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

WRV200 Alpha/Beta FW

Discussion in 'Cisco Small Business Routers and VPN Solutions' started by ccbadd, Sep 1, 2006.

  1. ccbadd

    ccbadd Network Guru Member

    To all you guys who are testing the new firmwares for the WRV200, could you give us an update on how things are working out? I am curious what has and has not been fixed or improved.
  2. Toxic

    Toxic Administrator Staff Member

    i will be uploading a firmware to the site within the hour, however we found a few bugs, more on that soon.
  3. Toxic

    Toxic Administrator Staff Member

    OK file is up:

    link removed (broken)

    use at your own descretion.

    you may talk about this until your red in the face, linksys knows there are problems, and are dealing with them in due coarse. I cannot confirm when but we hope sometime soon.
  4. ccbadd

    ccbadd Network Guru Member

    Thanks Toxic, I'm not using my WRV200 right now, I just wanted to get an idea of how things are coming along. I am more comfortable now that I can see just how far development has come, I can't wait to be able to put it back in service.
  5. Toxic

    Toxic Administrator Staff Member

    hopefully it should be too long, a few of use submited bugs we had found just after linksys decided to get this firmware into beta, unfortunetley the main bug we found was the Wireless/VPN isssue. you best bet is to use the WRV200 as a VPN, but if you have a WAP/WRT behinf this then use that as a wireless access point and disable the wireless of the WRV200.

    I do also have concerns on the firewall. out of 1056 ports scanned only 6 were stealthed and 1050 were closed.
  6. MarkToo

    MarkToo LI Guru Member


    Thanks for making the 1.0.19 file available... I've got it up and running on my WRV200 (wireless disabled for now). I'm VPN'd into our office and have my Avaya IPOffice home office telephone working happily over the vpn in port 1 (port based QoS = high). Port 2 is for my home VoIP telephone (SunRocket - also port based QoS = high). Port 3 handles my home LAN (port based QoS = low). And for now, I have a WRT54G attached to port 4 to handle wireless (port based QoS = low).

    As an Avaya dealer, we have many VoIP customers who can really benefit from the WRV200 features of VPN and QoS combined in the same unit. For a SOHO, the Kentrox Q Series routers are much too expensive (about $800)... the WRV200's price point makes it much more attractive for this market.

    Anyway, I'm looking forward to the day when this product is "rock-solid" with all features enabled :thumbup:

  7. cargo

    cargo LI Guru Member

    ... How long time update can take? Using standard procedure on mine WRV200 I am uploaded file and waited ~40 min. After I did router reboot and actually from now router is dead.. do not responding even to ping :(.. Is any revival procedure avalable for WRV###?
  8. MarkToo

    MarkToo LI Guru Member


    I had a similar experience... I just "reset" the WRV200 by pressing and holding the reset button for several moments. This brought it back to a factory default config with the 1.0.19 firmware.

  9. Toxic

    Toxic Administrator Staff Member

    it maybe rock solid only with wireless disabled!
  10. ifican

    ifican Network Guru Member

    anyone else notice that the response time really speed up for the gui. After loading 19a my web gui is noticeably faster and i no longer have sporadic characters when changing screens rapidly.
  11. cargo

    cargo LI Guru Member

    I had a similar experience... I just "reset" the WRV200 by pressing and holding the reset button for several moments. This brought it back to a factory default config with the 1.0.19 firmware.


    So, reset button is not helped actually. I tryed hold 5 sec (as by Manual), 30 sec. like for WRT54# and even sequence: 30 sec (powered device) + keep pressed 30 sec (unpowered) + 30 sec. keep pressed (powerded again).. Do not saw any effect like reset. I am thinking that flash is corrupted. However device is brand new and I am going give it back to seller for replace.
    This is not complain. This is suggestion for others - for upgrade better to use tftp utility and not router's WEB interface as I did.
  12. cargo

    cargo LI Guru Member

    ... Interesting.. is there any kind of safe mode for WRV200 or telnet access or whatever? It seems that if flash memory is demaged or unaccessible, even reset button is not works at all. I see Power lamp (alway's ON) and one of the Wired UTP port's lamp ON - where I have cable connected (sometimes blinking). So, Is default port for this router Before (few day's ago) I have noticed that shttp connection requested certificate from 192.168.168.?? address.. Can it be that router is real brick from now or it has just some non-standard for Linksys IP port for tftp upload..???
  13. csayers

    csayers LI Guru Member

    Upgrade to 1.0.19 bricked router

    Well was excited to try new firmware and did update through web. Waited 5 minutes could not log in tried for a few miutes more, then pulled power and waited. No Luck, Did long reset with and without power attached, she is toast.

    Ive about had it with this junk, does linksys have any type of trade-up to a different router under warranty returns?

    This is the most misleading piece of hardware I have ever bought. On the front it says WirelessG VPN Router with Rangebooster Business Class.

    I was one of the first to comment that it does not allow Wireless and IPSEC point to point to be used simultaneously. Absolutely horrendous that this was released when its advertised features don't work. Did they think nobody would notice?
  14. eric_stewart

    eric_stewart Super Moderator Staff Member Member

    Sorry to hear about your bricking your router. The mods did warn that the firmware was alpha at best. I flashed my own no problem but haven't had a chance to test it out.

    I share your misgivings about the problems with this router but I can't share your inference that Linksys knowingly foisted a piece of junk on us. I've been around networks for a very long time (2 decades actually) and am a bit more foregiving than most about little incongruities. I have to admit that the wireless not working at the same time as the VPN is a show-stopper for some but since I don't need the wireless I am happy to have a solid VPN router with syslog / SNMP and a bunch of other features at a low price point.

    We're charting new territory here in that Linksys seems to be actively engaged with specific members of Linksysinfo.org in proactively (I opine) finding solutions to issues. Jumping up and down, screaming, and having a hissy fit will just alienate them and call the experiment "closed".

    Moving forward in a spirit of cooperation is hardly naieve (granted that you didn't say that!) but one that I'm willing to try...provided that Linksys meets us part way and starts providing us stuff which has less than a beta feel to it when it hits the market. One thing I will never advocate is a manufacturer beta testing their boxes on the public. I don't think this has happened yet, but I will certainly be the first to scream bloody murder if I think that I am paying money to be a tester.

  15. cargo

    cargo LI Guru Member

    Agree to eric_stewart. And as person who is know what development is can assume - tanks to enthusiasts like we are here many things are going ahead in many fields.
    Only one thing I can't accept from manufacturer is beta testing using retail chain. Moreover if HW is not damaged, unit must have some (can be advanced) revival procedure otherwise amount of complains from less technically educated people can just damage Linksys image and finally sales revenues. This fact can be very bad for future development.
    However I am looking positively to the future. Implementation into WRV200 device for all declared options will put it into next level of small business networking and will make it one of the best on the market for sure.
  16. csayers

    csayers LI Guru Member

    Eric, don't get me wrong, I have been building small business networks for 9 years using all sorts of low and high priced equipment to get the job done. I have learned to put up with quirky low priced gear, (which can usually be made to work) after some strange regimen.

    I must disagree with you that Linksys didn't know about the features not working together, that is just not possible. They knowingly foisted this on retail hoping that nobody would notice.

    This is my second WRV200 as I sent the first back after having it set up 15 minutes out of the box. I thought it was defective and sent it back in late May. After getting second unit I confirmed behavior. It is September and we are still beta testing. I Had to buy a dlink wireless router so I could use my laptop while still having VPN to the office, a $45.00 expense.

    Linksys will have a chance to redeem themselves when I RMA this to them, A first for me with Linksys.
  17. DocLarge

    DocLarge Super Moderator Staff Member Member

    From a personal persective of having dealt directly with the "firmware" guy at Linksys-Cisco, these guys have bought a board from Taiwan (the company is "Gemtek" to be exact) and this very same board tha drives the WRV200 is in a Belkin router also. Simon has the pictures somewhere...

    The board the wrv200 runs on was originally intended to have "3" dipole antennaes instead of two, which means this was supposed to be a "draft-n" MIMO router. Linksys bought the board and simply loaded their code onto it. That's when all Hell broke out...

    In a push to get it out to the consumer's they (in my opinion) didn't check it properly and most likely met the "minimum" standards to get the wrv200 "on the streets" and figured if there were any problems, they'd handle it by producing upgraded firmeware. Putting some faults on customers is allowable, to an extent, but the wrv200 was a piece of sh*t when it left the factory, and I'd be hard pressed to see Linksys not knowing about. But that's just me...

    In the end, field inputs from users makes the difference and makes the product that much more bankable because "real world" users with "real world" problems will be considered as long as the firmware developers can be provided a means to reproduce the results (video is my choice :) ).

    It's still dirty business clowning up production networks with products that should be properly beta tested before being deployed...

  18. TazUk

    TazUk Network Guru Member

    Maybe the WRVS4400N is what the WRV200 was suppose to be :unsure:
  19. eric_stewart

    eric_stewart Super Moderator Staff Member Member

    You're probably right and you are very polite too. I'm not the moderator so I should mind my own business. I can afford to be patient since I don't have one of these in a production environment and I'm still experimenting with it. I have it (at least today) in my home network but it's sitting behind a PIX and I've never had an iota of trouble with *it*.

    Some positives though...the GUI is now lightening quick.

  20. svg1

    svg1 Network Guru Member

    Makes adding a removable antenna very easy . Adding a 3rd antenna seems to have made a big improvement to the range .

    Using the wrv as a access point only the vlan , repeater features work perfectly.

    I also noticed a major improvement using .19 firmware & am hoping the official release with take care of the majority of issues with the wrv.

    Attached Files:

  21. erict

    erict LI Guru Member

    WRV200 and 1.0.20

    I must agree with csayers -- Linksys is shoddy. It looks like what you guys called beta was pushed to the driver distribution site almost simultaneously (Toxic calls it beta on the 12th, Linksys releases it on the 11th of Sep). Like CSayers I tried to upgrade my WRV200 from 1.0.12 to 20 using the web, and now it's as dead as his. I'm contemplating swallowing the 75 bucks and taking it apart to see if I can find a way to hard-reset it. Could the chap who added the third antenna tell us how he got inside?
  22. DocLarge

    DocLarge Super Moderator Staff Member Member

    DO "NOT" Upgrade Firmware Over the Web! (For At least right now...)

    Okay folks,

    I'll go ahead and say it:


    By far, we all know it's safer to do a direct upgrade. Firmware 1.0.12 was garbage (we all know this) therefore, I personally wouldn't trust that particular firmware to handle a "web upgrade."

    Until you're safely running 1.0.20, I'd think twice about upgrading via web access.

  23. ifican

    ifican Network Guru Member

    As a thought, i wonder what the success/fail rate for a 12 -> 20 vs a 12 -> 19 -> 20 upgrade is?
  24. svg1

    svg1 Network Guru Member

    Carefully remove the four rubber pads on the bottom of the router , underneath you will find screws which hold the wrv200 together .
  25. eric_stewart

    eric_stewart Super Moderator Staff Member Member

    WRV200 1.0.20 Firmware -- keep reporting bugs!

    The 1.0.20 firmware still has one little bug that I mentioned a while ago, but which probably missed the cut when Linksys implemented fixes. When I initiate an IPSec site-to-site VPN where the remote gateway is a FQDN vs. an IP address, it connects fine but when you click on the details button in the VPN summary it doesn't display the SPI number, and protected addresses.

    I'm still annoyed that this product was released with so many bugs but, on the other hand, I think Linksys has been very proactive with this product in implementing fixes quickly and I hope they continue the good work on what is likely to become a very popular product. I imagine many of the modules they are working on are part of the build for the other products' firmware which share the same features.

    Last week I had it up the whole week with a site-to-site VPN to my home office while I was travelling. The WRV200 was behind a NAT'ng firewall and my PIX501 which is protecting my home network has a public IP address. It was rock-steady (with the wireless turned off as some have mentioned). I particularly like the feature of being able to pick particular AES ciphers since I noticed that by using AES-128 (vs. AES-256) the performance of the VPN improved measurably. The WRV200 has hardware-accelerated encryption....very cool, but my poor PIX501 at home spiked to 20-25% CPU utilization anytime I started copying files over the VPN. I tested the GUI while transmitting large amounts of data in the VPN while simultaneously web-surfing and found a few very small hiccups in the GUI but nothing on the magnitude of the previous problems with the 1.0.12 firmware.


Share This Page