ROG Rapture GT-AC5300 (Owners)

[Maahfu]

Neither would I but it is simply not a problem with a 1gb connection. Monitoring traffic it becomes obvious that the line is never saturated so there will always be bandwith for any of the scenarios you mention. They simply do not happen. And even if one client should somehow find a magic server that could deliver a data at "full speed", all our connections are wireless the throughput here would be limited by this.

I have always used QoS in the past but after getting a 1 gbps WAN connection it becomes obvious that it is not needed (yet - in a few years this may be a wrong assumption).

Or you dont have 30 devices

 

[Trentors]

Or you dont have 30 devices

Number of devices does not really mean anything. If you have 50 Sonos speakers it will still not use 50 mbit.

Take my ISP for instance. Fast.com speedtest shows that Netflix can only send about 250 mbit on my 1gbit connection. So that still means around 10 devices could show full 4K HDR UHD video and still we would almost 700 mbit to spare. But the fact is that Netflix is limited to 250 mbit and that means their service cannot even come close to saturate our connection no matter how many is using it. And the same thing goes for most services. You never get access to anything that even comes close to saturating the connection.

 

[drabisan]

Number of devices DO matter on wireless.
An idle device do communicate with the router. All the time. Not a lot but some beacons and some probes are always going through. And the worst part if most of this idle communication is done at lowest basic speed, far from maximum one and it's highly inefficient in air time utilization.
If you are curios enough you can read the actual speed parts of the wireless frame are send at, how much time it takes. In that process you can understand why there's no way in the world anyone will ever reach full bandwidth of a wireless link.

 

[TinyRK]

Another issue I am now seeing, is everytime I click on firmware....either through firmware version on top of screen or Administration/firmware it automatically starts a firmware download and install. Instead of going to firmware page to check signature/ check firmware/ or upload firmware.

Try a reset to factory defaults after downloading your settings.
And then reapply them.

 

[Trentors]

Number of devices DO matter on wireless.
An idle device do communicate with the router. All the time. Not a lot but some beacons and some probes are always going through. And the worst part if most of this idle communication is done at lowest basic speed, far from maximum one and it's highly inefficient in air time utilization.
If you are curios enough you can read the actual speed parts of the wireless frame are send at, how much time it takes. In that process you can understand why there's no way in the world anyone will ever reach full bandwidth of a wireless link.

Yes but what does it have to do with saturating a 1gbps WAN connection and usage of QoS? Please look at context instead of replying on a single sentence out of context.

 

[Bartman]

Another issue I am now seeing, is everytime I click on firmware....either through firmware version on top of screen or Administration/firmware it automatically starts a firmware download and install. Instead of going to firmware page to check signature/ check firmware/ or upload firmware.

Just restart the router, no factory reset needed.

Regards

 

[Bartman]

All of a suden I am having issue with OpenVPN on router. It is coming up as....

Initialinzing the settings of OpenVPN server now, please wait a few minutes to let the server to setup completed before VPN clients establish the connection.

But never comes up!

Again, restart the router to see if the problem is fixed.

Regards

 

[Rolo]

re: QoS. Like I said, "latency", not bandwidth. Higher bandwidth lessens QoS' impact but it doesn't eliminate its impact.

I do and never has anyone reached back out to me!

Heh...I got a reply on one of my reports:

Vanic Huang(黃宗仁)
Jan 30

Hi sir,

Thanks for your feedback, ASUS is aware of this issue already, we will hot fix this bug ASAP.

Thanks,
Vanic


-----Original Message-----
From: router_feedback
Sent: Wednesday, January 31, 2018 7:11 AM
To: router_feedback
Subject: GT-AC5300 feedback

CUSTOMER FEEDBACK

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Model: GT-AC5300
Firmware Version: 3.0.0.4.384_20287-g51c2770 Inner Version:

Comments:

Unable to view the Firmware Upgrade tab. As soon as I click on it, it displays a "firmware updating" progress bar and after a few minutes, it kicks me back to the dashboard.

It doesn't actually update firmware or reboot or anything (lights remain the same, router doesn't reboot, syslog doesn't report anything to my syslog server).

 

[Lachrymator]

I just flashed my router to the new firmware and keep getting this message spammed in the logs.

kernel: protocol 0800 is buggy, dev eth4

Not sure which of the ports it considers eth4, going by whats on the back I have nothing plugged into the 4th port on the back of the unit, it doesn't show right away after a reflash of the firmware or reboot it takes it a couple minutes before it starts.

 

[Albert Fernández]

You know what this error is that comes out just every hour, I tried to disable the QoS and Game ips protection of trendmicro and keeps coming out.


Jan 31 20:32:40 kernel: ERR... udb_ioctl_op_dc_get_ips_rt_event: hooknum for vp must be 1 or 3
Jan 31 20:32:40 kernel: ERR... udb_ioctl_op_dc_get_ips_rt_event: hooknum for vp must be 1 or 3
Jan 31 20:32:40 kernel: ERR... udb_ioctl_op_dc_get_ips_rt_event: hooknum for vp must be 1 or 3
Jan 31 20:32:40 kernel: ERR... udb_ioctl_op_dc_get_ips_rt_event: hooknum for vp must be 1 or 3
Jan 31 20:32:40 kernel: ERR... udb_ioctl_op_dc_get_ips_rt_event: hooknum for vp must be 1 or 3
Jan 31 20:32:40 kernel: ERR... udb_ioctl_op_dc_get_ips_rt_event: hooknum for vp must be 1 or 3
Jan 31 20:32:40 kernel: ERR... udb_ioctl_op_dc_get_ips_rt_event: hooknum for vp must be 1 or 3
Jan 31 20:32:40 kernel: ERR... udb_ioctl_op_dc_get_ips_rt_event: hooknum for vp must be 1 or 3
Jan 31 20:32:40 kernel: ERR... udb_ioctl_op_dc_get_ips_rt_event: hooknum for vp must be 1 or 3
Jan 31 20:32:40 kernel: ERR... udb_ioctl_op_dc_get_ips_rt_event: hooknum for vp must be 1 or 3
Jan 31 20:32:40 kernel: ERR... udb_ioctl_op_dc_get_ips_rt_event: hooknum for vp must be 1 or 3
Jan 31 20:32:40 kernel: ERR... udb_ioctl_op_dc_get_ips_rt_event: hooknum for vp must be 1 or 3
Jan 31 20:32:40 kernel: ERR... udb_ioctl_op_dc_get_ips_rt_event: hooknum for vp must be 1 or 3
Jan 31 20:32:40 kernel: ERR... udb_ioctl_op_dc_get_ips_rt_event: hooknum for vp must be 1 or 3
Jan 31 20:32:40 kernel: ERR... udb_ioctl_op_dc_get_ips_rt_event: hooknum for vp must be 1 or 3
Jan 31 20:32:40 kernel: ERR... udb_ioctl_op_dc_get_ips_rt_event: hooknum for vp must be 1 or 3
Jan 31 20:32:40 kernel: ERR... udb_ioctl_op_dc_get_ips_rt_event: hooknum for vp must be 1 or 3
Jan 31 20:32:40 kernel: ERR... udb_ioctl_op_dc_get_ips_rt_event: hooknum for vp must be 1 or 3
Jan 31 20:32:40 kernel: ERR... udb_ioctl_op_dc_get_ips_rt_event: hooknum for vp must be 1 or 3
Jan 31 20:32:40 kernel: ERR... udb_ioctl_op_dc_get_ips_rt_event: hooknum for vp must be 1 or 3
Jan 31 20:32:40 kernel: ERR... udb_ioctl_op_dc_get_ips_rt_event: hooknum for vp must be 1 or 3
Jan 31 20:32:40 kernel: ERR... udb_ioctl_op_dc_get_ips_rt_event: hooknum for vp must be 1 or 3
Jan 31 20:32:40 kernel: ERR... udb_ioctl_op_dc_get_ips_rt_event: hooknum for vp must be 1 or 3
Jan 31 20:32:40 kernel: ERR... udb_ioctl_op_dc_get_ips_rt_event: hooknum for vp must be 1 or 3
Jan 31 20:32:40 kernel: ERR... udb_ioctl_op_dc_get_ips_rt_event: hooknum for vp must be 1 or 3
Jan 31 20:32:40 kernel: ERR... udb_ioctl_op_dc_get_ips_rt_event: hooknum for vp must be 1 or 3
Jan 31 20:32:40 kernel: ERR... udb_ioctl_op_dc_get_ips_rt_event: hooknum for vp must be 1 or 3
Jan 31 20:32:40 kernel: ERR... udb_ioctl_op_dc_get_ips_rt_event: hooknum for vp must be 1 or 3
Jan 31 20:32:40 kernel: ERR... udb_ioctl_op_dc_get_ips_rt_event: hooknum for vp must be 1 or 3
Jan 31 20:32:40 kernel: ERR... udb_ioctl_op_dc_get_ips_rt_event: hooknum for vp must be 1 or 3
Jan 31 20:32:40 kernel: ERR... udb_ioctl_op_dc_get_ips_rt_event: hooknum for vp must be 1 or 3
Jan 31 20:32:40 kernel: ERR... udb_ioctl_op_dc_get_ips_rt_event: hooknum for vp must be 1 or 3
Jan 31 20:32:40 kernel: ERR... udb_ioctl_op_dc_get_ips_rt_event: hooknum for vp must be 1 or 3
Jan 31 20:32:40 kernel: ERR... udb_ioctl_op_dc_get_ips_rt_event: hooknum for vp must be 1 or 3
Jan 31 20:32:40 kernel: ERR... udb_ioctl_op_dc_get_ips_rt_event: hooknum for vp must be 1 or 3
Jan 31 20:32:40 kernel: ERR... udb_ioctl_op_dc_get_ips_rt_event: hooknum for vp must be 1 or 3
Jan 31 20:32:40 kernel: ERR... udb_ioctl_op_dc_get_ips_rt_event: hooknum for vp must be 1 or 3
Jan 31 20:32:40 kernel: ERR... udb_ioctl_op_dc_get_ips_rt_event: hooknum for vp must be 1 or 3
Jan 31 20:32:40 kernel: ERR... udb_ioctl_op_dc_get_ips_rt_event: hooknum for vp must be 1 or 3
Jan 31 20:32:40 kernel: ERR... udb_ioctl_op_dc_get_ips_rt_event: hooknum for vp must be 1 or 3
Jan 31 20:32:40 kernel: ERR... udb_ioctl_op_dc_get_ips_rt_event: hooknum for vp must be 1 or 3
Jan 31 20:32:40 kernel: ERR... udb_ioctl_op_dc_get_ips_rt_event: hooknum for vp must be 1 or 3
Jan 31 20:32:41 kernel: ERR... udb_ioctl_op_dc_get_ips_rt_event: hooknum for vp must be 1 or 3
Jan 31 20:32:41 kernel: ERR... udb_ioctl_op_dc_get_ips_rt_event: hooknum for vp must be 1 or 3
Jan 31 20:32:41 kernel: ERR... udb_ioctl_op_dc_get_ips_rt_event: hooknum for vp must be 1 or 3
Jan 31 20:32:41 kernel: ERR... udb_ioctl_op_dc_get_ips_rt_event: hooknum for vp must be 1 or 3
Jan 31 20:32:41 kernel: ERR... udb_ioctl_op_dc_get_ips_rt_event: hooknum for vp must be 1 or 3
Jan 31 20:32:41 kernel: ERR... udb_ioctl_op_dc_get_ips_rt_event: hooknum for vp must be 1 or 3
Jan 31 20:32:41 kernel: ERR... udb_ioctl_op_dc_get_ips_rt_event: hooknum for vp must be 1 or 3
Jan 31 20:32:41 kernel: ERR... udb_ioctl_op_dc_get_ips_rt_event: hooknum for vp must be 1 or 3
Jan 31 20:32:41 kernel: ERR... udb_ioctl_op_dc_get_ips_rt_event: hooknum for vp must be 1 or 3
Jan 31 20:32:41 kernel: ERR... udb_ioctl_op_dc_get_ips_rt_event: hooknum for vp must be 1 or 3
Jan 31 20:32:41 kernel: ERR... udb_ioctl_op_dc_get_ips_rt_event: hooknum for vp must be 1 or 3
Jan 31 20:32:41 kernel: ERR... udb_ioctl_op_dc_get_ips_rt_event: hooknum for vp must be 1 or 3
Jan 31 20:32:41 kernel: ERR... udb_ioctl_op_dc_get_ips_rt_event: hooknum for vp must be 1 or 3
Jan 31 20:32:41 kernel: ERR... udb_ioctl_op_dc_get_ips_rt_event: hooknum for vp must be 1 or 3
Jan 31 20:32:41 kernel: ERR... udb_ioctl_op_dc_get_ips_rt_event: hooknum for vp must be 1 or 3
Jan 31 20:32:41 kernel: ERR... udb_ioctl_op_dc_get_ips_rt_event: hooknum for vp must be 1 or 3
Jan 31 20:32:41 kernel: ERR... udb_ioctl_op_dc_get_ips_rt_event: hooknum for vp must be 1 or 3

 

[stevef9432203]

I just flashed my router to the new firmware and keep getting this message spammed in the logs.

kernel: protocol 0800 is buggy, dev eth4

Not sure which of the ports it considers eth4, going by whats on the back I have nothing plugged into the 4th port on the back of the unit, it doesn't show right away after a reflash of the firmware or reboot it takes it a couple minutes before it starts.

Got the same message on eth3 sigh..

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-T677A using Tapatalk

 

[Lachrymator]

Got the same message on eth3 sigh..

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-T677A using Tapatalk

Do you have anything connected to that port? I had a hub connected to mine at first but I moved it to another port to see if the error message moved with it but it didn't.

 

[RMerlin]

Heh...I got a reply on one of my reports:

And Vanic is actually one of the developers, he's not just a tech support representative, so you can't get closer to the source than this.

 

[stevef9432203]

Do you have anything connected to that port? I had a hub connected to mine at first but I moved it to another port to see if the error message moved with it but it didn't.

No, eth3 has been empty allways

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-T677A using Tapatalk

 

[7stringjazz]

Got the same message on eth3 sigh..

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-T677A using Tapatalk

Got the same msg with eth4! What’s up with that? Router seems to work but I have little confidence.

 

[stevef9432203]

Got the same msg with eth4! What’s up with that? Router seems to work but I have little confidence.

Don't know, it shows up in early versions of linux kernels in the 4.x series, according some website searches. Sigh.
Do any of you folks use Entware on your gt-ac5300?

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-T677A using Tapatalk

 

[Michael Seaman]

I’m glad I purchased the extended warranty, because I’ve finally decided to return it. I think I’ve come to the conclusion that this router is just not what it’s supposed to be. It certainly isn’t meeting my performance needs for gaming on the Xbox. I bought into all the marketing hype, shame on me.

This afternoon I got so fed up with how poorly my online games were playing, laggy studdering, etc. So, I decided to plug in an old netgear nighthawk x4 to see if there was a difference and it was like night and day. My games were instantly smooth and all lag and studder has disappeared.

So disappointed because there is no reason my old router should be outperforming this one.

 

[Jrac86]

I just flashed my router to the new firmware and keep getting this message spammed in the logs.

kernel: protocol 0800 is buggy, dev eth4

Not sure which of the ports it considers eth4, going by whats on the back I have nothing plugged into the 4th port on the back of the unit, it doesn't show right away after a reflash of the firmware or reboot it takes it a couple minutes before it starts.

Did you try disabling link aggregation? I contacted Asus support and they were able to replicate the errors and are working on a fix. If you aren't using link aggregation, disabling it should stop those errors. Also I believe eth3 and eth4 are actually ports 5/6 if you want to try changing ports. If you are using link aggregation, you have to revert to a previous beta firmware to stop those errors or wait til Asus patches the issue in a future one.

 

[drabisan]

I just flashed my router to the new firmware and keep getting this message spammed in the logs.

kernel: protocol 0800 is buggy, dev eth4

Not sure which of the ports it considers eth4, going by whats on the back I have nothing plugged into the 4th port on the back of the unit, it doesn't show right away after a reflash of the firmware or reboot it takes it a couple minutes before it starts.

It's due to link aggregation. You have a 802.ad capable device connected to Asus' ports 5&6.
Disable it if it's not a must for you.
I'm having the same problem and one of Asus' developers give me a beta release today. And indeed the message disappears in this new release.
I need some more time to do some tests to confirm I can exceed 1G towards my Synology. And some even more time to confirm it's stable.
I'm mostly chasing stability rather than features. With official release and only feature that are a must for me it was rock solid for 3 days ( ). 802.11ad is not in the must list. I can live with "only" 1G, but every now and then I would appreciate to go above that. Not that few minutes saved per month are important in any way.

 

[Dan76]

Submitted a case for my protocol is buggy spam in the syslog from the recent official firmware.

Feb 1 20:38:14 kernel: protocol 0800 is buggy, dev br0
Feb 1 20:38:17 kernel: protocol 86dd is buggy, dev eth0
Feb 1 20:38:17 kernel: protocol 86dd is buggy, dev br0
Feb 1 20:38:21 kernel: protocol 86dd is buggy, dev eth0

Received a reply today with a link to beta firmware Version:9.0.0.4.384_20311 but it didn’t solve the issue. Raised another support case through the feedback option in the router.