Old news? - ASUS GT-AX11000, no 160 Mhz bandwidth option on 5G-2

[KLFDRO]

This topic has been bandied about for years, but I have been recently chasing my tail with it. I have found many descriptions of suggested rituals, but no definitive or consistent resolution.
None of the 4 varieties of "reset" options have worked. (2 via buttons, 2 via web GUI)
And here's my additional twist - I have 3 GT-AX11000 devices which share:
(1) the same HW version,
(2) same location of manufacture
(3) the same firmware, and
(4) the same settings file.

Of the 3 devices, only 1 is missing the 160Mhz bandwidth option on the 5G-2 band. That would seem to effectively eliminate any resolution by changing the firmware or some available system setting.
Perhaps not a huge issue in the overall scheme of things, but is the one device destined to forever live without the 160Mhz/5G-2option?

 

[ColinTaylor]

Perhaps not a huge issue in the overall scheme of things, but is the one device destined to forever live without the 160Mhz/5G-2option?

Probably. SSH into each router and compare their territory codes.

nvram get territory_code

 

[Tech9]

They are only 2x available 160MHz wide channels on 5GHz band, Ch.50 (36-64) and Ch.114 (100-128). Depending on how ASUS split the band and the available channels in the region you may or may not have available 160MHz on 5GHz-2 radio. There is Ch.163 (149-177) available only in the US and no client device supports it, can be used between two identical routers for wireless backhaul. Perhaps one of the routers has different region code.

 

[KLFDRO]

Probably. SSH into each router and compare their territory codes.

nvram get territory_code

It appears we have a winner. Territory codes are US/01, US/01 and . . . . . CA/01 for the rogue device.
I can see that, in theory, I could change that with an SSH "nvram set" command (and I am in the US).
Does that theory play out in reality?
Or will I just be trading my tail chasing for a wild goose chase?

With some trial and error on one of the US/01 code devices I was also able to retrieve the following nvram parameters:
wl0_country_code=US
wl0_country_rev=821
wl1_country_code=US
wl1_country_rev=821
wl2_country_code=US
wl2_country_rev=821
1:ccode= US
2:ccode= US
3:ccode= US

 

[ColinTaylor]

I can see that, in theory, I could change that with an SSH "nvram set" command (and I am in the US).
Does that theory play out in reality?

No that won't work.

Or will I just be trading my tail chasing for a wild goose chase?

Indeed.

And in case you're wondering, discussions about circumventing a router's regional restrictions are against these forums rules. Any such discussions will be deleted.

 

[KLFDRO]

Noted. I'm on my own. Seems a bit counter productive since my goal is to match the device settings to the region where it was purchased and will be used. But thanks for providing the quick diagnostic tip.

 

[degrub]

It is because RF communications are regulated differently in each country - specifically Tx power and frequency bands allowed within the three current radio bands - 2.4, 5, 6 GHz.

 

[Tech9]

The CA router is also limited to 23dBm on lower 5GHz band non-DFS range. There are more differences than channel selection. Strange this device was sold in the US. May explain the situation if the device was purchased second-hand, but I've seen Newegg in Canada selling US devices and in theory it's illegal.

 

[jksmurf]

I've seen Newegg in Canada selling US devices and in theory it's illegal.

I sometimes wonder about this (for any jurisdiction), whether having it is illegal, or only using it.

Not suggesting anyone breaks the law or skirts around it by any means, but if you fix (set) specific channels and TX power and are in full compliance, is doing so on a device that is simply capable of operating outside legal limits in itself illegal?

As a simplified example, if someone has a very powerful or even not so powerful car, that can drive above the maximum speed limit, why is that vehicle not similarly illegal? Anyway, just musings, apologies to veer OT a wee bit.

 

[Tech9]

I sometimes wonder about this

ASUS routers come on Auto and Performance by default. If US region router chooses Ch.36 in Canada it will violate the local RF power regulations. The user doesn't know and has no control. ASUS firmware doesn't have settings in dBm.

why is that vehicle not similarly illegal

Because the user has control. Using ASUS router analogy your vehicle is set to 200km/h by default (5x higher than allowed by law), has no speedometer on the dashboard, the user is in 40km/h school zone and has no instructions how to slow down.

 

[KLFDRO]

I sometimes wonder about this (for any jurisdiction), whether having it is illegal, or only using it.

Not suggesting anyone breaks the law or skirts around it by any means, but if you fix (set) specific channels and TX power and are in full compliance, is doing so on a device that is simply capable of operating outside legal limits in itself illegal?

As a simplified example, if someone has a very powerful or even not so powerful car, that can drive above the maximum speed limit, why is that vehicle not similarly illegal? Anyway, just musings, apologies to veer OT a wee bit.

Isn't it obvious?
If someone were to take the steps necessary to "recalibrate" their router in the best manner compliant with their local regulations, there is little obvious good that could come of it.
In contrast, if someone were to "recalibrate" their router to be non-compliant with their local regulations, the world would immediately come to an end.
Accordingly, we simply CANNOT allow any discussion or understanding of any such recalibration.
That might lead to better understanding the inner working of routers. [Apparently] NOT a suitable topic for a networking group.
And we certainly cannot allow any humor in the discussion.
BTW, the analogy is spot on.

 

[ColinTaylor]

This subject was flogged to death on these forums 10 years ago when the regulations changed. There were hundreds of posts across multiple threads. For example here.

 

[KLFDRO]

I sometimes wonder about this (for any jurisdiction), whether having it is illegal, or only using it.

Not suggesting anyone breaks the law or skirts around it by any means, but if you fix (set) specific channels and TX power and are in full compliance, is doing so on a device that is simply capable of operating outside legal limits in itself illegal?

As a simplified example, if someone has a very powerful or even not so powerful car, that can drive above the maximum speed limit, why is that vehicle not similarly illegal? Anyway, just musings, apologies to veer OT a wee bit.

Using it, or SELLING it or MANUFACTURING it.

This subject was flogged to death on these forums 10 years when the regulations changed. There were hundreds of posts across multiple threads. For example here.

Huh. And remains unresolved.
Did I mention the lack of any sense of humor?

 

[KLFDRO]

I sometimes wonder about this (for any jurisdiction), whether having it is illegal, or only using it.

Not suggesting anyone breaks the law or skirts around it by any means, but if you fix (set) specific channels and TX power and are in full compliance, is doing so on a device that is simply capable of operating outside legal limits in itself illegal?

As a simplified example, if someone has a very powerful or even not so powerful car, that can drive above the maximum speed limit, why is that vehicle not similarly illegal? Anyway, just musings, apologies to veer OT a wee bit.

Using it, or SELLING it or MANUFACTURING it.

ASUS routers come on Auto and Performance by default. If US region router chooses Ch.36 in Canada it will violate the local RF power regulations. The user doesn't know and has no control. ASUS firmware doesn't have settings in dBm.



Because the user has control. Using ASUS router analogy your vehicle is set to 200km/h by default (5x higher than allowed by law), has no speedometer on the dashboard, the user is in 40km/h school zone and has no instructions how to slow down.

Legal citation, please. I want to see where any such regulation applies to the end user rather than the manufacturer or seller. Not saying it doesn't exist, but let's compare aples to apples.

 

[KLFDRO]

Using it, or SELLING it or MANUFACTURING it.

Legal citation, please. I want to see where any such regulation applies to the end user rather than the manufacturer or seller. Not saying it doesn't exist, but let's compare aples to apples.

or apples to apples

 

[jksmurf]

This subject was flogged to death on these forums 10 years ago when the regulations changed. There were hundreds of posts across multiple threads. For example here.

@KLFDRO as much as I enjoy your sense of humour, I think @ColinTaylor chose quite a good post to refer to here, in that the ramifications of non-compliance include potential loss of all 3rd party firmware, so in this regard (and for this reason alone), I think the horse is well and truly dead.

I apologise for bringing it up even as a random musing. I wasn’t aware of the previous heated debate on the subject.