Modify

Opened 2 years ago

Last modified 2 years ago

#20441 new defect

TL-WR1043ND V2.1 WAN limited connection

Reported by: yo2mno@… Owned by: developers
Priority: normal Milestone: Barrier Breaker 14.07
Component: other Version: Barrier Breaker 14.07
Keywords: Cc:

Description

I have TP-Link TL-WR1043ND V2.1 and my speed on WAN is limited to 200Mbps. I have a 300Mbps connection and if I use stock firmware to access Internet, it works as expected.
I connect to Internet using PPPoE.

Attachments (0)

Change History (6)

comment:1 follow-up: Changed 2 years ago by anonymous

as an owner of a TL-WR1043ND V2.1, i can tell you that stock firmware uses the hardware NAT module.

Using that in OpenWRT requires a lot of ugly hacks of the linux kernel and a few bits of proprietary code in a way that will probably break compatibility with a lot of other devices and is not legally available for an open source project... as such, OpenWRT must avoid using the hardware NAT feature and do all NAT functions using only the CPU.

most common options in this area are either:
-buy an OpenWRT-compatible router that has a faster cpu
-stay with stock firmware.

see
http://wiki.openwrt.org/doc/hardware/switch#features

and ticket #11779 for the whole saga of the Hardware NAT

also, some improvements for "fastpath" NAT seem to be in the pipeline, but the legal department at Marvell is still digesting whether to approve those for release as open source or not.

the thread for this feature
https://lists.openwrt.org/pipermail/openwrt-devel/2014-December/030214.html
seems to have died off around march 2015... without any update on this.

comment:2 Changed 2 years ago by yo2mno@…

A WDR3600 will be better? Or is the same thing?

comment:3 in reply to: ↑ 1 Changed 2 years ago by Mihai Macarie

The WDR3600 it's better?
Replying to anonymous:

as an owner of a TL-WR1043ND V2.1, i can tell you that stock firmware uses the hardware NAT module.

Using that in OpenWRT requires a lot of ugly hacks of the linux kernel and a few bits of proprietary code in a way that will probably break compatibility with a lot of other devices and is not legally available for an open source project... as such, OpenWRT must avoid using the hardware NAT feature and do all NAT functions using only the CPU.

most common options in this area are either:
-buy an OpenWRT-compatible router that has a faster cpu
-stay with stock firmware.

see
http://wiki.openwrt.org/doc/hardware/switch#features

and ticket #11779 for the whole saga of the Hardware NAT

also, some improvements for "fastpath" NAT seem to be in the pipeline, but the legal department at Marvell is still digesting whether to approve those for release as open source or not.

the thread for this feature
https://lists.openwrt.org/pipermail/openwrt-devel/2014-December/030214.html
seems to have died off around march 2015... without any update on this.

comment:4 follow-up: Changed 2 years ago by anonymous

wdr3600 (cpu 560MHz) is actually worse than wr1043nd v2.1 (cpu 720MHz)

http://wiki.openwrt.org/toh/tp-link/tl-wr1043nd
http://wiki.openwrt.org/toh/tp-link/tl-wdr3600

see some speed tests here:
https://superwrt.ro/teste-gigabit-tp-link/

comment:5 in reply to: ↑ 4 Changed 2 years ago by anonymous

I understand. So can you give some recommendation in this budget?
Replying to anonymous:

wdr3600 (cpu 560MHz) is actually worse than wr1043nd v2.1 (cpu 720MHz)

http://wiki.openwrt.org/toh/tp-link/tl-wr1043nd
http://wiki.openwrt.org/toh/tp-link/tl-wdr3600

see some speed tests here:
https://superwrt.ro/teste-gigabit-tp-link/

comment:6 Changed 2 years ago by anonymous

please take this discussion to forums... the ticket tracker is for bugs only.

Add Comment

Modify Ticket

Action
as new .
Author


E-mail address and user name can be saved in the Preferences.

 
Note: See TracTickets for help on using tickets.