beta thread that I couldn't quite get the performance with new drivers even after trying a few tweaks here and there. I haven't tried this yet, but it'll likely be the same. Since I use it as an AP (not open to the internet directly), I would be fine with building it occasionally with the old drivers.

 

[Andi P]

I stand corrected Somewhere I came under the assumption that Class C was not route-able.

But, the cobwebs finally cleared and I did figure it out. I run with nearly all my clients routed through a VPN. When you do this, then you need to set up the alternate interface.

@Andi P - Have you started using a VPN client?

EDIT: I had put this in place before the days of VPN Policy based routing.....now an alternative solution (just tested) is to define a WAN rule with the modem address as the destination in the policy rules.

Oh dear, you are damn right.
I was connected to a VPN when I tried.

Working now. Thanks for the hint. Feeling stupid now

And then I can confirm, all working as it should for me.


Andi

 

[john9527]

Can anyone with a RT-AC68U Rev. A1 confirm that the new firmware is working correctly for them (particularly the 5ghz wifi) ?

And I just checked my AC68R (Best Buy seller) is also a Rev A1 and working on both bands in Media Bridge and Router modes.

 

[john9527]

Why with the LTS i cant set my AC68(a1) in brigde mode like you .

Before you change to bridge mode, go to Wireless Professional and set
Regulation mode to 802.11d if using 2.4GHZ or 802.11d+h for 5GHz

Then set bridge mode....