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

upgrading my AC68U from 1.28

Discussion in 'Tomato Firmware' started by vivithemage, May 13, 2017.

  1. vivithemage

    vivithemage Networkin' Nut Member

    So I have been running 1.28 for a while now, works great.

    I was wondering what changes were made that I might find beneficial in 1.40? I know there is multiwan support, which I don't need. But are there any performance gains? Or other new features?

    I really only care about stability and max throughput. I am getting 1gb fiber soon, so I want to make sure I can utilize it at full speed of the router!
     
  2. boardlord

    boardlord Network Guru Member

    I think the consensus here is that Shibby's build is the "bleeding edge", while Toastman is more stable. But neither Tomato branch will let you get full utilization of your connection, the router is simply not powerful enough... Unless you enable CTF, but then you cannot use many features (just search for CTF and routing). My R7000 maxes out at around 250-300 Mb, so you'll need a really beefy (not SOHO-class) router to max out your connection... Or an old PC with pfsense :)

    Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk
     
  3. vivithemage

    vivithemage Networkin' Nut Member

    Are you sure? I see people posting on dslr and getting 900-950mbps.

    I'm curious about the upgrade though? Should I even? Or just leave it?
     
  4. boardlord

    boardlord Network Guru Member

    I also have a 1 Gbit fiber connection, and with CTF enabled I get around 900 Mbit down out of my R7000. But CTF isn't for me, as I need some features for my home network that don't play well with it...

    You can read more here
    https://routerguide.net/nat-acceleration-on-or-off/

    Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk
     
  5. vivithemage

    vivithemage Networkin' Nut Member

    Thanks, I use port forwarding, so I don't know if that will work.

    How about upgrading, or should I just stay on 1.28? Have there been any useful changes up to 1.40 beyond multi wan support?
     
  6. boardlord

    boardlord Network Guru Member

    I'm usually an "if it ain't broke, don't fix it" guy, but since Shibby 1.28 there has been numerous updates to modules, security related fixes etc. So I suggest an upgrade. Since you wrote that stability is paramount, and an nvram erase is mandatory anyway when upgrading from such an old version, I'd suggest give Toastman's build a try (unless there are some Shibby features that you definitely need) - he didn't implement Multiwan (which brought along lot of bugs that are still being ironed out).
     
  7. vivithemage

    vivithemage Networkin' Nut Member

  8. ruggerof

    ruggerof LI Guru Member

    And for the record, they are all version 1.28 but different builds, Shibby's versions are, for example: Tomato Firmware 1.28.0000 - 136 K26ARM USB AIO-64K, so probably you are discussing about upgrading from build 128 to 140.

    I personally think that the "1.28" should be dropped by all devs, it does not make any sense now and generate this kind of confusion.
     
    boardlord likes this.
  9. boardlord

    boardlord Network Guru Member

    Yup, I meant 128 as Shibby's build tag, but thanks for making it clear in my place

    Edit: And yes, I'd also support dropping 1.28 as the main version number wholeheartedly. We're so far past Jon's version's feature set and HW support...
     
  10. LastSilmaril

    LastSilmaril Networkin' Nut Member

    I just got GigE service from Verizon today and was wondering why the damn thing couldn't break 280mbps in either direction on speedtests with this router. After enabling CTF (from under 'Advanced' --> 'Miscellaneous'), I managed to get them to show acceptable results inline with what the SNB charts say I should be getting:

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]

    I was only able to get these on my main workstation (4770K) in Edge (in Chrome I got around 280mbps down and maybe in the 700s up).

    Apparently FA is not enabled on the original version of this router, per this SNB thread, so this looks like as good as it gets with the OG RT-AC68U, afaict. I haven't noticed that anything is broken yet (was able to ssh into a computer behind the router via my phone, so port forwarding doesn't look broken?) so that's good news
     
    Last edited: Jun 14, 2017
  11. LastSilmaril

    LastSilmaril Networkin' Nut Member

    Wait, am I wrong about this? Are AsusWRT (esp Merlin's but even mainline) so optimized that it can yield speeds near max of what TCP would allow? I realized that I was looking at an older version of the chart at SNB - the newer one has the RT-AC68U hitting 941 etc.
     
  12. vivithemage

    vivithemage Networkin' Nut Member

    Same for me LastSilmaril, my port forwarding is working, which is all I really care about. It doesn't log traffic anymore, but I can deal with that.

    I am getting this
    [​IMG]
     
    LastSilmaril likes this.
  13. alpovs

    alpovs Networkin' Nut Member

    I suggest upgrading to 132 Shibby Tomato but not anything higher than 132 as it is still buggy. 132 is the latest stable/non-buggy build. I keep waiting for a new non-buggy build but it hasn't happened yet based on the reports here. I regret that Shibby decided to implement multi-WAN in his firmware as it made it unusable up to now due to bugs. There are special multi-WAN routers if anybody needs multi-WAN. And people with high speed connections don't need multi-WAN. People who need multi-WAN can't fully use multi-WAN builds due to bugs. Looks like a lose lose situation.
     
  14. LastSilmaril

    LastSilmaril Networkin' Nut Member

    Note that at as of now while port forwarding works, NAT loopback does not. You can work around that somewhat by like, adding a custom rule in dnsmasq but it's not perfect - if you use different ports externally than internally, you'll have to make some configuration changes elsewhere. Also, if you have multiple VLANs, a simple rule in dnsmasq would only work in one of them :/

    Also, is this with the RT-AC68U? Which revision? Which browser did you use? What are your specs like? Sorry but I'm trying to figure out if there's any reason I can't get beyond around 800 or so down on speedtests.
     

Share This Page