GL-SFT1200 Opal 4.x testing

imre · 2023-04-24T07:56:27.627Z

This is a fantastic router, just doing it’s job, I really love it!
I really hope there are no hardware barrier to continue and finish development of the 4x firmware, which should result in releasing a stable 4x firmware.
I am waiting for 4x firmware because I need the load balance/failover option, but not using the current beta and snapshot version, because there is an issue with wireguard connection.
BTW
The failover function is even working in 3x firmware!
Simply I connect a wired internet to WAN port and another one - for example - wifi in repeater mode, and when cable connection goes down, then router automatically switch to the wifi, and when cable connection is available again, it switch back again. The only drawback is, that there is no dedicated menu for failover settings in 3x, but it works with some limitations. That’s why I’m looking forward to the 4x firmware.

imre · 2023-04-29T13:35:14.395Z

The 3x firmware shapshot is released almost daily for Opal. For other routers 4x snapshots are also regularly updated, but not for Opal. As I wrote earlier, I really hope there is no hardware barrier to continue and finish development of the 4x firmware. Will there be a new shapshot? Do you plan to release a stable version and when?

alzhao · 2023-05-03T06:11:27.784Z

imre:

As I wrote earlier, I really hope there is no hardware barrier to continue and finish development of the 4x firmware. Will there be a new shapshot? Do you plan to release a stable version and when?

There will be update. This month we should be able to speed up firmware releasing.

imre · 2023-05-15T15:57:53.866Z

I have tried the new 4.2.3 beta for Opal.
The Wireguard client finally connects, and its working now, so this is a very good improvement! But… I have a few comments:

The router is connecting to the internet significantly slower (through cable, and also as a wifi repeater), than it was case with the 3.216.
Similarly, the Wireguard client also needs much-much more time to connect.
If I activate the WG client, I cannot reach the router above Opal (wich is from the wan side), regardless of whether is “Block Non-VPN Traffic” option is turned on or off. In the 3.x firmware if I turn off the Killswitch I can access it, if I turn it on, I can’t. And I think it should be that way. But with 4.2.3, when if Wireguard is active, I can’t access it in any way.

I hope these things can be improved.

hansome · 2023-05-16T09:48:40.099Z

imre:

Similarly, the Wireguard client also needs much-much more time to connect.

Thank you for your feedback. Optimization is in progress.

imre:

And I think it should be that way. But with 4.2.3, when if Wireguard is active, I can’t access it in any way.

Please turn on “Allow Access WAN”(which is below “Block Non-VPN Traffic” option).

imre · 2023-05-16T12:53:15.962Z

hansome:

Please turn on “Allow Access WAN”(which is below “Block Non-VPN Traffic” option).

Thank you very much for the feedback!
We may be misunderstanding each other.
I don’t want to allow access to Opal from WAN. I want the exact the opposite: to access the ISP-s router which is connected to the Opal’s WAN port. With 3.216 I was able to access it, even though option “Allow Access WAN” was turned off. I think, turning this option on is not the best solution for the problem.

hansome · 2023-05-17T01:32:57.425Z

Sorry I should explain it better, that option could be misleading indeed. But it does not allow WAN to be accessed by the Internet.

Please refer to “Allow Access WAN” part.

docs.gl-inet.com

VPN Dashboard - GL.iNet Docs 4

Documentation for GL.iNet Productions

imre · 2023-05-18T12:46:42.714Z

Yes, you are right. Thanks for explanation!

imre · 2023-06-10T08:25:09.538Z

Hello!
The new 4.3.2 beta1 firmware is much more stable than the previous beta version was, and the connection time is significantly shorter. It seems, router works perfectly except one bug: there is a popupping message for no apparent reason: “Timeout in response. Please check the network environment or reboot the device.” - while everything is working fine. So simply I just ignoring this message.

Screenshot_2023-06-10_10-14-161270×271 41.4 KB

davidedd · 2023-06-10T10:00:25.417Z

Hi all!
I bought GL-SFT1200 for a having a cheap network file repository/sharing drive using USB. Taking it out of the box it was running 3.x but NETWORK STORAGE feature was poor working with other devices due to outdated samba server (really old and unsafe SMB protocol shall be enabled on the network devices)

Then I upgraded to 4.1.1 (beta1), and finally NETWORK STORAGE feature worked fine (it uses samba4 server)!

Yesterday I upgraded to latest 4.2.3 (snapshot) and 4.3.2 (beta1) but the NETWORK STORAGE feature seems not available anymore!

As you can see below, 4.1.1 shows NETWORK STORAGE but it is not for 4.3.2 (the same for 4.2.3)

immagine1319×666 113 KB

You are welcome for any suggestion for enabling NETWORK STORAGE feature on 4.2 and 4.3 by official GL.iNet GUI (not by LuCI because GL.iNet is not responsible for LuCI maintenance)!

Anyway, likely, I had a local copy of 4.1.1 .tar archive and I downgraded to it, but I cannot understand why GL-iNet doesn’t give any chance to download older fw version from its website…
It sounds strange to me as well that GL-iNet is not able to create stable versions of 4.1, 4.2, 4.3. It’s pretty good introducing new features and I thanks it fot that, but previous/older features shall be kept working, then it should stabilize separately 4.1, 4.2 and 4.3…
GL-iNet, I understand that stabilizing different fw versions could be expensive, but at least leave chance to your customers to get older fw releases from your website.
GL-iNet, please bear in mind that the NETWORK STORAGE feature is part of GL-SFT1200 product specs and it should be kept working.
Thanks!

MCH · 2023-06-10T13:11:16.171Z

davidedd:

Anyway, likely, I had a local copy of 4.1.1 .tar archive and I downgraded to it, but I cannot understand why GL-iNet doesn’t give any chance to download older fw version from its website…
It sounds strange to me as well that GL-iNet is not able to create stable versions of 4.1, 4.2, 4.3. It’s pretty good introducing new features and I thanks it fot that, but previous/older features shall be kept working, then it should stabilize separately 4.1, 4.2 and 4.3…

There is a discussion on the Openwrt forum about this GL-SFT1200 Opal and other less supported device and the conclusion by some of the outside developer is something like this:

There is a huge difference between a hacked-up and partially proprietary OS somehow based on OpenWrt on one hand and on the other having all the drivers needed and a recent Linux kernel built from source, having documented the code and it being accepted by the community after review.
The former is impossible to maintain in the long-run, meaning you will have to live with bugs and vulnerabilities because you can’t do anything about it (as not all components are available in source-code form – and even if we had those sources, I bet the code quality is so low that it would still need a huge amount of work to get it cleaned up and built on top of an up-to-date Linux Kernel).

GL-iNet has some interesting and cutting edge devices that is very affordable for the consumer, but with many of the devices the user must be cognizant of what can be expected of them and the limitations that one may have to live with.

This is a list of GL-iNet devices on the OpenWrt device page, the ones on the left panel are those that OpenWrt has device-pages dedicated to them and have a better chance of full OpenWrt compatibility.

OpenWrt Wiki – 16 Dec 15

GL.inet

GL.inet Device pages Techdata pages

davidedd · 2023-06-10T15:08:17.415Z

Dear MCH,
here we are speaking about a product still in the GL-iNet products portfolio. Hundreads of pieces sold everyday on-line for example on the Amazon sales channel. GL-iNet, not the Openwrt community, has full responsibility for hardware and software and making it working in front of the customers and of the law. In my opinion, it’s useless running and running for implementing new features if the basic ones (from product specs) are not working.

Gl-iNet (that it is not the Openwrt community) decided not to stop manufacturing/selling this product and to officially move from 3.x to 4.x
If you start with 4.0 beta with some new features, it should get to a stable version with those features only…
Meanwhile, starting from results of 4.0.x you can start with 4.1 beta with additional new features till having a stable version…
That means that a Customer should be able to download 4.0.xyz, 4.1.xyz, etc., according to its need of features.

Here we are with a 4.2.3 (snapshot) and a 4.3.2 (beta) without the basic network storage feature noticed by product specs and the previous 4.1.x not downloadable anymore. What does it means? Where is a stable version? Why not giving chance to customer to download 4.0.x, 4.1.y, 4.2.z, 4.3.w each one at its state of development?

It’s clear that the Openwrt community is not supporting GL-SFT1200 but GL-iNet shall do it. The matter here is realesing tested firmware with full backward compability.

It’m not criticizing… but what should I have to do without a local copy of 4.1.1? It’s a simple suggestion that could help GL-iNet customers…

Where is it possible to download a more stable/developped version of 4.1 from a GL-iNet repository?
Meanwhile I hope GL-iNet will fix this problem on 4.2 and 4.3 considering it is part of the 4.x documentation.

eric · 2023-06-10T15:52:11.991Z

GL iNet firmware is a closed source development. They regularly change features, and do not provide access to previous beta or snapshot versions. Sometimes they even take down previous production versions, which is why I keep local copies of everything I use or test.

Multiple times GL iNet has dropped or broken features I use, and I have had to go back to a previous version of their firmware. There is no known bug list, and I have found that the documentation on changes between versions is very sparse, especially on exactly what changes were made to fix security bugs, or what features were changed or removed.

They seem to believe in the philosophy of try it you’ll like it, as many times they recommend trying the new beta version, and report back on if it works. They are not good at providing the information needed to make an intelligent decision on when to upgrade.

zim555 · 2023-12-01T19:13:14.123Z

A whole year has already passed since there was a topic about testing firmware 4.x But the development does not seem to be moving. It would be nice for the manufacturer to give his comment regarding this router model. It looks like the firmware is built automatically, only the build date changes but nothing new or fixed

admon · 2023-12-01T19:34:31.788Z

I’m using the beta 4.3.7 and it works fine:
https://dl.gl-inet.com/?model=sft1200&type=beta

WG works totally fine and I would say it’s “stable” (enough)
They already told that Network Storage won’t come back since there isn’t enough space.

Which feature is not working properly in the beta?

zim555 · 2023-12-01T21:02:37.175Z

admon:

Which feature is not working properly in the beta?

For exemple Tor, and dnscript-proxy

deva2253 · 2023-12-03T00:56:43.007Z

hello! any news about 4x stable version? thx

deva2253 · 2023-12-17T13:31:26.301Z

hello all
dear @alzhao please restore TOR feature on SFT1200 in firmware 4.x.
thanks

deva2253 · 2023-12-26T17:05:48.335Z

I see now with latest beta that the TOR feature is came back. Thanks!

zim555 · 2024-06-05T12:31:05.607Z

Please return DoH (DNS over https) and add inside firmware kmod-nf-nathelper-extra to use pptp