switch to DD-WRT for K3.x support

[legitsu]

is there any advantage to be had by flashing DDWRT K3.0 vrs the 2.6 kernel tomato uses ?

 

[TonyH]

Hi,
I for one, can't answer your question. You did not mention what you do with your router.
Most Linux is moving to 3.x Kernel. Trying dd-wrt is not hard. You can switch back to
original f/w easily.

 

[legitsu]

Hi,
I for one, can't answer your question. You did not mention what you do with your router.
Most Linux is moving to 3.x Kernel. Trying dd-wrt is not hard. You can switch back to
to original f/w easily.

mainly its just handels media streaming tho It does stream multipl >1080p videos at a time and tomato is showing its age and lack of core functionality development the only reasion I switched to tomato was because builds for my WRN3500L where giving me fitts with wifi stablity
mainly what I need is a boost in lan-routing performace

 

[RMerlin]

is there any advantage to be had by flashing DDWRT K3.0 vrs the 2.6 kernel tomato uses ?

The kernel itself means very little from the enduser's point of view. The bigger question is, will you benefit from the features DD-WRT offers versus Tomato. There lies a much bigger change from your enduser's point of view.

 

[legitsu]

The kernel itself means very little from the enduser's point of view. The bigger question is, will you benefit from the features DD-WRT offers versus Tomato. There lies a much bigger change from your enduser's point of view.

what I have setup now is
1. Entware running AICCU And various bits like NANO,bash,irssi and a more recent build of minidlna

2. I use CIFFS use the router to handle all the streaming for 4 different computers
my main bottle neck now is if I run more then 3 1080P streams over the lan my WAN connection dives
know i have heard that the newer K3.x built drivers do offer some performance improvements along with the improvements in the 3.x kernel
i really don't like the stock-firmware GUI and in my test its slower then tomato
Edit: do I press Z button or Not http://cl.ly/Tl2U/Image 2014-02-06 at 1.07.00 AM.png
you decide

 

[legitsu]

Andd its done went absolutely without issue took 2.5M
http://cl.ly/TlHP/Image 2014-02-06 at 1.26.32 AM.png
what is odd tho is that its reporting I have 256KB of nvram even tho its a 64KB CFE ...
edit:nm apprently BS changed it to support 256KB
well that sells me on DD-WRT then

 

[connorm]

The kernel itself means very little from the enduser's point of view. The bigger question is, will you benefit from the features DD-WRT offers versus Tomato. There lies a much bigger change from your enduser's point of view.

actually i have been using tomato shibby lately and i am extremely confident in saying it is more stable then both merlin and asus wrt (in my opinion, don't wanna start arguments)

the only single downside I can think of with these firmwares would be the fact there is no HW acceleration, however they have implemented BCM_NAT which seems to increase throughput by a good bit.

another small loss with tomato and dd-wrt is ease of use. but i figure thats a givin.

overall i have felt tomato is just much "lighter" then the asus and merlin wrt allowing the router to do its job easier. i actually think i survived my first ddos without HW acceleration last night.

now on the topic of the kernel. i believe you can use kongs version of dd-wrt which uses the 3.4 kernel. maybe im wrong and its 3.1 or something but thats what i recall. i believe 3.4 is also where SFQ-Codel can be used as the QOS scheduler. SFQ-codel is big step for QOS. it and the PIE algorithm by cisco have shown great potential to combating bufferbloat. the day cable companies start implementing PIE or SFQ-Codel in there cmts and cable modems will be a very significant day indeed. as a COD nerd bufferbloat is one of my biggest enemies, and hobbies to learn about and fix. while probably a large majority of people in networking barely even understand it or care....sigh

 

[legitsu]

actually i have been using tomato shibby lately and i am extremely confident in saying it is more stable then both merlin and asus wrt (in my opinion, don't wanna start arguments)

the only single downside I can think of with these firmwares would be the fact there is no HW acceleration, however they have implemented BCM_NAT which seems to increase throughput by a good bit.

another small loss with tomato and dd-wrt is ease of use. but i figure thats a givin.

overall i have felt tomato is just much "lighter" then the asus and merlin wrt allowing the router to do its job easier. i actually think i survived my first ddos without HW acceleration last night.

now on the topic of the kernel. i believe you can use kongs version of dd-wrt which uses the 3.4 kernel. maybe im wrong and its 3.1 or something but thats what i recall. i believe 3.4 is also where SFQ-Codel can be used as the QOS scheduler. SFQ-codel is big step for QOS. it and the PIE algorithm by cisco have shown great potential to combating bufferbloat. the day cable companies start implementing PIE or SFQ-Codel in there cmts and cable modems will be a very significant day indeed. as a COD nerd bufferbloat is one of my biggest enemies, and hobbies to learn about and fix. while probably a large majority of people in networking barely even understand it or care....sigh

id love to see tomato move to K3.x but word has it that its pretty well stuck on 2.6 and I agree the ASUS codebase seems like a lost cause the UI is meh and it *feels* slow for whatever reason
the real problem is tomato is that there has been no REAL work done on the "core" in ages granted people like shibby are hacking away at it fixing stuff and keeping everything updated but old-code is still old
I did mess with the Codel QoS a bit but it seems seriously broken in this build all it did was make the connection extremely slow

 

[connorm]

id love to see tomato move to K3.x but word has it that its pretty well stuck on 2.6 and I agree the ASUS codebase seems like a lost cause the UI is meh and it *feels* slow for whatever reason
the real problem is tomato is that there has been no REAL work done on the "core" in ages granted people like shibby are hacking away at it fixing stuff and keeping everything updated but old-code is still old
I did mess with the Codel QoS a bit but it seems seriously broken in this build all it did was make the connection extremely slow

on which verison of dd-wrt kernel did you try the codel qos?

also on another note. i just tested nas performance on tomato. and i think its the best i have seen. transferring 2gb files from a NTFS drive i seen a minimum of 13MB read. (13-13.2 it was constantly going back and forth) and the write was at 14.4 sometimes dropping down to 14. never lower then 14MB on the write speed but the real performance gain here was the read speed