Im using Brume right now, and where is VPN button on the right side?
Im using it pretty often.
Another question : Brume has AGH “localhost” user problem; doesn’t show every user separately, is this problem resolved with new Openwrt?
I would suggest all the network ports (or as least two) stick to the highest speed supported.
e.g. If 2.5gbps WAN is supported, make sure as least one LAN supports 2.5gbps.
If not the 2.5gbps WAN seems to be wasted.
By the way, for those users who have 2.5gbps connection, is it 2.5gbps x1 or 1gbps x2?
It seems not easy to config or use 1g x2 on routers?
I think 2.5Gbps is wasted in general, right now. To get full advantage, you would need CAT6 Ethernet cabling throughout at home and you are unlikely to get wifi speeds that fast.
Although some ISP’s may offer 2.5Gps, I believe the takeup will be minimal for some time to come when few families are not even willing to pay for 1Gbps now.
This reminds me of 100 megapixel cameras that few need/buy to print 4x6 inch photos or watch on their 4K TV’s with 8.3 megapixels. It is mainly a marketing gimmick for rich people.
I do not work for and I do not have formal association with GL.iNet
It’s different case in Hong Kong. It is common to have CAT6 and 1gbps. ISPs offer 1gbps x2, 2.5gbps, or 1gbps x4 service plans.
You can run 10GBase T on CAT5E for short distances. 45 meters maximum, which for my house is plenty! To have the full 100 meters CAT6A is needed for 10GBase T. And that’s for 10gbps, not 2.5gbps!
2.5GBASE-T and 5GBASE-T can be deployed at a cable length of up to 100 m on CAT5E actually!
As I pointed out above; with this device it will be hard to go past 1gbit on wan due to there being only 1 2,5gbit interface. Technically a USB-A to 2.5GBASE-T could fix that.
1 Like
Hong Kong has a population of ~7.5 million in a world of ~8 billion people.
Good for you, but not for everyone.
Yes, CAT6a goes up to 10Gbps and I would never run CAT5e for 2,5Gbps. Most houses built 10+ years ago still have CAT5.
I have Brume 1 and use a Realtek wireless adaptor when needed. This makes it the most complete device for covering every scenario. Just received my Brume 2 (MT2500A), really would be nice to see WiFi support in the future.
2 Likes
My 2 GL-MT2500 should arrive on Monday. Import VAT + FedEx service fee are 24,47 € = 123,99 € total = 62 €/unit. I hope firmware is not as disastrous as the one of the Flint AX1800 even after two years.
1 Like
Modern(ish) kernel and better support package - the under the hood stuff is much better put together. Those ipq6000 products are running on duct tape and hope tbh.
1 Like
The Brume 2 not having wifi makes for less issues 
.
After ~1 week, I am still putting my Brume 2 through the paces and Firmware 4.1.1 seems okay.
I do not work for and I am not directly associated with GL.iNet
Brume 1 and Brume 2 have almost identical openvpn performance in my situation. About 52Mbs down on Nordvpn running on comcast with non vpn speed of 360Mbs otherwise.
2 Likes
I was able to get >180Mbps download/>30Mbps upload with NordVPN OpenVPN on Brume 2 (my Internet plan is max. 30Mbps upload from the ISP)
I was able to get >360Mbps download/>30Mbps upload with NordVPN WireGuard on Brume 2 (my Internet plan is max. 30Mbps upload from the ISP)
This confirms the GL.iNet advertised download speeds of 150Mbps for OpenVPN and 355Mbps for WireGuard.
2 Likes
You’re the MVP buddy
1 Like
Brume 2 running OpenVPN UDP server has pretty good download/upload throughput.
Brume 2 running WireGuard server has good download/upload throughput.
It seems strange that upload is faster than download with the OpenVPN UDP server, but download is faster than upload with the WireGuard server.
Speed tests were performed using an OpenSpeedTest server on my local network, without Internet connection limits and traffic congestion as with speedtest.net.
1 Like
I’m curious what people are using the Brume 2 for…
I’ve got mine and starting to play with it now. I’m traveling off and on for the next two weeks and I’ll be having it at home running a Wireguard server. I’ll be using my GL-AC1300 in my hotel and connecting to the Brume 2 at home (I’ve got 1Gb fiber at home).
There seems to be so much untapped potential here other that a simple VPN server. I’m thinking of setting up a MQTT Broker to offload that task from my Home Assistant server.
Other ideas?
2 Likes
What settings are you using to get speeds that slow on OpenVPN? There’s got to be something messed up on the server side because I just ran 12 tests with the following results (all on TCP … which should be even slower than UDP):
| ovpn 128-gcm | d/l | u/l |
|---|---|---|
| test 1 | 181.95 | 168.90 |
| test 2 | 177.58 | 131.32 |
| test 3 | 181.85 | 169.45 |
| ovpn chacha20-poly1305 tcp | ||
| test 1 | 148.51 | 144.93 |
| test 2 | 133.92 | 143.40 |
| test 3 | 140.55 | 143.64 |
| ovpn 128-cbc | ||
| test 1 | 159.49 | 137.16 |
| test 2 | 157.06 | 135.72 |
| test 3 | 165.97 | 133.72 |
| ovpn 256-gcm | ||
| test 1 | 149.60 | 172.46 |
| test 2 | 159.28 | 176.07 |
| test 3 | 165.96 | 174.75 |
All tests conducted with the Brume 2 hitting a VPN server on my LAN, then passing traffic out to the real internet - so in theory this should be slower than using iperf3 or a speed test server on my local network, like you did.
p.s. I know you’ve blocked me and won’t see this, but at least people can see actual OpenVPN numbers, and maybe somebody can alert you to the fact that your setup may have some serious flaw in it.
This isn’t actually too surprising since they both have the same 2x aarch64 cores, though the original Brume is clocked slower, and its stock firmware had some sort of goof that gave it substantially slower speeds on openssl than it got in Ubuntu (like… about 55% slower).
1 Like
Performance of Brume 2 cascading OpenVPN UDP server with NordVPN OpenVPN UDP client drops a lot, even more than I expected, vs. running only the server or the client individually (my Internet plan is max. 30Mbps upload only, not the download).
Unfortunately, cascading WireGuard server with NordVPN WireGuard client does not work on my Brume 2 running Firmware 4.1.1-1105. When I start WireGuard Server first, then WireGuard client will not start with error “wireguard wgclient: Could not create IPv4 socket” and “RTNETLINK answers: address is in use”. When I start WireGuard client first, then WireGuard server shows it has started, but my PC WireGuard client will not connect to the server.
EDIT 1: I realized an error in the cascading OpenVPN results … will repost after I rerun.
EDIT 2: Reposted cascading OpenVPN results … I had used wrong figures from the tests for running the server only, instead of from the tests for running both the server and client.