From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-ob0-x230.google.com (mail-ob0-x230.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4003:c01::230]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com", Issuer "Google Internet Authority G2" (verified OK)) by huchra.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1280621F2D5 for ; Wed, 18 Feb 2015 01:30:11 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-ob0-f176.google.com with SMTP id wo20so63314283obc.7 for ; Wed, 18 Feb 2015 01:30:10 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=dE3HYOw7LU2MjIDsNxo2txqUIsNXznYIHT8LFMb7ySg=; b=OSi49HEUJIFy7gpYXaUUFSFLNqHeMZ3HkwT5VSTolHoDQc8KBIxLfUb2lqg9ONMuZZ kAfS7XPeUSxIxzDWPUHOtmV+qZa8j3vrP7CB43Gnky1kZkSxc+VK5WELKZt7vdPBPYgv QV22Co4H5ziJQIk1Msc9bYLgbFjBVjzpJ5Fkt+IA+I27QVmRRkz4BB2EDDaIDNarDEe3 PJy7bpSNH0B0sTcs8ODegDYtK7Pu/aXOwZPG7Kw0Pf3gd8YftuKsnuW1hca3mI69Am9Z xxOlQ07D1QonWVe+9kO9vdqydrKtwR2sa2PAuTaqA1Ql7tB5w/MQshPlrdcp4QsoYoN/ 6dKA== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.60.57.9 with SMTP id e9mr21605487oeq.24.1424251810800; Wed, 18 Feb 2015 01:30:10 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.202.51.66 with HTTP; Wed, 18 Feb 2015 01:30:10 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: <63C60796-0C39-474C-B5A4-F2FCACC4592A@gmx.de> <54C4CEE3.2040909@openwrt.org> Date: Wed, 18 Feb 2015 01:30:10 -0800 Message-ID: From: Dave Taht To: Sebastian Moeller Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=089e0149c4a840fd99050f59777f Cc: cerowrt-devel Subject: Re: [Cerowrt-devel] another contender for WNDR replacement X-BeenThere: cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13 Precedence: list List-Id: Development issues regarding the cerowrt test router project List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 18 Feb 2015 09:30:40 -0000 --089e0149c4a840fd99050f59777f Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 1:28 AM, Sebastian Moeller wrote: > Hi Felix, hi List, > > > On Jan 25, 2015, at 12:09 , Felix Fietkau wrote: > > > Here's another candidate: > > > http://us.dlink.com/products/connect/wireless-ac1200-dual-band-gigabit-cl= oud-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=C2=B4s news: http://forums.dlink.com/index.php?topic=3D61634.msg250538#msg250538 > > CPU: MT7621 (dual-core MIPS, 880 MHz, 4 virtual CPUs) > > The device has preliminary OpenWrt support already. In my tests, handle= s > > ~820 Mbit/s NAT without any special acceleration features (with fq_code= l, > > 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 i= t > is running out of steam on my temporary 100/40 Mbps link. This thing look= s > 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=E2=80=99s are left? I notice that from look= ing 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 B= 1 > 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 wit= h > new photos is required)? > > Best Regards > Sebastian --=20 Dave T=C3=A4ht thttp://www.bufferbloat.net/projects/bloat/wiki/Upcoming_Talks --089e0149c4a840fd99050f59777f Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable


On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 1:28 AM, Sebastian Moeller &l= t;moeller0@gmx.de&= gt; wrote:
Hi F= elix, hi List,


On Jan 25, 2015, at 12:09 , Felix Fietkau <nbd@openwrt.org> wrote:

> Here's another candidate:
> http://us.dlink.com/p= roducts/connect/wireless-ac1200-dual-band-gigabit-cloud-router-dir-860l/

=
=C2=A0
> CPU: MT7621 (dual-core MIPS, 880 MHz, 4 virtual CPUs)
> The device has preliminary OpenWrt support already. In my tests, handl= es
> ~820 Mbit/s NAT without any special acceleration features (with fq_cod= el,
> no shaping). Haven't done any tests with shaping yet.
> Wifi (MT7612E) is still buggy with my mt76 driver, but I'll fix th= at in
> March when I get back from vacation.
>
> - Felix

=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 I am currently searching for a repl= acement 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 htt= ps://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 qui= te 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?)
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 So, does anybody here now how to order a specif= ic revision in Germany? Or is the only way to wait a bit and hope the A1 re= vision clears the retail channel so only B1=E2=80=99s are left? I notice th= at from looking at the internal photos for both devices posted on the FCC s= ite that the old A1 Broadcom revision has its USB port "above" th= e 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 ha= rdware needs to match the FCC design exactly (that is, in case of revision = a new FCC submission with new photos is required)?

Best Regards
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 Sebast= ian



--
--089e0149c4a840fd99050f59777f--