Re: [Cerowrt-devel] another contender for WNDR replacement

[Dave Taht <dave.taht@gmail.com>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2743 bytes --]

while I am grumping:

https://plus.google.com/u/0/107942175615993706558/posts/NyW5HQusMMw

It has been a bad day.

On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 1:30 AM, Dave Taht <dave.taht@gmail.com> wrote:

>
>
> On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 1:28 AM, Sebastian Moeller <moeller0@gmx.de>
> wrote:
>
>> Hi Felix, hi List,
>>
>>
>> On Jan 25, 2015, at 12:09 , Felix Fietkau <nbd@openwrt.org> wrote:
>>
>> > Here's another candidate:
>> >
>> http://us.dlink.com/products/connect/wireless-ac1200-dual-band-gigabit-cloud-router-dir-860l/
>>
>>
> I just ordered one of these to play with. I am otherwise quite depressed
> about how the home gateway industry arbitrarily switches out products and
> software with the same brand for something else, usually inferior.
>
> Today´s news:
> http://forums.dlink.com/index.php?topic=61634.msg250538#msg250538
>
>
>> > CPU: MT7621 (dual-core MIPS, 880 MHz, 4 virtual CPUs)
>> > The device has preliminary OpenWrt support already. In my tests, handles
>> > ~820 Mbit/s NAT without any special acceleration features (with
>> fq_codel,
>> > no shaping). Haven't done any tests with shaping yet.
>> > Wifi (MT7612E) is still buggy with my mt76 driver, but I'll fix that in
>> > March when I get back from vacation.
>> >
>> > - Felix
>>
>>         I am currently searching for a replacement for my wndr3700v2 as
>> it is running out of steam on my temporary 100/40 Mbps link. This thing
>> looks quite decent, but I notice between
>> https://wikidevi.com/wiki/D-Link_DIR-860L_rev_A1 and
>> https://wikidevi.com/wiki/D-Link_DIR-860L_rev_B1 that d-link reused the
>> sam name for quite different hardware implementations, and only the more
>> recent B1 revision will work for us. (Is it just me or do you also find
>> this tendency to not even add the revision to the official name a bit
>> annoying?)
>>         So, does anybody here now how to order a specific revision in
>> Germany? Or is the only way to wait a bit and hope the A1 revision clears
>> the retail channel so only B1’s are left? I notice that from looking at the
>> internal photos for both devices posted on the FCC site that the old A1
>> Broadcom revision has its USB port "above" the ethernet ports while the B1
>> Mediatek revision has the USB port between DC in and below the ethernet
>> ports. Am I correct in assuming that deployed hardware needs to match the
>> FCC design exactly (that is, in case of revision a new FCC submission with
>> new photos is required)?
>>
>> Best Regards
>>         Sebastian
>
>
>
>
> --
> Dave Täht
>
> thttp://www.bufferbloat.net/projects/bloat/wiki/Upcoming_Talks
>



-- 
Dave Täht

thttp://www.bufferbloat.net/projects/bloat/wiki/Upcoming_Talks

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 4457 bytes --]