<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>

<rss version="2.0" xmlns:blogChannel="http://backend.userland.com/blogChannelModule">

<channel>
<title>Topic &#x27;Re: [Firmware] DD-WRT vs Tomato for UPnP and TCP connections&#x27; in forum &#x27;Linksys&#x27; - dslreports.com</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Firmware-DDWRT-vs-Tomato-for-UPnP-and-TCP-connections-22610418</link>
<description></description>
<language>en</language>
<pubDate>Fri, 10 Feb 2012 12:53:56 EDT</pubDate>
<lastBuildDate>Fri, 10 Feb 2012 12:53:56 EDT</lastBuildDate>

<item>
<title>Re: [Firmware] DD-WRT vs Tomato for UPnP and TCP connections</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Firmware-DDWRT-vs-Tomato-for-UPnP-and-TCP-connections-22654493</link>
<description><![CDATA[Napsterbater posted : <div class="bquote"><small>said by <a href="/profile/416336" onClick="this.blur(); return popup(event,'/uidpop?ajh=1&uid=416336');">robewhitener</a>:</small><br><br>I prefer Tomato 1.23.  1.25 seems to have some issues, but 1.23 seems to be rock solid.  I'm using the Victek mod..  That guy is just amazing. <br> </div>What kind of issues, 1.25 has been rock soild for me on my WRTSL54GS (man that a long model number =P)<br><small>--<br>AMD Phenom II x3 720 BE @ 3.5Ghz(OC) | 4Gb Memory @ 1600mhz | Sapphire ATI HD4870 1GB 800mhz/1000mhz(OC) | 2x500GB HDD's Raid 0 | Windows 7 Ultimate x64 Build 7100</small>]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Firmware-DDWRT-vs-Tomato-for-UPnP-and-TCP-connections-22654493</guid>
<pubDate>Sat, 04 Jul 2009 16:50:06 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: [Firmware] DD-WRT vs Tomato for UPnP and TCP connections</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Firmware-DDWRT-vs-Tomato-for-UPnP-and-TCP-connections-22651526</link>
<description><![CDATA[robewhitener posted : I prefer Tomato 1.23.  1.25 seems to have some issues, but 1.23 seems to be rock solid.  I'm using the Victek mod..  That guy is just amazing. <br><small>--<br><br></small>]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Firmware-DDWRT-vs-Tomato-for-UPnP-and-TCP-connections-22651526</guid>
<pubDate>Fri, 03 Jul 2009 19:59:40 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: [Firmware] DD-WRT vs Tomato for UPnP and TCP connections</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Firmware-DDWRT-vs-Tomato-for-UPnP-and-TCP-connections-22648381</link>
<description><![CDATA[RoadRunner79 posted : If I have DD WRT already on router is it easy to put tomato onto the router?]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Firmware-DDWRT-vs-Tomato-for-UPnP-and-TCP-connections-22648381</guid>
<pubDate>Fri, 03 Jul 2009 02:35:30 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: [Firmware] DD-WRT vs Tomato for UPnP and TCP connections</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Firmware-DDWRT-vs-Tomato-for-UPnP-and-TCP-connections-22622781</link>
<description><![CDATA[anon posted : thank you for pointing that out I have been out of the loop after Tomato 1.23<br><br>For my main router I agree Tomato is the way to go.]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Firmware-DDWRT-vs-Tomato-for-UPnP-and-TCP-connections-22622781</guid>
<pubDate>Sun, 28 Jun 2009 02:25:13 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: [Firmware] DD-WRT vs Tomato for UPnP and TCP connections</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Firmware-DDWRT-vs-Tomato-for-UPnP-and-TCP-connections-22614937</link>
<description><![CDATA[koitsu posted : At this point, I would say Tomato wins out, especially with its adoption of miniupnp.  The default upnp library (Intel's) and utility that comes with the stock firmware (and last I looked, DD-WRT) is atrocious.<br><br>I've covered this in the old and recent past:<br><br>&raquo;<A HREF="/forum/r22318762-New-Version-Of-Tomato">New Version Of Tomato</A><br>&raquo;<A HREF="/forum/r18269779-wrt54gl-DDWRT-and-UPnP">wrt54gl / DD-WRT and UPnP</A><br><small>--<br>Making life hard for others since 1977.<br>I speak for myself and not my employer/affiliates of my employer.</small>]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Firmware-DDWRT-vs-Tomato-for-UPnP-and-TCP-connections-22614937</guid>
<pubDate>Fri, 26 Jun 2009 12:06:15 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>[Firmware] DD-WRT vs Tomato for UPnP and TCP connections</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Firmware-DDWRT-vs-Tomato-for-UPnP-and-TCP-connections-22610418</link>
<description><![CDATA[anon posted : I would like to know all of yours opinions as to witch firmware has the best UPnP  and TCP management ability. ]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Firmware-DDWRT-vs-Tomato-for-UPnP-and-TCP-connections-22610418</guid>
<pubDate>Thu, 25 Jun 2009 16:44:38 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

</channel>
</rss>

