[Cerowrt-devel] another contender for WNDR replacement
dave.taht at gmail.com
Wed Feb 18 04:38:36 EST 2015
while I am grumping:
It has been a bad day.
On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 1:30 AM, Dave Taht <dave.taht at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 1:28 AM, Sebastian Moeller <moeller0 at gmx.de>
>> Hi Felix, hi List,
>> On Jan 25, 2015, at 12:09 , Felix Fietkau <nbd at openwrt.org> wrote:
>> > Here's another candidate:
> 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
>> > 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
>> 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
> Dave Täht
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Cerowrt-devel