Beta ASUSWRT 386 RC2 public beta with full functions AiMesh 2.0

  • ATTENTION! As of November 1, 2020, you are not able to reply to threads 6 months after the thread is opened if there are more than 500 posts in the thread.
    Threads will not be locked, so posts may still be edited by their authors.
    Just start a new thread on the topic to post if you get an error message when trying to reply to a thread.
Status
Not open for further replies.

drabisan

Senior Member
I have been following the public beta for some time now. I finally decided to try out the latest beta firmware RC-7 on my GT-AC5300 mesh system with a RT-AC68U router. The RT-AC68U has firmware 3.0.0.4.386.40558 that was just released. After flashing the RC-7 beta firmware onto my GT-AC5300 router I instantly noticed a vast speed increase in my overall wireless performance. My internet speed is rated at 15mbps up and 50mbps down. After flashing the R7 firmware I gained 3mbps up and 7mbps down on my 5ghz AC. The 2.4ghz spectrum on N was unchanged. Overall the RC-7 firmware has been completely stable. Unfortunately, the RC-7 firmware has brief instants of dropping wireless signals on the 5ghz. It is interesting since some of my devices suffer worse than others on dropping the 5ghz signal. I seem to have trouble with a Samsung Galaxy Note 10+ 5G and a older iPad. A current generation iPad Pro 11 and iPhone X have no drops and no problems on the 5ghz AC. My Google Pixel C tablet also has micro drops. When I revert my GT-AC5300 back to firmware 3.0.0.4.384.81974 I have no problems what so ever. I am sharing my experience in hoping this will speed the process of a final firmware for the GT-AC5300 as I really love the new features and speed improvements! One question; will this new 386 firmware include VLAN? That is a feature I could really use!

My experience with GT-AC5300 is:
- wait 10 minutes to stabilise after a reload. It needs to listen a lot until it decides on 5GHz channels and that combined with smart connect leads to several minutes of "instability".
- after some reloads it comes up ok, but it doesn't last for more than 1-2 days and it starts kicking out clients. Especially 2.4 ones. After most reloads it's stable for weeks.
- connect an Openvpn client few times will drive it crazy! Sinner than later! When I know I'm away and I have to use OpenVPN I am scheduling a reload over night.

All the above were true on 384 and are true on 386.

And your speed you're getting on WiFi is not impressive at all! 650mbps can be easily achieved so you should be easily capable to use all your wan speed.
 

gfhkgfhk

New Around Here
My mesh router is TUF-AX3000 and my mesh node is RT-AC68U. There is only 1 LAN + several wireless connected to the mesh node, and various LAN + wireless connected the main router. Occasionally, there is a lot of "br0: received packet on eth3 with own address as source address", which is the LAN interface that the mesh node connected to the main router. Then my laptop will lose the internet connection, and the mesh router will loop, flood, and offline. If I disable my laptop's LAN, the situation will not happen. I do not connect my laptop to the node via wifi, so I have no idea why would that error happen.

the Mesh is running on ethernet backhaul

I've tried using 3.0.0.4.386.40558 / 3.0.0.4.385.20632 on RT-AC68U, and 3.0.0.4.384.9923 / 9.0.0.4.386.40577 on TUF-AX3000
 
Last edited:

baz

Regular Contributor
Hi Moabdave,

I would agree that also @bluegrass with RT-AX devices have a different issue than "we" have with the RT-AC88U devices. Unfortunately I have not the flexibility to try our setup - on my end the workaround as long as a fix is there is to run my star setup just with wireless backhaul, which really works fine with rc2-7. So fingers crossed that @ASUSWRT_2020 already has a clue.

Just for completeness I also tried the workaround mentioned in https://www.snbforums.com/threads/a...unctions-aimesh-2-0.65235/page-71#post-630433 , but this one is not working or felt kind of unstable. Not working as I have the rt-ac68u node, which can only connect wireless. And even I turned the wireless backhaul connected rt-ac68u off, switched on ethernet backhaul system setting, I could not see a setting to select 1G LAN, I only could see 1G WAN. That kind of feels like the RT-AC88U have something special wrong with rc2-7.

Lets wait and be patient, Sebastian
I posted this in the merlin forum..
I'm running Merlin Alpha 2 on my AX88U with one mesh node (AX58u Running 386 rc2-7) and they run good.
I have tried Alpha 2 and 386 rc2-7 on my AC88U, but have had no luck getting it to be a mesh node. Alpha2 will not even see it, where as 386 rc2-7 will add it as a node, but then drop it right away. I'm using a wired backhaul on all my nodes, but the only one that seems to work is the AX58U. I'm also running my AX88U as an AP where Firewalla is my main router.
 

RattyMan

Occasional Visitor
Just tried RC2-7 today - AX88U primary router. AC88U and AC68U as Aimesh nodes.
I did a dirty flash and the AX88U and AC68U came up perfectly with no issues.
AC88U seems to be a big issue - disappeared as a node after the upgrade. Did a factory reset and readded, but only worked on WiFi - could not get Eithernet backhaul to work at all.
Did factory reset on all the nodes, and reconfigure - the same result for AC88U.
Also tried the workaround posted above, didn't make a differenc.

So unfortunately I'm reverting as we speak.
 
Last edited:

citrixscu

Occasional Visitor
Has anyone experienced issues using Wireguard VPN with the latest firmware on the client side? On iOS, Linux and MacOS, the connection seems to time out after a while (2min - 10min). The VPN remains connected but the devices do not have any access outside of the network. I have tried two different wireguard VPN providers, so that is not the issue. OpenVPN works fine. After the connection times out, nothing gets past the router. I.e. ping works to the router but not to any IP outside, even if not using DNS to resolve IP addresses. Disconnecting from the VPN restores normal behavior.

Using AC86U; tried latest RC and latest 386 stable.
 

marc093

New Around Here
Just tried RC2-7 today - AX88U primary router. AC88U and AC68U as Aimesh nodes.
I did a dirty flash and the AX88U and AC68U came up perfectly with no issues.
AC88U seems to be a big issue - disappeared as a node after the upgrade. Did a factory reset and readded, but only worked on WiFi - could not get Eithernet backhaul to work at all.
Did factory reset on all the nodes, and reconfigure - the same result for AC88U.
Also tried the workaround posted above, didn't make a differenc.

So unfortunately I'm reverting as we speak.
Same problem here as well.

Using AX88U primary router. AC88U and AC68U as Aimesh node and cannot add the ac88u.
 

SomeWhereOverTheRainBow

Very Senior Member
Has anyone experienced issues using Wireguard VPN with the latest firmware on the client side? On iOS, Linux and MacOS, the connection seems to time out after a while (2min - 10min). The VPN remains connected but the devices do not have any access outside of the network. I have tried two different wireguard VPN providers, so that is not the issue. OpenVPN works fine. After the connection times out, nothing gets past the router. I.e. ping works to the router but not to any IP outside, even if not using DNS to resolve IP addresses. Disconnecting from the VPN restores normal behavior.

Using AC86U; tried latest RC and latest 386 stable.
Too many variables are involved to say the firmware is causing a wireguard conflict. Simple solution would be to go back to the old version of firmware to see if wireguard is producing the same issue. To me it sounds like a recent update took place with your wireguard implementation that could be resulting in a connection conflict. (This is assuming you have eliminated the firmware as the culprit.)
 

Scottp

Occasional Visitor
Damn the "port forwarding issue not working after few days" is back. I use Asus DDNS and the whole router GUI is inaccessible via WAN within 2-3 days. Only solution is to reboot the router. It was fixed in RC2-B5 but now it's back again in B7. Why can't Asus get a basic thing like PF working reliably?
@ASUSWRT_2020
In case it gives a data point, I have had no issues whatsoever with port forwarding all through this beta and before. - I have Zenwifi XT8, port 443 forwarded, my own domain name with dns provided by namecheap, I have a script that regularly checks ip to see if it changed and updates dns. I have nginx reverse proxy with my server behind that. This service is used a lot so I would know if there was an issue, I don't reboot my routers much either current uptime is 17 days when I installed last beta.
 

sanke1

Senior Member
In case it gives a data point, I have had no issues whatsoever with port forwarding all through this beta and before. - I have Zenwifi XT8, port 443 forwarded, my own domain name with dns provided by namecheap, I have a script that regularly checks ip to see if it changed and updates dns. I have nginx reverse proxy with my server behind that. This service is used a lot so I would know if there was an issue, I don't reboot my routers much either current uptime is 17 days when I installed last beta.
Actually Asus acknowledged this issue a month ago and had issued a fix in RC2-B5. I have set it up as fresh and monitoring since 2 days.

TBH, RC2-B7 is highly unstable with random PPPOe drops, port forwarding issues. PPPOe disconnects were fixed after factory reset and hoping that portforwarding issue is also due to corrupt settings file.
 
Last edited:

SignedAdam

Occasional Visitor
I’ve made this account just to post this question:

I have both a GT-AX11000 used as my main “router” and a RT-AC86U used as a node “AiMesh extension”

why are most of asus’s firmware and development resources going in to the RT-AC86U when it is the cheaper of the two and is an older model, I appreciate the updates but if my main router GT-AX11000 isn’t brought up to 386 then I can’t take advantage of most of the “Aimesh 2.0” improvements and features.

I won’t be taking part in this public beta so please don’t offer me a beta build, I would like to see the public release soon, like we have seen from the RT-AC86U
 

bitsbytes

Regular Contributor
I’ve made this account just to post this question:

I have both a GT-AX11000 used as my main “router” and a RT-AC86U used as a node “AiMesh extension”

why are most of asus’s firmware and development resources going in to the RT-AC86U when it is the cheaper of the two and is an older model, I appreciate the updates but if my main router GT-AX11000 isn’t brought up to 386 then I can’t take advantage of most of the “Aimesh 2.0” improvements and features.

I won’t be taking part in this public beta so please don’t offer me a beta build, I would like to see the public release soon, like we have seen from the RT-AC86U
Think about it this way. We ac86u owners waited 3 years for this update. Why should you wait only one?
 

SignedAdam

Occasional Visitor
If you read my question correctly you would know I’m also a rc-ac86u owner. The reason the GT-AX11000 should get the update before any other model is simple.
1) I paid a premium for the GT-AX11000 and the ac86u is like a quarter of the price, that’s reason enough in my eyes, 2) not only that it’s also newer! which means it’s still maturing. 3) because the GT-AX11000 is newer, uses wifi 6, 4 core processors it shouldn’t be hard to see these models will be used as mains (the router that is the main node) because I don’t have this update yet Aimesh 2.0 functionality isn’t fully supported which is ridiculous when a unit costing a quarter of its price supporting this feature before it with an update...

obviously because I own a rc-ac86u I’m going to want it to carry on getting updates, which it has had many in the last year which I’m happy about, but a restructure of how these updates are released to the public is needed, newer products should get more focus. I feel disappointed with my purchase because of the timing of these updates,
[/QUOTE]
Think about it this way. We ac86u owners waited 3 years for this update. Why should you wait only one?
 

drabisan

Senior Member
You are asking why 86U has 386 as an official firmware, but AX does not.
Asus explained here they have a problem with SDK and on the first post of this thread is:
"Change log
1. Changed SDK and support more AX models."

SDKs are out of vendors control. If something is wrong and chipset producer needs to update the SDK, vendor have to absorb that delay. And drive the users crazy in the process, but...

Regarding focus to expensive models Vs cheap. Have you considered sales volume? I don't have any insights, but if they sell 10 cheap routers to 1 expensive, they will invest slightly more time on popular products.
I'm not defending Asus here. It's annoying some products were officially promoted to 386 and a lot of more expensive are still struggling with beta 386. I totally get that annoyance, but I have to see there may be reasonable reasons to do that.
 

yongtjunkit

New Around Here
Hi,, does the AC68U support 802.11K/V roaming with 2* AX92U aimesh system ?

currently running 386 RC7 on the AC68U, 3.0.0.4.384.8697 on both AX92U( newer firmware apparently isn’t stable with crashes)

Already enabled and set roaming assistant(on main router - AX92U) to -60 dbm but my phone doesn’t roam to my AC68U till -70 + dbm
 

OzarkEdge

Part of the Furniture
Regarding focus to expensive models Vs cheap. Have you considered sales volume? I don't have any insights, but if they sell 10 cheap routers to 1 expensive, they will invest slightly more time on popular products.
I'm not defending Asus here. It's annoying some products were officially promoted to 386 and a lot of more expensive are still struggling with beta 386. I totally get that annoyance, but I have to see there may be reasonable reasons to do that.
Indeed. Main stream AC86U and similar router sales likely subsidize the development of the high margin, low volume, high fashion routers with gobs of antennas.

OE
 

Darkje

Occasional Visitor
@ASUSWRT_2020 So i just wanted to see what was up so i installed it on my 86u. And all seems ok (offcourse known issues aside). Only one remark. speedtest uses only one connection. And since i have 2. That dont seem to work. Tryed the alpha2 of @RMerlin and it gives me the same issue. I use loadbalancing on 2 cable connections. If that is of any importance. On the oakla website it combines the speed.
 

RMerlin

Asuswrt-Merlin dev
@ASUSWRT_2020 So i just wanted to see what was up so i installed it on my 86u. And all seems ok (offcourse known issues aside). Only one remark. speedtest uses only one connection. And since i have 2. That dont seem to work. Tryed the alpha2 of @RMerlin and it gives me the same issue. I use loadbalancing on 2 cable connections. If that is of any importance. On the oakla website it combines the speed.
This is to be expected, as load balancing does not balance based on packets, but based on connections. The speedtest establishes une connection to the remote server, so all traffic to that server goes through that WAN interface through which the connection was established.
 

OzarkEdge

Part of the Furniture
This is to be expected, as load balancing does not balance based on packets, but based on connections. The speedtest establishes une connection to the remote server, so all traffic to that server goes through that WAN interface through which the connection was established.
That explains that!

Can one assume that Ethernet port aggregation is based on packets, not connections?

OE
 

RMerlin

Asuswrt-Merlin dev
Can one assume that Ethernet port aggregation is based on packets, not connections?
No, also based on connections. That`s why a single computer cannot benefit from link aggregation, you need multiple computers.
 

WhiteDogBe

Occasional Visitor
I'm using the AC86U (in AP mode) together with 3 Lyra in AIMesh 1.0.
Already not very happy with the Lyra not receiving any updates for almost one year now.

What happens if I upgrade the AC86U to 386 (or worse, it upgrades by itself)?
Do the Lyra remain working or can I throw them away?

I've invested in 5 Asus routers in my Home, if they expect me to throw 3 of them out (purchased not that long ago) my next devices will not be from Asus !
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Sign Up For SNBForums Daily Digest

Get an update of what's new every day delivered to your mailbox. Sign up here!
Top