Netgear 3500Lv2 Problems on Tomato

Discussion in 'Tomato Firmware' started by butchkemper, Aug 10, 2018.

  1. butchkemper

    butchkemper New Member Member

    I have a Netgear WNR3500Lv2 running tomato-Netgear-3500Lv2-K26USB-1.28.AT-RT-N5x--3.5-140-AIO and I have these problems:
    • I am unable to download more that 102Mbps from a 200Mbps/10Mbps cable modem link. This is measured by the speedtest app on Win7 from a PC connected via 1Gbps ethernet to the Netgear. When the PC is directly connected to the cable modem, the speedtest app shows 200Mbps download.
    • When I enable the Tomato VPN client to a IPVanish server, the speed is 9.37Mbps dwn/8.67Mbps up using the speedtest app on win7. If I use the IPVanish client on the PC with no VPN active on the Netgear, the speedtest app shows 99.9Mbps dwn/13.83Mbps up.
    All VPN tests used the same VPN server in Dallas and multiple tests on multiple days resulted in results with only slight, non-significant variations in the speeds.

    These test suggests that the Netgear WRN3500Lv2 has insufficient processing power to:
    • Drive the WAN port at more than 100Mbps when not managing a VPN connection.
    • Drive the WAN port at more than 10Mbps when managing a VPN connection.
    Does anyone have suggestions that could increase the VPN throughput of the WRN3500Lv2?

    Does anyone have any results using similar tests with a Netgear AC1900 NightHawk?

    Thanks.

    Butch



     
  2. butchkemper

    butchkemper New Member Member

    On the Netgear WRN3500Lv2 wireless network is a HP 8910 OfficeJet Pro printer that cannot be consistently accessed by the PC with Win7 for printing.

    If a continuous ping to the printer IP address from the PC is started, the pings timeout or are reported as destination host unreachable. When through the printer console, the wireless connection is switched offline and then online, the ping begins to respond when the wireless connection is reestablished. As long as the ping is active, the printer remains accessible. However once the ping stops, the printer soon becomes inaccessible.

    This problem did not occur when I used a Motorola cable modem with wireless capability or the Verizon FIOS modem with wireless capability.

    Obviously, I need to adjust a Tomato parameter but which one?

    Thanks.

    Butch
     
  3. eibgrad

    eibgrad Network Guru Member

    Frankly, those numbers are not that surprising. According to WikiDevi.com, that router dates back to 2011, w/ a 480MHz single core CPU.

    https://wikidevi.com/wiki/Netgear_WNR3500Lv2

    If you go back to even older Linksys routers, circa 2005 or a few years later, we're talking about routers w/ a measly 200-240MHz CPU that typically tapped out around 30-35Mbps. So seeing a 480MHz processor tap out around 100Mbp seems consistent.

    Fact is, it takes more processing power than most ppl expect for a router to handle anything over 100Mbps. And if you add a VPN, you typically see around a 90% loss of efficiency. Yeah, you heard right, 90%! And I believe the primary reason for this loss of efficiency is due to packets having to pass through the IP stack twice, from user space to kernel space, and back (i.e., ring changes). All that context switching places a tremendous burden on the processor.

    So in general, your typical consumer grade router is NOT a good platform for a VPN. At least not if you're expecting good performance. Just because third-party firmware provides access to additional features like a VPN doesn't mean those features will necessarily perform well. You need a *much* more powerful router before you'll see anything decent (e.g., Netgear 7800, Linksys WRT1900ACSv2, perhaps 70Mbps under ideal conditions). Personally, it's my recommendation you don't even use these consumer grade routers for your VPN, but a full-blown PC (even an old one w/ measly specs) instead. Such a PC will blow away just about any router.

    https://forum.dd-wrt.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=315751
     
  4. butchkemper

    butchkemper New Member Member

    Hey, thanks for the input. I will read the old forum message later when I have time to understand all the research you did. I like the idea of a Linux/PC router.

    Thanks again.

    Butch
     
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice