WRE54G Latest Firmware?
The Walrus
latest on the LinkSys site I figured I must have the most up to date because
it wouldn't install. I got the message: "Firmware install failed! Firmware
too large!"
Am I right?
Jeff Liebermann
No, it's not. According to the Linksys web pile at:
<http://www.linksys.com/servlet/Satellite?c=L_CASupport_C2&childpagename=US%2FLayout&cid=1166859842852&pagename=Linksys%2FCommon%2FVisitorWrapper&lid=4285237314B259&displaypage=download#versiondetail>
2.01.12 is the latest firmware for the WRE54G.
--
Jeff Liebermann je...@comix.santa-cruz.ca.us
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558
Tony Hwang
Forget Linksys f/w. Load dd-wrt one.
Jeff Liebermann
>"The Walrus" <nos...@please.com> hath wroth:
>
>>I have 3.01.01 on a version 3 router. Since I tried to flash with the
>>latest on the LinkSys site I figured I must have the most up to date because
>>it wouldn't install. I got the message: "Firmware install failed! Firmware
>>too large!"
>>
>>Am I right?
>
>No, it's not. According to the Linksys web pile at:
><http://www.linksys.com/servlet/Satellite?c=L_CASupport_C2&childpagename=US%2FLayout&cid=1166859842852&pagename=Linksys%2FCommon%2FVisitorWrapper&lid=4285237314B259&displaypage=download#versiondetail>
>2.01.12 is the latest firmware for the WRE54G.
This is weird. This article:
<http://www.smallnetbuilder.com/content/view/29840/98/>
shows that 3.01.01 is the latest firmware for v3. The accompanying
picture also shows 3.01.01 dated Jan 2006.
<http://www.smallnetbuilder.com/images/stories/wireless/linksys_wrt54g_setup_revised/wre54g-setup-page8.jpg>
However, the 2.01.12 on the Linksys web pile is dated 3/30/2005.
Where did you find 3.01.01?
Jeff Liebermann
Are you sure that it DD-WRT works on the WRE54G (various revisions)?
It doesn't seem to be on the shopping list of supported devices:
<http://www.dd-wrt.com/wiki/index.php/Supported_Devices>
Linksys does have open source code available for the v1 mutation, but
methinks the v2 and v3 versions use a different chipset and probably
won't work:
<http://www.linksys.com/servlet/Satellite?c=L_Content_C1&childpagename=US%2FLayout&cid=1115416836002&pagename=Linksys%2FCommon%2FVisitorWrapper>
OpenWRT lists the WRE54G v1 as using a Broadcom chipset, but that the
firmware is "untested".
<http://wiki.openwrt.org/TableOfHardware?action=show&redirect=toh>
The Walrus
news:t7r013he43lq0heno...@4ax.com...
> "The Walrus" <nos...@please.com> hath wroth:
>
>>I have 3.01.01 on a version 3 router. Since I tried to flash with the
>>latest on the LinkSys site I figured I must have the most up to date
>>because
>>it wouldn't install. I got the message: "Firmware install failed!
>>Firmware
>>too large!"
>>
>>Am I right?
>
> No, it's not. According to the Linksys web pile at:
> <http://www.linksys.com/servlet/Satellite?c=L_CASupport_C2&childpagename=US%2FLayout&cid=1166859842852&pagename=Linksys%2FCommon%2FVisitorWrapper&lid=4285237314B259&displaypage=download#versiondetail>
> 2.01.12 is the latest firmware for the WRE54G.
Well, see how funny that is? Because on my WRE54G it clearly states the
firmware version is 3.01.01, dated January 12, 2006. The 2.01.12 to which
you refer is dated March of 2005. I made sure I chose the correct model and
version number, which is 3.
The Walrus
news:W7_Ph.16232$aG1.2195@pd7urf3no...
The thing is, I'm in a situation where I have to install these for other
people, which is why I made myself the guinea pig. I really cannot afford
to put myself in the position of having to take a return that has
non-LinkSys firmware installed, or to have it not being replaceable under
warranty if something goes wrong down the road.
I've learned enough that I could comfortably recommend the WRT54G and
WRT54GS routers for people in small- to medium-sized one story homes or
apartments. My house is a tad too long from one end to the other without
help from a range extender. I can say that the boost you get from a WRE54G
range extender is good only to within 15-20 of the PC, and it isn't worth a
shit going through walls. There has to be something better.
Having said all of that, does the firmware you refer to actually improve
throughput? And do they supply firmware for range extenders as well?
Thank you.
The Walrus
> Jeff Liebermann <je...@comix.santa-cruz.ca.us> hath wroth:
>
>>"The Walrus" <nos...@please.com> hath wroth:
>>
>>>I have 3.01.01 on a version 3 router. Since I tried to flash with the
>>>latest on the LinkSys site I figured I must have the most up to date
>>>because
>>>it wouldn't install. I got the message: "Firmware install failed!
>>>Firmware
>>>too large!"
>>>
>>>Am I right?
>>
>>No, it's not. According to the Linksys web pile at:
>><http://www.linksys.com/servlet/Satellite?c=L_CASupport_C2&childpagename=US%2FLayout&cid=1166859842852&pagename=Linksys%2FCommon%2FVisitorWrapper&lid=4285237314B259&displaypage=download#versiondetail>
>>2.01.12 is the latest firmware for the WRE54G.
>
> This is weird. This article:
> <http://www.smallnetbuilder.com/content/view/29840/98/>
> shows that 3.01.01 is the latest firmware for v3. The accompanying
> picture also shows 3.01.01 dated Jan 2006.
> <http://www.smallnetbuilder.com/images/stories/wireless/linksys_wrt54g_setup_revised/wre54g-setup-page8.jpg>
>
> However, the 2.01.12 on the Linksys web pile is dated 3/30/2005.
>
> Where did you find 3.01.01?
Installed on my expander.
Jeff Liebermann
>I've learned enough that I could comfortably recommend the WRT54G and
>WRT54GS routers for people in small- to medium-sized one story homes or
>apartments. My house is a tad too long from one end to the other without
>help from a range extender. I can say that the boost you get from a WRE54G
>range extender is good only to within 15-20 of the PC, and it isn't worth a
>shit going through walls. There has to be something better.
Since you're apparently selling this problem as a solution, allow me
to offer some free experience:
RANGE EXTENDERS AND REPEATERS SUCK
A marginal exception are WDS bridges (repeaters), which the WRE54G
sorta emulates. I consider repeaters to be no better than jammers. I
also consider store and forward (single channel) wi-fi mesh networks
in the same class. They all double the amount of airtime used by a
given system. This leaves less airtime for other users who have to
share the same airspace and channel. In addition, the lack of
sufficiently detailed standards and zero Wi-Fi certification for
repeaters, results in some rather rotten implimentations. I've spent
considerable effort trying to make them work including MAC level
parameter hacking trying to get the timing correct and staring at a
protocol analyzer all day. I could make it work for some
configurations, with some access points, at some speeds, and during
some phase of the moon, but there was no way I could conjur something
that would work under all conditions.
There is also the not so minor problem of a 50% minimum slowdown of
maximum thruput speed in such a repeater (or mesh system). Some light
reading.... bug me if you want details:
<http://he-colo.netgate.com/archives/00000072.htm>
<http://wifinetnews.com/archives/003972.html>
<http://black.csl.uiuc.edu/~prkumar/ps_files/exp.pdf>
Note that a repeater is just a two hop mesh network. Most users will
not notice the speed loss unless they are running at fairly slow
wireless speeds and have a fairly slow DSL connection. For example, a
1.5Mbit/sec DSL line will run without slowdown with a repeater down to
a wireless connection speed of about 6Mbits/sec. However, the latest
burstable cable modems running at 15Mbits/sec will require 60Mbits/sec
through a repeater which just isn't possible with todays wireless
devices.
In addition, there are alternatives that work well and can be sold
without doing battle with repeaters. Those are power line, phone
line, CATV coax, and fiber optics. Install one at the other end of
the house and you're done.
Power Line networking:
<http://www.homeplug.com>
Phone line networking:
<http://www.homepna.com>
CATV coax sharing:
<http://www.coaxsys.com>
<http://www.multilet.com>
<http://www.mocalliance.org> (sorta, maybe)
If you can run CAT5, simply installing a 2nd access point at the other
end of the house on a different channel is probably the best solution.
There are also aftermarket antennas, which will tailor the pattern to
the shape of the house and coverage area. However, for multiple
floors, I usually put one access point on each floor rather because
antennas with sufficient horizontal pattern do so at the expense of
vertical pattern. If you want to go cheap, there's also reflectors:
<http://www.freeantennas.com>
Anyway, given the problems and available alternatives, I suggest you
give up on selling repeaters as solutions.
Jeff Liebermann
>> Where did you find 3.01.01?
>
>Installed on my expander.
Call Linksys support and ask for an explanation. It won't be the
first time they either miscounted their revision numbering, or posted
the wrong version firmware on their web pile. I would interested in
what they have to offer. I tried looking all over their ftp site and
found nothing.
The Walrus
> give up on selling repeaters as solutions.
Thanks for the message. It was very educational for me.
I have two CAT-5 runs going to the opposite end of the house. It's pretty
clumsy. Six years ago I just strung CAT-5 cable through the attic and fed
the runs through the closets and into the rooms straight into the machines.
No punch downs or anything on either end -- just straight from the router
into the PC's. I'm positive I'm in violation of some building code, but
it's worked pretty effectively.
One of the runs has badly deteriorated, which is why I looked to wireless in
the first place. I like the idea of CAT-fiving an access point into the one
CAT-5 connection that is still solid and hasn't been eaten by creatures in
the attic. You're right, repeaters are shit.
Thanks again.
The Walrus
> "The Walrus" <nos...@please.com> hath wroth:
>
>>> Where did you find 3.01.01?
>>
>>Installed on my expander.
>
> Call Linksys support and ask for an explanation. It won't be the
> first time they either miscounted their revision numbering, or posted
> the wrong version firmware on their web pile. I would interested in
> what they have to offer. I tried looking all over their ftp site and
> found nothing.
I posted a message in the forum about it. If I get a definitive reply I'll
post here.
Jeff Liebermann
>"Jeff Liebermann" <je...@comix.santa-cruz.ca.us> wrote in message
>> Anyway, given the problems and available alternatives, I suggest you
>> give up on selling repeaters as solutions.
>
>Thanks for the message. It was very educational for me.
No sense in you repeating my mistakes.
>I have two CAT-5 runs going to the opposite end of the house. It's pretty
>clumsy. Six years ago I just strung CAT-5 cable through the attic and fed
>the runs through the closets and into the rooms straight into the machines.
>No punch downs or anything on either end -- just straight from the router
>into the PC's. I'm positive I'm in violation of some building code, but
>it's worked pretty effectively.
Ummm... That what most installions look like. There are those that do
the nifty structured wiring installations, but for the typical home
user, it's usually a much simpler installation. The only problems
I've had with mice and rats eating wire is when we were eating potatoe
chips while pulling wire. The rats just love the salty grease and
sweat. The next install, I washed the cable with alcohol, and have
had no problems. Same with squirrels and flooded CAT5 between the
trees in the forest.
>One of the runs has badly deteriorated, which is why I looked to wireless in
>the first place. I like the idea of CAT-fiving an access point into the one
>CAT-5 connection that is still solid and hasn't been eaten by creatures in
>the attic. You're right, repeaters are shit.
Try corrugated electrical flexible plastic conduit or PEX
(Cross-linked Polyethylene) tubing/conduit with the CAT5e inside. The
PEX is really made for plumbing, but works well. I use mostly 1" ID
because I often have to drill through stud walls. If all else fails,
just run Schedule 50 PVC conduit or armoured metal flex conduit.
John Navas
wrote in <461075f5$0$17128$4c36...@roadrunner.com>:
>The thing is, I'm in a situation where I have to install these for other
>people, which is why I made myself the guinea pig. I really cannot afford
>to put myself in the position of having to take a return that has
>non-LinkSys firmware installed, or to have it not being replaceable under
>warranty if something goes wrong down the road.
>
>I've learned enough that I could comfortably recommend the WRT54G and
>WRT54GS routers for people in small- to medium-sized one story homes or
>apartments.
My personal favorite is the high-power Buffalo WHR-HP-G54, which has
significantly better range.
--
Best regards, FAQ for Wireless Internet: <http://Wireless.wikia.com>
John Navas FAQ for Wi-Fi: <http://wireless.wikia.com/wiki/Wi-Fi>
Wi-Fi How To: <http://wireless.wikia.com/wiki/Wi-Fi_How_To>
Fixes to Wi-Fi Problems: <http://wireless.wikia.com/wiki/Wi-Fi_Fixes>
Doug Simar
for having the same model name but changing chipsets between versions. The
firmware for v1 will be different from ver 2.5. Look on the outside of the
box for the right version number along with the modem number.
Doug
"The Walrus" <nos...@please.com> wrote in message
news:46106aff$0$8984$4c36...@roadrunner.com...