Netgear Launches Open Source-Friendly Wireless Router

An anonymous reader submits news of Netgear's release of the "open source Wireless-G Router (model WGR614L), enabling Linux developers and enthusiasts to create firmware for specialized applications, and supported by a dedicated open source community. The router supports the most popular open source firmware; Tomato and DD-WRT are available on WGR614L, making it easier for users to develop a wide variety of applications. The router is targeted at people who want custom firmware on their router without worrying about issues, and enjoy the benefits of having an open source wireless router."

Comments

What's the point of a new wireless-G one?

[mrchaotica]

Here in 2008, I'm only interested in Free Software-friendly 802.11 N routers. Anybody know of any?

Re:What's the point of a new wireless-G one?

[schnikies79]

I would rather wait till they finalize the spec.

Re:What's the point of a new wireless-G one?

[Anonymous Coward]

There's still no such thing as an N router. They're all provisional N

Re:What's the point of a new wireless-G one?

[mhall119]

The 802.11 N spec isn't even final yet.

Re:What's the point of a new wireless-G one?

[mrchaotica]

Holy shit, you mean they haven't even finished the damn thing yet?! I mean, draft-N stuff has been out for years, so I just assumed...

WTF is taking them so long?!

Re:What's the point of a new wireless-G one?

[schnikies79]

Hell if I know. I wish they would get with it!

Re:What's the point of a new wireless-G one?

[zolf13]

The problem is how to use the same "free" radio frequency (2.4 GHz) both for "b/g" and "n" without interferencing each other.

Re:What's the point of a new wireless-G one?

[LordEq]

The problem is how to use the same "free" radio frequency (2.4 GHz) both for "b/g" and "n" without interferencing

* SLAP *

Don't do that.

Re:What's the point of a new wireless-G one?

[Anonymous Coward]

I bet they include 801.11n support in the HURD.

Re:What's the point of a new wireless-G one?

[Free the Cowards]

What do you propose as the alternative? The amount of spectrum that you can use without having to get a license for your installation is really small.

Re:What's the point of a new wireless-G one?

[Anonymous Coward]

Let him say what he wants.

Stop interferencing.

Re:What's the point of a new wireless-G one?

[Anonymous Coward]

I think he was objecting to the word 'interferencing', to which I say: screw you, the language is not yours to control.

Re:What's the point of a new wireless-G one?

[devjj]

802.11n operates on 5Ghz as well.

It's time to start ditching backward compatibility. Every refresh of the 802.11 spec does not have to have backward compatibility. Backward compatibility here just serves to increase the distance between theoretical maximums and actual observed speeds.

I run a dual-router setup on my home network. I've got a Linksys WRT54Gv4 running Tomato alongside an Apple Airport Extreme. The WRT fills the job of router as well as 802.11g (802.11b is turned off) access point, while the AEBN is configured to work as an 802.11n wireless bridge on the 5Ghz band. Actual throughput is far faster on this setup than on a single device serving everything.

I know there are practical reasons for backward compatibility, but we need to get off our love affair with it. Keep it in enterprise hardware, but for consumers, make a clean break. There's no reason why we can't have an abundance of cheap 802.11b/g devices and a separate class of devices for 802.11n. There's no reason one can't run both if one needs both. The convenience offered by a single package just makes it worse for everyone in the long run.

Re:What's the point of a new wireless-G one?

[Workaphobia]

Cromulence abounds.

Re:What's the point of a new wireless-G one?

[Free the Cowards]

Keep it in enterprise hardware, but for consumers, make a clean break.

You're kind of missing the point. The claim was that the need for backwards compatibility was part of what was making it so difficult to finalize the standard. If you keep it in enterprise hardware then the problem is still there! You could have two standards, I suppose, one "consumer" standard that makes a clean break and one "enterprise" standard that's backwards compatible, but that kind of defeats the whole purpose of having a standard in the first place.

Personally, my house has a lot of g-only devices, and I'm glad that I can serve everything off a single router.

Re:What's the point of a new wireless-G one?

[devjj]

The problem is solved by having two radios.

Re:What's the point of a new wireless-G one?

[mrsteveman1]

Well, that was a very fuckusanct thing to say wasn't it...

Re:What's the point of a new wireless-G one?

[mrsteveman1]

Or, you know, two modes....

Re:What's the point of a new wireless-G one?

[Tweaker_Phreaker]

All of Linksys's draft n routers can get DD-WRT on them with just a simple firmware flashing. Some of them require you to flash the micro version of the firmware the first time to circumvent the very pathetically flawed signature check, but it's far from as complicated as the WRT54G v5/v6 method is.

Re:What's the point of a new wireless-G one?

[Workaphobia]

Perhaps, but it's at (+4, Simpsons Reference) right now.

Man: "Well I believe I'll mod that down."
Kang: "Go ahead. Throw your vote away."

Re:What's the point of a new wireless-G one?

[spymagician]

802.11n operates on 5Ghz as well.

I know there are practical reasons for backward compatibility, but we need to get off our love affair with it. Keep it in enterprise hardware, but for consumers, make a clean break.

While I agree with your statement in principle, the unfortunate reality is that the *average* consumer wants both the backward compatibility and low price/cost of ownership. Removing that backward compatibility eliminates any compelling reason for the average consumer to upgrade. John Q. Public doesn't want to have to invest in an entire new network every time he upgrades a single component of that network. So, when he spends that Economic Stimulus check on a new laptop, he makes sure it will connect to his aging WRT54G. It's not that he wouldn't like to take advantage of the -n spec., it's that he doesn't want to spend the extra money to replace the router and all the NICs in his home that don't support it.

Re:What's the point of a new wireless-G one?

[cayenne8]

"I know there are practical reasons for backward compatibility, but we need to get off our love affair with it. Keep it in enterprise hardware, but for consumers, make a clean break. There's no reason why we can't have an abundance of cheap 802.11b/g devices and a separate class of devices for 802.11n. There's no reason one can't run both if one needs both. The convenience offered by a single package just makes it worse for everyone in the long run."

Honest question here....is there any problem with linux running g and n?

I've not tried to deal with anything but 'b'...and when I started to try to get wireless going with linux..it was a bitch to get things working...and I've not needed to upgrade lately...hell, WEP was something that was hard to do.

I've got a bunch of boxes with 'b' that I finally go going...can I new swap out for the newer g and n cards and they will just work? Not trolling...just wanting some tips on what I might have to change...etc...

TIA

Re:What's the point of a new wireless-G one?

[mixmatch]

He wouldn't have to upgrade the entire network. That is the point of the GP. He can keep all his old stuff on 802.11g and by an 802.11n access point that plugs into the g router. Voila, everything works.

Re:What's the point of a new wireless-G one?

[anwaya]

The problem is how to use the same "free" radio frequency (2.4 GHz) both for "b/g" and "n" without interferencing

* SLAP *

Seconded.

Re:What's the point of a new wireless-G one?

[Anonymous Coward]

If the router is open source friendly does it matter if the spec isn't finished? Is the spec going to affect the needed hardware or is it just a software thing?

Re:What's the point of a new wireless-G one?

[macslas'hole]

I run a dual-router setup on my home network. I've got a Linksys WRT54Gv4 running Tomato alongside an Apple Airport Extreme.

I use a WRT54GL running Tomato (love that QoS for VOIP while torrenting) and an Apple Time Capsule in basically the same setup (802.11b is on for old powerbook). Also works great.

Re:What's the point of a new wireless-G one?

[Anonymous Coward]

Asus WL-500W

Re:What's the point of a new wireless-G one?

[Anonymous Coward]

Here's the download page for the GPL'ed source for the 802.11N Asus WL-500W:

http://support.asus.com/download/download.aspx?SLanguage=en-us&model=WL-500W

Re:What's the point of a new wireless-G one?

[houstonbofh]

802.11n operates on 5Ghz as well.

It's time to start ditching backward compatibility. Every refresh of the 802.11 spec does not have to have backward compatibility.

I provide the WiFi in hotels. I generally put between 10 and 15 APs in, and guess what I will use if that is the case? The old standard most guests have. Hell, some hotels still have 802.11b in them. Slightly better range than G, and still faster than the pipe they have. So if you loose backwards compatibility, I hope you don't want to use any hotspots.

Re:What's the point of a new wireless-G one?

[Tumbleweed]

I provide the WiFi in hotels.

Oh, YOU'RE the guy.

Don't let me find you.

Re:What's the point of a new wireless-G one?

[amorsen]

All the vendors of draft-N equipment promise that their equipment can be upgraded to the standard when the standard is ready. Now, that happens to be true if that particular vendors implementation ends up being close to the standard. However, the implementations are different enough that it's unlikely that they can find a way for ALL vendors to keep their promise.

As long as no standard emerges, noone has to make product recalls.

Re:What's the point of a new wireless-G one?

[devjj]

News flash: in most enterprise environments, transitions happens gradually. It is perfectly feasible to phase in and phase out new and old APs respectively.

Ditto on Tumbleweed above me, by the way.

Re:What's the point of a new wireless-G one?

[zolf13]

IEEE 802.11 in general has 3 independent layers:

• LLC - logical link control (connecting to access points, handover, encryption, ...)
• MAC - an algorithm to share the same radio channel among many terminals (users)
• PHY - physical transmission (modulation, coding, EM signal spreading, timer values, ...)

Magic letters mark the extensions of the original standard. And a/b/g (and new 'n') extensions define only the PHY part that is done in hardware.
MAC implementation has very strict operating requirements (response delay to various events at level of 10 microseconds or lower) so it is also implemented in hardware (or FPGA, or any "chipset").
The part that you are concerned about is the LLC (partly done in hardware, partly done in OS). Linux must have a way to configure it to use available features (including WEP/WPA). And we are back to the problem of Linux drivers and chipset manufacturers that ignore Linux.
Solution: use cards with Linux-friendly chipsets (Ralink, Intel, Atheros) and you may have working WEP.

Re:What's the point of a new wireless-G one?

[yabos]

I have the same setup. AEBS does the N network and I can consistently get 14MBytes/s syncing to my AppleTV over it on 5 GHz which is great for wireless. I turned on wide channels which got me that huge speed boost from about 5MB/s.

Re:What's the point of a new wireless-G one?

[sunderland56]

It's time to start ditching backward compatibility. Every refresh of the 802.11 spec does not have to have backward compatibility.

You mean in the same way that 802.11b was backward compatible with 802.11a?

Re:What's the point of a new wireless-G one?

[bill_mcgonigle]

Here in 2008, I'm only interested in Free Software-friendly 802.11 N routers. Anybody know of any?

I needed to find an openwrt-capable n/a/g/b device that could run on PoE for a project. I was able to find zero (0) devices available that meet that spec. Buffalo had some but the Aussie government has shut them down over software patent issues.

Any citizens of Australia here who wouldn't mind casting aspersions that way, please cast one for me.

Re:What's the point of a new wireless-G one?

[tlhIngan]

The problem is how to use the same "free" radio frequency (2.4 GHz) both for "b/g" and "n" without interferencing

* SLAP *

Seconded.

Uh, the 802.11 spec already accommodates this using the "virtual carrier" (a timer set by a packet that basically says "the medium is busy for X microseconds).

In fact, it's funny people believe 802.11 gear "interfere" with each other. They actually cooperate. If they interfered, everyone's signal would be such a horrendous mess of noise that the only way you could get a signal was to be right beside the accesspoint.

Instead, the IEEE team realize that during the creation of the 802.11 (1/2Mbps original spec) that new technologies might make it possible to have faster networking, but that the gear already deployed should be able to cope with that. Since the new modulation schemes might not be compatible with the old schemes (and thus detectable by old receivers), they have a "virtual carrier" to basically say "the medium is busy, even though you can't tell" in the header packet.

It's also why the headers are normally sent at 1/2Mbps, but I believe in 802.11g, they can use "fast headers" where they're sent at G rates. Until they detect a legacy device (B or no designation) which they then enable slow headers again ("g protection" mode) so the legacy devices won't try to interfere.

And this is for all devices that a receiver can pick up - regardless of if they're on the same network as you. So back in the days when everyone was running "G only" mode to avoid the slow headers, it was mostly a moot point since a singla B device on the same channel, regardless of whether they're on the same network, automatically enables it.

Same thing will happen with 802.11n. Because your neighbor might have his accesspoint right next to your computer, and if you decided to interfere with his accesspoint, he might buy a new one that interferes horribly with your N network (if you're lucky, he'll upgrade. If not, he'll buy some cheap sale crap).

Sure it's nice when you can toss out all the legacy crap, but that legacy crap is what keeps everyone happy. Sure you get slower speeds, but would you rather have high speeds but be limited to 15 feet of the accesspoint, or lower speeds, but actually have useful mobility? The practical upshot is your non-legacy N gear will hurt your neighbor's WiFi, who'll get someone to install another accesspoint, or a repeater, and another one, and another one... then someone will introduce higher-powered radios...

Re:What's the point of a new wireless-G one?

[rootooftheworld]

they can spend all the time they want, just get rid of the unrealisticaly low RF power limit, and IEEE 802.11g will serve us well for years to come, besides it would then be intruiging as a cheap last-mile infrastructure for small ISPs.
</acidblotter>

Problems...

[Darkness404]

It always seems that whenever a company releases something open-source they have to make at least one component proprietary. As this allows Open-WRT to be installed on it perhaps it is really open, but just about every device that uses something open-source has something that makes it hard to install something new on it or they don't use a 100% open source OS (examples, N800, EEE PC, TiVo, etc)

Re:Problems...

[wellingj]

I think Gumstix are so popular precisely because they are completely open.

Re:Problems...

[mrsteveman1]

Well, in some cases its to protect DRM systems, like TiVo.

Probably similar problems with phones, they have to lock phones to a provider somehow with the ones that are subsidized.

Re:Problems...

[KGIII]

(Not intentionally trolling...) But, "so popular" with whom, for what? When I saw this thread I opened it thinking (I was being optimistic) that I'd find people in here debating all the great things that they'd do with it. I scrolled through and, well, I came across your post (and clicked even the link in your signature) because you said something was "so popular" and it was something I'd never heard of before. It turns out that I had seen them via another link or an industry magazine, or at least I think so, but I I don't recall the brand name. I don't recall them being used widely. I don't recall them at all really. So, well, I'm curious as to what they're so popular with or with whom they are so popular. (And yes, I'm legitimately curious.)

Re:Problems...

[houstonbofh]

It always seems that whenever a company releases something open-source they have to make at least one component proprietary. As this allows Open-WRT to be installed on it perhaps it is really open, but just about every device that uses something open-source has something that makes it hard to install something new on it or they don't use a 100% open source OS (examples, N800, EEE PC, TiVo, etc)

EEE PC? You mean this EEE PC running Ubuntu right here? It can't do that? Hmmm... Well I better stop altering reality then...

Re:Problems...

[mrmeval]

I'd buy a Make controller or the new megarduino or one of several CPLD and FPGA play toys available and have money left over for so Icanhascheeseburger.

srsly expensive stuff those gumshoe boys are hawking.

Re:Problems...

[Darkness404]

EEE PC? You mean this EEE PC running Ubuntu right here? It can't do that? Hmmm... Well I better stop altering reality then...

Well, considering that the stock Ubuntu distro doesn't contain drivers for the Wi-Fi card on the EEE... I would call that part of my "hard to install a different OS" post. It is like saying that you can install OS X on any computer... It just is very hard.

Re:Problems...

[Anonymous Coward]

Look at the atheros wifi/lan cards. No specs, no support for the wifi (except a very very big patch).

Yes, you can run ubuntu and alike on it. With a specially baked kernel, of course, which sucks.

Nasty bugs in both DDWRT & Tomato

[Anonymous Coward]

I have two WRT54GL, having spiritually bought into the whole "open source aftermarket firmware" thing.

DDWRT has a long-standing bug/issue where it drops all the settings on poweroff for SOME people SOME of the time. Its not a problem until it happens to YOU. Devs don't seem interested in fixing it, but its the only aftermarket firmware with the issue.

I like Tomato, and am using it now. However, I have several devices that won't connect to it. Weird, huh? Tried other firmwares & other situations, only Tomato gives me problems.

I'm gonna try X-wrt next.

I like the momentum & featureset of DDWRT the most, but if it doesn't work, it doesn't work....

Wonderful!

[Nethead]

Now we can use vastly superior ROT13 encryption instead of that lame WEP stuff.

Re:Wonderful!

[song-of-the-pogo]

everyone knows ROT13 is easily cracked. those of us in the know have long since switched to the much more robust ROT26.

Re:Wonderful!

[Ocker3]

pity noone figured out what you meant, 's good joke

Re:Wonderful!

[ChrisMP1]

Dammit! None of the mods had a clue what you were talking about, and I just blew my last modpoint.

Mod parent Funny.

ROT13. Second paragraph of Usage section explains ROT26.

Losing Marketshare to Linksys

[MBCook]

So they finally decided to stop handing the Linux tweakable router market to Linksys/Cisco, huh? Let's see, how long did that take?

According to Wikipedia, Linksys cut hardware back on their routers and released the hackable WRT54GL in 2005. So they've done nothing but ignore this market for nearly 4 years.

Took someone else long enough.

Re:Losing Marketshare to Linksys

[Fallen Kell]

Dude, Linksys routers were SHIPPED with linux originally back in 2002. Yes, the "L" version came out in 2005, the only reason there is an "L" version is because after v3 of the WRT54G, Linksys removed 1/2 the memory and switched to a proprietary firemware and not open source because they were threatened with lawsuits due to the original versions and not fully complying at first with release of the source code. They felt they had given up too many secrets of how their hardware worked when they had to release the source code in compliance with the GPL, and also wanted to cut production costs. The "L" version was really just a WRT54G version 3 hardware, which they then priced a lot higher...

Re:Losing Marketshare to Linksys

[scuba_steve_1]

I love that router...and have three running Tomato at home - two configured as bridges. Regardless of what anyone says about Linksys, I'll give them props for coming out with the GL and keeping it out there just for the geeks. They are ROCK solid with Tomato.

I would also love to see the N spec go final...and then see a Tomato-supported N router hit the market. G is getting a little long in the tooth to stream video in my place.

Re:Losing Marketshare to Linksys

[houstonbofh]

The "L" version was really just a WRT54G version 3 hardware, which they then priced a lot higher...

And weren't they surprised when it still sold well. Hint... There is a market for open stuff. Some of those folks will even pay more for it!

Re:Losing Marketshare to Linksys

[Anonymous Coward]

After WRT54G version 4. WRT54G version 4 is essentially the same hardware as WRT54GL version 1.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wrt54gl

Re:Losing Marketshare to Linksys

[Andy Dodd]

You know, I recall Netgear has had a Linux-based "Open Source" router (In fact, this very model IIRC.) for at least a year or two.

But there was little to no support for it, no community, and no information. It seemed then to be just lip service to the whole open source concept. Not sure what's different now.'

Given my past experience with Netgear hardware (I was a fan for a while, but I have since seen the light), I'll stick with Buffalo, or while Buffalo is dealing with patent trolls, Linksys.

Re:Losing Marketshare to Linksys

[Andy Dodd]

This is not true. Linksys switched to VxWorks not because of lawsuits (otherwise why continue with the GL?), but because it was perceived to have a lower memory footprint than Linux, with the license cost being less than the cost of the "extra" hardware needed to run Linux. Of course, the DD-WRT crew proved them wrong after a few months by trimming down their distro to fit in the reduced-memory devices while retaining as much functionality as the stock firmware.

no USB?

[speedtux]

Come on, guys, put four USB ports on there and then we're talking. Without it, it's really limited.

Re:no USB?

[larry bagina]

and only 16 MB ram. I can't find the CPU specs.

Re:no USB?

[Nossie]

and no gigabit ethernet? wake me up when I can get a netgear adsl wireless n+ router with fricking gigabit ethernet!

open source or not I'd buy it :(

Re:no USB?

[pipatron]

What? And no PCIe? Please. No SATA???? What do they think it is? A frikkin accesspoint or something?

Re:no USB?

[Daimanta]

And no monitor included? No printer function either?

I'm not going to buy this piece of shit.

Re:no USB?

[Anonymous Coward]

The high-performance WGR614L, which is "Works with Windows Vista" certified, features a 240 MHz MIPS32 CPU core with 16 KB of instruction cache, 16 KB of data cache, 1 KB of pre-fetch cache, and incorporates 4 MB of flash memory and 16 MB of RAM. In addition to an external 2 dBi antenna, the WGR614L integrates a second internal diversity antenna to provide enhanced performance and range.

Re:no USB?

[coaxial]

16mb is a ton for something like that.

Try something new.

Re:no USB?

[Anonymous Coward]

Less space than a Nomad? Fuck these guys.

Re:no USB?

[Jesus_666]

And no decent graphics chipset, not even a GMA950! Given the fact that AMD is now actively contributing to the OSS Radeon drivers, there's no excuse for not building an HD4850 into the router.

Re:no USB?

[Grishnakh]

Is this some kind of joke? What the hell do you need USB for? The only thing a wireless access point and router needs is 1) an input ethernet port, for connecting to your cable/DSL modem, 2) 4 output ethernet ports, for connecting to your wired machines (including printer), and 3) antennae for your wireless devices.

I do tend to agree with the other reply to this; any newer router needs gigabit ports on the output. It's pretty annoying that all my machines have GbE, but can only talk to each other at 100 Mb/s because of the router they're connected through (which admittedly is an older model). If Netgear or someone else released an open-source-friendly wireless router with 802.1n and GbE ports for the internal network, that would probably be attractive enough to me to decide to upgrade from my current D-Link. As it is, just being open-source-friendly isn't quite enough to get me to upgrade; as long as my current router works, I don't have much to complain about. Unfortunately, my D-Link barely works right: I'm unable to upgrade the firmware to the newer versions, because then it won't allow wirelessly-connected devices to access my JetDirect-connected HP printer. I've emailed D-Link about it and they don't care.

Re:no USB?

[LarsG]

What the hell do you need USB for?

If it had 802.11n and a 4-port GigE switch I wouldn't complain, but the current hardware spec on this thing makes it just a clone of the good old wrt54gl. It is really nothing new or exciting at all, just a clone of a Linksys product.

Now, with some USB ports you can do all sorts of additional stuff. External harddisks. Printers. Scanners. NAS for your home network. uPnP media server. Network printer/scanner server. Look up all the things people have been using NSLU2s for and then imagine a device that has the capabilities of both the 54GL and the NSLU2.

Re:no USB?

[_Sharp'r_]

What the hell do you need USB for?

I don't personally, but some people use the USB port on their router to connect a PC to it, so they've been coming that way for years.

I think a more useful feature on this model would be to use a USB port to connect an external USB storage enclosure and turn it into a NAS as a bonus. With a Linux OS, that'd be pretty easy to configure.

Re:no USB?

[Thrashing Rage]

Actually there is instructions on their website on how to solder a USB cable to the router. This is shown for recovery purposes.

http://www.myopenrouter.com/article/10341/Recover-Your-WGR614L-Using-a-Serial-Console-Windows/

Probably not exactly what you want but, its nice there is already instructions (in case) you brick it.

Re:no USB?

[Minwee]

That's a serial console. The fact that USB was involved is just a coincidence.

Re:no USB?

[evilviper]

I think a more useful feature on this model would be to use a USB port to connect an external USB storage enclosure and turn it into a NAS as a bonus. With a Linux OS, that'd be pretty easy to configure.

Easy enough to configure, but sure to max-out the low-speed CPU in the router instantly.

Packetizing data at full 100Mbps uses serious CPU time, which this box doesn't have. And if you want any kind of security for the data, like SFTP accesses, just forget the whole thing.

If you want a SAN, grab an old computer. Don't try to force a router into a file server role.

Re:no USB?

[McNally]

Is this some kind of joke? What the hell do you need USB for?

For just a moment, don't think of it as a router. Think of it as a low-power-consumption custom Linux server with a certain amount of RAM and a certain amount of flash storage. Now think about other options for such a device -- perhaps as a SAMBA file server or a CUPS print server. I'd even like to see it with an audio output so I could hook it to a stereo ala Apple's Aiport Express -- I'm sure someone would soon have a pretty good UPnP media server software project well underway -- but if they don't want to build audio in USB would at least leave it open as an option.

Apple's got several successful products (Time Capsule & Airport Express) that exist in the "wireless access point plus more" realm. A moderately-priced decent-build-quality piece of hardware with fair extension capabilities via open-source firmware has some pretty fascinating potential.

Re:no USB?

[afidel]

Uh, it's a low power linux box that happens to run with a web configuration page and some iptables magic. Hanging some storage and/or a printer off it makes perfect sense. I've done both, the storage for nearline backup (I have Mozy but I'd rather not pay for DVD's or wait forever to download my backups if my HDD simply dies, Mozy's more there in case the house burns down.) Simply handing the printer off the wireless router saved me enough in the first year to pay for the router (previously I had it hanging off an old Athlon XP workstation that ate power).

Re:no USB?

[afidel]

Hahahaha, you think a multi-hundred mhz cpu can't saturate a 100Mb line, I did it with a 66Mhz pentium. Also you save a TON on power by using a low power device like these as a low volume file server. I wouldn't hang an entire office off one, but they have more horesepower than most of the fileservers had when I started in the industry, and we made those work somehow =)

Re:no USB?

[Anonymous Coward]

It is a computer, why shouldn't it have USB? If it can run Linux-based firmware you can hack it to stream video from a webcam, work as an open FTP server with a USB storage device, or a print server with a USB printer.

Or you could connect one of those Huawei USB 3G modems to get a mobile wireless internet access point. That's what we do in our family's summer cabin where we don't have ethernet, DSL or even a regular phone connection. Just plug in the modem and turn on the router and everyone can use their laptops at the same time, anywhere within 100 meters. Works like a charm.

Re:no USB?

[TomC2]

I believe there are a handful of consumer routers out there that can also use their USB port as a printer server, which could be handy.

Re:no USB?

[wtom]

If you use openwrt, you don't just have an access point. You have a surprisingly capable Linux-based computer. There are hundreds, and maybe thousands of packages for openwrt. For a $99.00 router plus a $20.00 flash drive, you get an amazingly flexible little linux box.

I have over 30 OpenWRT boxes in the wild, out at my customers' sites. They act as WAPs, VPN endpoints, stateful packet filtering firewall, NAT, usb print server, usb external drive smb shares, testing points (nmap, tcpdump, ngrep), and the list goes on. A similarly functional device from cisco would be thousands of dollars. For a small business running a single T1, DSL, or cable internet, it is the best thing going.

Re:no USB?

[corellen]

This is why I use a 8 port GbE switch, connect it to the router and everything else to the switch gives me gig speeds for lan transfers and since 100Mb/s is more than my cable link its more than good enough for out bound traffic.

Re:no USB?

[speedtux]

Is this some kind of joke? What the hell do you need USB for? The only thing a wireless access point and router needs is 1) an input ethernet port, for connecting to your cable/DSL modem, 2) 4 output ethernet ports, for connecting to your wired machines (including printer), and 3) antennae for your wireless devices.

The point of having something like this run Linux is so that it can be modified and used for other purposes.

What do people plug into those USB ports? Disk drives, printers, wifi interfaces, card readers, webcams, usb drives, point-and-shoots, sensors, anything you plug into a desktop.

Look at the NSLU pages, since you're obviously too stupid to figure out why a $70 device running Linux is more useful with USB ports than without. And the extra USB ports don't cost much. Many companies already have them on their wireless routers, so why not this one?

I do tend to agree with the other reply to this; any newer router needs gigabit ports on the output.

Yeah, you would, because you don't have a clue what people are using these for. Gigabit would be nice, but USB is much, much more important for a hackable router.

As it is, just being open-source-friendly isn't quite enough to get me to upgrade; as long as my current router works, I don't have much to complain about. Unfortunately, my D-Link barely works right: I'm unable to upgrade the firmware to the newer versions, because then it won't allow wirelessly-connected devices to access my JetDirect-connected HP printer. I've emailed D-Link about it and they don't care.

I'm not surprised. They probably concluded, like I did, that there is a PBKC.

Re:no USB?

[Anonymous Coward]

Usb is great for people who have a USB printer they want shared on their network, without the need to have a PC acting as a print server.

That being said, i did install NFS on my Asus Wl-500G/OpenWRT box to share a usb stick and it's quite a cool feature to have. I didn't benchmark performance because i had no real reason to use it.. it was just cool to do (made me feel all warm and geeky inside)..

Re:no USB?

[Dark_Gravity]

and no gigabit ethernet?

If you can afford a gigabit internet connection, then you can certainly afford better than a consumer grade WAP.

Re:no USB?

[Nossie]

which part of the above post did I remotely mention gigabit internet? hmmm... lets see.. how about NONE ????

so your point is full of shit, some people do have internal networks.

Re:no USB?

[Nossie]

oh come on... how hard would it be to add a gigabitE switch to this?

http://netgear.com/Products/RoutersandGateways/RangeMaxNEXTWirelessRoutersandGateways/DG834NB.aspx

its not exactly fricking rocket science.

so ha ha fucking ha all you people saying "And no monitor included? No printer function either?" but the reality of it all is they just don't want to cannibalize their current switches.

http://www.cisco.com/en/US/prod/collateral/routers/ps5855/product_data_sheet0900aecd8016a8e8.html

yep... like I need one of those.

Truth is, I had a netgear gigabit switch.... and I managed to fry it AFTER a thunderstorm by plugging the power of the adsl router into the switch by accident
http://kbserver.netgear.com/products/DG834Gv1.asp

Its one of the older models that required a higher voltage than the poor switch :(

That was one or two years ago now... and I've been dying to replace it with gigabitE again but I cant help but feel Netgear (and the rest) will shortly replace the crappy 10/100 hub with gigabitE

http://netgear.com/Products/RoutersandGateways/RangeMaxNEXTWirelessRoutersandGateways.aspx

Look at the above products... really? how hard would it be? I'd really rather not have to go back to two devices... and I'm sure if I did right now I'd get burned lol

Re:no USB?

[rootooftheworld]

USB? for flashdrives etc. OK, but HDD need SATA/FireWire or something speedier. i hurd that FireW S3200 had Cat5 support, so a tweak at the chipset or maybe firmware would make it into a great near-enterprise NAS thingy (how hard would it be to retrofit some firewire external enclosures to use Cat5, hmm..). But i have to agree, USB would be awesome on these things, and we'll always love'em, at least until they release desktops/laptops with ARM/MIPS CPUs...
Ny $0.02

Older hardware is cheaper, its on the shelf

[gelfling]

Netgear doesn't make money on firmware. They make money selling routers. So if this sells more routers, then fine. But don't look to them to start cannibalizing their sales of Super-G, MiMo or N routers to sell more older on the shelf gear. 614 routers are themselves, fairly old probably as old internally as Linksys open routers. All they did was tweak the gear slightly in light of cheaper hardware now vs 3 years ago.

BTW, I LOVED my 624v3 Super-G Netgear router, for the 12 months it lasted. Then last month the wireless piece of it conked out. I replaced it with an 824v2 with all internal diversity antennas so the fact that Netgear cheaped out and never built replaceable antenna couplings is moot.

Re:Older hardware is cheaper, its on the shelf

[noidentity]

Netgear doesn't make money on firmware. They make money selling routers. So if this sells more routers, then fine.

What about companies that sell two versions of the same hardware, charging more for the one with uncrippled software? They hate for people to be able to put software sometimes better than even the uncrippled software on them.

Re:Older hardware is cheaper, its on the shelf

[gelfling]

Yeah but with routers it's a straight trade off between RAM and ROM size and manufacturing cost. I bet Netgear and Linksys have or had warehouses full of these older G routers or, they had very long job contracts with Solectron and similar spec manufacturing companies. They have to use the inventory or the production runs and it's probably cheaper to tweak the hardware a little bit to accommodate Tomato etc than it is to write off the bulk of it. And, if all goes well they instill a little goodwill with the hobby community and get a peak into some of the requested features they don' deliver.

Hell, if they play their cards right, commodity routers could all be sold w/o any firmware at all and Netgear and Linksys could save dollars (or Yuan) not having to develop it or support it all. I've often wondered why they would even bother creating v1, v2, v3 and so on of what is essentially the same hardware with the same features and performance if they didn't have to worry about hardware requirements versioning.

I think they already tried this once...

[DaMoisture]

The KWGR614 was the single worst router I have ever used. VPN, chat, P2P, and any other application that required other than port 80 never worked, it liked to drop connections for no reason, and has received not a single firmware update to date. At least Newegg was nice enough to give me my money back so I could buy a Linksys. The only success it achieved was setting the bar extremely low for this new open source offering.

Re:I think they already tried this once...

[bobbozzo]

My dad has a Netgear that looks like that; it constantly overheats and completely drops wifi connections (ethernet works fine).

Ventilating it and adding some aluminum fins onto the main chip helped only somewhat.

I wonder, is this new one any better?

Re:I think they already tried this once...

[jchawk]

I had trouble with my Netgear wireless router... It would work fine for a few days then would stop accepting new connections.

I upgraded to the latest firmware and haven't had any trouble since...

If you haven't already tried, it's probably worth a shot!

Re:I think they already tried this once...

[radoni]

I too bought a KWGR614 on the premise that it was open source licensed firmware code. It was like selling a budget level automobile without brakes. "Here, these are the blueprints for everything except the brakes, why don't you design those yourself?"

The default firmware was awful (from a user perspective), and no OpenWRT nor DD-WRT developers are interested in going near its SoC processor. Everything at the time it was released had been based on the Broadcom CPU and Linksys firmware.

We have developers and an interest in Linux-on-wifi-router today because the Linksys firmware is user friendly. This isn't the ground-up approach some Free Software or Linux fantasies are made of. The product would have sold well with or without Linux compatibility. The WRT54G worked well and could be modified, and this fact sold many extra units of product, leading to a new market of firmware-modding buyers.

It's not exactly exciting for Netgear to be releasing this new Linux-friendly product this year. Keep in mind that their last such product was a certifiable failure. This time around they have learned from a past mistake, and promise compatibility with existing "mainstream" firmwares (DD-WRT, Tomato).

What is exciting IMO is that this move further helps to legitimize small Linux-based projects in existing techie business applications. In markets where you depend on products being available 5-10+ years for purchase, shopping for the cheapest / fastest Linux compatible wifi router hardware "flavor of the month" is not an option. The specs of this router are not the important factor here! It is most important that Netgear is offering a long-term product and is accepted by the businesses who rely on repeat purchases, of a Linux-compatible wifi product.

Re:I think they already tried this once...

[canUbeleiveIT]

As with motherboards, this is what you get in the price-is-the-only-factor world of consumer-level computer or network equipment. I install shitloads of these things and every brand is just as inconsistent. In the last year, I have had bad/malfunctioning units from the following:
* Netgear
* D-Link
* Linksys (never again)
* ZyXEL (I used to love them more than life itself)
* Hawking
* Belkin

The fact is that they're all shit and they all have an unacceptable level of bad units.

Re:I think they already tried this once...

[nlogax]

I tried updating to the latest firmware, because it claimed to fix problems with "heavy bittorrent sessions" (where heavy must mean 1 or more active torrents). First attempt resulted in an out of memory message, second attempt seemed to be successful, but now the admin interface doesn't work at all. Apart from that, it seems to work a little better, I hope the owners never try to use the admin interface.

Re:I think they already tried this once...

[Fred_A]

The KWGR614 was the single worst router I have ever used.

It's a shame with the catchy name and all.

Those things have even worse naming schemes than CPUs.

Re:I think they already tried this once...

[sideshow]

Yeah, I have that piece of shit as well. It got demoted to a wired switch after I got a Linksys off eBay and put DD-WRT on it.

Buffalo anyone?

[Anonymous Coward]

Hasn't Buffalo been shipping routers running DD-WRT for the longest time? Shouldn't we be supporting the people who were doing it the longest?

Re:Buffalo anyone?

[lscotte]

Uh, no... Buffalo stopped sales of all their wifi products as of November 2007 due to an injunction against them from Australia. Go Google for it, but you won't be buying a Buffalo wifi router anytime in the near future...

Re:Buffalo anyone?

[Anonymous Coward]

If we only support the people who are first to open up source, then there is no incentive for any company to open up once the first company has. Rather, we'd like to encourage any company to be more open, no matter their past behavior. There's enough love to go around.

Re:Buffalo anyone?

[darkmeridian]

I believe that CSIRO got an injunction to prevent patent infringement by the Buffalo routers so you can't buy these routers in the US anymore.

Re:Buffalo anyone?

[saleenS281]

Yes, and as a side benefit, they also had the strongest signal of any router I've tested. We sat it alongside a cisco with a high gain antenna, and the output from the buffalo was still stronger.

Unfortunately, as stated below, you cannot buy them new in the US retail. You can still find them on ebay though.

Re:Buffalo anyone?

[DeepZenPill]

For some time Buffalo was prohibited from selling 802.11a and 802.11g devices in the US due to legal issues, so their mindshare has been hurt a good deal by people who were forced to by the WRT54GL if they wanted a good DD-WRT compatible solution.

Re:Buffalo anyone?

[Hohlraum]

The don't ship routers anymore because of an injunction I believe.

http://www.buffalotech.com/press/releases/buffalo-issues-a-statement-about-the-csiro-appeal/

I have one of the DD-WRT compatible G routers. Its awesome! :)

Buffalo is banned in the US

[Anonymous Coward]

Some sort of patent/licensing dispute. I have one, with DD-WRT I installed myself, and it's great. I even made one for my parents to use.

Drop out?

[Walzmyn]

OK, I'm not a networking guy. (My nerd credientials fall in biology) but does this mean that my linux box would work better with this router?

Currently the wife's XP laptop will never drop off the wireless. If my Linux laptop is connect they will both drop about once a day. If I turn on my linux desktop which is wired in, the wireless laptops will drop out about once an hour.

Re:Drop out?

[WK2]

An open source router appeals to people because it is more customizable. They can add QOS, servers, etc. Any router should work fine with Linux, Windows, Mac, BSD, or any other OS that uses BSD-style networking (any modern OS).

Your problem comes from a crappy router. Perhaps a Netgear? They make a lot of crappy routers. About half of router crappiness is from software, and half is from hardware. If a crappy router is open source, you can fix the software part. But you still can't fix the hardware part.

I would recommend you plop $60 on a nice open source router. Perhaps a Linksys WRT54GL. Stay away from Netgear. I've heard good things about Buffalo, but have never actually used them. With the WRT54GL, you probably won't even need to mess with the default firmware, but it's an option. Linksys is pretty good quality.

Re:Drop out?

[Anonymous Coward]

You'll need an additional piece of hardware to iron things out.

N.B.: I'm not a networking guy either. (My nerd credentials fall in fire-fighting.) I hope that hardware helps though. It invariably does for me. ;-)

Re:Drop out?

[Walzmyn]

It is a linksys WRT54GX2. And the thing really does not like linux. but since you've mentioned it, i'm goin gto google around and see if there are some firmware hacks to make it work better. I've just upgraded the firmware recently and have the .bin so if I fook anything up really bad, I can just stick the "real" one back on. right? :)

Tomato and DD-WRT is not open nor free;use openWRT

[viking80]

Tomato is not really open source. It is open source except for the UI.
DD-WRT is just a branch of OpenWRT that costs money. It is free for home use however.

Use OpenWRt; It is open and free. If you want simplicity, use X-wrt, which is basically OpenWRT with a web based UI. It does not use the latest version of OpenWRT, but is very stable. It includes a smörgåsbord of modules to add with a simple mouse click.

Re:Tomato and DD-WRT is not open nor free;use open

[feld]

This is true, but there are modded Tomato firmwares floating about without Jon complaining. I've dontated to his project; I love Tomato. He deserves the right to keep control over the web ui, but I do agree that it detracts from making the firmware as free as it could be.

Invalidate warranty?

[Anonymous Coward]

Hmmm... " !!!! Opening The Router Housing or Putting In Any Customer
Software on The Router Will Void The Warranty On Your
Router!!!!"

WGR614L Open Source Guide V2

What does it mean by open source anyway? Could I install OpenBSD on this thing? I thought broadcom was one of those difficult manufacturers whose stuff had to be reverse engineered because there are no specs? They came around?

Speaking of which...

[Tubal-Cain]

Will current N routers get a firmware upgrade when the spec is finalized?

Re:Speaking of which...

[spikedvodka]

theoretically, YES...

The draft N spec includes language to ensure that they can be firmware upgraded

That's OK, this device isn't open either...

[msauve]

only some parts - it still uses the precompiled, no-source-code Broadcom binary.

It's also not new, so it's not clear why this is on /. now. It's marketing more than anything.

Re:That's OK, this device isn't open either...

[Anonymous Coward]

I too think so.

Netgear is correcting their screwup

[Hanzie]

Apparently a number of the new WGR614L router boxes got WGR614v9 routers instead.

This page:

WGR614L really a WG614v9?

talks about it.

May 16, 2008 3:36 PM Sean, I am the Product Line Manager for Wireless Products at NETGEAR and I apologize. Please do send me your contact information and I will send you a WGR614L version out immediately. There had been an issue with one of our distributors and a few V9 versions was shipped out by mistake. We have recalled, but I guess you were one of the unfortunate ones to get a V9. Again, I apologize. My email address is **DELETED** Please do send me your address. Regards -Som Pal Choudhury Senior Product Line Manager, Advanced Wireless NETGEAR Inc.

I removed his contact numbers and email address. They're on the page I linked to, and he really doesn't need a slashdot post of his vitals, he's got enough problems right now.

Nice to see Netgear's on the ball.

Apparently Netgear's guy responsible is personally taking care of the problem.

hanzie

Re:Netgear is correcting their screwup

[Anonymous Coward]

My email address is som.choudhury@netgear.com. Please do send me your address.

Regards

-Som Pal Choudhury
Senior Product Line Manager, Advanced Wireless
NETGEAR Inc.
Off: 408-367-7884
Cell: 408-910-2936

Re:Netgear is correcting their screwup

[Aspirax]

I am the Jason in that lengthy post. What an ordeal. I am anxious to get my WGR614L routers that according to two of their technical support agents... do not exist!

Dupe! Was previously posted as WRT54GL! ;-p

[LarsG]

The specs on this thing is suspiciously similar to the good old WRT54GL. Unless the price is lower, I really don't see what this thing brings to the table.

If it had just included a couple USB ports and upped the ram/flash a little bit, it would have improved the hackability considerably. Look at what people have been able to do with the NSLU2. With these fairly minor changes the WGR614L could supersede both the 54GL and NSLU2.

Re:Dupe! Was previously posted as WRT54GL! ;-p

[davolfman]

Perhaps because they are all based upon the same reference platform. What? You thought linksys actually had electrical engineers? Silly person.

Sir Bedevere And His First Government Contract

[smittyoneeach]

Sir Bedevere: There are ways of making this work:
On days whose name match "\w*a\w", we use the old 11b/g standard.
However, on days whose name match "\w*y", we use 11n.
Govvy: Splendid. You make this all sound so simple. How many Full Time Equivalents will this take to implement?
Sir Bedevere:Three-score and a fortnight, no more.
Govvy: This new learning amazes me, Sir Bedevere. Explain again how sheep's bladders may be employed to prevent earthquakes.

Woosh!

[Anonymous Coward]

n/t

Re:Tomato and DD-WRT is not open nor free;use open

[mpoulton]

MOD PARENT UP. I wish I had points. I used to be a rabid fan of DD-WRT, and I still believe it is the best firmware out there for the WRT series routers. However, the project leader (Brainslayer) has recently started to close source certain parts of the project, and it seems he is working to make it unusable in open-source form (i.e. requires proprietary code to function at all). Basically, he's pulling a Sveasoft move here and screwing a great number of the people who donated time and money to make the system work in the first place.

Later, Lead Coder Baldric Goes to Sir B.

[smittyoneeach]

Baldric: Sir Bedevere, there is a flaw in the regular expression used to match 11b/g days. "Saturday" will match early, just "A Minute Past" the end of Friday, when we decide which standard is more standard for the day.
Sir Bedevere: Can we use XML?
Baldric: I have a cunning plan. We will use UTF-8, and have our system include SÃturday, instead of Saturday, so that there won't be any ASCII 97 characters except in the penultimate position.
Sir Bedevere: Recall, Baldric, that I hired you away from Edmund Blackadder not to solve problems, but to maintain them. Your fix can go in, but you have to make sure that it ripples through the system and triggers at least twice as many problems, or we won't consume all our FTE.

Re:Later, Lead Coder Baldric Goes to Sir B.

[Anonymous Coward]

Holy shit you're not funny. Quit posting.

Re:Later, Lead Coder Baldric Goes to Sir B.

[smittyoneeach]

Regret if the joke was too close to home for you.

My Buffalo runs BSD

[Nick Driver]

I bought a Buffalo wifi router a couple years ago, when Worst Buy has them on clearance for $39. It runs stock firmware, which identifies itself as BSD based. The thing works flawlessly. I wish I had a couple more of them.

so, is it cheaper ?

[bugs2squash]

Don't get me wrong, I appreciate being given permission to hack the device and having a door left open. But really - if it is not cheaper then what value does netgear place on their own firmware ?

Re:so, is it cheaper ?

[WK2]

The value of proprietary firmware, assuming that the open source version can do everything the proprietary can do, is 0. If their open source offerings were the same price as the proprietary offerings, would you really choose the proprietary over the open source?

That being said, in a possible future where router manufacturers no longer decide to maintain their own firmwares, routers might be cheaper.

Really?

[Velorium]

About fucking time. Now only if they get some USB dongles out too that have drivers Linux compatible that don't use two to three different chipsets under the same product name. My WG111v2 works great on XP but is terribly hard to get a consistent connection on linux with no open-source drivers (Ubuntu works out of the box but will drop if too many packets come through at a time or something. Seems whenever I do anything data intensive it gets angry with me.)

broadcom firmware?

[Anonymous Coward]

Does it still use broadcom chipset? If so, it is not really open sourced (neither is WRT54GL), since the wireless firmware is totally closed behind the door.

About time...

[hyc]

I think they're just acknowledging that they can't write firmware to save their lives. I had a WG602 that would always lock up after a few days of use; the lockups would happen sooner after big ftp/scp sessions. Basically the damn thing had a memory leak. Updating to the latest firmware didn't help; I finally replaced it with a Linksys.

(Oh yeah, and they also promised upgradability to 802.1x WPA when I bought it, and never released a firmware update with WPA support.) AFA I'm concerned, this is the smartest decision they could possibly make. Now they don't have to bother with fake promises of future firmware upgrades, they can just leave it to their customers to upgrade at will. And people buying these routers won't have to put up with buggy firmware without any recourse.

Of course I still think it's too late; I've completely sworn off ever buying Netgear again and have stuck to Linksys...

Re:About time...

[Anonymous Coward]

I had a WG602 that would always lock up after a few days of use; the lockups would happen sooner after big ftp/scp sessions. Basically the damn thing had a memory leak. Updating to the latest firmware didn't help; I finally replaced it with a Linksys.

Indeed, I used to have a Netgear router - a FVS318v1, that gave me nothing but trouble. There was apparently a bug in the DHCP client so my ISP kept dropping the connection on me, and not long after I bought mine the FVS318v3 hit the shelves. The v3 had a MIPS processor unlike the earlier models which were equipped with ARM's, so Netgear, in their infinite wisdom, dropped support for the earlier models and hasn't shipped an updated firmware for them ever since. Basically screwing us who bought the older ones and killing any hope of us ever getting fixes we needed. The FVS318v1 was also one of the slowest routers I've ever used; maxing out at 200-300KB/s, no - I'm not kidding (the v3 had MUCH better performance from what I hear).

My experience suggests that Netgear occasionally produces some quality hardware but the firmware is often the buggiest POS you can imagine. The ONE thing that Netgear is superb at is CASINGS, man do I love to hold a Netgear with their sturdy metal casings, but from the looks of things they're switching over to plastic on the consumer level and they're ugly as hell. The plastic WGR614L casing seems to be standard for cheapo Netgears these days.

It's ironic really, because I also switched to Linksys (WRT54GL, running Tomato) after my Netgear experience and in spite of the WRT54GL being butt ugly - it has served me well. In fact, it has been one of the best consumer router I have ever owned.

Re:About time...

[Scumbumbo]

I think you've hit the nail on the head here. After countless problems with their WG302 series access points and several models of switches, coupled with abysmal customer support we've not only completely sworn off NetGear where I work but have budgeted to replace all of our NetGear equipment en masse this fiscal year.

Re:About time...

[delt0r]

Well I have just been configuring my WGR614v6. If you set your network up the way they planed, it works fine. But if you do something different then you are out of luck. For example you can't change/turn of NAT or the firewall and there is no telnet interface, so you have to hack it work with a already present home network. All the hacks out there didn't work for me and so I have a 50 euro piece of junk. I can't see this being enough really.

I will never get netgear again.

Re:About time...

[Hemogoblin]

I've also sworn off Netgear after using their shitty WGT624 for three years. I can't count the number of times that it has locked up. I wouldn't use a Netgear product even if I was given it for FREE.

Re:About time...

[Insightfill]

I think they're just acknowledging that they can't write firmware to save their lives.

Agreed. I had one of the original 802.11b ME102 wifi access points that Netgear had out there, and they sat on the whole "40 bit encryption" pot for way too long. Incompatibilities of the wifi admin software with Windows 2000 was the final straw. I flashed it with the Linksys firmware (identical chipset, 128-bit WEP) and used the Linksys admin software, and never went back.

Nice!

[ProfessionalCookie]

Late to the game, but quite welcome! Also see Ubiquity.

Cheers, Ed

Re:Tomato and DD-WRT is not open nor free;use open

[Anonymous Coward]

Fork it? Is he violating the GPL? Is there a page about this? I use DD-WRT because it is awesome. I've heard whispers about what you say, but never seen anything concrete on it.

maybe some kind soul will write an autoconfig api

[sneakyimp]

I know it's probably a big fat security risk, but I've always thought it would be great if a router could be auto-configured to open the ports necessary to run an MMOG or other application rather than having to visit a site like port-forward.com.

saturday night funnies

[LordMyren]

wanna see something funny? try their hardware specs page. yeaaah we can definitely turn that into a great open source router.

Re:saturday night funnies

[LordMyren]

wrong fucking topic my bad

open source firmware bricked my router.

[elucido]

Here in 2008, I'm only interested in Free Software-friendly 802.11 N routers. Anybody know of any?

anyone know how to fix it?

Too little memory! No USB ports!

[cciRRus]

incorporates 4 MB of flash memory and 16 MB of RAM.

The problem I have with my WRT54G hardware version 4 is the lack of storage space. It has 4MB of flash memory for the system files as well as for storing my photos and webpages. 4MB of flash is clearly insufficient.

To make matters worse, there are no USB ports available for connecting external USB storage devices as secondary storage. Argh!

Then I saw this Slashdot article. I thought, "this could be it!" To my disappointment, this is just as (in-)capable as my current box. Sigh.

There's are two good contenders though... Asus WL-500G and Asus WL-500G Deluxe.

Re:Too little memory! No USB ports!

[Fred_A]

The problem I have with my WRT54G hardware version 4 is the lack of storage space. It has 4MB of flash memory for the system files as well as for storing my photos and webpages.

I can see how this can be a problem. Not to mention that it probably won't be enough to run Duke Nukem Forever when it comes out.

Oh, wait, it's a router, not a NAS or a terminal server !

Re:Too little memory! No USB ports!

[cciRRus]

Why should a router provide wireless access? Well, it can be useful at times. Not all, but to some users, this is useful. Why should a router come with QoS? Again, its not always useful to everyone.

If you look at the typical NAT device available in the market, you'll find that it has evolved into a multifunctional device. Essentially, a router is a server. If it could support new functionalities that are useful to the user, I don't see why not.

I can't say for you, but I'm a techie and I'd like to save electricity. If I could run my webserver on a low-power Internet gateway if it had USB ports or had more flash memory, that would really be good.

Re:Too little memory! No USB ports!

[larry bagina]

with a couple USB ports and 64 meg of ram (or 32 + swap), it could also do SAMBA, NFS, SSH, LAMP, SMTP, ... a very useful multipurpose, low power device.

Netgear rep contact info

[Hanzie]

Can a moderator or two give a +1 informative to the parent of this post, please?

The below contact info was posted by an AC whom I believe to be the Netgear gentleman in question.

Here it is again (because lots of folks will never see an AC post)

My email address is som.choudhury@netgear.com. Please do send me your address. Regards -Som Pal Choudhury Senior Product Line Manager, Advanced Wireless NETGEAR Inc. Off: 408-367-7884 Cell: 408-910-2936

Mr. Choudhury, I recommend registering for an account here and posting. If you don't, someone else will.

Thank you very much for proactively working to fix the problem. It gives me confidence that your company's equipment might be worth trying.

hanzie.

How about some BSD-based open source routers?

[Brett Glass]

I'd really like to have a turnkey, commercially built router with the security of OpenBSD, NetBSD, or FreeBSD. Given the business-unfriendliness of the latest version of the GPL, why aren't companies like Netgear moving to BSD? Or is it just a matter of time before they do?

Re:How about some BSD-based open source routers?

[saleenS281]

They may have already... thing is you wouldn't know it since they have no requirement to release any source.

Re:How about some BSD-based open source routers?

[Brett Glass]

If the router is intended to run open source, then of course they would release it. Also, it is not true that manufacturers are required to release all the source code that runs on a Linux-based router. They can have as many custom applications, provided without source, as they wish.

Re:How about some BSD-based open source routers?

[saleenS281]

They are required to release all code that is covered by the GPL. This would be why linksys ran into all the legal troubles they ran into. They were linking to the kernel with custom code and not releasing the code IIRC. The only thing they can keep from releasing are modules they build that aren't linked to the kernel.

You said you wished they'd build one that ran BSD... there is a TON of network gear out there today that runs on BSD that isn't open source. Just because it's built with open source software, doesn't mean the vendor has ANY interest in releasing their code.

Re:How about some BSD-based open source routers?

[mysidia]

I'd really like to have a turnkey, commercially built router with the security of OpenBSD, NetBSD, or FreeBSD.

A router built like a *BSD platform?

Sounds like Junipers' routers that run JunOS, such as the high-end T320. OS is based on *BSD (with proprietary changes, of course)

These aren't consumer-level units, naturally. *BSD kernels have many features that aren't needed (and therefore waste memory) in a consumer appliance.

Proprietary OSes like VxWorks-based implementations can be much leaner.

There are lower end units with just as much security as the *BSDs in the OS itself.

The OS of lower-end consumer units may be BSD based, but you'll never know, because access to a CLI is considered a high-end enterprise feature by most manufacturers, that adds a cost of many $$$ compared to cost of same device with just menu or web-based UI.

Security bugs in lean devices are likely to be in the GUI/web UI for managing the device, vendor add-ons, not the OS core, so much, which tried and true (proven) software may be used for.

It is not like they are running Windows -- but when the web GUI itself runs off the unit's kernel, with no requirement for the web page to authenticate to another OS component, any bug in the web UI/browser code leads to full control of the unit.

Re:maybe some kind soul will write an autoconfig a

[afidel]

Look into uPnP (universal plug and play/pray). It's horribly insecure both from a design standpoint and from the standpoint of most of the real world code being horribly sloppy, but it exists and is fairly well supported for opening up the required ports for applications from Windows. I personally turn it off on both the router and the client because it's been the source of TONS of critical security vulnerabilities.

And no FXS, Re:no USB?

[La Gris]

Add FXS interfaces and use it as an SIP to Analog phone gateway.

I'm still looking for a device capable of ADSL + router + wireless + IPv6 + SIP(G729)FXS + USB Printserver, NAS + gigabit ethernet + backup Analog modem on the same line socket as ADSL (internal splitter), in a single box without having to use an ISP custom box. I want my SIP gateway not owned by my ISP. I want native IPv6 wan, routing and filtering. I do not want that cludge of multiple sucking power adaptors and boxes. Please, just one consistant device.

Re:And no FXS, Re:no USB?

[houstonbofh]

Add FXS interfaces and use it as an SIP to Analog phone gateway.

I'm still looking for a device capable of ADSL + router + wireless + IPv6 + SIP(G729)FXS + USB Printserver, NAS + gigabit ethernet + backup Analog modem on the same line socket as ADSL (internal splitter), in a single box without having to use an ISP custom box. I want my SIP gateway not owned by my ISP. I want native IPv6 wan, routing and filtering. I do not want that cludge of multiple sucking power adaptors and boxes. Please, just one consistant device.

So buy a low power computer and build one. Those Atom motherboards look nice for that...

Re:And no FXS, Re:no USB?

[tchuladdiass]

I think the best option would be to pick up a "slug" (nslu2), which has ethernet (or 2 ethernet, I can't remember) + 2 usb. Then add a usb wifi dongle that can run in AP mode, along with a 4-gig usb thumbdrive, and you're golden.
Another option is to use a ethernet -> wifi box (they are sold as wifi adapters for things like the sony ps2). But then you are back to having multiple power bricks.

Re:And no FXS, Re:no USB?

[La Gris]

Think of it, every small factor motherboard only provide 1 PCI slot and most only provide 1 ethernet port. I'll have to plug a side card, and do many hacks to add other hardwares :
- Linux supported ADSL2+ PCI card or an USB ADSL2+ modem hacked to an internal USB port + rewiring power cables + rewiring DSL line to a custom internal splitter to share with analog modem.
- FXS interface card (phone line) with hopefully embeded DSP to offload G729a/b CODEC from CPU + wiring FXS and analog modem togagher though a relay switch as pass through the analog line and through the splitter, so to have phone calls through to the analog line in case DSL or SIP is unavailable.
- Wifi PCI interface or internal USB wired WIFI thumb + hack of an antenna outside the box (unless the box is not metal and allow radio signals though)
- PCI or serial or USB analog modem + hacking line wiring with the ADSL2+ modem though a splitter and adding an RJ11 connector to the box.

It is a theorically doable home-made assembly. Free Proxad ISP here in France has done this precise all in one small-factor box with their Freebox. By the way, this is a lot of engineering for one casual home hacker. Hacking such a box myself means several months work, and surely will cost much more than buying dedicated seperate equipment devices.

meh

[Eil]

This is okay, I guess, except that WRT54GL has been available for a long time and has roughly the same specs.

A few years ago, I thought that open-source Linux-based routers would have been a boon for router manufacturers and end-users alike, but that dream has yet to be realized. Off-the-shelf wifi routers still have little more than basic NAT functionality. The third-party firmware options offer far more features, of course, but every one of the projects seem to either lack focus or developers and consequently don't even come close to realizing the full potential of these semi-powerful little boxes.

DD-WRT was forked from the Sveasoft code because some guy didn't like the fact that they started selling their firmware. A few years later, he turns around and does something similar.

OpenWRT is a great base upon which to build, but even it can be somewhat buggy and lacks a decent interface. The X-WRT Web UI is good start, but nothing I would dare put into production.

For home and small-office routing, it's probably easier to buy some cheap low-power x86-class machine (maybe even an old laptop) and either put something like m0n0wall on it or just install your distribution of choice and tweak away. This is what I plan to do in the near future.

Sadly necessary...

[Markos]

Well, considering it's possible, but not likely, to brick a router when flashing I'd say they really can't support it officially via warranty.

As far as I know, Linksys at some point back was forced to comply with the GPL and release their Linux firmware. Inside the firmware is a binary kernel driver, like Nvidia, that enables support with the wireless aspect of the chipset. No source code is available for this.

All of the open source firmwares for these routers are based on the orignal Linksys source AFAIK.

WAG302

[Anonymous Coward]

Netgear has released open source firmware in the past for some of their other gear. I have a WAG302 access point that runs firmware based on MontaVista Linux. Now if only Netgear would put out updated firmware for it. :-|

IPv6?

[Anonymous Coward]

I've been meaning to buy a wireless router as soon as it supports IPv6. I'm currently using a Linksys AP with 6to4 support enabled via OpenWRT, but I would happily support the first commercial entity that supports IPv6 in their own firmware.

But I agree with you that 802.11n without GbE doesn't make sense.

Re:IPv6?

[Bert64]

Apple airport extreme supports IPv6, and has gige built in.

Re:IPv6?

[EdwinFreed]

AFAIK the Airport Extreme only supports having a single public IP address. That's a big problem when you have servers on more than one address. (I'd appreciate being correct if you know this isn't the case.)

The various Linksys products have similar issues. It's been a while since I checked so I don't recall all the specific models, but the intersection of 6to4-capable routers with ones that support multiple public IPs, NAT, access controls, and all the other stuff you need appeared to be empty. (And again, if you have information to the contrary I'd love to hear more.)

I've been looking for a viable router solution short of a Cisco that handles multiple public IP address and has 6to4 capabilities and I haven't found anything I like. The closest I've come is DD-WRT, but the ipv6 support there is an command-line-only add-on, not fully integrated, and I've heard it's even busted in v24.

It's hard to see how anyone expects ipv6 to become a reality without support for it in inexpensive routers.

Re:IPv6?

[Nossie]

adsl modem?

not all of us live in a cable world :( or would like multiple devices.

Re:IPv6?

[Bert64]

Then Cisco is about your only option...
I use a 1701 for my ADSL, and i have native IPv6 provided by the ISP. The airport extreme sits behind the router, it doesn't route ipv6 in my setup, it just has an ipv6 address itself.

Re:IPv6?

[Bert64]

Well, i don't use 6to4, i have native ipv6 transit... The airport extreme has a v6 address, but it doesn't route any traffic because its just bridging onto my lan... I've never tried what other v6 capability it has, but there were some options last i looked.

It's hard to see how anyone expects cost cutting vendors to implement ipv6 into inexpensive routers while there is very little demand, very few sites available via v6, and very few isps providing service to consumers.

But...

[Anonymous Coward]

...will it run Linux?

Bad experience with Netgear

[jopet]

I have had so many bad experiences with Netgear that this won't change my mind of avoiding their products. The replies I got about missing Linux support for cards and other products were arrogant and not very interested at all.
Thanks, but no thanks.

ipv6 and brand names.

[sjwest]

Nor it seems can any other consumer router vendor. Sure they all grok ipv4 but not ipv6 - they all need to spend money on the software something netgear seem to have woken up on ?

I was given a 'spare' netgear wifi router by a friend when they changed isp's and did not think much of it even though it was a month old. I have a very old netgear 814 consumer router (no wifi) which is my backup router.

I sold my friends wifi netgear device (not via ebay), and kept my old netgear 814 router as the backup.

If the consumer router makers dont do something about ipv6 i think we will all be seeing new companies move into there market.

I current use Chinese oem stuff (branded but unknown to most) for home networking and its pretty good. Linksys is my next router choice for home networking, not netgear.

5.8 GHz

[yabos]

That's why you can use the 5.8GHz spectrum for 802.11N. Well, until that gets crowded as well, but at least for now it's pretty free from as many access points. It also has the advantage that your microwave won't interfere with your network.

Other source

[Midnight Thunder]

Source code for other of Netgear's routers are also available:

http://kbserver.netgear.com/kb_web_files/n101238.asp

I myself am tempted to download the source for the WPN824EXT, because my parents bought the WPN824EXT and had issues installing it. They were wanting to use it as a range extender. Trying to work it for them, I found this was not something was easy to configure, when compared to other routers. One thing I found is that as sold this does not really extend the range, unless one end is cabled to the base station. I was expecting a smarter range extender that would be able to simply extend the range wirelessly.

Can I say security Nightmare

[Anonymous Coward]

Sorry for not having an account to track this one but I like the ability to somewhat rely on Netgear to not put tracking malware on my router. Open sourcing firmware for a router is an awesome idea and yet I couldn't imagine anything more potentially dangerous especially given the possibility of someone finding a way to push the router config without my knowledge(a complete possibility with open source firmware) and then I'm humped. Thanks but no thanks.

System Requirements

[Ryzzen]

(Taken from Netgear's Site)

Internet Explorer 5.0 or Netscape 7.0 or higher

So to use the open-source router, you must have a closed source (or discontinued) browser. Nice. I know they probably copy/pasted the requirements from all their other routers, but still. They went and made a special website for the it, you'd think they could at least add "Firefox" on their page...

wimpy!

[drwho]

Not enough ram or flash to do anything interesting. I like the old WGT634U: 8mb flash, 32mb ram.

Re:wimpy!

[rootooftheworld]

???!! add in network boot and i'll take it as my desktop. ;)

Re:wimpy!

[rootooftheworld]

throwin net boot and firewire over Cat5 (S3200), and i'll take ten as desktops.

+1, Interferencingly

[Anonymous Coward]

we love lameness filter