Parental control - limiting no of h per day

  • 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.

Adooni

New Around Here
A lot of people ask me why Asus do not have parental control that allow to set MAC device to access internet for example for 2-3h per day. We have option only to set timing range like access to internet between 18.00-20.00. Personally I would prefer to limit no of h per day then setup some exactly timing when child can access internet. Even for safety reason for example if we set internet working from 18.00 child can be outside and will run/ bike what ever to get to home at time could have accident etc. When it will be set for 2h per day doesn't matter if child will back to home 18.00 or 18.30.

For people with teenage it sometimes main reason not to buy ASUS router as same internet operators devices are supporting it.

would be possible to add such option to RMerlin or to amtm?
 

eibgrad

Very Senior Member
I understand your frustration. But the problem from the OEM's perspective is this requires managing *sessions*. IOW, the router has to uniquely identify a user and track them over time. Not that it couldn't be done, but that involves a LOT more work to develop and support. It's the equivalent of setting up a captive portal, which *some* firmware does support (but even then it may only be for simple authentication and/or expiration). But when dealing w/ only a fixed time period, it's much simpler. No sessioning required. You simply set a start time and end time w/ some firewall rule and you're done.

It sort of makes sense (again, from the OEM's perspective) because they're looking to keep things as simple and cost effective as possible. And not everyone wants or needs such capabilities. The payoff for *them* is therefore more questionable, and so most just do the minimum necessary and leave it at that.
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

Sign Up For SNBForums Daily Digest

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