Voxel Custom firmware build for R7800 v. 1.0.2.90SF

Voxel

Part of the Furniture
Continuation of

. . .
https://www.snbforums.com/threads/custom-firmware-build-for-r7800-v-1-0-2-88sf.74425/
https://www.snbforums.com/threads/custom-firmware-build-for-r7800-v-1-0-2-89sf.75539/

New version of my custom firmware build: 1.0.2.90SF.

Changes (vs 1.0.2.89SF):

1. Toolchain: Go is upgraded 1.17.2->1.17.5.
2. Toolchain: gdb is upgraded 10.1->11.1.
3. Typo in dnsmasq startup init file is fixed.
4. dnsmasq: startup init file is changed to allow disabling dnsmasq only in AP mode.
5. curl package is upgraded 7.79.1->7.80.0.
6. fcgi package is upgraded 2.4.0->2.4.2.
7. iproute2 package is upgraded 3.3.0->4.4.0.
8. xtables-addons package is upgraded 1.42->1.47.1.
9. libubox package is upgraded 2021-08-19->2021-11-20.
10. ethtool package is upgraded 5.14->5.15.
11. ncurses package is upgraded 6.2->6.3.
12. ca-certificates package is upgraded 20210119->20211016.
13. transmission-web-control package is upgraded 2020-09-26->2021-09-25.
14. Default congestion control algorithm is changed to 'highspeed'.
15. HTCP congestion control algorithm is added.
16. Making an order in mtd-utils package (patches, Makefile).
17. Host tools: various updates.


The link is:

https://www.voxel-firmware.com (thanks to vladlenas for his help with hosting).

Voxel.
 
Last edited:

microchip

Very Senior Member
Any reason for changing TCP YeAH to Highspeed?

btw, all engines go ;)
 

Voxel

Part of the Furniture
Any reason for changing TCP YeAH to Highspeed?
My own testing by iperf3 shows that use of Highspeed allows to increase the speed of downloading/uploading. Up to 30 per cents vs YeAH. I used my own remote servers (3 different locations, long distance) with iperf3 running and several public iperf3 servers as well.

Illinois is also good BTW.

But FYI: Highspeed vs Yeah vs Illinois vs etc: does not matter if server is very close to your router (traceroute) or in your LAN.

Examples of testing (you may try yourself):

Code:
iperf3 -c <Server IP or Name> -C yeah
iperf3 -c <Server IP or Name> -C highspeed
. . .
iperf3 -c <Server IP or Name> -R -C yeah
iperf3 -c <Server IP or Name> -R -C highspeed
. . .

But of course: everybody is free to set his/her own congestion control algorithm.

Voxel.
 

microchip

Very Senior Member
I've had issues with illinois. If I set it on the router and all my Linux PCs, it would often just abort a movie I'm watching. As soon as I change to another CC, the problem goes away. I didn't troubleshoot so I don't know what's on with illinois (normal browsing is not a problem). I'm back to YeAH on all my PCs and router.
 

Voxel

Part of the Furniture
YeAH vs Highspeed (maybe worst comparison (?)), checked right now, iperf3 server speed is limited to 200Mbit/s.

YeAH:
1639160189946.png


Highspeed:
1639160212520.png


Voxel.
 

microchip

Very Senior Member
wow, YeAH really looks bad in this comparison. I've never experienced such low throughput with YeAH. It usually utilizes my link to the full speed (I have a 1 Gbps downlink). I do weekly backups from desktop to NAS system and they always hover from 110 MB/s to 112 MB/s so I'm happy with it.
 

fossil

Occasional Visitor
Thank you Voxel. Smooth as usual.

One minor thing not related to this firmware update.

readyshare_network.png


"ReadyShare > Advanced Settings > Network Neighborhood/MacShare" un-checking/disable this setting never sticks from the UI. It is like this for ages, goes back to the stock firmware. I think it tries to set the wrong nvram variable. Setting below nvram variable to 1 un-checks it from the UI.

Code:
nvram set usb_enableNet=1
 

manup85

Regular Contributor
Hello Voxel, i'm unable to flash this firmware:

Current Version 1.0.2.88SF
Uploaded Version 1.0.2.90SF

1639221162427.png


not sure what was the issue but after rebooting the router it flashed properly.
THank you
 
Last edited:

phattio

New Around Here
first of all, THANK YOU VOXEL for all of your hard work and dedication to improving netgear's firmware!

**note: maybe this will help someone out there - i installed/set up all of my wyze cam v3's on my netgear r7800 with voxel's custom firmware 89. when i noticed voxel released 90, i updated the firmware on my router. wyze cam v3's no longer worked. went back to firmware 89 and everything works great again!

thank you again voxel! i'll just be sticking to firmware 89 for now!
 

IAMP373R

Occasional Visitor
Thanks Voxel again, great firmware, so much stable and fast compare with stock one.
BTW I experienced router freeze once while using chromecast with .89SF, IDK why?
wow, YeAH really looks bad in this comparison. I've never experienced such low throughput with YeAH. It usually utilizes my link to the full speed (I have a 1 Gbps downlink). I do weekly backups from desktop to NAS system and they always hover from 110 MB/s to 112 MB/s so I'm happy with it.
I always switch to westwood instead, since R7800 is in router mode. I think in router mode using an aggressive congestion control algo is ok.
I was wonder what if multiple APs use westwood, is latency or bandwidth gonna suffer?
 

FormerGamer

New Around Here
**note: maybe this will help someone out there - i installed/set up all of my wyze cam v3's on my netgear r7800 with voxel's custom firmware 89. when i noticed voxel released 90, i updated the firmware on my router. wyze cam v3's no longer worked. went back to firmware 89 and everything works great again!

I too have Wyze Cam V3 and updated to Voxel firmware 1.0.2.90SF with no issues. This may be on your end.
 

microchip

Very Senior Member
Thanks Voxel again, great firmware, so much stable and fast compare with stock one.
BTW I experienced router freeze once while using chromecast with .89SF, IDK why?

I always switch to westwood instead, since R7800 is in router mode. I think in router mode using an aggressive congestion control algo is ok.
I was wonder what if multiple APs use westwood, is latency or bandwidth gonna suffer?
westwood is very aggressive. It sucks up all bandwidth and behaves unfair towards other processes requiring bandwidth too. It is great for wireless links though, but am not fond of its aggressive nature and unfairness. It's also packet-loss only instead of the others (YeAH, illinois, htcp, etc) which are hybrid (packet & delay)
 

IAMP373R

Occasional Visitor
westwood is very aggressive. It sucks up all bandwidth and behaves unfair towards other processes requiring bandwidth too. It is great for wireless links though, but am not fond of its aggressive nature and unfairness. It's also packet-loss only instead of the others (YeAH, illinois, htcp, etc) which are hybrid (packet & delay)
Westwood is packet-loss base algo? It's different from Wikipedia which identify as loss/delay feedback.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TCP_congestion_control
After all Wikipedia could be wrong. I may give other algo a try. Thanks for answer anyways.
 

microchip

Very Senior Member
Westwood+, which is used in Linux, is packet-loss only. Packet loss can come from many things so it's not always an indication that's there's congestion going on in your network. Packet-loss/delay-based algo's are better at estimating when there's congestion.

Not saying Westwood is bad (it's pretty good for wireless links) but is too aggressive. The wiki claim that it fairly distributes resources on wired links is not really accurate. I've read lots of papers where this is not the case.
 

Latest threads

Sign Up For SNBForums Daily Digest

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