Joined: 29 Mar 2010 Posts: 60 Location: San Jose, CA
Posted: Sat Jul 14, 2018 0:36 Post subject:
mrjcd wrote:
wesweber wrote:
I noticed the ISP router says to use the same SSID and passwords for 2.4G and 5G interfaces.
Is that true for the ddwrt fw?
I never use the same SSID. Guess you could if you wanted but I prefer to know what band I'm connecting to with certain devices ...hence I use different SSIDs.
It didn't work well, the iphone only connected to the 2.4 inf, tried a different pw on the 5g inf and it wouldn't connect to the 5g. ipad wouldnt connect until I changed the pw on the 5g inf then it connected to the 5g inf. Seems like the apple stuff doesn't care about the ssid's.
I have that functionality in inSSIDer. Thanks anyway.
What kind of wl adapter/nic do you use in your PC/laptop.
Oh yeah, I talked to Apple support, they sit the iPhone 5s doesn't connect to 5g band even though I told them that mine do on the ISP router.
Most all I have is wired.
Only have one wireless in Dell Laptap.
[Dell Wireless 1703 802.11b|g|n (2.4GHz)]
Never had a bit of trouble with it but it don’t do 5GHz
Some others at other end of WDS link… iPhones, iPads, other Dell laptop but they connect to main network thru a (2.4) WAP on that end except for the Dish Network and it’s on a private network on the WAP with other guests.
Well...... I also have two TVs and two chromecast here connected to main EA8500. They all connect to the guest network on 2.4 but can cast if on 2.4 or 5GHz guest network from phone or whatever.
So everything I've read so far doesn't explain the connection protocol between a client and the router. Do you know where I can get that? I downloaded Eye PA and have it running on my PC with a wusb6300 adapter. Seems to work, I'm seeing several different types of packets, not sure what theyre doing. I changed the ipad to the 24G band then back to the 5G band on channel 149 to generate some traffic. You can see the ipad talking to the router, although it didn't pick up the SSID. Just shows the routers MAC as the SSID.
Nice piece of software, but it lists for $799, a bit too steep for me. They need a hobbist version.
Joined: 21 Jan 2017 Posts: 1783 Location: Illinois Moderator
Posted: Tue Jul 24, 2018 18:02 Post subject:
wesweber wrote:
I'm gonna replace the ea8500. I could get another 8500 or a r7800. r7800 has some future proofing with the 160MHz bandwidth capability.
Thoughts?
Stick with the EA8500 for the money.
The R7800 is only better in terms of being able to go from stock firmware to DD-WRT without having to open up the router. With the EA8500 it will likely come with the latest stock firmware, or recent one anyway, and require you to use a USB to TTL adapter and possibly solder on pins. If you are ok with doing this, the EA8500 IMHO is the better router in terms of TX/RX power.
I have a R9000, R7800, and EA8500 and the EA8500 has the best radio TX/RX of the three. The R7800 has a slightly better processor than the EA8500, but you won't notice anything.
The R9000 is quad core and can run the new Linux 4.9 kernel with ease while the EA8500 and R7800 have to run on Kong's builds because he reverted to k3.18 builds. There's huge latency issues with the R7800 and EA8500 using K4.9 builds.
Joined: 03 Jan 2010 Posts: 7568 Location: YWG, Canada
Posted: Tue Jul 24, 2018 18:39 Post subject:
the qca9984 radios can supposedly only do 160mhz at 2x2 or 80mhz(and lower) at 4x4 so.. and 160mhz devices arent exactly everywhere, and then theres the consideration of 80+80 for certain devices or reg domains. so dont consider vht160, only look at r7800 for the better cpu, slightly better cooling, and easier use of switching between ddwrt <-> stock and netgear easy built in tftp. i would also say that brainslayer has a r7800 (2 of them) and no ea8500's.. but for a while now hes not really fixing anything so that doesnt really matter anymore..
the qca9984 still get supported from qca with radio firmwares where qca9980 seems pretty dead or nearly dead _________________ LATEST FIRMWARE(S)
BrainSlayer wrote:
we just do it since we do not like any restrictions enforced by stupid cocaine snorting managers
Joined: 29 Mar 2010 Posts: 60 Location: San Jose, CA
Posted: Tue Jul 24, 2018 21:04 Post subject:
I'm leaning toward the r7800 mainly for the ease of upgrading the fw.
If I get another ea8500 then I'd have to get a new USB-TTL cable. I bought the recommended cable at the time I bought the ea8500, 2015, but windows 10 came along and doesn't support the chip in the cable and the manufacturer isn't upgrading the driver, so I'd rather put the that money into the newer device.
I do like the ea8500 but being unable to fix the current one I might as well work with something newer. It'll all be mute in a few years when ax gets approved anyway.
Question though, I have kong's r36175M on partition 1 on the ea8500 and partition 2 has what I believe is BS's r36247. The UI shows the partition 2 fw as being dd-wrt v3.0-r36247 std. What exactly is BS doing, kernal 3, 4 or both?
Joined: 03 Jan 2010 Posts: 7568 Location: YWG, Canada
Posted: Wed Jul 25, 2018 4:55 Post subject:
ea8500 and r7800 have the same cpu, the r7800 one is just "overclocked" *cough* "certified" *cough* at a higher freq, ipq8064 vs ipq8065. kernel cares about architecture not just a clock speed difference of an otherwise, same cpu.
all routers with an ipq806x are of the same architecture and family. _________________ LATEST FIRMWARE(S)
BrainSlayer wrote:
we just do it since we do not like any restrictions enforced by stupid cocaine snorting managers
Joined: 29 Mar 2010 Posts: 60 Location: San Jose, CA
Posted: Thu Aug 02, 2018 18:47 Post subject:
So I bought a r7800, plugged it in and all the devices, iphones, ipads and all the adapters on the laptop and the PC saw the new SSIDs with similar setting I had on the 8500.
During one experiment I was doing with the PC adapters, I noticed the adapter could see the 5G SSID on the 8500 but there were no signal bars showing, that was with the 8500 radio set at channel 149 UU+6(same as on the 7800). I reset the 8500 setting to 54 UU+6 and the adapter could see the SSID with a strong signal.
I'm thinking the 5G radio is not, or weakly, broadcasting on the upper channels, above 100.
I'm happy now with a working device and a semi-working device to experiment with.
