[Preview] 380.57 alpha test builds for all models

[RMerlin]

@RMerlin: can you move the DNSsec conversation to a different thread?

Dnssec is only available in this preview build, which is meant to gather feedback. This is the correct place to discuss it.

 

[vanic]

Hi all,
1. Adblock won't maintain anymore because of legal issue, and it can't work perfectly for all situations. Its code and function will be removed in 2016/Q2.
2. Bandwidth monitor / Adaptive QoS will have new GUI modification for matching user behavior, we are trying to implement.

Actually, ASUS heard something you discussed here,and we are trying to do better function and GUI, but one thing to know is we can't satisfy everyone's requirement, we are trying to do UX testing for better GUI design. And thanks for Merlin's help again, hope Merlin can bring more powerful function for you guys.

ps. hope I am not a spammer here.
Thanks,
Vanic

 

[charlie2alpha]

@vanic you're definitely not spammer, lol! It's good for us user to know that the company listens.

 

[martinr]

...
ps. hope I am not a spammer here.
Thanks,
Vanic

Hi Vanic,

It's good to see to here; spammers like you are more than welcome. Don't forget: anytime you want a second pair of eyes to check over the English grammar.....

Martin

 

[Steelstar]

I can confirm that even after restoring default settings, this section doesn't work correctly.

I've upgraded to the last Alpha iteration, but rules under Badwidth limiter in the QoS section still do not work. This section is completely broken at the moment.

 

[RMerlin]

Actually, ASUS heard something you discussed here,and we are trying to do better function and GUI, but one thing to know is we can't satisfy everyone's requirement, we are trying to do UX testing for better GUI design. And thanks for Merlin's help again, hope Merlin can bring more powerful function for you guys.

Would you like me to start a separate thread on the official forums devoted strictly to user feedback on the UX itself (and nothing else)?

 

[vanic]

Would you like me to start a separate thread on the official forums devoted strictly to user feedback on the UX itself (and nothing else)?

Hi Merlin,
No needed by now, if any UX for help, @ASUS_ASUSWRT will do that and we will post in ASUSWRT - Official.

Hi all,
Thanks for your encouragement, I think it can make more developers post more here. I think positive opinion and feedback will make us better and better. Just be patient!! Anyway, just focus on Merlin's firmware. If any update, we will try to post more information in ASUSWRT-official

Thanks,
Vanic

 

[lilstone87]

Hey Vanic,

It seems you work with Asus in some way regarding the router side of things. I wanted to ask you, if you don't mind. I have already posted a thread in the official section of the forums here. But I'm a recent owner of the newer AC3100, which I like a lot. However the QoS side of things seem to be a bit off, and not working like they should. Adaptive QoS seems to work mostly, but the thing I don't understand, is giving the customer option to manually set the bandwidth limits for download/upload. However after inputting them, and applying them, these limit's aren't used, and so you can still go well over the set limits you inputted.

With Traditional QoS, it's the same way with setting manual bandwidth limits, you can still go higher then the set limits. Another issue with Traditional QoS, and this one makes it impossible to use right now for me. Once I set a priority for a device, all my devices oddly are capped at like 15mbps max on the download. I even gave the speed testing device highest priority, and still was limited to 15mbps down max. I had my download set to 205mbps, which is what I get from my isp. Anyways sorry for going off-topic in your thread Merlin, I just wanted to bring this up. As I feel like QoS system isn't fully working correctly, with the newer AC88U/AC3100 routers.

 

[RMerlin]

Hey Vanic,

It seems you work with Asus in some way regarding the router side of things. I wanted to ask you, if you don't mind. I have already posted a thread in the official section of the forums here. But I'm a recent owner of the newer AC3100, which I like a lot. However the QoS side of things seem to be a bit off, and not working like they should. Adaptive QoS seems to work mostly, but the thing I don't understand, is giving the customer option to manually set the bandwidth limits for download/upload. However after inputting them, and applying them, these limit's aren't used, and so you can still go well over the set limits you inputted.

With Traditional QoS, it's the same way with setting manual bandwidth limits, you can still go higher then the set limits. Another issue with Traditional QoS, and this one makes it impossible to use right now for me. Once I set a priority for a device, all my devices oddly are capped at like 15mbps max on the download. I even gave the speed testing device highest priority, and still was limited to 15mbps down max. I had my download set to 205mbps, which is what I get from my isp. Anyways sorry for going off-topic in your thread Merlin, I just wanted to bring this up. As I feel like QoS system isn't fully working correctly, with the newer AC88U/AC3100 routers.

These values are not meant as bandwidth limiters, but to calculate what percentage of traffic gets allocated per traffic classes when you allocate a percentage to a given class. After that, any client will still use as much bandwidth as possible, unless higher priority traffic happens, in which case traffic gets allocated in slices calculated based on these two values (and the classes's percentages).

 

[aetbly]

RMerlin, is there any chance you might release a firmware compatible with the ASUS RT-N12 (B-D) routers? Thanks for all your hard work.

 

[RMerlin]

RMerlin, is there any chance you might release a firmware compatible with the ASUS RT-N12 (B-D) routers? Thanks for all your hard work.

None. I only focus on high-end routers, with more flash and more RAM.

 

[nagle3092]

I've upgraded to the last Alpha iteration, but rules under Badwidth limiter in the QoS section still do not work. This section is completely broken at the moment.

I just checked and it appears my rules are not working either anymore.

 

[cockytrumpet]

I've flashed (and factory reset) my new RT-AC88U with 380.57_alpha3 and enabled DNSSec support.

In the logs:

Dec  4 00:20:21 dnsmasq[1038]: DNSSEC validation enabled

As my OpenDNS setup doesn't seem to work, I tried google public DNS (https://googleonlinesecurity.blogspot.com/2013/03/google-public-dns-now-supports-dnssec.html) with

dig @8.8.8.8 versign.com +dnssec

; <<>> DiG 9.8.3-P1 <<>> @8.8.8.8 versign.com +dnssec
; (1 server found)
;; global options: +cmd
;; Got answer:
;; ->>HEADER<<- opcode: QUERY, status: NOERROR, id: 29849
;; flags: qr rd ra; QUERY: 1, ANSWER: 1, AUTHORITY: 0, ADDITIONAL: 1

;; OPT PSEUDOSECTION:
; EDNS: version: 0, flags: do; udp: 512
;; QUESTION SECTION:
;versign.com.            IN    A

;; ANSWER SECTION:
versign.com.        3599    IN    A    72.13.63.55

;; Query time: 148 msec
;; SERVER: 8.8.8.8#53(8.8.8.8)
;; WHEN: Fri Dec  4 00:13:07 2015
;; MSG SIZE  rcvd: 56

Got a DO (DNSSEC answer OK) flag. All is well?

 

[RMerlin]

Got a DO (DNSSEC answer OK) flag. All is well?

Yes. OpenDNS does not support DNSSEC.

 

[jsmiddleton4]

Changed to Google DNS for both IPV4 and IPV6. DNSSEC now shows I'm protected.

I'm so proud.

 

[jsmiddleton4]

I don't know the 3100 but for the 68U its on the DHCP LAN page.

 

[bodean]

DNSSEC is only under LAN, and not WAN.
I have always put my google dns servers under WAN setting. Should they be under both LAN and WAN setting (home environment)

 

[jsmiddleton4]

I thought the DNS fields in the LAN area are only for "special" circumstances. WAN is all that is required for most setups.

 

[jsmiddleton4]

While I had DNSSEC working in terms of the web site confirmation I found a noticeable slow down in web throughput. I can access web sites like the BBC from Arizona, USA but it took a long time to load.

After removing the Google DNS servers from both IPV4 and IPV6 fields, did full power off to refresh IPV6, BBC, etc., all very snappy.

But then I'm using my default Cox dns server information for both protocols and DNSSEC is not part of Cox's DNS server infrastructure.

I know RMerlin has done a lot of work on DNSSEC. I'm just not sure if in the bigger picture DNSSEC is going to be that much of a player on the great wide web.

 

[eddiez]

While I had DNSSEC working in terms of the web site confirmation I found a noticeable slow down in web throughput. I can access web sites like the BBC from Arizona, USA but it took a long time to load.

After removing the Google DNS servers from both IPV4 and IPV6 fields, did full power off to refresh IPV6, BBC, etc., all very snappy.

But then I'm using my default Cox dns server information for both protocols and DNSSEC is not part of Cox's DNS server infrastructure.

I know RMerlin has done a lot of work on DNSSEC. I'm just not sure if in the bigger picture DNSSEC is going to be that much of a player on the great wide web.

Possibly Cox is using some proxy/caching in its infrastructure. Usually the Google dns servers are pretty responsive.

@RMerlin: Can you elaborate a bit on the workload that is added to the router by using DNSSEC?