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

Tomato vs. Thibor 15c

Discussion in 'Tomato Firmware' started by damko, Oct 2, 2006.

  1. damko

    damko Network Guru Member

    Which one is better for heavy P2P (mule, torrents), has better QoS implementation and has more features?

    Any experiences with Tomato? It seems good FW..

  2. njeske

    njeske Network Guru Member

    i used thibor for a long time, and have been trying out tomato for the last week or so. so far, i haven't noticed any differences between the two as far as QoS functionality. the main difference is that tomato is a bit more complex when you're setting up your QoS rules, but this also gives you some additional control. but once it's setup, it functions just as well as thibor.

    i think i'll be sticking with tomato.
  3. turbo53

    turbo53 Network Guru Member

    I have also been using Thibor and will probably stick with Tomato. The main thing that I like about it (as so many others do) are the bandwidth and QOS graphs. You can make a change and immediately see if it is working as you expected.

    One improvement that I would like to see would be on the "View Details" page of the QOS section. For the well known ports, it would be nice if Tomato actually specified the protocol (HTTP, FTP, NTP, etc) rather than the port number. I know a lot of them off the top of my head, but not all!
  4. njeske

    njeske Network Guru Member

    ditto. i'd like to see protocol names as well.
  5. fareal

    fareal LI Guru Member

    I can live with just the port #, but how about some sort of timestamp? Or is the list already sorted by default to top is newest or bottom is newest?
  6. dvaskelis

    dvaskelis Network Guru Member

    From the README:

  7. fareal

    fareal LI Guru Member

    dvaskelis: not talking about the rule list. talking about the qos "view details".
  8. neoufo51

    neoufo51 Network Guru Member

    I will stick with Thibor until Tomato becomes stable enough for a "release" status rather than experimental.
  9. fareal

    fareal LI Guru Member

  10. Disman_ca

    Disman_ca Super Moderator Staff Member Member

    I believe this would be a disclaimer. You should be able to gauge wether or not this applies to you. As for is it stable, just read the link provided in the previous post. Its stable as far as I am concerned like many others attest to.
  11. digitalgeek

    digitalgeek Network Guru Member

    This can be true of any aftermarket firmaware that anyone flash there router with non linksys code does so at there own risk, void any and all warranties provided by Linksys... If you unsure of what you are doing or uncomfortable eith tampering and effecting any support than you should not use any of the firmwares mentioned on these forums. But for those of us brave enough this is another option. Keep up the good work Jon...

Share This Page