Posted: Tue May 18, 2021 16:22 Post subject: Build recommendations for DIR-300 REV A
So, I'm looking for a good build for this router. Currently, I'm using DD-WRT v24-sp1 (07/26/08) std (SVN revision 9994), and for the most part, it works fine. The idea of this router is for extending my wireless network via ethernet (idk if the correct terminology for that is Bridging). The only problems I've encounered for now are:
-Port Forward from WEB-GUI does not work
-The router detects no internet connection but all wifi clients have internet*
-Always low memory aviable (around 1.4K)**
-The router does not provide a stable internet connection, like, you search something on google and it shows no internet connection (sometimes), and after one minute or so, it works fine
-You cannot change the wireless regulatory domain, if you do so, you wont be able to see or connect to the wifi
-You can only use AP mode under wireless/basic, if you use another mode, you wont be able to see or connect to the wifi
*I think the router detects no internet connection because the NTP time never syncs, idk if i have to do something to trigger ntp sync or what.
**I have tried to optimise and reduce memory consumption, by disabling firewall, DNSMasq, WAN Traff Counter, Info Site, Remote WEB-GUI management, cron, STP and DHCP server, but it didnt got that better.
For the moment, im only really interested in getting a build that has working Port Forwarding, but for the long term, i would like a build that meets and fixes all the requirements.
NOTE: I have tried one of the latest builds (r46681) and i was unable to complete the setup of my router because of WEB-GUI inestability. Sometimes it didnt load the whole page, and sometimes httpd just wont respond, and in the worst cases, the whole router would just freeze.
I actually used google chrome, with only adblock installed, and at least for V24 SP1 it works fine. I did configure the router completely isolated from the internet (no wifi on my computer, no wan port connected, just the router and my pc via ethernet). Maybe i'll try to use one of the latest builds again following your recommendations, but i need to have a working webgui in case something goes wrong.
And, you're totally right about the performance of this router, and i really want to upgrade to something better, but for the moment i dont have the money to do so.
Maybe my best option is to go back to the stock fw...
Ok, im going to try with that FF/ESR portable web browser that you say, and see if the port forwarding works from the web-gui on the v24 sp1 build. If it does not work, do you know about a build that its pretty good in terms of performance and bugs?
Well, setting up port forwarding on FF/ESR didnt worked. But, out of curiosity, isnt there anything (command or setting) that i can use to forward any port that requests to be forwarded? I know that there is something similar called UPnP, but i dont think this router will be able to use UPnP with such a little ram.
Using the same browser for internet and webUI has been known to cause issues.
Appearently, not all issues are related to Chromium-Based browsers. Look at this, build r46690, flashed through web-gui, previous release V24 SP1 r9994, did 30/30/30 reset before and after flash, using FF/ESR:
Also, the same bug as before, where you can only use AP mode, if you use another mode, you wont be able to see or connect to the wifi
idk about other bugs because it freezes and i cannot take logs, but that confirms that such new builds dont work well on this router
Joined: 08 May 2018 Posts: 8998 Location: Texas, USA
Posted: Tue May 18, 2021 21:13 Post subject:
I'm surprised you didn't brick it doing a 30-30-30. You don't 30-30-30 this router AFAIK. I guess typing "private browsing mode" isn't enough. Open a new private window... you are not in private browsing mode...
Question: did reloading the page fix it? This is still known to happen, regardless of browser. Giving up at the first sign of something like that is a defeatist attitude.
hehe, i forgot to open the privete tab. But, does it matters if its a fresh install? i mean, there is no user data like cookies or idk what else.
Question: did reloading the page fix it?
And, about your question, yes, reloading the page fixed it (after two or three attempts).
The only modes I know of that are supported by atheros are AP, Client, and Client Bridge (routed)
When you say routed, do you mean that in order for client bridge to work, something has to be routed? I mean, i used this wiki, it never talks about routing something.
...not sure what you're trying to do with this thing.
To clarify things a little bit, what i want is to have wifi upstairs on my home, and for that to happen, i have this router. There is a main router downstairs that its the one in charge of providing internet acces, but its signal strength isnt enough to get to my bedroom or desk, where my pc is. What i need is a way to extend my wifi range to the areas where there is no signal. Also, a requisite in that, is that i must be able to port forward from upstairs.
ONLY Broadcom supports native repeater and repeater bridge modes
Ohh, that clarifies some things...
Also, to quote the wiki you linked:
Use build 32170 or newer.
Right now i'm using build r46690, so the build isnt an issue.
per the wiki for Atheros "repeater bridge".
Also, i did what the wiki says, step by step, so i think that there is no problem there.
Now, the only problem that i've encountered with the wiki that i used, is that i cannot select Client Bridge (routed) and have a working wifi connection*. The only mode that lets the wifi work properly is AP mode**. I dont know why. Is there any way to figure out whats going on?
Wait, wait. You're probably going to get really mad, but, with your latest reply I got in doubt of what I was doing. I always had this concept of Bridge mode in routers: Extend your wireless network via an Ethernet link to your main router. Now that you said that I had to have the same exact ssid as my main router, I thought, "that dosent makes sense, if my wifi dosent reaches where this repeater is, why is there a obligation of using the same name? Is it a bug and I have to do it like that? Or am I doing something wrong?"
I decided to go to this wiki page, talking about different ways of linking routers, and I noticed that, bridge mode/client bridge wasnt the thing that I was looking for. What I should've done instead, is an WAP (or AP). I configured the router as an AP, and everything worked, except port forwarding.
I'm really sorry of making you loose your time, I should've read the wiki with more attention. I'm going to still open a new thread to see how can I make port forward work. This thread has had a bad use, given it's title.
So, thank you, and in really sorry of wasting your time
Ok, then lets keep it here.
Supposedly, i already have my ports forwarded on my main router (i say supposedly because i had to ask my isp more than 5 time to do so), so, for the moment we can forget about my gateway. The problem is on the second router. It just dosent lets the ports go through. I have my server already running, and its working (192.168.1.7 its the ip of my server):
Now, on the second router, i have this configuration about port forward:
But, on, it wont let the port 25565 go to the gateway(192.168.1.4 is the second router):
Now, on the stock firmware, doing exactly that, did the trick. I had to do what you say, double port forward, but it did work. Could it be that the Web-gui is not working properly?