RT-N66U official firmware 3.0.0.3_162

[sharpz44]

Can anyone help with this please

Hi I am new, I have a 66u and recently update latest firmware, my main use is for gaming,when I did a test on my ps3 it says the router in use may not support ip fragments, it was fine before, I have no internet problems but this does not help in online games,please see the report below and thanks in advance
The ICSI Netalyzr
Start » Analysis » Results
Result Summary + – (help)
adsl-2-solo-175-93.claranet.co.uk / 80.168.175.**
Recorded at 17:57 EDT (21:57 UTC), Aug 03 2012. Permalink. Referrer. Client/server transcript.
Summary of Noteworthy Events + –
Minor Aberrations –
Certain TCP protocols are blocked in outbound traffic
Fragmented UDP traffic is blocked
The network path does not reply when it needs to fragment traffic
The measured packet loss was somewhat high
Network packet buffering may be excessive
The network blocks some or all EDNS replies
Not all DNS types were correctly processed
Address-based Tests + –
NAT detection (?): NAT Detected +
Local Network Interfaces (?): OK +
DNS-based host information (?): OK +
NAT support for Universal Plug and Play (UPnP) (?): Yes +
Reachability Tests + –
TCP connectivity (?): Note –
Direct TCP access to remote FTP servers (port 21) is allowed.
Direct TCP access to remote SSH servers (port 22) is allowed.
Direct TCP access to remote SMTP servers (port 25) is allowed.
Direct TCP access to remote DNS servers (port 53) is allowed.
Direct TCP access to remote HTTP servers (port 80) is allowed.
Direct TCP access to remote POP3 servers (port 110) is allowed.
Direct TCP access to remote RPC servers (port 135) is allowed.
Direct TCP access to remote NetBIOS servers (port 139) is allowed.
Direct TCP access to remote IMAP servers (port 143) is allowed.
Direct TCP access to remote SNMP servers (port 161) is allowed.
Direct TCP access to remote HTTPS servers (port 443) is allowed.
Direct TCP access to remote SMB servers (port 445) is allowed.
Direct TCP access to remote SMTP/SSL servers (port 465) is allowed.
Direct TCP access to remote secure IMAP servers (port 585) is allowed.
Direct TCP connections to remote authenticated SMTP servers (port 587) succeed, but do not receive the expected content.
The applet received the following reply instead of our expected header:
"421 Cannot establish SSL with SMTP server 67.202.32.138:465, SSL_connect error 336031996 "
Direct TCP access to remote IMAP/SSL servers (port 993) is allowed.
Direct TCP access to remote POP/SSL servers (port 995) is allowed.
Direct TCP access to remote OpenVPN servers (port 1194) is allowed.
Direct TCP access to remote PPTP Control servers (port 1723) is allowed.
Direct TCP access to remote SIP servers (port 5060) is allowed.
Direct TCP access to remote BitTorrent servers (port 6881) is allowed.
Direct TCP access to remote TOR servers (port 9001) is allowed.
UDP connectivity (?): Note –
Basic UDP access is available.
The applet was able to send fragmented UDP traffic.
The applet was unable to receive fragmented UDP traffic. The most likely cause is an error in your network's firewall configuration or NAT.
The maximum packet successfully received was 1464 bytes of payload.
Direct UDP access to remote DNS servers (port 53) is allowed.
Direct UDP access to remote NTP servers (port 123) is allowed.
Direct UDP access to remote NetBIOS NS servers (port 137) is allowed.
Direct UDP access to remote NetBIOS DGM servers (port 138) is allowed.
Direct UDP access to remote IKE key exchange servers (port 500) is allowed.
Direct UDP access to remote OpenVPN servers (port 1194) is allowed.
Direct UDP access to remote Slammer servers (port 1434) is allowed.
Direct UDP access to remote L2 tunneling servers (port 1701) is allowed.
Direct UDP access to remote IPSec NAT servers (port 4500) is allowed.
Direct UDP access to remote RTP servers (port 5004) is allowed.
Direct UDP access to remote RTCP servers (port 5005) is allowed.
Direct UDP access to remote SIP servers (port 5060) is allowed.
Direct UDP access to remote VoIP servers (port 7078) is allowed.
Direct UDP access to remote VoIP servers (port 7082) is allowed.
Direct UDP access to remote SCTP servers (port 9899) is allowed.
Direct UDP access to remote Steam gaming servers (port 27005) is allowed.
Direct UDP access to remote Steam gaming servers (port 27015) is allowed.
Traceroute (?): OK +
Path MTU (?): Warning –
The path between your network and our system supports an MTU of at least 1500 bytes, and the path between our system and your network has an MTU of 1492 bytes. The path MTU bottleneck that fails to properly report the ICMP "too big" is between 195.157.0.6 and 80.168.175.93. The path between our system and your network does not appear to report properly when the sender needs to fragment traffic.
Network Access Link Properties + –
Network latency measurements (?): Latency: 96ms Loss: 2.5% –
The round-trip time (RTT) between your computer and our server is 96 msec, which is good.
We recorded a packet loss of 2.5%. This loss rate can result in noticeable performance problems. It could be due either to significant load on our servers due to a large number of visitors, or problems with your network. Of the packet loss, at least 2.5% of the packets appear to have been lost on the path from your computer to our servers.
TCP connection setup latency (?): 80ms +
Network background health measurement (?): no transient outages +
Network bandwidth (?): Upload 1.1 Mbit/sec, Download 10 Mbit/sec +
Network buffer measurements (?): Uplink 490 ms, Downlink is good –
We estimate your uplink as having 490 msec of buffering. This level can in some situations prove somewhat high, and you may experience degraded performance when performing interactive tasks such as web-surfing while simultaneously conducting large uploads. Real-time applications, such as games or audio chat, may also work poorly when conducting large uploads at the same time.
We were not able to produce enough traffic to load the downlink buffer, or the downlink buffer is particularly small. You probably have excellent behavior when downloading files and attempting to do other tasks.
HTTP Tests + –
Address-based HTTP proxy detection (?): OK +
Content-based HTTP proxy detection (?): OK +
HTTP proxy detection via malformed requests (?): OK +
Filetype-based filtering (?): OK +
HTTP caching behavior (?): OK +
JavaScript-based tests (?): OK +
DNS Tests + –
Restricted domain DNS lookup (?): OK +
Unrestricted domain DNS lookup (?): OK +
Direct DNS support (?): OK +
Direct EDNS support (?): Note –
EDNS-enabled requests for small responses are answered successfully.
EDNS-enabled requests for medium-sized responses are answered successfully.
EDNS-enabled requests for large responses remain unanswered. This suggests that a proxy or firewall is unable to handle large extended DNS requests or fragmented UDP traffic.
DNS resolver address (?): OK +
DNS resolver properties (?): Lookup latency 170ms +
Direct probing of DNS resolvers (?) –
Your system is configured to use 1 DNS resolver(s).
The resolver at 192.168.1.1 (resolver03) could not process the following tested types:
Large (~3000B) TXT records fetched with EDNS0
It does not validate DNSSEC. It does not wildcard NXDOMAIN errors. The resolver reports a number of additional properties. Show them.
DNS glue policy (?): OK +
DNS resolver port randomization (?): OK +
DNS lookups of popular domains (?): OK +
DNS external proxy (?): OK +
DNS results wildcarding (?): OK +
DNS-level redirection of specific sites (?): OK +
Direct probing of DNS roots (?): +
IPv6 Tests + –
DNS support for IPv6 (?): OK +
IPv4, IPv6, and your web browser (?): No IPv6 support +
IPv6 connectivity (?): No IPv6 support +
Host Properties + –
System clock accuracy (?): OK +
Browser properties (?): OK +
Uploaded data (?): OK +
Feedback + –
User-provided feedback +
ID 43ca208a-19000-71618e96-1967-44d5-beae

 

[sharpz44]

Sorry forgot to add can anyone help with this or is the firmware buggy

 

[sharpz44]

Since all you require is web-based access to your NAS then you have no need for VPNs, as long as your NAS web interface is protected by a secure password.

Go to the WAN -> Virtual Server page. Make sure "Enable Port Forwarding" is set to "Yes".

Create a port forward entry under Virtual Server.

Click on the "+" under Add/Delete to add the new rule.

You can repeat it for HTTPS access:

Click on the "+" under Add/Delete to add the new rule.

Then click on Apply at the bottom.

You should then be able to connect using http://hostname.dyndns.org:8080 (not recommended since this is not encrypted) or https://hostname.dyndns.org. If it doesn't work then it means your DynDNS might not be properly configured. To check, open a command prompt in Window, and type the following:



It should return your WAN IP. If not, re-check your DynDNS configuration (username, password and hostname).

Hi, I have put a post and reopt about asus latest firmware on this forum, I was wondering if you could have a look please, I am a bit of a noob with router setting,but can see that udp traffic is fragmented, thanks for your help

 

[RMerlin]

I have no idea what I'm supposed to be looking at in this long log, but if you are having packet fragmentation, it means you probably have an MTU problem. Make sure you don't have any weird MTU values on your network and on your WAN interface. Everything should be set to 1500 normally, unless using PPPoE in which case 1492 or 1484 might work out better.

 

[worthmining]

Just curious what you are using to measure "radiation", what band are you using, and what do you have the transmitter power set to?

Thanks.

This is what I used:
http://www.amazon.com/dp/B001PFPTCS/?tag=snbforums-20

 

[sharpz44]

I have no idea what I'm supposed to be looking at in this long log, but if you are having packet fragmentation, it means you probably have an MTU problem. Make sure you don't have any weird MTU values on your network and on your WAN interface. Everything should be set to 1500 normally, unless using PPPoE in which case 1492 or 1484 might work out better.

thanks for reply,I have my MTU set @ 1492,however I still keep getting fragmented UDP traffic is blocked,is this normal? Also I was looking at your firmware, I mainly have this router for gaming,would yours be better or is the asus firmware sufficient.
Thanks

 

[Daybreak]

This is what I used:
http://www.amazon.com/dp/B001PFPTCS/?tag=snbforums-20

Howdy,
I do not want to thread jump, but this thread really needs to stay on topic. Any radio wave device lets off EMF. Which is NOT radiation.

next

 

[RogerSC]

Howdy,
I do not want to thread jump, but this thread really needs to stay on topic. Any radio wave device lets off EMF. Which is NOT radiation.

next

Sorry, I was interested in finding out what he was talking about, and now I know. I didn't realize how off-topic it was until I saw what he was using for "measurement".

 

[Gitsum]

thanks for reply,I have my MTU set @ 1492,however I still keep getting fragmented UDP traffic is blocked,is this normal? Also I was looking at your firmware, I mainly have this router for gaming,would yours be better or is the asus firmware sufficient.
Thanks

Why do you have it set @ 1492? 1500 is normal unless using PPPoE, as Merlin said. I ran your ICSI test on my ASUS RTN66U with Shibby's Tomato build and did not receive the errors you reported. Leave your MTU alone unless required by ISP.

 

[RMerlin]

thanks for reply,I have my MTU set @ 1492,however I still keep getting fragmented UDP traffic is blocked,is this normal? Also I was looking at your firmware, I mainly have this router for gaming,would yours be better or is the asus firmware sufficient.
Thanks

My firmware will have no incidence on your particular issue. I personally (IMHO) think that my firmware is a better choice, since general stability is one of the things I am improving with it.

 

[sharpz44]

Why do you have it set @ 1492? 1500 is normal unless using PPPoE, as Merlin said. I ran your ICSI test on my ASUS RTN66U with Shibby's Tomato build and did not receive the errors you reported. Leave your MTU alone unless required by ISP.

It is set at that automatically ,it's on ppoe,yes so you ran the test on tomato,well what I am trying to find out is is it my Asus firmware or down to my ISP ,
So maybe I will install merlins firmware and that should give me an answer,thanks for you help aswell

 

[sharpz44]

My firmware will have no incidence on your particular issue. I personally (IMHO) think that my firmware is a better choice, since general stability is one of the things I am improving with it.

Ok thanks for your reply,Is it just a matter of installing it the same way as Asus firmwares,really want to put your on as from what I have read it a lot better.
Thanks

 

[sharpz44]

Ok thanks for your reply,Is it just a matter of installing it the same way as Asus firmwares,really want to put your on as from what I have read it a lot better.
Thanks

Thanks, I have now installed it and running great,thanks for your help

 

[dikkiedirk]

My firmware will have no incidence on your particular issue. I personally (IMHO) think that my firmware is a better choice, since general stability is one of the things I am improving with it.

Will my router be in "factory-reset" state when I flash your firmware? I still have the original 3.0.0.90 fw that it came with when I boght it. Is there a way to go higher than 100 mW when living in Europe?

 

[RMerlin]

Will my router be in "factory-reset" state when I flash your firmware? I still have the original 3.0.0.90 fw that it came with when I boght it. Is there a way to go higher than 100 mW when living in Europe?

Yes, it will be reset since your router will be upgraded from a 32K NVRAM to a 64K NVRAM storage. This will also be the same issue if you flash with a 64K NVRAM enabled firmware once Asus releases one, so it will happen eventually.

I haven't removed the power output limitations, so no, unless you try to modify the nvram settings that puts the router settings in the EU region. I've seen it done on other forums, so it's technically doable.

 

[bobradarbob]

Looks like a bunch of things got fixed, but I still got some issues:
- DCHP reservation doesn't let me add new reservations and apply doesn't seem to do anything.
- Manual QoS: I can add a MAC address and priority, but the "apply" warns that a field can't be empty; not sure which one? (I don't want to enter bandwidth limits)
- Tx Power adjustment can be set to 500, but it still requires 3 x Apple.

Anybody else have these issues?

Yes! I can't set the DHCP range because the APPLY button does not work. I see a small message in the lower LEFT corner that indicate and error on page but that's all that happens. Yours is the only comment that I've read here that even mentions this. It is very difficult to setup VPN unless you can create a 10 IP range and my router is set from 2 thru 254 and I can't change it.

I am using xxxx 3.162 FW.

what now?
bob

 

[sidamos]

Yes, it's a known bug in firmware 3.0.0.3.162.

With .112, when I set wifi to off during the night, it won't be enabled again in the morning. So, this bug is still in .162?

 

[RMerlin]

With .112, when I set wifi to off during the night, it won't be enabled again in the morning. So, this bug is still in .162?

Not sure if it's the same issue or a different one that came back, but yes, wifi won't turn back on as it should with 162. Asus are aware of the issue.

 

[sidamos]

Thanks! And will going from .112 to .162 wipe my settings?

 

[RMerlin]

If it's the original Asus firmware, no.
If it's my custom firmwmare, yes (due to the 64K NVRAM upgrade)