• bulwark@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    52
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    3 days ago

    Just pulled the trigger, only had European plugs in stock. I’ve got adapters so np. I’m getting it to replace my Raspberry Pi router that I’ve been using for a few years.

    *Edit, I should say I’m a huge fan openWRT despite the fact that 15 years ago I managed to brick my linksys router so bad it actually caused sparks to shoot out the ethernet jacks. I flashed the wrong model firmware.

  • SayCyberOnceMore@feddit.uk
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    26
    ·
    3 days ago

    I’m glad it’s open hardware as much as open software, but I think I’ll wait to see what the OpenWrt Two looks like.

    • shortwavesurfer@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 days ago

      I was thinking the same thing, because I want either Wi-Fi 6E or Wi-Fi 7, as I currently have Wi-Fi 5, and it works well enough.

    • ColeSloth@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      2 days ago

      I’m fine with the looks and hardware, except I’m not upgrading again for a wifi 6 router. I’ll wait till they make a 7. 7 has a couple pretty big improvements over 6.

    • v01@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 days ago

      I just ordered the GL-MT6000. Wondering if I should cancel and get this instead.

      • Aceticon@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        2 days ago

        The very example I provided comes with an mPCI-e slot to install a WiFi card of your choosing.

        Also they have SIM card slots so you can install a data SIM card and set-up a fallback configuration that switches to it if your landline internet connection goes down.

        • Avid Amoeba@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 days ago

          Of course. But this one comes with WiFi onboard and a case with antennas if you go for the clothed option.

          • Aceticon@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            2 days ago

            Yeah, the case with antennas is a good point - when I decided to concentrate various things in a Mini-PC in my living room (TV-Box, Router and so on) I actually looked into these router Mini-PCs as an option and the biggest problem was the lack of a proper antenna, so I ended up going with a generic Mini-PC and leaving out the router functionality which remains done by my old router (which is quite decent, just a bit outdated).

            Mind you, this one also wouldn’t work for me because I’m using 4 Ethernet ports (1 for the external connection and 3 internally) whilst this one only has 2 (a weird choice for a router).

            IMHO, this isn’t really better than just getting an SBC with 2 Ethernet ports and WiFi and put it in a box with an antenna), a setup which suffers from exactly the same problem as this one: not enough Ethernet ports.

      • Aceticon@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        3 days ago

        Whilst that’s a nice slogan, in Electronics “open source” doesn’t mean anywhere as much as it does in Software because it’s generally just knowing which components go into the circuit, which is but a fraction of the work (laying out the board is a massive chunk of work, in some cases most of it, and at high enough clock speeds circuit design is an art in itself).

        Mind you, I like the Orange Pi and Banana Pi guys, and the idea of an SBC designed for being an open source router is pretty appealing, though nowadays maybe pfSense would be a better choice than OpenWrt.

        Finally this thing having only 2 ethernet ports + WiFi makes it little more than a regular $70+ SBC board + a box - something easy enough to put together by any technically inclined person - which isn’t exactly exciting.

        • Kazumara@discuss.tchncs.de
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          2 days ago

          pfSense would be a better choice than OpenWrt

          I heard pfSense had a hard time with wireless radios, and that’s where OpenWrt shines comparably. Is that not true?

          • ikidd@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            2 days ago

            Yes, FreeBSD doesn’t handle many wireless cards. Same applies to OPNsense, my preferred version.

    • rmuk@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      23
      ·
      3 days ago

      Most of those run OpenWrt or PfSense. Assuming the hardware is well-supported by the open source software it runs, there’s a argument to be made that there’s no difference. There’s always the risk of them using some weird chipset that won’t be supported in a year’s time. The only difference is that the OpenWrt One is specifically designed for OpenWrt with well-supported hardware.

      • ᕙ(⇀‸↼‶)ᕗ@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        3 days ago

        how good is openwrt these days? i used it a long time ago on tp link hardware are remember it was not too good…like adding own scripts, addons etc. and then i tried stuff like ipfire,ipcop and pfsense. pfsense was so much better and now opensense is quite good. how does current openwrt compare?

        • capital@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          2 days ago

          I’ve been using it on my last 2 routers, currently the Netgear WAX206 and I’m loving it.

          It does what it’s supposed to. No complaints.

        • philpo@feddit.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          edit-2
          2 days ago

          OPNsense is like comparing a bicycle to a car (in Europe) Both will get you there,the first one is more convenient most of the time for most users,but the second one is a whole class of “more powerful”. But it’s far easier to take a shortcut with a bike.

    • ikidd@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      2 days ago

      GL.inet has some LTE routers with OpenWRT on them. I haven’t tried the LTE version, and the one (Shadow) I have has to be rebooted once a week, but that’s a really cheap one I was trying.

  • ColeSloth@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    14
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    2 days ago

    The price is right for sure, but it’s still sad they didn’t shoot for wifi 7. It was a pretty big leap in latency reduction.

  • jagged_circle@feddit.nl
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    16
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 days ago

    Isn’t RAM like the biggest bottleneck in routers causing bufferblaot and packet loss?

    How does the article not mention how much RAM this device has?

    • Kazumara@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      22
      ·
      edit-2
      2 days ago

      Packet loss occurs when a router has to drop some packets because the buffer to store them is running out because the link where they are supposed to go is overloaded.

      Bufferbloat is the issue where you make your queues too deep, i.e. you allocate too much RAM to buffering, while the cause of the buffering still exists, so the deeper queue just fills up anyway, so you haven’t improved anything, and have induced extra latency on the packets that do make it trough.

      Deep buffers can help in situations where you have a step down in link speed, but only bursty and not sustained overloading of the slower output link.

      The big bottleneck in router hardware is more about TCAM or HBM memory used to store the FIB of the global routing table. Since the table has grown so much the devices with less high speed memory can’t hold the table anymore, and if they start swapping the FIB to normal memory your routing performance goes to shit.

      So not all of your concerns seem to apply to this class of device, but of course you’re right, The Register should have mentioned the RAM.

      • jagged_circle@feddit.nl
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 days ago

        Thanks. You know a lot about hardware spec reqs in networking equipment. It always drives me crazy when buying a router because they dont seem to list this info.

        Do you have any general advice for spec’ing hardware reqs for small businesses with event spaces with occasionally loads of people? How do u ensure the router can handle everyone’s traffic without dropping packets?

      • jagged_circle@feddit.nl
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        2 days ago

        Wait, is this why packet shapers limiting bandwidth on one guest vlan drop so many damn packets? How do you prevent this?

    • GHiLA@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 day ago

      …is it?

      …can I get a peer review on the amount of shade we’re being given, here? I get it’s their hardware but isn’t it more… chosen hardware? Isn’t the software also public?

      Where’s the shade, exactly?