Netgear → FM114P R22 firmware

said by NickG8:

---

You can make one yourself using a Linux box in a few hours and it'll be rock stable and stay up for years, so why Netgear are finding it so difficult is really beyond me.

Nick...

---

I recently downloaded RH linux and they gave me a month long support account. I received more security patch notices from them in one month than I have from MS in three...

So maybe software is more complicated than you would like to admit, or maybe we should all have zero faith in using linux to set up a router with.

said by NickG8:

---

I'm a software developer myself with a degree in Computer Engineering and I still don't understand how they can really be this bad at making a simple router! You can make one yourself using a Linux box in a few hours and it'll be rock stable and stay up for years, so why Netgear are finding it so difficult is really beyond me.

Nick...

---

BUT FR114P only have 1M flash, a full fucntional OS cant be installed into this too small flash.

I just want to say that at last my issues with SSH are definitely gone with this firmware release. Good work netgear !!

In fact: the R22-release is a good work from netgear, except the performance loss.... I changed back to R21c ... I hope they´ll fix it soon, ´cause now my long-url-problem is back...

CU

said by DocCardan:

---

In fact: the R22-release is a good work from netgear, except the performance loss.... I changed back to R21c ... I hope they´ll fix it soon, ´cause now my long-url-problem is back...

CU

---

Me too..I changed back to R21c..it is significantly faster.

quote:

---

I recently downloaded RH linux and they gave me a month long support account. I received more security patch notices from them in one month than I have from MS in three...

---

quote:

---

BUT FR114P only have 1M flash, a full fucntional OS cant be installed into this too small flash.

---

I said Linux - not Redhat! Obviously you wouldn't try to put an entire desktop operating system like Redhat Linux or Windows XP on a router. Redhat has many security updates because it has thousands of packages. You need just a tiny fraction of those to make a router.

I meant using a distribution designed for routing like the Linux Router Project (»www.linuxrouter.org/) which easily fits on a floppy disk (despite being a "fully functional OS"). Or any version of Linux designed for embedded networking systems will probably be less than 1Mb.

Nick...

said by NickG8:

---

I said Linux - not Redhat! Obviously you wouldn't try to put an entire desktop operating system like Redhat Linux or Windows XP on a router. Redhat has many security updates because it has thousands of packages. You need just a tiny fraction of those to make a router.
Nick...

---

You missed my point. My point was that writing software is not as simplistic as you make it. And yes, I do write software for a living. No matter what, bugs get introduced. Typically several people are on a project and everything is in a time crunch. You do your best and think there are no issues but inevitably something will pop up. When it does, you fix it and do your best once again.

Knock Netgear all you want, they may well be at fault for not having a better firmware by now, but I don't care how stripped down a linux you run, it has bugs. ALL SOFTWARE OF ANY MERIT DOES, just like all CPU's in existence have errata, bugs, and stuff corrected in bios.

I disagree. Software has bugs when it's first released, but Netgear have released about 50 versions of the firmware now and they really should have fixed fundamental problems like TCP sessions being dropped, ping-of-death vulnerability before now. It's not like this is the first version where I would expect to find bugs - this router has been out for ages. They keep adding new features like UPnP when they still haven't got the basic features working reliably. Most people are still reporting random lockups and bugs in the most recent versions of the firmware. They even occasionally email out firmware that has huge bugs noticeable with just a few minutes of testing. Stuff like this shouldn't be released - the testing should happen in-house in a controlled manner. They should have to wait for us lot to keep e-mailing them a list of bugs every time a new firmware is released.

I just can repeat: the R22 is a very good beta firmware release, it is stable at all. The only thing about it is the low performance. I hope they´ll fix this soon, and I would be glad to be emailed with a R22a attached.

And for me personaly UPnP is a basic feature...I don´t want to miss it.

Good work so far netgear, keep on like this..it is on the right way...

CU

said by DocCardan:

---

I just can repeat: the R22 is a very good beta firmware release, it is stable at all. The only thing about it is the low performance.

---

I tend to agree, it seems stable. The performance problems seem to stem from two areas...

1.) Regardless of the router's MTU setting (I tried both the "default" and "custom" settings at 1500), I would see a reduced MSS (1428) with the new firmware as seen in the Tweak Test. In past versions of firmware, the MSS shown was 1460 (properly reflecting my MTU setting of 1500 for a DHCP connection). I reloaded 1.41b19 this morning, and the MSS was back to 1460... and my speeds were back, too.

2.) My line monitor showed brief periods of HUGE latency from time to time (up to 4 seconds!) with the new software, although monitor test latency was low (50 mS) the remainder of the time. This was even during periods of NO local use (3 AM), and with all logging disabled in the router. Going back to the earlier firmware helped this, too.

I think Netgear is getting close, but I decided not to run 1.422 now because of these problems.

Dan

My tip: use R21c ... it is beside the google-bug very stable and high performing. It also has perfect UPnP.

CU

Now 5 day have gone since I mailed to betabugs...and still no answere.I would like to know,if they realy work around the performance-loss of R22.....

You should have gotten an auto response when you emailed them. If you take the time to read the auto response, it clearly states that they will only send you a reply if they need to compile more information. They don't reply to everyone, until they have a new release to send you. These things have never happen overnight.

I mailed a lot with betabugs ... and I never got a auto-response, I always got a personel answere.

CU

You're right, I'm mistaken about the auto reply. It's on the website and the beta release notes. Here's what it says.

Reporting Bugs in Beta Software:
Beta software is not supported through NETGEAR’s Customer Support group. To report a bug in the beta software, please send email to:
betabugs@netgear.com
Please tell us the model number and beta software version with your report. You will not receive a response unless further information is necessary.
Thank you! NETGEAR appreciates your participation in our beta program.

said by DocCardan:

---

I just can repeat: the R22 is a very good beta firmware release, it is stable at all. The only thing about it is the low performance.
CU

---

I simply disagree with that.
I don't notice any decrease of speed with R22.
Still the full bandwith as it used to be.
With gaming (tried Quake 3 Arena) its seems pretty
fast, if not faster.
I am happy with this beta.
And stable, didn't have to restart the router once
since this firmware. With R21 that was couple of times
a day.

... so you are the first one who reports this ... in fact here are a few people who noticed the performance loss, I know also a lot of people from european boards who have this problem.

CU

Not only a performance degrade, but also a definite bug is reported here with firmware 1.4 R22:
My Router freezes/hangs always when trying to connect with another Notebook (DELL Inspiron 8200 with Broadcom 10MBit WLAN mini-pci adapter).
I had to reverse to the old - and official - 1.3 R 05 Release.

Regards,
Christian

I haven't noticed any performance loss compared with any other release. Ping times are identical and I can still download at close to the theoretical maximum speed for my line.

Are you using WEP?

Nick...

im going to have to agree with NickG. These bugs are ridiculous.

There has been no such thing as a stable firmware with this product as far as im concerned. It was put on the market with inadequate testing.

By the way with your Linux routing topic, you could use Freesco. That runs off a floppy.

Has anyone else noticed that even if you have the MTU set to 1500 in the FM114P, it still shows up in the tweak test here as 1468?

This is not a ridiculous bug at all, a lot of fr114p- and fm114p-user have the problem, and the slow down is significantly. In my case, I went back to 1421c.

CU

said by Zaphrox:

---

Has anyone else noticed that even if you have the MTU set to 1500 in the FM114P, it still shows up in the tweak test here as 1468?

---

Yes... I saw this too. I think this is where some of the performance loss originates, especially for folks that need to run at a full 1500.

Dan

said by Good Ol Dan:

---

Yes... I saw this too. I think this is where some of the performance loss originates, especially for folks that need to run at a full 1500.

Dan

---

Netgear has now posted the R22 beta firmware on their support site. Item 32 of the changelog says:
"Change default MTU size: DHCP:1468, PPPoE:1460, PPTP:1430."

I wonder if this is the problem.

speaking of 1421c, where is it? I have 1421, but I haven't been able to find this elusive 'c' rev. So if someone could point me to it I would appreciate it!

Thanks!

said by Zaphrox:

---

speaking of 1421c, where is it? I have 1421, but I haven't been able to find this elusive 'c' rev. So if someone could point me to it I would appreciate it!

Thanks!

---

I think this is it: »Re: FR114P acting strange

I don't recommend using 21c though. It still has issues with long URLs.
[text was edited by author 2003-05-01 18:26:46]

said by melevittfl:

---

Netgear has now posted the R22 beta firmware on their support site. Item 32 of the changelog says:
"Change default MTU size: DHCP:1468, PPPoE:1460, PPTP:1430."

I wonder if this is the problem.

---

Well, the default SAYS it's 1500, even though it's not. And you can apparently no longer change the "custom" value to 1500... as soon as you try, it selects "default" all by itself.

Dan

Phooey on all this almost-ready-for-the-market firmware with its lame performance and lockups!

I got out my trusty old RT311 (flashed to a Zyxel P310) and a Linksys 5-port switch, ripped out the FR114P and put in the old stuff. Speeds are up, pings are down, and it still shows full "stealth". I'll do without the print server for now.

I sure would like to see a good, stable, high-performance firmware load for the FR114P... until then it's back to the old "iron", which still kicks butt.

Geez... I've got a RT311/P310, RP114 and now a FR114P in my junkbox. I'm starting to feel like BestBuy here. I guess I'm loyal to Netgear though... I gave away a Linksys BEFSX41 that I tried (it was a real POS).

Dan

Hi there,

I have a FR114P with FW 1.4R22 on a PPPoE DSL connection. Now what I found is, that I had to set my MTU back to 1500 on LAN side (in the router menu and the PC) to get max performance. Download at max. rate (768 kBit/s) is no problem. I just want to point out that the MTU, which can be adjusted in the FR114P is for the LAN side. There is no setting for the WAN side.
I can ping with these settings with DF Bit set:

ping www.microsoft.de -f -l 1472

Ping www.microsoft.de [212.184.80.190] mit 1472 Bytes Daten:

Antwort von 212.184.80.190: Bytes=1472 Zeit=210ms TTL=123
Antwort von 212.184.80.190: Bytes=1472 Zeit=170ms TTL=122
Antwort von 212.184.80.190: Bytes=1472 Zeit=210ms TTL=122
Antwort von 212.184.80.190: Bytes=1472 Zeit=230ms TTL=122

Ping-Statistik für 212.184.80.190:
Pakete: Gesendet = 4, Empfangen = 4, Verloren = 0 (0% Verlust),
Ca. Zeitangaben in Millisek.:
Minimum = 170ms, Maximum = 230ms, Mittelwert = 205ms

adding the 28 Byte for the ICMP header I get 1500 Bytes on the LAN.
Comments are welcome.

Side note: to my big surprise I found that I can ping my DynDNS name from the LAN (PC with Win2k). Some testing revealed that setting my PC as DMZ host allowed me to connect to a FTP server running there from the LAN through the use of my DynDNS name (f.e. ftp myname.gotdns.com). The server showed an incoming connection with the WAN IP of the router to port 21.
The connection was blocked when blocking FTP in the Rules/Services menus of the FR114P, exactly as if the connection attempt was originated in the Internet.

Would be interesting to get some other infos on that matter, as some people in this forum were looking for NAT loopback ...

Have fun.

I have access to my ftp-server within my lan (it also shows my wan-ip) without putting me in dmz....fw r2421c, but it worked with several previous versions too. Bye the way, this does not mean, that netgear has loopback, cause webservers and steaming livecams are not reachable from inside lan.

CU
[text was edited by author 2003-05-03 10:43:31]