From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-ig0-x22a.google.com (mail-ig0-x22a.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4001:c05::22a]) (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 9509621F244 for ; Thu, 27 Mar 2014 05:50:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-ig0-f170.google.com with SMTP id uq10so1415116igb.3 for ; Thu, 27 Mar 2014 05:50:28 -0700 (PDT) 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=baj2v3IN3JZv+/y/aj4+iG9tsjr9Ngd7qXT85xFpzug=; b=hq/wHoof/gEnGLzp2aHdj05AuKP5xgctrldPD7psczwKWknPjAc6/fwOuiJr5f+ZGK Y7zLr0/b1suU4ZuFNyBTq0XDVmSlwp9doq5xsM0vKluavZx3q8SMoBqpg1JValpcaeJe aPdWU5IfgIn+KOO3Z/f1FsgjWnkglXLV3wnlcmM9O3kjhu00A60UrekUOV1Ifrjcspdv JxJIYD4teT9S0cQVY0JYMolPefyBLKYddI4Qx+hhLECom3KstqsFeGorb8YBS8Xs9k6F bfFA7GycEFXRxKcZbIIPa1yoM3usMNp+YX5nAGnPE1A9GrPgwqR8b6erqeQzbLeok8cA ZwPg== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.50.43.225 with SMTP id z1mr30434316igl.29.1395924627912; Thu, 27 Mar 2014 05:50:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.64.238.70 with HTTP; Thu, 27 Mar 2014 05:50:27 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: Date: Thu, 27 Mar 2014 13:50:27 +0100 Message-ID: From: Aaron Wood To: David Lang Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=089e010d8dd6947e5904f596074b Cc: "cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net" Subject: Re: [Cerowrt-devel] Fwd: wndr3800 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: Thu, 27 Mar 2014 12:50:28 -0000 --089e010d8dd6947e5904f596074b Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 On Wed, Mar 26, 2014 at 11:11 PM, David Lang wrote: > If the openwrt folks could figure out how they are going to deal with NAND > flash, it would be nice to be able to use one of the many routers that is > shipping with more flash (128M in the newer netgear routers would be nice) > > if I were to get my hands on one, what sort of testing would you want to > do to it to tell if it looks like it would hold up? I have experience running mtd on NAND, using jffs2. It seems to be holding up well. Better than NOR did, honestly. Although in general, I wish they would shift to eMMC. But it's driven by two factors: 1) part cost 2) chipset support from the router SoC vendors Given some of the wishes that I see on here, I think for development, people would be happier with a platform that wasn't based on a router SoC (like the wndr is), but instead was based on an embedded application processor with PCIe for the radios, and an external switch fabric. But for thermal purposes alone, I've been seeing more and more external switch fabrics. The heat of a 5-port gigabit switch IC is pretty substantial (from my teardowns). One item I think will be a boon, especially with DNSSEC, is super-cap or battery-backed rtc, but that's asking for a unicorn, I think. Or... a Gateworks Ventana GW5310 loaded with a couple standard (industrial-grade) PCIe radios, loaded into a custom case. My guess is that it's a pretty expensive route, though. I would be surprised if a completely assembled unit would be <$300. At which point it starts to look better to just run a separate router and AP (using standard wndr-type platforms as the APs and a higher-end board or PC as the gateway). -Aaron --089e010d8dd6947e5904f596074b Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On W= ed, Mar 26, 2014 at 11:11 PM, David Lang <david@lang.hm> wrote:<= br>
If the openwrt folks could figure out how they are going to deal with NAND = flash, it would be nice to be able to use one of the many routers that is s= hipping with more flash (128M in the newer netgear routers would be nice)
if I were to get my hands on one, what sort of testing would you want to do= to it to tell if it looks like it would hold up?

I have experience running mtd on NAND, using jffs2. =A0It seems to b= e holding up well. =A0Better than NOR did, honestly. =A0Although in general= , I wish they would shift to eMMC. =A0But it's driven by two factors:

1) part cost
2) chipset support from the rout= er SoC vendors

Given some of the wishes that I see= on here, I think for development, people would be happier with a platform = that wasn't based on a router SoC (like the wndr is), but instead was b= ased on an embedded application processor with PCIe for the radios, and an = external switch fabric. =A0But for thermal purposes alone, I've been se= eing more and more external switch fabrics. =A0The heat of a 5-port gigabit= switch IC is pretty substantial (from my teardowns).

One item I think will be a boon, especially with DNSSEC= , is super-cap or battery-backed rtc, but that's asking for a unicorn, = I think. =A0Or... =A0a Gateworks Ventana GW5310 loaded with a couple standa= rd (industrial-grade) PCIe radios, loaded into a custom case. =A0My guess i= s that it's a pretty expensive route, though. =A0I would be surprised i= f a completely assembled unit would be <$300. =A0At which point it start= s to look better to just run a separate router and AP (using standard wndr-= type platforms as the APs and a higher-end board or PC as the gateway).

-Aaron
--089e010d8dd6947e5904f596074b--