Dave Taht wrote: > I have been pounding several cerowrt boxes utterly flat for 13 days now. > root@davedesk:~# uptime > 20:54:29 up 13 days, 13:28, load average: 0.04, 0.04, 0.04 (well, > formerly flat prior to this email) > Aside from seeing one kernel trap (see bug #442) for it, it's stayed > up on wifi, reliably for 10s of thousands of tests... for me. > I have - along the way - collected gigabytes of useless packet > captures, crashed every serial dongle I own, the 802.11ac ap I'm > working on, windows multiple times, and linux on a pair of laptops, > and reduced multiple beaglebones with the edimax 802.11ac to > gibbering, crashed hysteria unrecoverable even with a usb serial > connection, needing a reflash. > but never cerowrt. So I'm happy about that, YEAH! KUDOS > I really, really, really, really wanted a stable cerowrt release, and > then to move on. I'd hoped that 3.10.44-6 would have been it. I've > thought about putting out a bug bounty for it, if that would find > someone with the wherewithal to nail this !@#! thing to the floor. > In the interim, I'd like to make clear to everyone that I regard bug > 442 as the only thing holding up a general stable release, and there > have been a couple updates to it. I have no OSX at my house... it all... well, it's all Linux (debian/Android/Chrome), with some cisco phones and switches. I've never seen 442-type thing on any release. My understanding is that a power cycle of the cerowrt fixes the 442 problem? Lots of "factory ROMs" need to be power cycled weekly. So my take is to go forward like this. > http://www.teklibre.com/~d/elwr/emails.html > My first documented encounter with the need for aqm and packet > scheduling on wireless was: > Mon, 19 Oct 1998 19:18:09 ha. -- ] Never tell me the odds! | ipv6 mesh networks [ ] Michael Richardson, Sandelman Software Works | network architect [ ] mcr@sandelman.ca http://www.sandelman.ca/ | ruby on rails [