GL-SFT1200 Opal OpenWrt Support

alzhao · 2025-01-19T20:47:50.117Z

There was still one issue not resolved. Let me check out.

projects · 2025-01-22T22:50:13.823Z

Is there any way of using openwrt on this router? I see a lot of threads on the Internet that are a little confusing. Some say it will never happen and some say it seems there is hope or even something already out. In my case, image builder for this using openwrt is all I need.

hecatae · 2025-01-23T09:08:10.096Z

Do you need a specific Openwrt version, as it's possible to build the Openwrt 18.06 SDK without GL goodies, what are you missing in the stock firmware?

projects · 2025-01-23T14:03:42.583Z

The most important things for me case is using the latest ssl related things so that when I install these things remotely, they don't just stop communicating and I have to have them shipped back or go running around. It's happened twice already so I no longer use old builds. I also need image builder because using source is overkill for what I need.

Anyhow, the question was, is there actually a current version of openwrt that does or will run on this because the threads are a bit confusing to know that.

I basically just need a gl.inet with one 1Gbps port that is not well over $50 which is why I bought this one.

hecatae · 2025-01-23T15:42:45.430Z

Ok, so as you have probably seen, the Opal is currently using a Openwrt 18.06 Software Development Kit provided by Siflower.
This gives you a 4.14 kernel and other stuff which is not quite up to date.

github.com

GitHub - Siflower/1806_SDK

Contribute to Siflower/1806_SDK development by creating an account on GitHub.

Siflower back in August 2024 added the chipset the Opal uses to Mainline Openwrt by adding the SF19A2890 Evaluation Board:
https://git.openwrt.org/?p=openwrt/openwrt.git;a=commit;h=4ed209326b5299584ad22b82d0f5ba0d12ceb169

There's been various comments on here and the Openwrt forums that the ethernet is missing, or the wireless stuff is not correct, or something else.

At present it's very much a mess, especially when you consider that GL is probably the biggest customer Siflower has, and had not informed them of the Openwrt mainline commit.

Here's hoping @alzhao gets an update on the thing tht is stopping them from releasing a 6.6 kernel based op24 version for the Opal which would save the development team from having to backport so many changes to the 4.14 SDK version.

projects · 2025-01-23T16:00:58.100Z

Thanks for the info. It sounds like I need to send this back. It's too bad because it's the only gigabit port device they have that is under $50.00.

I use a bunch of these and don't want to pay anywhere near $50.00 per device. I don't see any others in this price range with Gigabit port, even if SOC based, that would be fine for my needs.

hecatae · 2025-01-23T16:41:17.857Z

Agreed, gigabit port device, USB C powered, 128 NAND, 128 RAM, there's nothing else in this price range.

projects · 2025-01-23T16:55:30.466Z

Bit confusing they don't have one unless they are simply trying to push the options into the higher price range. Guess I'll have to use another brand at this point.

SourMilk · 2025-01-26T17:04:13.728Z

I've just ordered one of these assuming it would be based on the latest OpenWrt but it's based on 18.06 from 2020 with a 4.x kernel. I saw the commit but am also confused. Can we build images from source for this based on current OpenWrt or do we have to wait/be lucky that Siflower/GL.iNet updates this at some point?

hecatae · 2025-01-26T17:36:18.818Z

The mainline Openwrt commit is for the Siflower evaluation board.
Both GL.iNet and Sinovoip have released products based on the same 18.06 SDK provided by Siflower.

GL have found something doesn't work regarding the WiFi or ethernet and have asked Siflower to fix this.

There's also a chance the SF1200 Meet could be officially supported by mainline Openwrt if Siflower fixes the outstanding issue.

Anything to save these capable devices from ending up in landfill or running an unsupported SDK for longer than necessary.

SourMilk · 2025-01-26T18:07:12.790Z

Thank you for the informative reply, you have removed my confusion! I'll hold on to it for now and do testing with the stock firmware and if anything is missing try to build my own using the SDK though I don't think that includes any fixed/improvements made by GL.iNet.

hecatae:

Anything to save these capable devices from ending up in landfill or running an unsupported SDK for longer than necessary.

Spot on! Plus they are still be sold online in many shops including their own. This would imply they wouldn't just EOL the device next week as that would upset many customers who just bought it. So I remain hopeful

If anyone from GL.iNet is reading along, please note that this cheap device could very well be the gateway "drug" people need to get into your ecosystem. I'm pretty sure other brands do this on purpose, not sure if you guys it on purpose too. But keeping at least one entry device supported and well priced will entice many new users. Me included!

eric · 2025-01-26T18:49:57.181Z

You may want to read some past posts on abandoned routers from GL iNet before you get your hopes up. The SF1200 was dropped and there is no OpenWrt version, so those routers are headed to the landfill.

The USB150 and N300 are two products that were promised 4.x upgrades, which GL iNet later reneged on. Now, they are past support. Fortunately, unlike the Opal and SF1200, there are current OpenWrt versions for these routers, allowing users to keep using the devices safely.

I would never buy a GL iNet router that did not have current OpenWrt firmware available at the time I bought it, as one never knows how long GL iNet will support a product.

hecatae · 2025-01-26T21:33:56.979Z

SF1200 is supported until May 2026

gl-inet.com – 14 May 24

GL-SF1200's Product End-of-Life Notice

We're discontinuing the manufacturing of GL-SF1200 as we offer an alternative product with better performance and efficiency. Learn more about GL-SF1200's support period.

eric · 2025-01-26T21:48:42.891Z

As someone who has experienced GL iNet support during the period between being discontinued and end of support, I expect the SF1200 will get very minimal support during this period.

Unlike many other GL iNet routers, there is no OpenWrt firmware to move to, so the SF1200 is heading to the landfill.

bpwl1 · 2025-01-26T22:23:57.291Z

The SFT1200 and SF1200 are 2 quite different devices AFAIK.

SourMilk · 2025-01-26T23:47:04.673Z

bpwl1:

The SFT1200 and SF1200 are 2 quite different devices AFAIK.

An important distinction to make! It would be very odd (and telling) if they sold a device today knowing they will make it obsolete in 15 months.

I have no experience at all wit this brand, I dipped my toes in cheaply and will see how this device behaves. I assume CVE's (if any) will be patched and I see the beta firmware is from December 2024. I don't mind running older kernels/software as long as it's safe and secure.

As an aside I bought a brand new cheap Zyxel wifi6 router for testing, it's on kernel 3.x not even kidding but it works great and is supported. The what I call Debian approach doesn't have to be bad as long as security and severe bugs get patched and back ported.

I do hope we'll see some more movement in getting OpenWrt on it at some point, the commit is promising even though it may mean nothing in the end. Guess it's a glass half full or half empty situation.

Amazon Germany shifts at least 200 of these a month. I don't know if this number is for all Amazon sites or just the German one. Still 200 units sold a month should be a nice push to keep this device interesting now and in the future.

Screenshot 2025-01-27 at 00.42.431162×272 50.7 KB

With the current voucher it's not too bad. According to this items pricing history they either sell it around 37 euro without a voucher or around 43 with a voucher. In the end you always pay the same, some people will feel better when they get a 7 euro discount. Marketing is wonderful lol.

projects · 2025-01-26T23:51:49.381Z

What's really frustrating is having to buy other brands because gl.inet simply won't come out with a sub $50 gigabit routers. I always prefer buying gl.inet when possible but don't want to get stuck with devices that won't be supported for long. Using 18.x is a bad idea for many reasons, including ssl CA's and other things moving on while openwrt would not for this.

bpwl1 · 2025-01-27T09:27:25.100Z

I have a very similar story. Just stumbled into GL.inet because some tourists brought 5 of these devices and disturbed my Mikrotik wifi provision. Surprised to see another device besides Mikrotik (GL.inet) that could do Enterprise (EAP) logon, on the 5 GHz channels.

Bought GL.inet to test and to make instructions for proper setup and use, and also found Cudy TR1200 to be similar (and same price range) . Mikrotik is too complicated for the occasional user, despite the Quickset setup. Cudy cannot do EAP logon, so is stuck to the portal logon in my managed wifi. But the Cudy TR1200 performs very well (is only 100MHz eth) , and has Zerotier. Their advanced use is on a different path.. Less features in GUI, which is based on LUCI, but one can install supported OpenWRT instead.

OpenWRT 18.06 is not a problem for me (but maybe that's why SSHUTTLE on recent Ubuntu complains about ssh-rsa key offered)

Release 4.7.2beta brings the SFT1200 features up to date with the other models. There may still be some bugs in that beta. (TXpower and DFS connection). If bugs fixed , the SFT1200 will be the recommended device, and can be a travel router for many years.

There was also a TP-link in the competition, but I had bad experience with a bricked router.

nonaname · 2025-01-27T18:50:24.428Z

hecatae:

SF1200

SF1200 not SFT1200.

But codings of products really strange. Too many almost same codings. For example E750 and X750

Maybe use different numbers?

eric · 2025-01-28T00:33:12.812Z

GL.iNet makes some solid routers, but their product naming is a dumpster fire. How are we supposed to navigate this chaos? The “Slate” alone has four variants (Slate, Slate Plus, Slate AX, Slate 7), and the AR750 (Creta) vs AR750S (Slate) makes zero sense. Then there’s the AR300M, AR300M-Lite and the AR300M16. Same name, different firmware and specs. Why reuse names if the specs aren’t compatible?

A simple fix? Stop recycling names and product numbers. This is marketing 101!