[Cerowrt-devel] another contender for WNDR replacement

Dave Taht dave.taht at gmail.com
Wed Feb 18 04:30:10 EST 2015

On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 1:28 AM, Sebastian Moeller <moeller0 at gmx.de> wrote:

> Hi Felix, hi List,
> On Jan 25, 2015, at 12:09 , Felix Fietkau <nbd at 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:

> > 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

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.bufferbloat.net/pipermail/cerowrt-devel/attachments/20150218/a10b070f/attachment-0002.html>

More information about the Cerowrt-devel mailing list