From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-qc0-x230.google.com (mail-qc0-x230.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400d: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 0237B21F1D2 for ; Sun, 9 Feb 2014 11:06:05 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-qc0-f176.google.com with SMTP id e16so9183472qcx.7 for ; Sun, 09 Feb 2014 11:06:04 -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:content-transfer-encoding; bh=noeqdt2jfOBklUh5Z0LrOJDkLpfDTyS7n//+Ebf4IZI=; b=YSMo/vN7gQfnqtkscILJ0oO5CDJc3SVA3d53o9aktgxW6pi9zGP3Kofa2Os2GqIy8v 1vvuxUDwg1RCQ2VQYeeWFTjBoMpu8F9HBWXG4QELh98bducA2UVejrXdw90npWGsiOHR nei7ijKBxJkFC7yd+txIBobes3MMUhWFRJgwfbVSqjhqZcHBiVU0OyIV1W7w/4h2qin4 EA8f1QoqOQjtbHs2xGSf7zbq+jzgMVNpnwfNSqZR6oEyMgfeLvKF4BZGN8v3M0muzj3v TK3HqDiEP5irbXUxZHs1P0bmLC+W4JmzVmzFboGUiTqyfNT9dR2uaFWdWs6z4PpHHuAR 3XlA== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.224.28.197 with SMTP id n5mr41720768qac.43.1391972764807; Sun, 09 Feb 2014 11:06:04 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.224.27.133 with HTTP; Sun, 9 Feb 2014 11:06:04 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <874n486rxe.fsf@toke.dk> References: <87mwi18fl5.fsf@toke.dk> <20140209122259.261147e0@giga.billmerriam.com> <874n486rxe.fsf@toke.dk> Date: Sun, 9 Feb 2014 11:06:04 -0800 Message-ID: From: Dave Taht To: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Toke_H=F8iland=2DJ=F8rgensen?= Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Cc: "cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net" Subject: Re: [Cerowrt-devel] WNDR alternative for higher capacity 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: Sun, 09 Feb 2014 19:06:06 -0000 Rich Brown had contacted linksys. I don't know the current status. So far we're not impressed with their follow through, or their announcement, or their hardware. They seemed to think that merely announcing they'd work with openwrt precluded things like, actually contacting the openwrt devs to talk about their plans. This is the rough equivalent of someone announcing a product that Apple would support, without Apple;s actual endorsement. Certainly linksys was a powerful brand and many folk have warm feelings about their breakthrough new products in the early 00s, but the company was a gutted shell long before it was sold off. Over the past year... I have had plenty of "early hardware" from various vendors to evaluate, all rejected thus far, primarily due to the binary blob problem. Some had pretty good kernel support, but rejected (like the mirabox) for heat and ancient kernel issues as well, and a couple got rejected because they couldn't push even half a gigabit. It's a rather long list of unacceptable hardware at this point. I can try to sort through what I can and cannot publish and get it out here at some point. Currently on the top of the "not so-horrible-I'm going-to-barf list" is the latest arm based atheros CPU chipset and mildly below that is the mindspeed stuff. Mindspeed got bought recently and that's taken it out of the running until they get their internal processes sorted out or sold again. The atheros chipset is still hotly smoking off the fab... I've held a dev board in my hands but they took it away from me real fast. :) The octeon was a contender for a while but with the death of mips it's time to leave that arch. The armada 370s are not bad, the imx6 stuff is not bad (there's been some good changes on the imx6 I should look at it again) That's just for cpu. In all cases from all vendors the 802.11ac radio code is in binary blobs, and barely works in the first place. The ath10k work is proceeding in public at least, but they are still battling with blowing up on the PCIe bus and other severely low level problems. Ath10k support HAS landed in openwrt.... At the moment what I think I'm trying to do is divide the problem in half, find a decent X86 based box with mini-pcie support, and solve the gigE problem that way, and the wifi problem separately. The cost goes way up... The closest I've found so far to what I wanted was the latest nuc with sata support. Still want two hardwired ethernet ports which it doesn't have.... On Sun, Feb 9, 2014 at 10:51 AM, Toke H=F8iland-J=F8rgensen = wrote: > Bill Merriam writes: > >> The announced but not yet available Linksys WRT1900AC might meet your >> needs. The press release says they are providing advance copies of the >> hardware to the openwrt developers and linksys expects openwrt to >> ready when the hardware is released in "Spring 2014". > > I think it might, and I considered that; but got stuck on the "announced > but not yet available" part... > >> It seems cerowrt developers need early hardware also. > > Well, maybe I'll try to convince someone at linksys that this is the > case; any ideas about who I should email? > > -Toke > > _______________________________________________ > Cerowrt-devel mailing list > Cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net > https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cerowrt-devel > --=20 Dave T=E4ht Fixing bufferbloat with cerowrt: http://www.teklibre.com/cerowrt/subscribe.= html