Reply

R8500 V1.0.2.94_1.0.79 FW still having major issues

There is no torrent e-mule features.

There is no QoS expert mode, so very low priority devices are sucking all the bandwidth of highest devices priority!

Users can't allocate some predetermined IP addresses like for example X.X.X.2 to X.X.X.20 to wired then X.X.X.30 to X.X.X.35 to NASes and so on.

No standalone print server capabilities. It has a runing question for at least 5 years and stil no solving date!

Those are the major issues still needed to be solved.

 

By the way what is bugging me is the power avalable for today routers from the R8000 to R9000 the last one could easily run a 17y/o PC but tons of ressources are waisted!

Torrent features could easily run among other features if they were well programed!

Sorry to be stoburn and pig headed but the key point is why a 17Y/O  piece of equipment can do and a shiny new stuff can't!!

Message 1 of 15
chascent
Luminary

Re: R8500 V1.0.2.94_1.0.79 FW still having major issues

I concur about the QOS. Back to DDWRT for me. 

Also port 68 still shows closed and NOT STEALTH like in DDWRT.

 

CC

Model: R8500|Nighthawk X8 Tri-Band AC5300 WiFi Router
Message 2 of 15

Re: R8500 V1.0.2.94_1.0.79 FW still having major issues

@chascent  I feel really lonely tryng to help Netgear making his products better but they barely listen to me!

Message 3 of 15
JLMaysonet
Guide

Re: R8500 V1.0.2.94_1.0.79 FW still having major issues

I'm the parent of 3 young adult and a Wifee... All of us do enjoy video/audio streaming services, play on PC and consoles, upload/stream to social media services... with 15+ wired/wireless devices added to this equation...

 

My actual Internet speed is 300/25 and yep... Netgear DO REALLY NEED a better QoS / Traffic Limit/Shaping/Prioritiztion solution.

I do have to say that UPNP is doing a great job maintaining the necesary ports in check with minimal to non reboots.

 

Being honest, it is a dissapointment not having this settings/controls on such expensive router and Afaik the R9000 does not offer any better solution on this topic so I'm actually looking other routers to replace this one.

 

Also, not supporting the DD-WRT/Open Source community to develop better firmwares that can actually help Hi-End Netgears products to shine is not helping neither.

 

Admins please pass it on to Dev/Eng personnel... The competition is fierce.

Model: R8500|Nighthawk X8 Tri-Band AC5300 WiFi Router
Message 4 of 15

Re: R8500 V1.0.2.94_1.0.79 FW still having major issues

It's like having a Ferrari with a 10T trailer attached to it!!

Message 5 of 15

Re: R8500 V1.0.2.94_1.0.79 FW still having major issues

Those issues really are painfull situations witch are present since the first appearance of this router!!!

 

It could be a wake up call but nothing is happening!!!

 

Clients are grumpy and some going to the next block bakery!!

 

Look at the previous thread nothing has changed.

 

https://community.netgear.com/t5/Nighthawk-WiFi-Routers/R8500-FW-V1-0-2-64-1-0-62-still-QoS-major-is...

 

Regards.

Message 6 of 15
schumaku
Guru

Re: R8500 V1.0.2.94_1.0.79 FW still having major issues


@aalexandrebeta wrote:

There is no QoS expert mode, so very low priority devices are sucking all the bandwidth of highest devices priority!

 


There is no reason lower prioritized traffic does make use of the all bandwidth available (upstream or downstream), as long as no higher prioritized systems are active for either data direction.

 

If higher prioritised traffic is in the pipeline, lower prioritised devices can not be simply cut-off from any activity.

 

Algorithms can vary, typically one would implement queues which are worked down in different cycles. Now, one thing unclear to me is the "what-for" we have this database on top of the pure queuing. One might guess this would allow ie. VoIP RTP packets be handled in a special way, raising these to a higher priority. Defining special services would be the only option to be configurable. Minimum (or maximum) bandwidth per service might be considered. 

 

Still - nothing will really boost the Internet access beyond it's bandwidth limits.

@aalexandrebeta wrote:
There is no torrent e-mule features.

By the way what is bugging me is the power avalable for today routers from the R8000 to R9000 the last one could easily run a 17y/o PC but tons of ressources are waisted!

Torrent features could easily run among other features if they were well programed!

There is not much headroom on a dual core 1.0 GHz on 256 MB DRAM (R8000) resp. 1.4 GHz (R8500) on 512 MB DRAM clocked ARM Cortex A9 to run something that is performing reasonably without having a negative impact on the routing, the WiFi / GbE switch bridging, monitoring and administration. "Well implemented" flexible manageable BT clients are resource intensive - in I/O, in memory, and finally in processing.

@aalexandrebeta wrote:

Users can't allocate some predetermined IP addresses like for example X.X.X.2 to X.X.X.20 to wired then X.X.X.30 to X.X.X.35 to NASes and so on.

Hm, IP address space management is probably beyond. And most "plans" are quickly obsolete - especially when we think about the large amount of mobile devices, IoT, ... added to our networks almost weekly.

@aalexandrebeta wrote:

No standalone print server capabilities. It has a runing question for at least 5 years and stil no solving date!

We have the ReadySHARE Printer (USB sharing, a virtual USB port, based on the NetUSB packet if I'm right) - much more powerful, permitting even complex multi-function-devices, audio devices, ... to be shared and accessible, with minimal loss of control and capabilities - this service reuires the relate package installed on the Windows or macOS side, talking ot the router netUSB on 20005/TCP.

Further on, the R9000 here does expose four JetDirect ports for four printers on 9100/TCP ... 9103/TCP and IPP on port 631/TCP permitting CUPS/IPP clients to address one to many printer (wild guess again four), too.

Dreams of a Windows Server like print services would be fully beyond (as printing/rendering/et all must be possible on the print server, so there would be printer drivers), similar emulating an AirPrint device (which would require a Postscript processor to print on non-PS capable printers), or similar Google CloudPrint.

 

Not sure what you expect under the "standalone print server" name.

@aalexandrebeta wrote:

Sorry to be stoburn and pig headed but the key point is why a 17Y/O  piece of equipment can do and a shiny new stuff can't!!

Hm, my 20+ year old DEC Alpha systems are outperforming all these platforms in many aspects with ease. The first ones required a US DOD super computer export clearances back then - pure single core CPU units btw.

 

Just like you, I'm convinced there would be a lot of headroom to make the Nighthawk routers (much, much, ...) better.

 

-Kurt

Message 7 of 15
JLMaysonet
Guide

Re: R8500 V1.0.2.94_1.0.79 FW still having major issues

Got to confess, I did get amused with so many arguments and facts within your post! But again, those didn't justify why a Cisco SMB class Wifi Router can outperform a far more expensive one by only trying to justify and non-functional and full of flaws queuing algorithm.

 

The point is not to lecture anyone with so many arguments that can be easily challenged by just reading the advertised media and hardware packing. Other than that, can be interpreted as misleading...

 

But once again here I'm dealing with someone trying to justify why it is no performing as advertised.

 

That's why I'm done with user forums, full of people trying to looks like Guru/Mentors/Virtuoso/Advocate/Specialist without knowing to whom you are directing to. And even worst, no response or feedback from actual Netgear personnel. No even contacting them directly.

 

So, consider this conversation done. This will not get us anywhere...

Model: R8500|Nighthawk X8 Tri-Band AC5300 WiFi Router
Message 8 of 15
schumaku
Guru

Re: R8500 V1.0.2.94_1.0.79 FW still having major issues


@JLMaysonet wrote:

Got to confess, I did get amused with so many arguments and facts within your post!


Great, pleasure. Realized the quotes? Obviously not.

@JLMaysonet wrote:

But again, those didn't justify why a Cisco SMB class Wifi Router can outperform a far more expensive one by only trying to justify and non-functional and full of flaws queuing algorithm.

The point is not to lecture anyone with so many arguments that can be easily challenged by just reading the advertised media and hardware packing. Other than that, can be interpreted as misleading...

The complete QoS and priority thing implemented is a black box to all of us here. And none of us has written any advertising and packaging text. 

@JLMaysonet wrote:

 

But once again here I'm dealing with someone trying to justify why it is no performing as advertised.

 

No idea where you are reading this. And again, I have not replied to you. The hardware is nice, the Wireless performance and reliability impressive. However, the Negear Nighthawk Genie router firmware is ****, ******, ******, and leaves a lot of room for enhancements. I'm spending a lot of time and effort with some Netgear business line, product managers, and some RD engineers on Netgear and ODM payrolls to make them change by providing qualified feedback and input.

@JLMaysonet wrote:

 

That's why I'm done with user forums, full of people trying to looks like Guru/Mentors/Virtuoso/Advocate/Specialist without knowing to whom you are directing to.

 

You missed to list your position, your organisation, your certificates - all details I don't care. I don't care on whatever rank a forum admin might find sexy after some posts - appears you can't stand it. And you failed to mention the unspecified Cisco SMB router performs better in your first post in this thread. Instead you nagged about Netgear supporting some Open Source development. I would prefer Netgear would spend more time and resources in addressing these meanwhile well-known shortcomings of their QoS implementation.


@JLMaysonet wrote:

 

And even worst, no response or feedback from actual Netgear personnel. No even contacting them directly.

Wrong attendance again. We're not Netgear. @ElaineM ... can you please jump in here please? I'm done with this Gentlemen.

Message 9 of 15

Re: R8500 V1.0.2.94_1.0.79 FW still having major issues

""There is no reason lower prioritized traffic does make use of the all bandwidth available (upstream or downstream), as long as no higher prioritized systems are active for either data direction.

 

If higher prioritised traffic is in the pipeline, lower prioritised devices can not be simply cut-off from any activity.

 

Algorithms can vary, typically one would implement queues which are worked down in different cycles. Now, one thing unclear to me is the "what-for" we have this database on top of the pure queuing. One might guess this would allow ie. VoIP RTP packets be handled in a special way, raising these to a higher priority. Defining special services would be the only option to be configurable. Minimum (or maximum) bandwidth per service might be considered. ""

 

But in that case my bro's Ipad or Iphone are on low priority are sucking my wired PC bandwidth with the highest priority!!!

 

""We have the ReadySHARE Printer (USB sharing, a virtual USB port, based on the NetUSB packet if I'm right) - much more powerful, permitting even complex multi-function-devices, audio devices, ... to be shared and accessible, with minimal loss of control and capabilities - this service reuires the relate package installed on the Windows or macOS side, talking ot the router netUSB on 20005/TCP.

Further on, the R9000 here does expose four JetDirect ports for four printers on 9100/TCP ... 9103/TCP and IPP on port 631/TCP permitting CUPS/IPP clients to address one to many printer (wild guess again four), too.

Dreams of a Windows Server like print services would be fully beyond (as printing/rendering/et all must be possible on the print server, so there would be printer drivers), similar emulating an AirPrint device (which would require a Postscript processor to print on non-PS capable printers), or similar Google CloudPrint.""

 

Well this feature is acting poorly and need to have the app while on my 17Y/O SMC crap I had to configure the thing only and took me 3 minutes the exact time to download and install that useless print serve Readyshare print thing!

 

""Not sure what you expect under the "standalone print server" name."  was ment to say that to run this feature there is no need to install the app!

 

 

 

I am just pointing some true facts.

 

Message 10 of 15
schumaku
Guru

Re: R8500 V1.0.2.94_1.0.79 FW still having major issues


@aalexandrebeta wrote:

But in that case my bro's Ipad or Iphone are on low priority are sucking my wired PC bandwidth with the highest priority!!!


Still unclear to which level. Highest priority does not imply all bandwidth available.

@aalexandrebeta wrote:

 ""...Further on, the R9000 here does expose four JetDirect ports for four printers on 9100/TCP ... 9103/TCP and IPP on port 631/TCP permitting CUPS/IPP clients to address one to many printer (wild guess again four), too. ...""

 

Well this feature is acting poorly and need to have the app while on my 17Y/O SMC crap I had to configure the thing only and took me 3 minutes the exact time to download and install that useless print serve Readyshare print thing!

This print server thing is an interesing part.

 

I'm almost conviced the 910x/TCP (raw TCP) Jet Direct ports as well as the 631/TCP (and 631/UDP for lookup) IPP can't be used direct - or worse ... these are not operational at all.

These are opened all together by the KC_PRINT binary - with no insight available in the Open Source repository. When killing and then run it from the shell, ten Jet Direct ports plus the IPP pots are opened for listening:

 

root@R9000:/# /sbin/KC_PRINT
[KC] R9000 RawTCP v1.2 (port = 9100) Start (Jan 3 2017 13:57:51)
[KC] R9000 RawTCP v1.2 (port = 9102) Start (Jan 3 2017 13:57:51)
[KC] R9000 RawTCP v1.2 (port = 9104) Start (Jan 3 2017 13:57:51)
[KC] R9000 RawTCP v1.2 (port = 9103) Start (Jan 3 2017 13:57:51)
[KC] R9000 RawTCP v1.2 (port = 9105) Start (Jan 3 2017 13:57:51)
[KC] R9000 RawTCP v1.2 (port = 9107) Start (Jan 3 2017 13:57:51)
[KC] R9000 RawTCP v1.2 (port = 9108) Start (Jan 3 2017 13:57:51)
[KC] R9000 RawTCP v1.2 (port = 9106) Start (Jan 3 2017 13:57:51)
[KC] R9000 RawTCP v1.2 (port = 9109) Start (Jan 3 2017 13:57:51)
[KC] R9000 RawTCP v1.2 (port = 9101) Start (Jan 3 2017 13:57:51)
[KC] R9000 IPP v1.2 Start (Jan 3 2017 13:57:52)

 

Further on, I can't find neither any indication of the reuired USB printer devices nr the USB printer kernel object.

 

The OEM config for USB does kind of confirm:

/config/defconfig_R9000 for example:
...
# USB Support
#
# CONFIG_PACKAGE_kmod-usb-acm is not set
# CONFIG_PACKAGE_kmod-usb-atm is not set
# CONFIG_PACKAGE_kmod-usb-cm109 is not set
CONFIG_PACKAGE_kmod-usb-core=y
# CONFIG_PACKAGE_kmod-usb-hid is not set
# CONFIG_PACKAGE_kmod-usb-net is not set
# CONFIG_PACKAGE_kmod-usb-ohci is not set
# CONFIG_PACKAGE_kmod-usb-printer is not set
# CONFIG_PACKAGE_kmod-usb-serial is not set
CONFIG_PACKAGE_kmod-usb-storage=y
# CONFIG_PACKAGE_kmod-usb-storage-extras is not set
# CONFIG_PACKAGE_kmod-usb-test is not set
# CONFIG_PACKAGE_kmod-usb-uhci is not set
CONFIG_PACKAGE_kmod-usb-xhci=y
...

@aalexandrebeta wrote:

 

""Not sure what you expect under the "standalone print server" name."  was ment to say that to run this feature there is no need to install the app!

 

I am just pointing some true facts. 

I can just confirm this.

-Kurt

 

Message 11 of 15

Re: R8500 V1.0.2.94_1.0.79 FW still having major issues

This FW is still painful and not aswering the questions asked in my post.

VOX CLAMENTIS IN DESERTO

The time to respond to isues is completly not tolerable!!!

Message 12 of 15
schumaku
Guru

Re: R8500 V1.0.2.94_1.0.79 FW still having major issues


@aalexandrebeta wrote:

VOX CLAMENTIS IN DESERTO


We're still not heard loud enough. @ElaineM , @JamesGL ?

Message 13 of 15

Re: R8500 V1.0.2.94_1.0.79 FW still having major issues

@schumaku

"We're still not heard loud enough. @ElaineM , @JamesGL ?"

Assuming they care about me or us!!!!!

Do they care about the time spent here to help each other?

No!

 

Patrick C. S. Lo does not seem to know what really is going on on the basement or he is complicit!

Message 14 of 15
schumaku
Guru

Re: R8500 V1.0.2.94_1.0.79 FW still having major issues

Agree - silence is deafening.

 

For my part - I'm still behind of trying to understand (test and probably reproduce) your QoS use case with the high prio PC and your brothers iPhone and iPad.

PS. I have great experience woth products form other Netgear business units, good connections, and Beta test expereince with the SMB team. Meanwhile, I had some good communication with the R9000 product manager - but I feel some frustration on the other end. Not sure this is caused by my expectations, or by my pressure. 

Message 15 of 15
Top Contributors
Discussion stats
  • 14 replies
  • 4452 views
  • 1 kudo
  • 4 in conversation
Announcements