WHR-HP-G300N woes

[happily1986]

Hi,

 

   I have recently purchased a WHR-Hp-G300N to replace my ageing Linksys WRT54G. I have pretty much left all settings stock, including the option of 300Mbps draft N 2.0 disabled as default (operating channel 20Mhz). I am currently still trying to get everything to work hence i am operating on MAC filtering mode with encryption off and on open authentication mode. I understand that the router is operating in mixed 11n/b/g mode

 

   I am able to connect to the router and surf without any problems from my desktop on a WUSB54 G wireless adapter. My desktop (Windows 7 64 bit) reports my SSID as a N wireless networking but nevertheless connecting at a maximum throughput of 54Mbps.

 

  My netbook (MSI U100 Wind) however is unable to connect to the SSID. The wifi adapter in question is an Atheros AR928X which is supposedly a b/g/n capable adapter. This netbook is on Windows XP Home SP3 and i am using the Windows Zero configuration utility. Let me described my problem in detail.

 

1.) Atheros AR928X reports the SSID to be weak in strength (1 or 2 bars out of 5) even though i am only about 10 feet away from the router with LoS.

 

2.) Even though i have configured the adapter to connect to the SSID even when it is not broadcasting and also when it is within range. The problem is that under Windows Zero configuration under the list of SSIDs, even though my SSID is shown as reflected as automatic, i have to click "connect" below. And the windows zero configuration utilty just gets stuck in an endless loop of trying to connect which fails in the end.

 

3.) During the brief moments when the wifi adapter does connects, it shows the throughput as 150Mbps. Is this correct? I am of the impression that the wireless connectivity of my SSID should drop back to 54Mbps since i have a client connecting using IEEE G mode.

 

4.) In case you are thinking the Atheros AR928X is the problem, i have no problems connecting it in my Varsity Wireless Network. The accesspoints used are Cisco Valet N routers i think.

 

Please advise, thank you!

[buddee]

Alot of this has to do with your wireless security, you must use WPA2 with AES only. Anything else falls back to G spec.

 

Also to answer your question about your adapter's link rate being at 150Mbps, you would need to research your particular adapter and see what it's MIMO setup is. If its a 1x1 MIMO, then yes 150 is max you'll get.

[happily1986]

Thanks for the reply buddy. I have since realised that the problem why the AR928X wifi adapter wouldn't connect is because the DNS Service was disabled. I turned it back to automatic and the wifi connection has been stable.

 

That been said, i have been quite disappointed with the signal strength coverage. It is not as good as my old Linksys WRT54G v2 and there i thought the WRT54G v2 was bad. Is there really no recourse save for getting higher gain antennas?

 

I understand that the default option during install was to install the basic firmware which is not DD WRT. Would installing DD WRT and pushing the Tx power from stock 42mW to about 70~80mW do the trick?

 

Thanks for your help.

[glenb7]

i found that using openwrt which uses the ath9k driver vs the madwifi of ddwrt and the stock firmware, gives much better wireless strength and stability. i used the trunk download for the latest wireless driver and have been very happy with the router. but openwrt takes a little know how to setup. if you spend the time you have a 2.6.37 k?ernel which is working really well for me.

[happily1986]

I am starting to get fed up with this router. 

 

1.) the Signal coverage of thsi router cannot even be on par with an old a/b/g router i.e. WRT54Gv2

2.) My Blackberry Curve 9300 refuses to associate with the AP

3.) The SSID sometimes MIA once in a blue moon

4.) Swapping out the two stock antennas with high gain 7dBi antennas  cause the router radio performance to take a serious beating.

 

Signal values become more negative

SNR decreases from about 60 to 32

Signal quality drops from about 55% to 32%

 

This is nonsense!

 

 

[KingJL]

I have finally solved my problems with the WHR-HP-G300N!

 

I have been complaining of low power on the Buffalo HP routers when using dd-wrt both to Buffalo Inc. and dd-wrt.  I have received no positive replies from either.  Buffalo says that they are working the problem with dd-wrt;  dd-wrt denies that the TX power is low, that it is limited to <20dBm by the hardware chip-set.  Even when presented with the FCC test report showing ~29dBm maximum power out on channel 6, dd-wrt still refuses to address the problem and Buffalo still refuses to leverage dd-wrt to address the problem. 

 

Well... I solved my problem;  I sold my WHR-HP-G300n and I am going to replace it with something that is supported by OpenWrt (I havn't decicded on which unit as of yet).

[buddee]

AFAIK, Your WZR-HP-AG300H is supported by OpenWRT.

 

http://downloads.openwrt.org/snapshots/trunk/ar71xx/

[KingJL]

buddee wrote:

AFAIK, Your WZR-HP-AG300H is supported by OpenWRT.

 

http://downloads.openwrt.org/snapshots/trunk/ar71xx/

I know... I have been following the Openwrt Timeline closely.  But, I'll go slowly on the 'AG300H.  It serves my purposes as I have it now configured.  I think that I will replace my 'HP-G300N with a 'HP-G300NH and try "Gargoyle" on it.  Gargoyle appears to provide the management capabilities that I need.  I want to stay with the newer Atheros chipsets;  they will provide the power (when properly set up in the fw);  they have some of the quietest receivers that I have come across.  The Buffalo units (HP-G300NH/AG300H) are well engineered from a hardware standpoint (e.g. they do not overheat, etc.).  Their fw just sucks.  The 'user friendly' fw lacks versatility in setup;  and the dd-wrt does not really support the hardware (that will remain the case until dd-wrt fully implements ath9k.  A hacked partial implementation of ath9k will not fully support the chipset).

[John_M]

 

KingJL wrote:

buddee wrote:

AFAIK, Your WZR-HP-AG300H is supported by OpenWRT.

 

http://downloads.openwrt.org/snapshots/trunk/ar71xx/

I know... I have been following the Openwrt Timeline closely.  But, I'll go slowly on the 'AG300H.  It serves my purposes as I have it now configured.  I think that I will replace my 'HP-G300N with a 'HP-G300NH and try "Gargoyle" on it.  Gargoyle appears to provide the management capabilities that I need.  I want to stay with the newer Atheros chipsets;  they will provide the power (when properly set up in the fw);  they have some of the quietest receivers that I have come across.  The Buffalo units (HP-G300NH/AG300H) are well engineered from a hardware standpoint (e.g. they do not overheat, etc.).  Their fw just sucks.  The 'user friendly' fw lacks versatility in setup;  and the dd-wrt does not really support the hardware (that will remain the case until dd-wrt fully implements ath9k.  A hacked partial implementation of ath9k will not fully support the chipset).

I've been running Gargoyle on my WZR-HP-G300NH for about a month now.  No dropouts, no reboots, full TX power, and you can get into the OpenWRT guts at the command line level if you want.  Give it a go!

 

[KingJL]

John_M wrote:

 

KingJL wrote:

buddee wrote:

AFAIK, Your WZR-HP-AG300H is supported by OpenWRT.

 

http://downloads.openwrt.org/snapshots/trunk/ar71xx/

I know... I have been following the Openwrt Timeline closely.  But, I'll go slowly on the 'AG300H.  It serves my purposes as I have it now configured.  I think that I will replace my 'HP-G300N with a 'HP-G300NH and try "Gargoyle" on it.  Gargoyle appears to provide the management capabilities that I need.  I want to stay with the newer Atheros chipsets;  they will provide the power (when properly set up in the fw);  they have some of the quietest receivers that I have come across.  The Buffalo units (HP-G300NH/AG300H) are well engineered from a hardware standpoint (e.g. they do not overheat, etc.).  Their fw just sucks.  The 'user friendly' fw lacks versatility in setup;  and the dd-wrt does not really support the hardware (that will remain the case until dd-wrt fully implements ath9k.  A hacked partial implementation of ath9k will not fully support the chipset).

I've been running Gargoyle on my WZR-HP-G300NH for about a month now.  No dropouts, no reboots, full TX power, and you can get into the OpenWRT guts at the command line level if you want.  Give it a go!

 

That is the current plan!!!

[buddee]

When you do this, please keep us posted on how it works for you. Also keep in mind that the G300NH is an entirely different animal than the G300N or AG300H. My G300NH outperforms my G300N and AG300H entirely, and this is with DD-WRT. My G300NH always has a much better/stronger signal, probably on average 12% better than the other 2.

 

 

[KingJL]

buddee wrote:

When you do this, please keep us posted on how it works for you. Also keep in mind that the G300NH is an entirely different animal than the G300N or AG300H. My G300NH outperforms my G300N and AG300H entirely, and this is with DD-WRT. My G300NH always has a much better/stronger signal, probably on average 12% better than the other 2.

 

 

Will do!!

 

Yes, I know that the g300gnh is different... that is why I chose it and sticking with buffalo.  If this does not meet my needs, I will go to ubiquiti (probably the 'bullet m2hp') to satisfy my client needs.

[happily1986]

Hi i am back as the original poster of this thread. A few things have transpired since my original post but my sentiments towards the WHR HP G300n are still grudgingly ambivalent to say the least.

 

1.) i have managed to figure out a reliable way to jack up and sustain the Tx power of the router to 23dBm.

2.) A few snoops on the internet led me to understand that the antenna closest to the power jack is Antenna no.1 whereas the Antenna closest to the LED indicators is Antenna no. 2. Antenna no. 3 i understand is an internal antenna with no upgradable option.

3.) I have adjusted the ACK timing from default 2000m to 0 which forces the Atheros chipset to automatically calculate the ACK timing. How the chipset does this i have no clue but it seems to improve wireless coverage a wee bit.

4.) I have tried to swap out the two stock 2dBi antennas for Engenius duckfeet 7dBi omnidirectional Antennae EAD2407. The funny thing is that changing No. 1 and 2 with the two HG antennas result in SNR plunging by almost 30%. With a mind of not wanting all my hard earned money go to waste (no 30 day no questions asked-exchange policy here in sunny Singapore), i compromised by swapping only No. 2 for HG antenna and leave No. 1 as it is.

5.) I constructed 2x parabolic reflectors out of aluminium foil and installed it on the omni-directional antennas to focus and make signal beaming a little more unidirectional.

6.) I recently only resorted to using my old WRT54Gv4 router as a wireless repeater bridge. Yes, one could say that this dire resort is the ultimate backhanded insult to the WHR HP G300N. I reside in a single storey apartment with a net area of no more than 100 m^2 and yet i have trouble saturating my residence with my SSID. To add insult to injury, i did a wifi survey in my home and the WRT54Gv4 wireless coverage/strength actually trumped the High Powered (hey thats the moniker!) router!

7.) i led out a cruel and bitter laughter

 

So here i am, bitterly recounting my struggle to make the WHR HP G300N supplant the shoes that the old WRT54Gv4 once filled. The shoes aren't exactly big but it seem that the HP G300N has exceptionally tiny feet. I would like to implore any users, technical support and admin alike to contribute any invaluable tips to improve the wireless coverage of WHR HP G300N. I am on an ADSL2+ 8Mbps plan now and would ostensibly be upgrading to either a 25Mbps or 50Mbps fibre plan soon. I am convinced that the WHR HP G300N might be a stumbling bottleneck. Please help me in any way you can before i quit on this bugger and offload it for good.

 

[yaktwok]

KingJL,

 

I noticed in some other posts and the dd-wrt forum that you figure out the "80211n_wlanconfig ath0 set_txpowercap?" code to increase the power reading of the WHR-HP-G300N. Does this actually show any improvement in signal strength, range or throughput? Or are the results just a phantom reading?

[nchall]

Has anyone figured out how to install OpenWRT on the WHR-HP-G300N? Looks like some people in this thread have installed it on slightly different models, but can't tell for sure if they have installed it on the model in the title.