Reply

Re: Experience with 1.0.16.98 for V1?

Tank_Killer
Tutor

Re: Experience with 1.0.16.98 for V1?

Wonder if the 3700 has a DNS relay in it? Most routers let you turn it off, if its in this router hopefully netgear will let us have control of it.
Message 151 of 332
Maltz
Aspirant

Re: Experience with 1.0.16.98 for V1?

Tank_Killer wrote:
Wonder if the 3700 has a DNS relay in it? Most routers let you turn it off, if its in this router hopefully netgear will let us have control of it.


It does, it's screwed up in 1.0.16.98, and as far as I know, you cannot turn it off. You can bypass it by manually setting one on the computer itself, but ugh, what a hassle.
Message 152 of 332
matey
Aspirant

Re: Experience with 1.0.16.98 for V1?

Port forward 80 not working. All ports open by ISP 100%!
Message 153 of 332
jmschnur
Aspirant

Re: Experience with 1.0.16.98 for V1?

I use the 3700 as a bridge to my Verizon Actiontec F router. I was having many many wireless dropouts.

I got a trendnet 1 gig 5 port and used that for the bridge for my hardwired computers. I attached the 3700 to that router and then have used the 3700 for wireless only.

seems faster and more stable for now.
Message 154 of 332
Retired_Member
Not applicable

Re: Experience with 1.0.16.98 for V1?

Call support see if they will give you 1.0.16.98-AP-Mode for the 3700v1 It fixes the WEB_UI not being able to access after using as a AP and the problem of clients not be able to reconnect in AP mode.
Message 155 of 332
joergent
Aspirant

Re: Experience with 1.0.16.98 for V1?

hotbbq wrote:
I cannot for the life of me keep port 80 open. All other port forwards work as they should. WTF is going on?


Does anybody have a clue ? I have the same problem after upgrading.:mad:
Message 156 of 332
Frippi
Aspirant

Re: Experience with 1.0.16.98 for V1?

Well 80 forward works flawless on mine 3700 on 1.0.16.98. What are the symptoms? It doesn't work at all, asks for password, or something else?
Message 157 of 332
joergent
Aspirant

Re: Experience with 1.0.16.98 for V1?

It is only working with remote management disabled. Otherwise all port 80 packets are discarded.
Message 158 of 332
roraniel
Novice

Re: Experience with 1.0.16.98 for V1?

I was using the 3700v1 mainly as a switch for my PC's and Home Entertainment wired connections and the wireless for our iPhones and Kindles.

Since I upgraded to Time Warner Extreme, the modem has a built in router so now I am using the 3700v1 only for the phone and kindle wireless connections. This makes the disconnections that I cannot get away from, not such an annoyance.

To bad I paid $140 for a wireless router for two phones and two Kindles when a cheaper one would have done the job!
Message 159 of 332

Re: Experience with 1.0.16.98 for V1?

I am using wndr behind my dg834gt which as i am using as a dum modem with dgteam firmware and it works great. we have live in a big house so i have a wn2000rpt extender for repeating the signals and so far after upgrading the firmware it has been workign great.. touchwood...
Message 160 of 332
penguada
Aspirant

Re: Experience with 1.0.16.98 for V1?

I am owning a refurbished router and can not contact support (no serial number).

Can any one please share the latest beta Smiley Very Happy
Message 161 of 332

Re: Experience with 1.0.16.98 for V1?

matey wrote:
Port forward 80 not working. All ports open by ISP 100%!


I have the same problem - all other port forwarding rules work fine, but can not forward external port 80 to an internal port 80. All usb boxes unchecked, remote management disabled (and configured to use 8080 anyways). Really frustrating, having to forward arbitrary external port (e.g., 808) to internal port 80 to access webserver.
Message 162 of 332

Re: Experience with 1.0.16.98 for V1?

Hmm, on further reflection, the problem may not be with Netgear -- I use COX for my ISP, and they may be blocking port 80 traffic "for my protection," and not at all for "their convenience."
Message 163 of 332
jkob
Novice

Re: Experience with 1.0.16.98 for V1?

Switching to 1.0.16.98 NA did not fix the issue with streaming MKV Matroska Container to my Samsung UE46D8000 TV. I still see on my TV "file is not supported".
The files are fine and played after plugging the drive directly to the usb port of the TV.

I discovered that the minidlna 1.0.22 stream the MKV correctly, but on the 1.0.16.98 NA there is still the old minidlna version:

root@WNDR3700:/# minidlna -V
Version 1.0.18

Is there a possibility to get an patch for it?

Cheerz,
Jkob
Message 164 of 332
Simon0
Novice

Any News on Post-1.0.16.98 for V1?

It's now a bit over 2 months since they released 1.0.16.98 for V1, are there any news of an updated firmware? I tested it out the other day as a router (back from AP) and found it to be still unstable, requiring a reboot after a day or two.

Reason I asked is some people are flashing their troublesome V2 routers using the WNDR3800 firmware and it seems to have fixed the issues they were having. I'm wish to make it stable before giving it to a relative to use as a router. I'm just hoping they've not abandoned us. Is anyone testing beta firmwares for this router, if not, it'll probably be EOL soon :mad:?
Message 165 of 332
nieroster
Novice

Re: Experience with 1.0.16.98 for V1?

Running now for almost three weeks with no major issues.

The only thing I've noticed is the webinterface when using Firefox 6.02:
sometimes the middle frame starts opening in a new tab.
I'm not sure if this is a firmware issue or a Firefox issue.

I could not reporduce it using Opera or IE.

Can anybody else confirm this behaviour?

Regards,
nieroster
Message 166 of 332
Warren11
Aspirant

Re: Experience with 1.0.16.98 for V1?

SkykingUSA wrote:
Thanks for that info. I have a similar setup to you regarding the USB drive, but mine is a 1 TB drive which apparently is not on the unofficial supported drives list. That is why I think it's causing my problems. Thanks again for the quick reply.


Make sure you disable the "Automatic Content Scan" under the Media Server page under the USB Storage section. On larger drives if this is enabled it will freeze up your router.
Message 167 of 332
globespy
Apprentice

Re: Experience with 1.0.16.98 for V1?

Any reason why the automatic firmware check when entering the router management page still shows the latest available firmware as 1.0.7.98 and not this new 16.98 one?

For me 4.55 is the most stable version I have used and I've tried them all. I have not had a single issue in over 4 months with 4.55 so I'm hesitant to even bother with 16.98?
Message 168 of 332
Warren11
Aspirant

Re: Experience with 1.0.16.98 for V1?

Not sure if anyone else had this same issue as I had when upgrading to this firmware but just about 2 or 3 times daily I was losing internet connectivity from the wireless or thru direct attached port. All while other devices like VOIP phones were still working.

The only change I've made so far is set Basic Settings -> Domain Name Server (DNS) Address section to "Use These DNS Servers" and entered 4.2.2.2 and 4.2.2.3 which are AT&T DNS servers. Not sure why this helped but I haven't had a problem since.

It's like the router gets freaked out when "Get Automatically from ISP" is checked and most likely encounters higher than normal responses from the ISP DNS servers. Can't soldify that assumption but is a bit strange.
Message 169 of 332
Warren11
Aspirant

Re: Experience with 1.0.16.98 for V1?

Warren11 wrote:
Not sure if anyone else had this same issue as I had when upgrading to this firmware but just about 2 or 3 times daily I was losing internet connectivity from the wireless or thru direct attached port. All while other devices like VOIP phones were still working.

The only change I've made so far is set Basic Settings -> Domain Name Server (DNS) Address section to "Use These DNS Servers" and entered 4.2.2.2 and 4.2.2.3 which are AT&T DNS servers. Not sure why this helped but I haven't had a problem since.

It's like the router gets freaked out when "Get Automatically from ISP" is checked and most likely encounters higher than normal responses from the ISP DNS servers. Can't soldify that assumption but is a bit strange.


One other thing, make sure that both "Enable WMM" settings are unchecked and that "Turn Internet Access QoS On" is also unchecked.
Message 170 of 332
project_mercy
Aspirant

Re: Experience with 1.0.16.98 for V1?

Warren11 wrote:

It's like the router gets freaked out when "Get Automatically from ISP" is checked and most likely encounters higher than normal responses from the ISP DNS servers. Can't soldify that assumption but is a bit strange.


This bug has been there for a while (it happened around 1.0.7.xx Not sure if it was at that rev or the one right after it). It seems to show up more often with those of us with Time Warner service. I've just switched to specifying the Google public DNS, and have had no issues with it. It's a work around, but it's better than having to roll back to a year old version.
Message 171 of 332
flaminio
Aspirant

Re: Experience with 1.0.16.98 for V1?

jkob wrote:
Switching to 1.0.16.98 NA did not fix the issue with streaming MKV Matroska Container to my Samsung UE46D8000 TV. I still see on my TV "file is not supported".
The files are fine and played after plugging the drive directly to the usb port of the TV.

I discovered that the minidlna 1.0.22 stream the MKV correctly, but on the 1.0.16.98 NA there is still the old minidlna version:

root@WNDR3700:/# minidlna -V
Version 1.0.18

Is there a possibility to get an patch for it?

Cheerz,
Jkob


+1 for this post. For me, minidlna 1.0.22 worked nicely; 1.0.18, not so much. Smiley Sad
Message 172 of 332
clintb
Aspirant

Re: Experience with 1.0.16.98 for V1?

Warren11 wrote:
The only change I've made so far is set Basic Settings -> Domain Name Server (DNS) Address section to "Use These DNS Servers" and entered 4.2.2.2 and 4.2.2.3 which are AT&T DNS servers.

Small correction: those DNS servers are owned by Level 3 Communications, not at&t.
Message 173 of 332
Warren11
Aspirant

Re: Experience with 1.0.16.98 for V1?

project_mercy wrote:
This bug has been there for a while (it happened around 1.0.7.xx Not sure if it was at that rev or the one right after it). It seems to show up more often with those of us with Time Warner service. I've just switched to specifying the Google public DNS, and have had no issues with it. It's a work around, but it's better than having to roll back to a year old version.


What's sad is Netgear knows of this issue but won't help you correct it because you're support contract is out of date. Nor will they post it as a known issue and give the resolution. Like in a KB or something.
Message 174 of 332
Warren11
Aspirant

Re: Experience with 1.0.16.98 for V1?

clintb wrote:
Small correction: those DNS servers are owned by Level 3 Communications, not at&t.


Sorry, you are correct. Those are Level 3 not AT&T. Not sure why I thought that.

Another set of public DNS addresses that can be used are Google's 8.8.8.8 and 8.8.4.4. Not sure which are more reliable or not.
Message 175 of 332
Announcements

Orbi WiFi 6E