OK, you don’t have anything to show.
So let GL-iNet to tell us what they are finding on their measurement.
This is what they announced:
I honestly wonder if these speeds where taken from what mediatek advertises with their chip vs what the router can do.
But especially for 802.11n I’m smh not seeing that happen on my speeds, maybe from driver reports/band speed, but not the actual speed on devices😉, these QAM rates are also discussed by OpenWrt and not considered a standard, for now its more of a trick/hack they are pulling in vendor sdks.
Some devices can work with that and some not, it makes it extra difficult to know what is what, and then you also got WED offloading which is very nice but barely affects cpu anymore which kinda make a test look nicer than what it actually is, so i also wonder where these stats are taken 
1 Like
You’re losing time.
These speeds are what is advertised from the vendor, you can see specific details by searching for the chip based on the Flint 2, the Filogic 830.
PS: Every router vendor does this. Just wake up…
1 Like
I don’t think I’m losing time asking for their measurements to compare against what they have announced 
They announced what the vendor says. And this is the same for every router brands.
Again and again and again…we are talking about same things.
Great, so they can ask to their vendors why the chipset is not given the performance announced.
Again? 
Why are you ignoring what I already said before?
in 4.5.7 a lot of tools miss from the package repository (at least fdisk, cfdisk, cryptsetup, several modules like kmod-crypto-user)
edit:
glinet_packages (4.5.5) was 816kB, glinet_gli_packages is a mere 626 kB, so I guess ~ 25% are missing.
edit 2:
~25% were a good guess, it’s 9712 packages in 4.5.5 and 4.5.6 (same distfeeds.conf) vs. 7757 packages in 4.5.7
There’s not much incentive to update when functionality is abandoned, GL-inet starts to remind of Microsoft where updating is a sure receipt for trouble
3 Likes
Yes, for certification from regulatory bodies a lab is used. Most of us don’t have a telecom lab sitting at home inside a Faraday Cage. But most of the better reviewers set up their test routers and nodes in the same locations and with the same WIFI parameters to be able to compare router performance. Pretty much all the reviewers do it that way. That is not 10 decimal place precise, but it is directionally correct testing.
1 Like
After being on 4.57 for about 8 hours…I decided to go back to 4.56 (Uboot restore) for now…Until I can figure out what I’m going to do…Clearly this whole Flint 2 firmware thing is going nowhere at least in the short term. I may give the Open-Wrt Snapshot a go and of course pull my hair out trying to get that going…Or just sit still for a while…Or abandon this all together and go back to Asus Merlin…
3 Likes
Would you mind sharing with us what the issues are, you discovered?
An extremely uneasy feeling that I was sitting on a flawed unpatched firmware by a company that does not know what to do and are more concerned with designing picture frames for their next 21.02 router.
5 Likes
Using an Openwrt snapshot and is working very well I have to say. Some devices that were not able to connect to both wifi with lg.net firmware (both .6 and .7) are now working very well.
1 Like
So not real issues, just emotional ones. I see.
1 Like
Fully expected that response from you. Not looking to get into a p contest with you. No I’m not a Router Programmer/Engineer…I do know from experience that when companies do stuff like this…I lose complete confidence. I guess you feel differently. To each his own.
6 Likes
Well, ain’t my reasons good enough?
A firmware missing ~25% of package repository, missing essential tools like fdisk and (the needed modukes for) cryptsetup is enough reason to downgrade.
TBH I do use the Flint2 only as switch, AP and DHCP-/VPN-server, kept my Beryl as router and kept it on firmware 3.x bc firmware v.4 already is a huge step down, made by people w/o actual networking practice who downgraded functionality (especially
- Clients | Block blocking not internet access anymore but LAN access which is a ridiculous function for a small/home net! One needs Smarthome and alike devices in the LAN but not in the internet!
- kill switch in v.4 blocks direct access to networks as well so in v.4 one has to choose either VPN bypass or having a killswitch)
1 Like
Currently I‘m running 4.5.4 as this one is working more of less stable besides the WiFi issues. I’ve seen multiple people in this thread which also stay on that version as the newer ones had new issues. Hopefully they are creating a new firmware with the updated OpenWRT branch based on the 4.5.4 version which then may resolves some remaining issues.
3 Likes
Yeah, totally essential packages like fdisk or cryptsetup on a router for consumers.
I don’t understand why people are always trying to do professional things without having a clue. OpenWrt is simply some kind of Linux, so just use the power, Luke!
cd /tmp
wget https://archive.openwrt.org/releases/21.02.0/packages/aarch64_cortex-a53/base/libfdisk1_2.36.1-2_aarch64_cortex-a53.ipk && opkg install libfdisk1_2.36.1-2_aarch64_cortex-a53.ipk
wget https://archive.openwrt.org/releases/21.02.0/packages/aarch64_cortex-a53/base/fdisk_2.36.1-2_aarch64_cortex-a53.ipk && opkg install fdisk_2.36.1-2_aarch64_cortex-a53.ipk
And … 
root@robbenrouter:~# fdisk -v
fdisk from util-linux 2.36.1
1 Like
Sure, bc. a sane user does automated backup to encrypted external media.
Whilst he can use a Linux machine or VM (needs to own it to use it!) to create said media he still cannot open and mount it in 4.5.7.
But I see how ‘serious’ your approach is. What a pity, v.3 were cool versatile actually usable routers.
regarding the rest:
Already downgraded to 4.5.6 and will probably stay with it for a while, it’s just too much effort to check/edit your scripts after each update, it’s really like with MSFT.