![]() |
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||
![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread | Display Modes | |
|
|
||||
|
|
#1 |
|
Rookie
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Halifax, NS
Posts: 3
|
I've been watching this forum as an unregistered user for a while and have benefitted greatly from the work of file and others to suss out the workings of the FibreOp service and especially file's dedication to creating a firmware image that makes it easy for folks to get an ASUS RT-N56U and replace the Actiontec unit with it. I ran file's firmware for a couple of months and was very very happy with it.
As a result of some web searching I did one day, however, I discovered that there's another custom firmware option out there being developed by some Russian folks and spearheaded by a guy called Padavan. The initial p-series release by this group didn't offer anything terribly interesting that would make me consider it over file's firmware (especially considering it apparently had some stability issues and 95% of the available support was in Russian). That all changed a couple of months ago when the b-series was released which integrated a newer linux kernel from yet another firmware project called "wive-rtnl". This other (also Russian) project releases firmwares for routers from Acorp which happen to be based on a similar hardware core as the ASUS. The kernel itself is, I believe, newer, and claims significant backports from later versions still. But what is more interesting (and impressive) is the complete reworking of the drivers for the RA-Link chips. A quick browse through the source reveals at the very least much much cleaner and more documented code. I immediately noticed some features that I wanted to try out, with WAN Port Isolation being at the top of the list. As it turns out, port isolation is impossible when you run VLANs (as you have to do for FibreOp), but there were enough other features that I'm sticking with it. Some of the additional features include:
On the downside, a few versions ago the "pre-configurations" for ISPs were removed, so ISP configuration is manual-only (not difficult, mind, but manual). And although the group doing the firmware seems to be responsive to bug reports in English (and provides English READMEs and Changelogs), they are native Russian speakers so 95% of the information regarding the firmware is in Russian. I wanted to put this out there because I'm sure there are folks who are interested in some of the above features. I would caution all, however, that you're not going to get the same kind of ease-of-use and support for this firmware that file has been providing on this forum for his firmware. The latest version of the Padavan firmware can be found at this site in the downloads section: http://code.google.com/p/rt-n56u/ The latest versions are (he's abandoned the -p# and -b# numbering although the last versions of each are still available, namely -p2 and -b5): RT-N56U_1.1.2.1-004_oldgui.zip RT-N56U_1.1.2.1-004_newgui.zip There are also "mini" variants that are a tad (~1MB smaller); not sure what is not included. A working FibreOp configuration with TV on LAN4 looks like this (under WAN - Internet Connection at the bottom): Choose IPTV STB Port: LAN4 VLAN Tagged Traffic Filter: (on) VLAN CPU: VID 35 PRIO 0 VLAN LAN4: VID 34 PRIO 4 Untag checked I do not know whether it is possible to accomplish file's "passthrough" mode through manual configuration. If you choose to install this, please note that the Region Code for both 2.4GHz and 5GHz wireless radios is set to Europe. While it's probably not a big deal, you could theoretically run afoul of the CRTC if you don't switch these to USA. |
|
|
| Sponsored Links | |||
Advertisement | |||
|
|
#2 |
|
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Riverview, NB
Posts: 766
|
Yes, I've seen both of those projects before but steered clear from a personal legal perspective. Some of the code looked like it wasn't released under an open source license as the headers still had standard confidential proprietary license headers.
I can explain why you can't do port isolation when VLANs are in use though! VLANs are used to accomplish port isolation and the switch chipset is shared between WAN and LAN, so if you create VLAN 35 for FibreOP internet it is accessible to your LAN ports - causing a potential conflict. Certainly possible though with enough logic to ensure all the VLANs don't conflict. |
|
|
|
|
#3 | ||
|
Rookie
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Halifax, NS
Posts: 3
|
Quote:
Code:
* This is UNPUBLISHED PROPRIETARY SOURCE CODE of ASUSTeK Inc.; * the contents of this file may not be disclosed to third parties, copied or * duplicated in any form, in whole or in part, without the prior written * permission of ASUSTeK Inc.. That all said, I totally understand your playing it safe in that regard. I'm not feeling any similar compunction because I'm just pointing at it, not publishing it Quote:
Code:
rtl8367m - create vlan: pvid=[34], prio=[4], member=[0x0011], untag=[0x0001], fid=[2] vlan 34 member mask 0x11 = 00000000 00010001 vlan 34 untag mask 0x1 = 00000000 00000001 This is in contrast to the VLAN 35 layout (this is from Padavan, the joshnet firmware does it differently): Code:
rtl8367m - create vlan: pvid=[35], prio=[0], member=[0x0210], untag=[0x0200], fid=[1] vlan 35 member mask 0x210 = 00000010 00010000 vlan 35 untag mask 0x200 = 00000010 00000000 I am also interested to see if at some point someone takes the time to get the (apparently supported) port mirroring going (mostly because port mirroring is cool, not because I've got a real use for it...). |
||
|
|
|
|
#4 |
|
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Riverview, NB
Posts: 766
|
Yes, you can control the tagging and untagging but the VLAN itself exists as an entity for both, so if you give the user control and they use the same VLAN for port isolation... badness. If you do everything behind the scenes and write logic so VLANs are used that *aren't* used on the WAN then stuff can work fine.
As for licensing yeah... I have no idea where they got that source code and don't want to touch it with a ten foot pole. Companies like RealTek are *extremely* insane about releasing stuff like that. Once you show up on their radar... it's not good. In the case of Asus for what they have released they would have had to talk to the upstream, gotten permission, etc. Even then some (like the wifi driver) is in a binary only form. |
|
|
|
|
#5 |
|
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Riverview, NB
Posts: 766
|
Personally one of the things I would love to do if I had the money and time is get a suitable router from an OEM (gigabit, hardware NAT, dual band 3x3 wireless, tons of flash, tons of RAM, USB, full source code) and just build the best solution possible. Commercial embedded routers are always just hacks upon hacks.
|
|
|
|
|
#6 | ||
|
Rookie
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Halifax, NS
Posts: 3
|
Quote:
Anyone reading this and considering the Padavan firmware should note that there is code with origins of questionable legality involved and that the firmware could disappear at a moment's notice. Quote:
|
||
|
|
|
|
#7 |
|
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Riverview, NB
Posts: 766
|
RaspberryPI is very interesting but not really a router platform. Still keeping tabs on it to see what people do with it.
|
|
|
|
|
#8 |
|
Rookie
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 1
|
Has anyone been able to get this working satisfactorily?
I tried installing it and I was able to get the Internet and IPTV working. The channel changing is horrible and even worse than the ActionTec. If anyone has and advice or tips to get it working better. I'm sure others would love to use that one as well. Thanks in advance. Andrew |
|
|
![]() |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | |
|
|