Bug: Clients count on Network Map

[kernol]

'bad' MAC in the sense of repeating, but fully functional and no errors seen any other way. It's the hub of *everything* done on the LAN for work, play and backup.

Well spotted @David Cavalli and thanks @dave14305 [for the commands] - I too have a Synology NAS which has run on dual LAN ports aggregated [in my case via a managed TP-Link Switch] for several years without issue.

Its MAC address is repeating indefinitely and the Client counts runs with it.
Shutdown the Synology and reboot the router - and the Client counts remains static at the correct number ... until the Synology is brought up again.

 

[David Cavalli]

Any chance you can temporarily disconnect one side of the link aggregation, just to see whether that stops the number counting up?

Unplugged LAN2 with Clients=110. Now 111 and holding. 60 seconds later, back to 110. 20 seconds, then 111. 2 minutes at 111 and holding as I post this reply. LAN2 is now *WHITE*, not green. NAS seems fully functional.

 

[David Cavalli]

This might be beating a dead horse, but let’s capture what networkmap is doing.

touch /tmp/NMP_DEBUG /tmp/NMP_DEBUG_MORE /tmp/NMP_DEBUG_FUNCTION
killall networkmap
networkmap | tee /tmp/networkmap_debug.log

You should see a lot of crap scroll by. Once it seems to slow down and pause after a bit, hit ctrl-c and review the /tmp/networkmap_debug.log file where the Synology MAC is mentioned.

Cleanup the debug with:

rm /tmp/NMP_DEBUG /tmp/NMP_DEBUG_MORE /tmp/NMP_DEBUG_FUNCTION
service restart_networkmap

Back from the game (LFC 4, Bourne 2) #YNWA #GoReds

Ran the commands. Hard to know what to look for when the Synology MAC is mentioned. Lots of appearances. Nothing overly repetitive, despite quantity, from newbie glance. Used grep to pull out the exact MAC address into a new file. Lots of things going on in various sections. From what I can glean, it mostly looks like pattern matching to see if the current "in play" IP address maps it's MAC address against one in a table.

If you can be more specific of what you want from this, happy to oblige, but I don't think I see the same repetition I did in the other things we did.

PS. It's very hard to see "check_wrieless_info" so many times thinking "Debug your strings...!"

 

[Kingp1n]

Back from the game (LFC 4, Bourne 2) #YNWA #GoReds

Off topic....but ....Great way to start the season!

 

[Analog-1]

hat's BS, as I already adressed it during the beta cycle.

RELAX.....

 

[dave14305]

If you can be more specific of what you want from this, happy to oblige, but I don't think I see the same repetition I did in the other things we did.

Just wondering if there is any hint why it finds that mac so often. Also, it lets you and anyone else see what networkmap is actually doing, despite being closed source.

 

[David Cavalli]

Just wondering if there is any hint why it finds that mac so often. Also, it lets you and anyone else see what networkmap is actually doing, despite being closed source.

I'm guessing because it is accessed constantly. It is work data for some, media (music, movies, tv, etc.) for all. I would assume that frequent access would bring repeated queries.

 

[David Cavalli]

Something new, in case it helps. I had a problem with Cox and had to reset everything. When everything came back online, went to Client List, sorted by network, to see if any machines needed to be brought back online. While looking for a Wired Linux server, I noticed something about my Synology entry. It has a little white number (181 and climbing) in the icon area. When my cursor is over this white number, it brings up the dialog box saying "181 clients are connect to RT-AX88U_PRO through this device."

We pretty much had it down to the Synology before, but I don't ever remember seeing this little number on the icon before. Hope that's useful!

Ha, one more new minor note. As it just hit about 250 or so clients, it automatically seemed to reset back to the real 39, before increasing again. Anyway, never saw the white number before, so hope that helps.

 

[dave14305]

I noticed something about my Synology entry. It has a little white number (181 and climbing) in the icon area. When my cursor is over this white number, it brings up the dialog box saying "181 clients are connect to RT-AX88U_PRO through this device."

Are both LAN cables plugged in again, or is this with one unplugged?

 

[kernol]

In my case - as soon as I plug in the second LAN cable for the Synology - the Router Client list number goes back to an ever increasing number.
I am content to live without the dual LAN on the Synology - but it is curious that this issue has not cropped up before.

 

[bennor]

In my case - as soon as I plug in the second LAN cable for the Synology - the Router Client list number goes back to an ever increasing number.

Have you configured Link Aggregation on either the Synology two LAN ports, or on the router where the two Synology LAN ports are connected?

I too have a Synology NAS but its a single LAN port unit and don't see the climbing client count. Wonder if something with the dual LAN config settings on Synology is triggering the router issue.

 

[Ripshod]

I used to see this when I had a 1Gbe switch connected to my rlrouter with LACP. With a single LAN connection no such problem.
So link aggregation is my first suspect.

 

[kernol]

Have you configured Link Aggregation on either the Synology two LAN ports, or on the router where the two Synology LAN ports are connected?

I too have a Synology NAS but its a single LAN port unit and don't see the climbing client count. Wonder if something with the dual LAN config settings on Synology is triggering the router issue.

The Synology DS220+ has dual LAN ports and allows link aggregation under its "Bond" configuration on the Network Interface.
The managed TP-Link Switch is correctly configured for LAG on the connected ports.

Until this firmware and its included Asus GPL there has never been a client count problem on my routers client list [ going back 6 years].

 

[David Cavalli]

Are both LAN cables plugged in again, or is this with one unplugged?

Both plugged in. Figured there seems to be no risk of actual problem with the count rising / resetting, so would rather have the double bandwidth. Colin said temporarily remove, so I assumed he didn't need additional testing. Can/will do if it helps isolate, but the NAS is the heart of the LAN here...

 

[David Cavalli]

Until this firmware and its included Asus GPL there has never been a client count problem on my routers client list [ going back 6 years].

Same. I think Dave and I interactively found out "Synology" with our tests and Colin isolated "link aggregation" with my removal of one LAN cable. I'm assuming that no follow-up from Colin literally means that this is ultimately solveable and Merlin is ever watchful of relevant threads. Probably just a matter of time now.

Keeping the current f/w and everything as-is, given that there are no functional issues, so I can be their guinea pig for further questions. Threads like this are why I have stuck with Merlin in my router choices, and have not been disappointed for almost 8+ years. <3

 

[ColinTaylor]

Same. I think Dave and I interactively found out "Synology" with our tests and Colin isolated "link aggregation" with my removal of one LAN cable. I'm assuming that no follow-up from Colin literally means that this is ultimately solveable and Merlin is ever watchful of relevant threads. Probably just a matter of time now.

Keeping the current f/w and everything as-is, given that there are no functional issues, so I can be their guinea pig for further questions. Threads like this are why I have stuck with Merlin in my router choices, and have not been disappointed for almost 8+ years. <3

Apologies for not posting a follow up. It was just a test to add another data point to what had already been collected, nothing more than that. My own feeling is still that this is something Asus needs to fix. However, if those effected can narrow down the cause then that may help Asus.

 

[dave14305]

There are two possible “open-source” places (httpd and client_function.js) where this might have been fixable, and one big closed-source networkmap binary where it isn’t fixable except by Asus.

Understanding what triggers the bug might help you and others avoid it, but since it’s cosmetic mostly, I don’t expect any time investment from Merlin. Especially since newer Asus firmware mentions client list fixes and he’s turned his attention to 388.10.

And he’s also been told to relax, so there is that too.

 

[David Cavalli]

Keeping the current f/w and everything as-is, given that there are no functional issues, so I can be their guinea pig for further questions. Threads like this are why I have stuck with Merlin in my router choices, and have not been disappointed for almost 8+ years. <3

Nope. Turns out, I'm not keeping 102.5... When the router crashed last night, I just assumed it was Cox. I rebooted the router *then* to just make sure everything was clean. When the router just crashed again right now, it was *not* Cox and 100% the router. I'm now of the opinion that whatever going on with the Synology at least has a chance to be a problem. Nobody in my house happy with me as all games and online synced TV were interrupted. Quick downgrade to see if things stay stable. Every month, I generally have a Cox issue, on average and almost never have a router one, 3x/year annually maybe. Two nights in a row, stability a priority.

Sorry I didn't keep 102.5 for testing. Happy to try the next version though.