StarDestroyer.Net BBS

I'm getting severely outdone with this router! I had to reset it AGAIN in the past two hours because it dropped packets, this time web browser (port 80). It feels like dialup, connections drop completely at times, and every two or three page loads the browser has to do a DNS lookup, which always takes twelve times longer than the page load itself!!

Yesterday it was bittorrent (couldn't upload at all) *RESET*, then Quake 4 (kept juggling between the 'connecting to server' and 'authorizing' steps on MP) *RESET*.

Keep in mind I flashed the damn thing's firmware, gave it more air circulation, forwarded the right ports in the right ways, turned MAC cloning on and then off after everything borked quickly and completely, etc. Basically everything short of driving a meter-long hundred-kilogram pointed depleted uranium spike through it at nine klicks a second, but I'm this close to doing so as soon as I get another router and a twenty-gigajoule railgun that can accomodate such a projectile.

Recommendations on replacement? My housemates and I are of the opinion that routers shouldn't need a hard reset every three motherfucking hours.

I've found linksys routers to be extremely reliable.

Which router do you have?

InnocentBystander wrote:I've found linksys routers to be extremely reliable.

This one is apparently on the skinny end of the bell curve, then. I'm suspecting a bad capacitor in the device. Call it a hunch.

Beowulf wrote:Which router do you have?

BEFSR41 v4.

Get a WRT54GL. Note the L at the end. The currently shipping WRT54G sucks.

Beowulf wrote:Get a WRT54GL. Note the L at the end. The currently shipping WRT54G sucks.

I read about the importance of the -L suffix. Stands for Linux, which basically means 'third-party firmware ftw'!

Can I use this as a wired router? I have no wireless infrastructure and no inclination to purchase, secure, or maintain same.

Does every computer in your house run XP?

Dominus Atheos wrote:Does every computer in your house run XP?

Yup, they both do.

Do they have any firewalls? Would you be adverse to putting firewalls on them? (even just Windows Firewall)

Dominus Atheos wrote:Do they have any firewalls? Would you be adverse to putting firewalls on them? (even just Windows Firewall)

Kerio, and it's not the problem.

By the nature of your question, it's apparent you barely know me at all

Dominus Atheos wrote:Do they have any firewalls? Would you be adverse to putting firewalls on them? (even just Windows Firewall)

That would not cause the symtoms he's experiencing dude. This is an issue with the router itself. Leave the troubleshooting to those that actually know what they're talking about, mmk?

To answer your question Ein, yes you can use it just as a wired router. You can disable the wifi in the router itself.

If you were to replace that router, you'd more than likely get a v5 which runs VXWorks......which is the worst firmware you could ever come into contact with. I have the wrt54g v5 (which runs vxworks) and I have to say that I fucking HATE vxworks. I have to powercycle the router every few days because it locks up and kills ALL internet access.

Thanks for the advice and putting Dumb Ass in his place, Chris.

I gathered the bit about using it as a wired when I looked at Newegg's pic of its ass end and saw the four Ethernet ports. Although I like the idea of possibly using it temporarily in wireless when a guest brings a laptop.

I'll be careful to get the WRT54GL version with the Linux bits.

Vertigo1 wrote:

Dominus Atheos wrote:Do they have any firewalls? Would you be adverse to putting firewalls on them? (even just Windows Firewall)

That would not cause the symtoms he's experiencing dude. This is an issue with the router itself. Leave the troubleshooting to those that actually know what they're talking about, mmk?

Yeah, no fucking shit, retard.

I was asking because I needed to know what kind of router he needs, dumbass. Routers which don't have things like firewalls tend to be cheaper then those that do, fuckface.

Home networks only need routers which have DHCP and NAT. No home network needs demilitarized zones. So buying one that has those would be a waste of money.

He certainly wouldn't need a virtual private network or content filtering, so I asked what he did need, so I could recommend the best router for his needs, fucking retard.

Fuck off, DA. This is not a place I'd like a flamewar. Chris is someone I trust because I've known him almost since the board was put up; you OTOH are just a triggerhappy n00b compared to him. I'm already fucking pissed off as it is, I do NOT need an excuse to rip your fucking face off and shit down your neck handed to me on a silver fucking platter.

Also, you're the one who fucking escalated the heat, not him, fucktard. So leave the flamewars to the Big Dogs.

Dominus Atheos wrote:

Vertigo1 wrote:

Dominus Atheos wrote:Do they have any firewalls? Would you be adverse to putting firewalls on them? (even just Windows Firewall)

That would not cause the symtoms he's experiencing dude. This is an issue with the router itself. Leave the troubleshooting to those that actually know what they're talking about, mmk?

Yeah, no fucking shit, retard.

I was asking because I needed to know what kind of router he needs, dumbass. Routers which don't have things like firewalls tend to be cheaper then those that do, fuckface.

Then why were you talking about a software firewall you dipshit? You do realize that software firewalls != router firewalls, right? If you're asking what his needs are in a router, then actually ASK what he needs. Don't go on about a fucking software firewall if thats not what you're after.

Home networks only need routers which have DHCP and NAT. No home network needs demilitarized zones. So buying one that has those would be a waste of money.

No fucking shit moron. However, you do realize that most home routers ALREADY HAVE those features anyways, so your point here is MOOT.

He certainly wouldn't need a virtual private network or content filtering, so I asked what he did need, so I could recommend the best router for his needs, fucking retard.

You do realize that certain linksys routers can use third party firmware, right? If he doesn't want to use certain functionality, he can *gasp* TURN IT OFF.

For the firmware you're going to put on it to replace the default, I personally like DD-WRT, but I hear good things about OpenWRT and HyperWRT. Try not to give Sveasoft money for Alchemy/Talisman, they don't play nice with the GPL.

Alright, at Einy's request I won't turn this thread into a flamewar.

Anyway, Routers are a shot in the dark when it comes to performance. IE, you never know what you are going to get. Read this to learn what I'm talking about.

WARNING: computer information to follow. If you are not interested in computers, skip to next yellow text block.

The problem is that all routers do something called NAT, which stands for Network Address Translation. What this does is it allows all computers on a home network to share the same internet connection. When a piece of information gets sent on the internet, it gets sent to a specific IP Address. So when you click on a thread on SDN, the server SDN is hosted on sends all the posts in that thread to YOUR IP address, to be displayed on your computer screen.

But when you have 2 or more computers sharing a single internet connection, and therefore a single IP address, it is impossible to know which computer clicked on that thread. So your router keeps track of all requests sent, and routs them to the correct computer. The problem is when a router is not programmed to rout a specific type of information(called protocols). Or when it is, but badly. (which is what is happening to Einy)

P2P protocols are VERY badly supported by most routers. My Router locks up when ever I try to run bittorrent under Bitcomet. Einy's locks up every so often when he tries to run AIM under Trillian.

Technical information over

The problem is that you can never know how well a router is going to support different protocols, so you're pretty much fucked.

Just so I can show off.

All SOHO routers do NOT use NAT they use PAT, but allmost none knows the difference between those two.

Nat exchanges one internal ip to an external ip, like this:

Internal ip range 192.168.0.0/24 external 172.24.10.0/24 so the first device that connects intenaly gets one exteral ip for example 172.24.10.1 the next device connecting to the device gets 172.24.10.53 or any other external ip adress. The device keeps a table and translates the adress. = NAT

PAT exhanges internal ip adresses to ONE external IP adress with a random port.

We have 192.168.0.0/24 on the internal network and 172.24.1.1 as the external ip adres on the router. The first device that connects throu this router gets the external ip adress 172.24.1.1 and a random portnumber over 1024 for example 35675 the next device that connects to the router gets the same IP externaly 172.24.1.1 but a diffrent port = PAT

ALL devices you buy at homedeport or whatever are PAT routers but marketing goons liked the name NAT better.

Anyways end of todays lession, Einy that router sounds like a lemon, get a new one.

Dominus Atheos wrote:WARNING: computer information to follow. If you are not interested in computers, skip to next yellow text block.

Dude, don't take this the wrong way but we've got NAT covered.

Faram wrote:Just so I can show off.

All SOHO routers do NOT use NAT they use PAT, but allmost none knows the difference between those two.

Nat exchanges one internal ip to an external ip, like this:

Internal ip range 192.168.0.0/24 external 172.24.10.0/24 so the first device that connects intenaly gets one exteral ip for example 172.24.10.1 the next device connecting to the device gets 172.24.10.53 or any other external ip adress. The device keeps a table and translates the adress. = NAT

PAT exhanges internal ip adresses to ONE external IP adress with a random port.

We have 192.168.0.0/24 on the internal network and 172.24.1.1 as the external ip adres on the router. The first device that connects throu this router gets the external ip adress 172.24.1.1 and a random portnumber over 1024 for example 35675 the next device that connects to the router gets the same IP externaly 172.24.1.1 but a diffrent port = PAT

ALL devices you buy at homedeport or whatever are PAT routers but marketing goons liked the name NAT better.

Anyways end of todays lession, Einy that router sounds like a lemon, get a new one.

I'd consider calling it NAT is more imprecise then wrong. PAT's a feature of NAT. The distinction isn't really that important unless you're working on a large network environment.

You're posting in G&C and you think readers don't know what NAT is? What the fuck is your problem? 'Technical information' indeed - I bet we've got plenty of technically ignorant readers in a thread about routers. Nice posing, though.

My current routers uses a deeply shit TI chip that can't handle high load - it overheats and does dumb shit. And they put a chip like that in a 'mid-range' router. Retards.

Uh, Stark, before you go off half-cock like DA did and reach for your nukes, sometimes a nice little educational post like Faram's is actually enjoyable and good to see. Kindly take your sour puss out of this thread and go get laid. It can't be that hard.

EDIT: Umm, I need an oral podectomy, stat! I thought you were referring to Faram, not DA. My apologies.

P.S. I still hope you get laid soon anyway

PS I was directing that at DA's last post, not Faram. Him and his 'yellow block of teh technicals'. I should start quoting.

For a replacement I second the suggestion for a Linksys WRT model. I personally have the WRT54GS and haven't had to do anything to it since the initial setup, it just runs and runs well.