: Aveyer September 16, 2010, 01:21:39 AM
Hi all, I finally gave in and tried official Buffalo DD-WRT v24SP2-EU-US (08/19/10) std - build 14998 on my own WZR-HP-G300NH (B0 B0) and it is working PERFECTLY.
All was done in 20mhz channel width since the option for 40mhz is not in DD-WRT (unless it is in N only mode? I didn't try yet)
I have tried two adapters: Buffalo WLI-UC-G300HP and Intel Pro/Set Wireless 2200BG (minor).
I tested firstly using Mikrotik bandwidth test and then a file transfer on the WLI-UC-G300HP:
UDP upstream reached 85 megabits
UDP downstream reached 51 megabits
An FTP file transfer: 50 megabits downstream.
This is the same performance I got from the stock Bufffalo firmware in this location.
I check latency after that:
Latency for wireless and wired clients to WAN and LAN are a solid 1ms.
Here's the real interesting bit: The TX power seems to be locked at 13dBm which must be related to the built in Amplifiers.
My signal strength is THE EXACT SAME as with the stock Buffalo firmware, the client adapter (-41 dBm on WLI-UC-G300HP) position and location was not changed at all between the flash and test from stock to DD-WRT.
Also checked with an iPod Touch in a different room, -61dBm, same as stock.
The TX and RX rates are a solid 130mbps.
I have not tried the USB storage yet, not urgent.
How I flashed:
-Buffalo v1.74 -reset in the GUI
-Flashed to DD-WRT from the Buffalo GUI
-After flash to DD-WRT, held in reset button for 20 seconds.
Configured it.
Problem with the image links, re uploaded here:
: drmemory September 16, 2010, 04:24:10 PM
Aveyer - thank you for trying this out and giving it a good going over.
We are working with DDWRT on the transmit power setting.
: Aveyer September 16, 2010, 04:34:32 PM
Working with them how exactly? Because I already seem to be getting the exact same signal strength as stock firmware.
: drmemory September 16, 2010, 05:12:33 PM
Aveyer, I can tell you how we work with them, if you email me at drmemory@buffalotech.com
: Aveyer September 16, 2010, 06:19:19 PM
Sent.
: DrewG5 September 16, 2010, 08:18:42 PM
Do you get any TX/RX errors after an extended period of time with those settings? Also how many other networks are in range? When I used the same settings TX errors would go through the roof. I have changed a lot of settings at this point though but still have less luck than you have had.
: Aveyer September 16, 2010, 09:38:27 PM
There's only 1 other AP and thats mine, on the roof (Channel 13 10mhz channel width). The WZR-HP-G300NH is on channel 5.
There are a few TX errors but I think that only happens with the Intel pro set wireless 2200bg and only sometimes. Performance doesn't seem to be affected. Right now says RX-no errors and TX 56 errors and doesn't seem to be going any higher.
: DrewG5 September 16, 2010, 10:55:54 PM
Ok.. I have a theory that I have to many other AP in range for smooth sailing... My router is picking up 12 other AP's running in range (Eeep!). If I connect with the Athros AR5B93 wifi card I have little to no errors :smileyhappy: The only change that I know improved things for me was setting TX and RX the same 3 TX 3 RX. I did so after reading the FCC test report and the data sheet I found here: http://www.buffalotech.com/files/products/wzr-hp-g300nh_DS.pdf
I'll post screen shots of the settings tomarrow when I get the time. So far I am happy with both the router and DD-WRT now..
: DrewG5 September 17, 2010, 04:07:45 PM
: scub September 18, 2010, 04:04:38 AM
my security light (lock LED) is no longer on after installing the WRT firmware.
firewall and wireless WPA2 is already enabled... with the other buffalo drivers the security LED on the modem was always solid.
: Aveyer September 18, 2010, 12:36:59 PM
Mine too, but I'd consider that as minor.
: Colt725 September 18, 2010, 02:58:08 PM
Thanks guys I was wanting to install this but I didn't have the time to do any tweaks. Seems like a good upgrade.
: AfterShock September 19, 2010, 01:04:27 AM
scub wrote:my security light (lock LED) is no longer on after installing the WRT firmware.
firewall and wireless WPA2 is already enabled... with the other buffalo drivers the security LED on the modem was always solid.
The security LED doesn't turn on in any version of ddwrt but they said this would be addressed in the next release, I hope they change the wireless LED to flash with activivity instead of a constant interval but these changes are minor compared to whats needed.
: llnsj September 19, 2010, 12:25:04 PM
The few critical features that were advertised w/ this router are:
- NAS + Drive formating: I have a hard drive that I formated as XFS w/ firmware 1.74 and now it's not mounted any more. This dd-wrt firmware doesn't support any large file system such as NTFS or FAS. When it tried to mount my drive it just failed and say NTFS or XFS are not support! You must be kidding me to allow me to format in 1 firmware and later say no support. This is customer data that you are serving!
- Bitorent: nice to have but as advertise onthe box
- DLNA/Media server
I notice many bug in wireless:
- Site survey always report 54b/g even the device is N available (check the TX and RX to see)
- TX and antenna gain setting do nothing.
Probably taking off the "repeater" "repeater bridge" from original dd-wrt is OK.
The key is the features come with this must be supported again.
LLN
: DrewG5 September 19, 2010, 03:13:26 PM
llnsj wrote:The few critical features that were advertised w/ this router are:
- NAS + Drive formating: I have a hard drive that I formated as XFS w/ firmware 1.74 and now it's not mounted any more. This dd-wrt firmware doesn't support any large file system such as NTFS or FAS. When it tried to mount my drive it just failed and say NTFS or XFS are not support! You must be kidding me to allow me to format in 1 firmware and later say no support. This is customer data that you are serving!
- Bitorent: nice to have but as advertise onthe box
- DLNA/Media server
I notice many bug in wireless:
- Site survey always report 54b/g even the device is N available (check the TX and RX to see)
- TX and antenna gain setting do nothing.
Probably taking off the "repeater" "repeater bridge" from original dd-wrt is OK.
The key is the features come with this must be supported again.
LLN
Sorry I did not see anywhere Buffalo claimed that DD-WRT firmware would offer the same things, in fact they offer it as a PRO option, not as basic consumer grade. If you want the features of the consumer grade firmware offers than use that firmware its intended for the consumer anyways.
As for your bugs; yes the TX settings do some thing; select a lower TX power and it will out put less power (WOW!)
: ramer October 13, 2010, 09:05:40 PM
This dd-wrt firmware doesn't support any large file system such as NTFS or FAS. When it tried to mount my drive it just failed and say NTFS or XFS are not support!
???????? ? ??? ??? Ipkg ??????? ???????? ?? ???? ???????. ???? ?????? MIPS, ? Ipkg Software ????? ????? mipsel software.
: runningfool November 03, 2010, 05:00:04 PM
I am also running in to this issue, has there been any updates or workarounds for this?
: Slipaway November 04, 2010, 12:16:16 AM
I don't speak Russian, and I'm not sure what those Russian characters mean, but does the Buffalo WZR-HP-G300NH support NTFS or FAS file systems (and support large file sizes over 4GB)??
I'd like to buy a WZR-HP-G300NH (actually we want 9 of them) but we need to make sure that the Buffalo WZR-HP-G300NH supports NTFS or FAS file systems and supports large files sizes OVER 4GB, and we also need to make sure that the router supports "NAT Loopback".
Have these issues been addressed? Does the router support "NAT Loopback" and file sizes over 4GB yet?
: Slipaway November 04, 2010, 12:28:44 AM
Does the WZR-HP-G300NH support "NAT Loopback"?? I would like to buy a few Buffalo WZR-HP-G300NH routers, but we need to make sure that they support "NAT Loopback" and we also need to make sure they support large file size (over 4GB), such as NTFS.
Also have the "issues" with wireless connectivity problems been resolved, and also do the LED lights flash with "activity" instead of just random flashing, do they flash based on network activity?
I just want to make sure these issues are addressed and "fixed" before making a purchase, so could someone let me know if these issues have been addressed/fixed yet?
Thank-you!
: sspeed December 15, 2010, 06:46:15 PM
Well.... I tested these back to back, with two different WZR-HP-G300NH routers (both firmwares tried on both), same cable modem, same wireless client, same wireless channel, same encryption. As much as I hate to say it because I love DD-WRT and was excited when Buffalo went to them, the Buffalo firmware performs much better.....
Both WZR-HP-G300NH routers with the DD-WRT firmware showed packet loss on wireless... This is verified with two routers both running the DD-WRT and Buffalo firmware just to test. Load DD-WRT on, wireless errors, back to Buffalo, none.
On the DD-WRT most wireless N clients would connect as 54 mb/s although they would show as high as 104 mb/s on the router display page. With the Buffalo firmware clients display 300 mb/s. This isn't true throughput though, see below.
Running the Lan Speed test program the Buffalo firmware had over 3x actual wireless network read speed vs the DD-WRT firmware. On network write they were close, with the Buffalo firmware just a bit higher.
Add to this that the NAS function is not nearly as easy to use, if at all, on the DD-WRT.
I hate to say it as I love DD-WRT, but the Buffalo firmware is better. I tried two routers in case mine was an anomaly...
And as to the sarcasm above, "As for your bugs; yes the TX settings do some thing; select a lower TX power and it will out put less power (WOW!)" I think what he was trying to say was increasing the TX power in the DD-WRT firmware does not increase the transmit power when you go verify the changes on the wireless status screen. I verified this on both WZR-HP-G300NH's I had as well.
One thing, on the Buffalo firmware internet MTU may be too high for your ISP, it's set to 1500, most internet provider limits are just below that, resulting in packet fragmentation to the internet and possible slowdowns. You can check that in Windows by typing "ping -l 1500 -f yahoo.com" and keep decreasing the number until it's no longer fragmented. Changing MTU from the default 1500 to 1472 jumped my download speedtest.net up by 4 mbps.
: WLANman December 15, 2010, 08:56:01 PM
DrewG5 wrote:Ok.. I have a theory that I have to many other AP in range for smooth sailing... My router is picking up 12 other AP's running in range (Eeep!). If I connect with the Athros AR5B93 wifi card I have little to no errors :smileyhappy: The only change that I know improved things for me was setting TX and RX the same 3 TX 3 RX. I did so after reading the FCC test report and the data sheet I found here: http://www.buffalotech.com/files/products/wzr-hp-g300nh_DS.pdf
I'll post screen shots of the settings tomarrow when I get the time. So far I am happy with both the router and DD-WRT now..
Here's an evil thought : )
Get a router with Rogue Access Point Detection to keep a few of those AP's out of commission and free up some channels.
Just kidding. That wouldn't be a very nice thing to do.
: WLANman December 15, 2010, 09:01:34 PM
sspeed wrote:
One thing, on the Buffalo firmware internet MTU may be too high for your ISP, it's set to 1500, most internet provider limits are just below that, resulting in packet fragmentation to the internet and possible slowdowns. You can check that in Windows by typing "ping -l 1500 -f yahoo.com" and keep decreasing the number until it's no longer fragmented. Changing MTU from the default 1500 to 1472 jumped my download speedtest.net up by 4 mbps.
Thanks SSpeed -- That is some **bleep** good information.