1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Anyone Still Using Their WRV54G?

Discussion in 'Cisco Small Business Routers and VPN Solutions' started by DocLarge, Aug 4, 2006.

  1. DocLarge

    DocLarge Super Moderator Staff Member Member

    It's been a while since we've seen consistent WRV54G traffic, which begs the question: would anyone still like to see some development done to it?

    Here's some of the things that need further development that I can think of:

    1) NAT-T
    2) GRE
    3) AES
    4) Better DDNS Support
    5) Qos
    6) VLAN Support

    Although this is starting to look like the WRV200, the WRV54G is better than the WRV200 when it comes to strictly hardware, but "not" when you look at the feature set (WRV200 is winner hands down as far as features go). In defense of the WRV54G, I personally never had it rebooting, dropping out, or any of this wild "ish" that we sometimes hear about. When running vpn, I could run tunnels for a minimum of a week straight and never have any issues mapping drives or maintaining good ping times.

    I've stayed with firmware 2.37.13 and have had "consistently" smooth operations. 2.38.x and 2.39.2 (as mentioned by TazUK) have been solid performers as well. I can say that setting the router back to default factory settings after flashing gives you a clean slate to work from.

    Anyway, if I've missed something that anyone feels should be considered being added to a new firmware set, shout it out...

  2. coolbean1000

    coolbean1000 LI Guru Member

    Yes, i have about 12 of these deployed to client locations, and am very happy with the performance, wireless range, security, reliability.

    I have a wrv200, had high hopes, and now plan to dump it on ebay.

    with respect to the wrv54g, Nat-t is huge, and i'd like to see it added/fixed/implemented yesterday.

    that's my shout out.....
  3. kspare

    kspare Computer Guy Staff Member Member

    I still have about 30 wrv54g's out there and I continue to order and deploy them. The wrv200 is completly useless to my business at this point. And now that i've found another bug in the multiple ssids, i'm even more disappointed.
  4. Toxic

    Toxic Administrator Staff Member

    Forget the WRV200 Guys, this is for Bugs in the WRV54G...
  5. ReRun

    ReRun Network Guru Member

    We have 3 of these. I told our shop owner to purchase a WRV200 next time instead. Hooked it up today to find out I can not VPN into it with IPSEC behind/past my inhouse router. Here tonight to read if it has been done. Never did get the WRV54G to do this.
  6. TazUk

    TazUk Network Guru Member

    I have two working well :grin:
  7. DocLarge

    DocLarge Super Moderator Staff Member Member

    The WRV200 has as an "awesome" feature set that works will "if" you don't try and run your vpn with wireless clients (as posted by one of our members). If you have wired clients, it appears that vpn is more stable. I know for fact (as do others) that enabling vpn on the WRV200 causes the router to reboot ruthlessly...

    The WRV54G that I have (I bricked my other run) handles vpn traffic effortlessly and gives solid performance to my private network. Hmmmm,
    Taz have you ever been able to get your WRV54G to restore from a config file? Maybe I might try and make a blank config and see if people can upload it (I use 2.37.13 and see no reason to use any of the others personally).

  8. DocLarge

    DocLarge Super Moderator Staff Member Member

    WRV54G Runs VPN Tunnels Behind NAT-T/GRE Routers


    I have just now connected a Netgear DG834G ADSL gateway/router as my internet connected router (connects directly to my isp via telephone line) and put my WRV54G behind it (I ran CAT5 from one of the Netgear's LAN ports to the WAN port of the WRV54G); I forgot I left a tunnel configured on it. Short story, it automatically connected "through" the Netgear DG834G to the router on the distant end. :)

    I can truthfully confirm that you can run an IPSEC VPN tunnel from the WRV54G "through" an NAT-T/GRE compliant router (in this case, the Netgear DG834G Firewall Router). I'm connecting to a Linksys WAG54G V1 router and the connection is solid!! With that said, if you're not able to run a vpn tunnel from behind the router that's connected to your ISP from your WRV54G, the issue is (possibly) with that router and not your WRV54G (your first router may not be NAT-T/GRE compliant). Also, what firware version are you running on the WRV54G? Use either 2.37.13, 2.38.6, or 2.39.2. The routers I know of that pass GRE/NAT-T are the following:

    1) Linksys WRV200 ($63 from Newegg.com)
    2) Netgear DG834G Firewall Router
    3) SMC SMCBR18VPN Firewall Router (Now sold as SMC SMCBR14UP Firewall Router with Print Server) ($56.99 from Newegg.com)
    4) Dlink DI-804HV/DI-808HV Routers ($49.99/$85.99 from Newegg.com)
    5) CISCO PIX 501 Firewall ($379.99 from Newegg.com or $275 from teksavers.com)

    Additionally, I'm port forwarding FTP through the netgear to the wrv54g and it works fine and I can access files using the private ip address of the ftp server and the WAN ip address.

    Speaking from my experience, my WRV54G is running fine, but I do have a preference for the WRV200 once the bugs are ironed out...

  9. DocLarge

    DocLarge Super Moderator Staff Member Member

    Just wanted to add that at the moment, a WRV54G trying to connect via an IPSEC "through" a NAT-t/GRE router to another WRV54G doesn't seem to be working "yet." However, I can also confirm that my vonage service is running fine through the WRV54G (I ran CAT5 from one of the WRV's LAN ports to the WAN port of my RT31P2).

    More info as I find out...

  10. TazUk

    TazUk Network Guru Member

    It's never worked when I've tried it previously so I gave up trying :erm:
  11. kspare

    kspare Computer Guy Staff Member Member

    I am running the latest 2.39.2 and I do this exactly. This came at 2.38 I beleive. I was able to the firmware on many of my wrv54gs remotely. How nice was that!
  12. Toxic

    Toxic Administrator Staff Member

    test - thread was broken it seems to be fixed now.
  13. jandho

    jandho LI Guru Member

    wrv54g still running

    I have 2 wrv54G still running - with VPN and dynamic ddns
  14. jandho

    jandho LI Guru Member


    I am still using WRV54G's
    would like option of adding 2 dsn server addresses in dhcp setup - with ip address of the computer in lan that is dns server for local domain and ip address of the wrv54G itself (then when the local dns server is down i can still browse the internet)
  15. ccbadd

    ccbadd Network Guru Member

    I just put mine back in service this week due to a failed BEFVP41. If your using a third party VPN client like Greenbow, it really is pretty easy to use and reliable. I don't use the wireless or DHCP server, but it is the main router connected to the internet. DDNS does give me problems some times and I am considering running a DDNS client on a server inside the network. That is what DynDNS.org prefers.
  16. TazUk

    TazUk Network Guru Member

    DDNS has been working fine for me using the 2.39.2 firmware :)

    3rd party client support is limited due to the lack of NAT-T :what:
  17. JonAlthoff

    JonAlthoff Network Guru Member

    My WRV54G works fine as a Wireless Access Point. I am using a BEFVP41 for VPN. I may at some point load the 2.39.2 firmware and test it. I am of course doubtfull that it will work any better than any other previous firmware.
  18. DocLarge

    DocLarge Super Moderator Staff Member Member

    WRV54G works great for me with firmware 2.37.13 (all the previous ones were trash IMHO). :)

    Minus the niceties of NAT-T, GRE, and AES, everything else about the WRV54G worked consistently and still does when I use the aforementioned firmware. I had a "bricking" incident with 2.38.6 (had to buy a new one) and haven't ventured above my present firmware since.

    Truth be told, the newer firmware seemed to be "taking away from" as opposed of "adding to" the router's feature set.

  19. pablito

    pablito Network Guru Member

    Hate to dig up an old thread but I'm trying to decide which firmware to install on the WRV54G. Is the older 2.37.13 actually preffered over the latest official? I'm about to install one at a friend's house and I need it to be stable (basic cable modem + net-net VPN).

    With the latest official version I'm getting inconsistent results where it might do a reboot after a config change but never come back to life unless I repower it, trying to set the time zone and daylight savings keeps returning to default, and today I can't get DHCP over wireless when I enable encryption (this worked a few days ago so I'm not yet sure).

    I think I might try the older version listed here but wonder why the newer versions seem flaky.
  20. DocLarge

    DocLarge Super Moderator Staff Member Member

    Go with 2.37.13 (in my opinion). Anything above that actually started removing features.

    I have a WRV54G that had an uptime of 1133hrs recently before there was an outage of some sort :)

  21. pablito

    pablito Network Guru Member

    Thank you. I went to 2.37.13 since it appears to be the popular version and the latest official seems unstable in my config. The timezone still can't be set but that won't be a big issue if it doesn't affect the VPN. I've seen VPNs that were fussy about correct time but it doesn't seem to affect this one.

    I'm spoiled with the RV0x's VPN and DHCP options but hopefully the WRV will perform "good enough".

    FYI, my inability to get DHCP wirelessly was due to a conflicting driver. That's what I get for venturing into Windoze land. :)
  22. askingnv

    askingnv LI Guru Member

    More Development needed

    Just my 0.02 ...

    1. NAT-T
    2. Better online Log file viewing (Why should I be required to run a syslog server for simple log checks?)

    The NAT-T issue is huge - I am setting up a VPN for my wife to connect to her office, but in choosing the WRV54T - to eliminate the extra wireless box and replace the aging Sonicwall Pro - I have now effectively killed my company VPN which is NAT-T.

    I am looking at getting the VPN up this weekend, and if it is not perfect sending both units back to Newegg and replacing them with something else - perhaps the WRV200.

    I have found the WRV54G to have some weird quirks at her office - dropping internet connectivity at random times. They also have experienced loss of connectivity to the network printer - which was cured by switching from RAW to LPR format.

    Any idea if Linksys/Cisco is looking to continue development on this device?
  23. DocLarge

    DocLarge Super Moderator Staff Member Member

    WRV54G Is No Longer a Priority Development...

    The WRV54G is in "maintenance mode" right now which means there'll most likely be no more new firmware until it can be fully justified (as told to me by one of the developers...

    Yes, we all wanted NAT-T, GRE, and AES, therfore the WRV200 was born. Unfortunately, I still own the WRV54G and it's got "mad skillz" that haven't been given their due.

    If you're looking getting up your wife's connection, you might consider either the WRV200 or something from the RV0xx series; they both support NAT-T and GRE.

  24. QuimaxW

    QuimaxW Network Guru Member

    I know this is a really, really, really, (really!) old thread, but I just had to post.

    There aren't any new threads mentioning the WRV54G router. Bummer. I still have 2 of them. Both are still cranking away, working perfectly fine running ver 2.39.2e. Only one of them has konked out, but just because of a power supply failure. I plan to get a new power supply and continue using it.

    I'm also looking into alternative firmware, but haven't been brave enough yet.
  25. DocLarge

    DocLarge Super Moderator Staff Member Member

    I have still have a WRV54G that I put online every now and again just to "marvel" at it. But because it doesn't do "port re-direction" like my WRVS4400N Gigabit Security VPN router (among a host of other things) I haven't seen the need to put it back into service. Man if they'd only taken to the time to "truly" develop that router...

  26. octopi

    octopi Addicted to LI Member

    Glad to see someone else is still using this workhorse (more of a pony). I too still have 3 of them in use, with an extra one in the inventory as a backup. A while ago one of them started to get flaky and it took quite a bit of head-scratching to find the power supply is faulty.

    Two quick questions:

    1. is the *only* difference between firmware versions 2.39.2 / 2.39.2e -> number of VPN client access users? (from 5 to 50)

    2. I used to connect to these WRV54G's using quickVPN, with its reliability okay to a certain point. Has anyone able to successfully connect to them (without annoying disconnects/hangups) using other (Windows based) VPN software? What about from linux?
  27. DocLarge

    DocLarge Super Moderator Staff Member Member

    Man, I missed this one...

    1) Yes. the ".2e" version just added clients

    2) It varies. I personally haven't used quickvpn since going to vista/windows 7 (I've opted for "site-to-site" tunnels or SSL vpn)

  28. QuimaxW

    QuimaxW Network Guru Member

    Mine both have .2e on them...have for quite some time now.

    Of course, I've never had QuickVPN actually work for me at all. The only VPN function I've used is the site-to-site IPSEC between two routers.
  29. DocLarge

    DocLarge Super Moderator Staff Member Member

    Just wanted to through this out there (I still have "love" for the WRV54G).

    I actually configured a VoIP Solution (FreePBX) behind my WRV54G and it ran for a few days flawlessly!!! I ended up putting the pbx back behind my CISCO 871W because i have multiple vlans running via the 871w and a CISCO 2924 switch.

    Long story short, the WRV54g was "solid" in handling the voice traffic. Should I get a minute, I'll post some information regarding running a pbx behind a Linksys router...
  30. Sfor

    Sfor Network Guru Member

    I do have one of WRV54G. I wanted to check what it is good for, so I bought one. The official firmware does not have what I need, so I started to look for an alternative one. Apparently, all supported projecs are relying on RedBoot, now. So, I learned how to tap to the WRV54G COM port, and how to flash it with RedBoot. Now, I have a fully operational ReedBoot powered RV042 without any usuful firmware on it.

    Now I have a problem. The most threads are related to OpenWRT and DD-WRT, but there is no official support for WRV54G. According to threads the "hand made" compilation of sources along with some tweaking is necesary. Unfortunately, I have no experience in this field. Is there someone with an operational alternative firmware powered WRV54G, around?
  31. Peacedog

    Peacedog Networkin' Nut Member

    Hi, I posted on the redboot.img thread that I would be interested in the last stable version, 2.39.2e I believe, or any betas available. I have inherited a WRV54G and would appreciate any help, but after reading this thread I really would like to try both the 2.39.2e and Doc's recommendation of 2.37.13. If anyone has these two firmwares I would appreciate it if I could get my hands on them. Thanks.

Share This Page