Reply

The gig is up -- the new AX12 will be D.O.A.

duckware
Virtuoso

The gig is up -- the new AX12 will be D.O.A.

The AX12 appears to have NO DFS channel support.

 

This is according to Netgear's own product page (no DFS mention; whereas routers with DFS support mention that), and FCC documents (PY317300397).

 

These FCC docs show AX12 support for only 9 out of 25 total 5 GHz channels.

 

Comments?

Message 1 of 37
schumaku
Guru

Re: The gig is up -- the new AX12 will be D.O.A.

Not uncommon new technology systems were initially coming with limited DFS/TPC capabilities. Nothing to do with the subject chosen. Vendors - and I'm talking about the SoC/radio chipset makers here, too - are commonly going over a second certification round for DFS support, it's often specific to the markets and regulatory areas as the requirements are not exactly the same.

Message 2 of 37
duckware
Virtuoso

Re: The gig is up -- the new AX12 will be D.O.A.

Until DFS channels are added, any device today is D.O.A. and not worth the price.

 

So buyer beware -- because Netgear has routers where DFS channels were never added later!

 

 

Message 3 of 37
duckware
Virtuoso

Re: The gig is up -- the new AX12 will be D.O.A.

schumaku, I understand that in the past it was common for a second round for DFS certification, but for Netgear -- in 2018 -- can you provide any examples of when Netgear did that (filed initial FCC application without DFS, then made permissive change to add DFS later)?

 

In 2018, all I can find for Netgear is FCC applications with DFS reports in the initial application...

 

...except for the RAX120 (AX12-Nighthawk AX12 12-Stream WI-FI 6 Router).  It was filed without DFS certification --  that is a strong clue that something happened (like maybe it did not pass initial DFS tests?).

 

The 'cousin' model (RAX80) FCC application was filed to the FCC with DFS reports.

 

Message 4 of 37
schumaku
Guru

Re: The gig is up -- the new AX12 will be D.O.A.

The AX8 and AX12 are (to my knowledge) complete different hardware platforms. So at the time of filing with the FCC, obviously DFS wasn't ready. Now a good part of the RF security code isn't implemented by the router and AP vendors Much more it's code operating on the embedded radio devices, provided by the chip/radio maker. The control and influence on this code is limited.

Instead of the AX8 has it blablah it would be much more interesting to see if the competitors implementing similar SoC and radios as in place on the AX12 are able to do any different. 

Message 5 of 37
myersw
Master

Re: The gig is up -- the new AX12 will be D.O.A.

Cannot go by what a product announcement is before it is actually on the shelves. Lots can change including FCC approval of the DFS support. Even if not first ship I am sure it will be included with a firmware update.

--Bill
ISP Comcast, Modem-Netgear CM1150V, Router-Unifi Security Gateway-Pro4, AP-2 Unifi AP-LR
Tesla > Edison
Message 6 of 37
dmystic1
Apprentice

Re: The gig is up -- the new AX12 will be D.O.A.

Im using the AX8.  It has DFS which I dont use anyway because my Samsung and Roku TV's wont connect.  There isn't even a release date for the AX12, it also states it will only be available thru the Premier Beta (whatever that is).

Message 7 of 37
duckware
Virtuoso

Re: The gig is up -- the new AX12 will be D.O.A.

schumaku, Yes, wikidevi says RAX80 is based on BCM43684 (Broadcom), but the RAX120 is based on QCN5154+QCN5124 (Qualcomm)

 

myersw, I would not buy any router in 2019 without DFS support present up front. Because not all netgear routers get DFS support later.

 

dmystic1, does it support ALL DFS channels (see duckware.com/wifi#5g for list; especially 144)?

Message 8 of 37
myersw
Master

Re: The gig is up -- the new AX12 will be D.O.A.

Based on my experience with Netgear Broadcom based routers I would not even consider the AX80. Now Qualcomm is a different story. Have had good luck with them in the past and some 3rd party dev might even make a build. 

--Bill
ISP Comcast, Modem-Netgear CM1150V, Router-Unifi Security Gateway-Pro4, AP-2 Unifi AP-LR
Tesla > Edison
Message 9 of 37
microchip8
Master

Re: The gig is up -- the new AX12 will be D.O.A.

+1 for Qualcomm routers. The fact that QCA uses OpenWrt as its SDK compared to the mess of Broadcom, and has true hardware accelerators instead of CTF for Broadcom. Also, on Broadcom my phones battery get drained really fast. On QCA i can hit up to 5-6 days (normal usage) on a single charge. I'd be happy to hit 2 days when on Broadcom. This is a personal experience/observations so personally I'll always go for QCA

Routing: NETGEAR R7800 - Voxel Firmware 1.0.2.84SF
Switching: 2x NETGEAR 8-ports (GS108v4) / 1x NETGEAR 16-ports (JGS516v2)
Desktop: AMD Ryzen 7 3700X - Server: Intel Core i7-7700K - NAS: Intel Pentium G4400 - Cruncher: Intel Core i5-7400
Message 10 of 37
schumaku
Guru

Re: The gig is up -- the new AX12 will be D.O.A.


@myersw wrote:

Based on my experience with Netgear Broadcom based routers I would not even consider the AX80. Now Qualcomm is a different story. Have had good luck with them in the past and some 3rd party dev might even make a build. 


This is not specific to Netgear - much more are Broadcom based devices coming with proprietary modules and APIs which are not available to open source developments. With Qualcomm there was some more luck...

Message 11 of 37
myersw
Master

Re: The gig is up -- the new AX12 will be D.O.A.


@schumaku wrote:

@myersw wrote:

Based on my experience with Netgear Broadcom based routers I would not even consider the AX80. Now Qualcomm is a different story. Have had good luck with them in the past and some 3rd party dev might even make a build. 


This is not specific to Netgear - much more are Broadcom based devices coming with proprietary modules and APIs which are not available to open source developments. With Qualcomm there was some more luck...


@schumaku

Yup. Have to have a license with Broadcom to get the proprietary stuff. Brainslayer of DD-WRT has a license and I tried his and Kong's builds on the r8000. Ran better then stock, but still had what appeared to be wireless driver issues, not surprising as had same or close to same modules as Netgear I would guess. This is the reason I keep saying the basic issues with the r8xxxx and r9000 cannot be fixed by Netgear unless they lean on Broadcom to get things right. 

 

Agree about Qualcomm. I ran Openwrt/lede and DD-WRT on the r7800 I still have. It is sitting on the shelf as a backup to the current gateway, (Unifi speak for router). It ran well with both, but like most others I just was not getting coverage that I needed as more and more wireless devices came into house. Wet plaster over metal lath walls doesn't help. Current setup with 2 APs works well. Like how the APs are PoE so only the Ethernet cable is needed. I sprang for a Unifi smart switch as well so I could get PoE without a dongle. With mesh enabled the wireless handoff is seamless. Can walk around house talking on iPhone using wireless and no hiccup of any kind when going to the next AP. Can view logs later and see where the iPhone rommed. 

 

Oh by the way, keep up the picture taking!!

 

--Bill
ISP Comcast, Modem-Netgear CM1150V, Router-Unifi Security Gateway-Pro4, AP-2 Unifi AP-LR
Tesla > Edison
Message 12 of 37
dmystic1
Apprentice

Re: The gig is up -- the new AX12 will be D.O.A.


@duckware wrote:

schumaku, Yes, wikidevi says RAX80 is based on BCM43684 (Broadcom), but the RAX120 is based on QCN5154+QCN5124 (Qualcomm)

 

myersw, I would not buy any router in 2019 without DFS support present up front. Because not all netgear routers get DFS support later.

 

dmystic1, does it support ALL DFS channels (see duckware.com/wifi#5g for list; especially 144)?


It does not.

Message 13 of 37
dmystic1
Apprentice

Re: The gig is up -- the new AX12 will be D.O.A.

Any idea why the RAX80 has 4 antennas while the RAX120 has 8?  They are both duel band correct?

Message 14 of 37
duckware
Virtuoso

Re: The gig is up -- the new AX12 will be D.O.A.

dmystic1, Netgear deleting my very detailed reply to you should tell you everything you need to know about Netgear.

Message 15 of 37
dmystic1
Apprentice

Re: The gig is up -- the new AX12 will be D.O.A.

I didn't get a chance to read it.  Is PM allowed?

Message 16 of 37
duckware
Virtuoso

Re: The gig is up -- the new AX12 will be D.O.A.

Netgear is confusing end users, plain and simple.

 

Netgear is stating that the RAX80 has 8 spatial streams and that the RAX120 has 12 spatial stream.  That is not possible since the RAX80 only has 4 antennas and the RAX120 has 8 antennas.

 

It is very well understood what "spatial streams" in the wifi industry means, and Netgear has decided to take that term and redefine what it means (https://kb.netgear.com/000060370/What-is-an-8-stream-router-and-why-should-I-buy-one), so that they can advertise a router with higher streams than it really has.

Message 17 of 37
dmystic1
Apprentice

Re: The gig is up -- the new AX12 will be D.O.A.

Recieved my AX12 today thru the Premier Beta Program, and no there are no DFS channels, at least not at this time.

Message 18 of 37
duckware
Virtuoso

Re: The gig is up -- the new AX12 will be D.O.A.

Another reason to avoid the RAX120.  The RAX120 uses 802.11ax -- that is supposed to work great with LOTS and LOTS of wireless devices.  But then Netgear cuts you off at the knees, and won't let you use all of those of wireless devices (limit 32)!

 

https://kb.netgear.com/24043/How-many-clients-can-you-connect-wirelessly-to-a-NETGEAR-router

 

PS: Anyone know if there is a limit to the number of 'wired' devices a Netgear router allows?

 

Message 19 of 37
schumaku
Guru

Re: The gig is up -- the new AX12 will be D.O.A.


@duckware wrote:

Another reason to avoid the RAX120.  The RAX120 uses 802.11ax -- that is supposed to work great with LOTS and LOTS of wireless devices.  But then Netgear cuts you off at the knees, and won't let you use all of those of wireless devices (limit 32)!

https://kb.netgear.com/24043/How-many-clients-can-you-connect-wirelessly-to-a-NETGEAR-router


There is no reference in this KB entry, neither to the RAX120 nor the RAX80, nor to the R9000 for example, too.

 

There are pure practical reasons why an enormous amount of concurrent wireless clients on the same radio and channels does not make sense - neither on the older nor on Wi-Fi 6.

 


@duckware wrote:

PS: Anyone know if there is a limit to the number of 'wired' devices a Netgear router allows?


The more interesting information is the number of concurrent NAT sessions. At some point, every NAT router has to close and re-use the oldest NAT sessions when new connections are established. The methods for this are varying, depending on the router software design.

It's amazing such basic information is not part of the official specs and data sheets for what are supposed to be top-of-the-line consumer routers, indeed.

Message 20 of 37
duckware
Virtuoso

Re: The gig is up -- the new AX12 will be D.O.A.

A large number of wireless clients is happening right now.  Each person in my household has a phone, tablet, notebook computer, game console, and other devices -- each wireless.  Then many rooms in the house have Smart TVs and Blu-ray player, etc.  Plus four ring cams.  Plus wireless thermostats.  This is only going to get much worse.

 

And that is expressly what 802.11ax was designed for (see "Provide improvements in the number of clients supported by an access point" at https://blogs.cisco.com/wireless/802-11ax-the-sixth-generation-of-wi-fi).  A large number of wifi clients in a small space.

 

My current wireless situation right now (family of four) is pushing the limit of 32.  Now of course, most wireless devices are just sitting there (no active traffic), which is why it works just fine right now.  But the situation will only get worse over time.  And I only have a family size of 4!

 

The limit of 32 wireless for Netgear routers is artificial and is going to be a brick wall (a show stopper) for a lot of people.  If the new RAX models can't handle more than 32 wireless clients, the router has a value of $0 to me.

 

Message 21 of 37
schumaku
Guru

Re: The gig is up -- the new AX12 will be D.O.A.


@duckware wrote:

A large number of wireless clients is happening right now.  Each person in my household has a phone, tablet, notebook computer, game console, and other devices -- each wireless.  Then many rooms in the house have Smart TVs and Blu-ray player, etc.  Plus four ring cams.  Plus wireless thermostats.  This is only going to get much worse.


Honestly? For such a set-up it's time to abandon the idea of a single central Wi-Fi router. Migrate to a wireless system with multiple wired access points.

Message 22 of 37
duckware
Virtuoso

Re: The gig is up -- the new AX12 will be D.O.A.

schumaku, Yes!  Two adults and two children in a 2140 sq ft single story home, with the router in the 'middle' of the home, with no wireless device more than 35 feet away from the router.  YES, I fully expect any new 802.11ax in 2019 to be able to handle that situation just fine!  And at the maximum distance away from the router, I get over 700 Mbps PHY (2x2 MIMO, so 866 max) speeds, which I find very good.

 

And if Netgear can't, I know of a great alternative.  I find it crazy that there is enterprise grade Wave2 802.11ac hardware cheaper than Netgear's home class routers.

 

But to your point, installing AP's all over will only work if Netgear routers have a much higher limit on the number of "wired" devices.  Do you know if Netgear routers will work with 100 wired devices?

Message 23 of 37
myersw
Master

Re: The gig is up -- the new AX12 will be D.O.A.


@schumaku schumaku wrote:


Honestly? For such a set-up it's time to abandon the idea of a single central Wi-Fi router. Migrate to a wireless system with multiple wired access points.


Totally agree. From client numbers we are building a high density environment with lots of wireless devices and ever growing. I adopted the model used where my group supported over 100 hospitals with all of their wireless requirements. A central router, no wireless on router, and distributed AP's. Gives me much better coverage for $450 over what a $400 Netgear or other vendor can provide. Claimed support for 200 clients per AP. Not sure about that, but sure indicates more then the seeming 32 limit Netgear gives. The Unifi gateway sits at 0 to 1% CPU usage and AP's hang around 5% in my limited environment so lots of room there CPU wise.

 

Could do something similar with Netgear products of course. Just decided if I was going this way and spend $400 plus then go more toward the commercial side as I do not need/want the parental controls etc Netgear provides. I subscribe more toward control the child rather then trying to control their environment. Worked well with the girl that came to live with us 4 years ago when 15. Off to university now.

--Bill
ISP Comcast, Modem-Netgear CM1150V, Router-Unifi Security Gateway-Pro4, AP-2 Unifi AP-LR
Tesla > Edison
Message 24 of 37
duckware
Virtuoso

Re: The gig is up -- the new AX12 will be D.O.A.

a second certification round for DFS support

 

But that is NOT what Netgear does.  Netgear does not add full DFS support.  For 80 Mhz channels...  There are two non-DFS channels (42, 155) and four DFS channels (58, 106, 122, 138).  When Netgear adds "DFS support" later, they only add three DFS channels (leaves out channel 138).

 

Compared that to Netgear's direct competation (ASUS, using the same chip sets as Netgear, who do add all four DFS channels).

 

For full DFS channel support in an AP/router, avoid Netgear.

 

Did you know that Netgear released the R7800 with firmware that allowed channel 138 to be used.  But Netgear never filed the proper paperwork with the FCC to use channel 138.  And rather than re-filing the proper paperwork, Netgear in a firmware update removed channel 138 (http://kb.netgear.com/000059692).  That sucks.

 

Message 25 of 37
Top Contributors
Discussion stats
  • 36 replies
  • 11082 views
  • 3 kudos
  • 8 in conversation
Announcements