10 ms·

OpenWrt Two Approval

205 points by todsacerdoti 2y ago

lzlrd 2y ago
> * 10G SFP > * 5G copper > * 4 port 2.5G copper > * 1-2 port 1G copper Should've gone for at least two 10G ports and dropped the extra two 1G ports...
- Namidairo 2y ago
  From what I can tell of the block diagram, dropping the 2x 1gbit ports would not yield you a 2nd 10G SFP, as those would be running off the integrated switch as opposed to one of two USXGMII interfaces. You would have to drop the other ports instead, and then you would just have 2x 10G SFP and a gigabit switch. Which is exactly how the BPi R4 is configured.
ksec 2y ago
> "Two" will (hopefully) be in the 250$ region What does that mean ?
- teruakohatu 2y ago
  I read that as “It will cost around $250.”
- Cyphase 2y ago
  That "Two" will hopefully retail for around 250 dollars. The full sentence: > "Two" will (hopefully) be in the 250$ region with yet again a portion of that being donated to the project.
- petesergeant 2y ago
  OpenWRT "One" and "Two" are physical routers designed specifically to run OpenWRT. This is describing "Open WRT Two", a physical piece of hardware, that will have a price-tag, rather than some new software release of OpenWRT.
  - RestartKernel 2y ago
    This should be at the top, since it's not clear at all from the RFC.
    - squarefoot 2y ago
      Possibly the result of little or no announcements elsewhere. I learned about the OpenWRT One existence only after searching what OpenWRT Two is 10 minutes ago.
    - ksec 2y ago
      Yes. I was thinking it will only work or it works on $250 dollar routers but I know for sure that is not the case. And I didn't even know OpenWRT made hardware routers. I search and looked at that router.... I wish someone from Eero or Ubnt hardware team would lend them a hand.
teruakohatu 2y ago
I wonder why they are including a 5G port. There does not seem to be a lot of gear that uses it. An additional 1/2.5G or 10G SFP would make more sense.
- jauntywundrkind 2y ago
  There's 30$ usb-c adapters out now. Where-as 10Gbe is usually $130+. Yes there are very few switches with 5Gbe. But I'd be open to that changing!
  - simoncion 2y ago
    > There's 30$ usb-c adapters out now. Where-as 10Gbe is usually $130+. Sure, but if you include another SFP+ port, you can run that at 1, 2.5, 5, or 10gbit. Another SFP+ port gives you a BUNCH of options (including the "copper, fiber, or twinax?" option). A 5Gbit copper port locks you in to just that one configuration. As for the expense of SFP+ modules, go check out the 10Gtek company. The optical ones are very inexpensive [0], and I've had eight of their optical SFP+ modules in my home networking hardware for many, many years with no problems whatsoever. I expect the copper ones to be just as reliable. [0] And their copper ones are on the low side of average price
    - m000 2y ago
      Options for who? 5GBASE-T can run on Cat5e/Cat6 cabling which people probably already have. This makes the router a viable product, which can improve your home network performance with minimal investment, just by swapping out your old router. OTOH, the dual SFP+ configuration is more on the exotic side. It may make sense on some professional setting (or some outlier home network configurations - like yours), but I guess this is not the intended market.
      - simoncion 2y ago
        > Options for who? The operator of the device. Who were you thinking of? > 5GBASE-T can run on Cat5e/Cat6 cabling which people probably already have. There are SFP and SFP+ modules that will do 1, 2.5, 5, and 10GBASE-T just fine. If the operator wants to run 1GBASE-T, they can. If the operator wants to run 10GBASE-[SL]R, they can do that, too. Options. > The dual SFP+ configuration is more on the exotic side. 1) Used to be that having a gigabit Ethernet port was on the exotic side, too. (If we go far enough back, 10mbit was hella fancy.) Times change. 2) Here are two SFP+ ports for ~140 USD. [0] Here are four for 150USD. [1] Times change, man. [0] <https://mikrotik.com/product/css318_16g_2s_in https://mikrotik.com/product/css318_16g_2s_in> [1] <https://mikrotik.com/product/crs305_1g_4s_in https://mikrotik.com/product/crs305_1g_4s_in>
Cyphase 2y ago
Previously: OpenWRT One Released: First Router Designed Specifically for OpenWrt - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42285689 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42285689 - Dec 2024 (144 comments)
- Springtime 2y ago
  It's weird reading the claim as there have been plenty of routers designed for OpenWRT in years prior. Some even quasi-bespoke. A selling point of the product is they release their source code but afaik this just means OpenWRT per se (and I suppose the bootloader) as various chips have closed source firmware anyway (much like other products that try to be as open source as possible).
usui 2y ago
Is there a reasonable scenario where enough people vote "no" here? It seems unlikely, so a nuanced discussion where pros and cons are considered seems more productive. Seems like a yes/no vote makes more sense if there is actual contention or disagreement among internal factions. If you vote no, you'll basically be seen as the stickler person without a good reason. 18 people are missing (abstained?), so could that be interpreted as an ambiguous "no"?
- reaperman 2y ago
  In a slightly different reality, most members might reasonably vote no if it was deemed too costly for the organization's budget, or if the champion of the project was seen as unreliable, or if there were genuine concerns with the chosen contractor. Some of these could change after a short bit -- a sudden funding source appears, a different leader of the project steps up, or they address concerns with the contractor bid.
- Havoc 2y ago
  Probably acts more like a project lead election
Cyphase 2y ago
Awesome, I hope this work continues. I got to put my hands on a One a few weeks ago at SCaLE 22x[0], where the Software Freedom Conservancy was the "Network Sponsor"[1] and the WiFi was being provided by a bunch of Ones. [0] https://www.socallinuxexpo.org/scale/22x https://www.socallinuxexpo.org/scale/22x [1] https://www.socallinuxexpo.org/scale/22x/sponsor/software-freedom-conservancy https://www.socallinuxexpo.org/scale/22x/sponsor/software-fr...
the-grump 2y ago
Heck yeah. GL.iNet is awesome, and these specs will make this the one router to rule them all for consumer applications. It’s a wonderful time to be into free software and free hardware. Thank you folks!
- _cenw 2y ago
  I have one of their travel routers (Beryl), and they beat a U7 Pro (the one with horrible still unfixed firmware) in consistency and throughput with one device connected to 5 GHz. While I sit next to the UniFi AP and the Beryl sits behind a concrete wall. And it's not a small difference either. I run it in AP mode for game streaming now because the UniFi keeps dying, even when I'm the only device on 6 GHz. The polish I'm missing on supposed premium products.
neilv 2y ago
GL.iNet is a popular brand, though I can't find a Wikipedia page for it. https://www.gl-inet.com/about-us/ https://www.gl-inet.com/about-us/ says: > GL Tech (HK) Ltd: #601, 5W, Hong Kong Science Park, N.T. Hong Kong > GL Intelligence, Inc.: 10400 Eaton Place, Suite 215, Fairfax, VA 22030 I'm a little curious about this. One of the reasons that some people run OpenWrt is for improved security. In the general security space, a Shenzen company isn't the most usual choice of vendor for Western countries. Also, the company having the US subsidiary/office/unit based in Virginia, and with "intelligence" in the name, hits a somewhat odd note.
- teleforce 2y ago
  The existing OpenWrt One is running a version of Banana Pi, also a product by a Chinese company [1],[2],[3]. From their website, "Banana Pi open source hardware community is an open source hardware project led by Guangdong Bipai Technology, and supported by Taiwan Hon Hai Technology (Foxconn)." [1] Banana Pi OpenWrt One: https://www.aliexpress.com/item/1005007795779282.html https://www.aliexpress.com/item/1005007795779282.html [2] Banana Pi website: https://www.banana-pi.org/web/index.php https://www.banana-pi.org/web/index.php [3] Banana Pi: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Banana_Pi https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Banana_Pi
- TechDebtDevin 2y ago
  GL Intelligence is just their 'American Agency', or their legal representation in the United States since they are a foreign company. Probably an American consultant firm they fund. This is required. You can't use your Hong Kong lawyers here. https://fcc.report/FCC-ID/2AFIW-XE300C4G/7058909.pdf https://fcc.report/FCC-ID/2AFIW-XE300C4G/7058909.pdf
- donnachangstein 2y ago
  Is it really any different than every person who insists on running pfSense for security reasons then immediately suggesting some Chinese shitbox PC off AliExpress as the ideal platform to run it on? Also, since when has having a Wikipedia page proven a company legitimate? You know most companies author their own pages anyway, that's kind of how Wikipedia works.
pzo 2y ago
What I would want to have some company to make one device that would at the same time be: 1) router 2) smart tv (airplay, chromecast, miracast) 3) smart speaker 4) smart home gateway (matter) 5) wireless charging pad 6) private cloud (nextcloud) 7) private backup (removable nvm) 8) private vpn / dns / pihole / adguard 9) mini server Everything in a nice package and preconfigure and ideally modular (upgradable ssd, wifi). UmbrelOS [0] is interesting but its quite expensive and its only for home server (no router, no smart speaker, smart tv, wireless charging pad). Apple TV has a great hardware and cheap but so limited for 3rd party. Wish they made it modular that you could attach magnetic speaker, wireless charging pad and had some usb for attaching 4g modem. [0] https://umbrel.com/ https://umbrel.com/
- teleforce 2y ago
  Please check Synology products, a Taiwanese company. They have affordable products and solutions that provide all your listed requirements and then some more [1],[2]. Not sure if they have one device or several devices integrate together to perform the functions you've listed, more likely the latter. [1] Synology Products A - Z: Applications: https://www.synology.com/en-global/products-a-z https://www.synology.com/en-global/products-a-z [2] Synology: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Synology https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Synology
- walterbell 2y ago
  Used Lenovo Tiny PCs with VMs, iGPU and 4-port NICs get close.
  - 3np 2y ago
    Got any specific recommendation for 4-port NIC?
    - walterbell 2y ago
      Depends on your preference for hypervisor/host, network performance, SR-IOV partitioning, need/avoidance of AMT vPro remote mgnt (e.g. Intel vs. Broadcom), OEM NIC firmware. I've used low-profile Dell quad-port NICs in the past.
petesergeant 2y ago
> OpenWRT "One" and "Two" are physical routers designed specifically to run OpenWRT. This is describing "Open WRT Two", a physical piece of hardware, that will have a price-tag, rather than some new software release of OpenWRT.
thescriptkiddie 2y ago
i heard reports that the openwrt one cpu was not fast enough to run cake sqm at line speed. i wonder if the two will be able to.
- microtonal 2y ago
  I don't know about the One. But some of the MediaTek CPUs apparently have hardware fq-codel support, or so I was told. I had a Gl.iNet with a MediaTek SoC (Flint 2) and it had great bufferbloat scores.
  - u8080 2y ago
    AFAIK, vanilla openwrt does not support that (HQoS is seems what you are referring to - only supported in official Mediatek SDK)
- Havoc 2y ago
  To be fair that’s true for majority of routers that aren’t top end. Cake is pretty resource hungry
xvilka 2y ago
I am looking forward for "qualcommax: ipq60xx: add GL.iNet GL-AX1800/AXT1800 support"[1] to be included in the release. [1] https://github.com/openwrt/openwrt/pull/14950 https://github.com/openwrt/openwrt/pull/14950
misiek08 2y ago
250 sounds like Banana R4 already won. Seeing different no-name boards such specs should be way less or we should have 2 10G fiber, 4-5 10G copper and some great specs in terms of computing... Did I miss anything?
- tguvot 2y ago
  I saw a post a couple of days ago that due to some component selection r4 radios weaker than previous model
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
nfriedly 2y ago
This is awesome! I've been using OpenWRT for more than a decade, and I think it's great that they're designing their own hardware now. I'm on a GL.iNet MT-6000 right now, and it's a great router. The stock firmware is based on openwrt, and they make it very easy to upgrade to an official openwrt release. I bought it before the OpenWRT One became available, but I probably would have gone with it anyways because it has two 2.5gb ports whereas the OpenWRT One only has a single 2.5gb port. I'm on 1gb internet right now, so that would be fine for the moment, my ISP has already been advertising 2gb service coming soon, and I'd like to upgrade once it's available. It looks like the MT7988 chip they chose for the OpenWRT Two supports either two 10gb ports or one 10gb and a bunch of other ports, so I think they made the right call. It should be capable of handling up to 5gb internet service, so it'd be a better fit for someone like me. I imagine it'll also be one of the first and likely best OpenWRT devices to support Wi-Fi 7.
- PaulKeeble 2y ago
  There is experimental support for the Asus BT8 which is a be14000 device, there are snapshot builds for it but issues going back to the Asus firmware. Also banana pi R4 development board and it's got a be14000 WiFi card. These are all the devices I know that have support but many of the mt7988s should get added in time.
evanjrowley 2y ago
GL.iNet's hardware has been great, but it's always annoyed me their products are designed with OpenWRT as an unsupported "advanced function" where updates lag behind the main project. If OpenWRT Two breaks this pattern, then I am very intrigued.
M95D 2y ago
OpenWrt went crazy in the last few years. OpenWrt (the OS) is a mess: - bugs are ignored, - bug fixes ignored, - improvements to core OpenWrt are ignored (although package PRs are still accepted somehow), - almost no new documentation, - no reply for documentation clarifications on the forum, - significant parts of OpenWrt are not accessible for PRs or bug reports: fstools, procd, ubus, etc. - no improvements to critical routing features, such as hardware acceleration, - routers abandoned left and right (kernel no longer fits in the factory partition) and absolutely no support for older kernels, But now they have video acceleration, mesa, X, wayland, Doom, etc. With OpenWrt Two, I bet they're going to make the same mistakes as OpenWrt One: not enough memory and not upgradable, wifi not replaceable, no usable expansion slots (mini-PCI, M.2) and, of course, no (e)SATA. Another e-waste product that will be obsolete even before it's available to buy. I wish they got back to routing.
- wtallis 2y ago
  > With OpenWrt Two, I bet they're going to make the same mistakes as OpenWrt One: not enough memory and not upgradable, wifi not replaceable, no usable expansion slots (mini-PCI, M.2) and, of course, no (e)SATA. Another e-waste product that will be obsolete even before it's available to buy. Those are only mistakes if you ignore the realities of what hardware is available. A highly-integrated SoC designed specifically for wireless router usage is a more cost-effective platform than a generic x86 PC. Basing OpenWRT One and Two on such hardware means work to improve support for those systems is more likely to benefit OpenWRT support for mainstream consumer networking equipment that also uses purpose-built SoCs. OpenWRT is not yet in a position to influence the hardware design decisions made by companies like Mediatek, Qualcomm, Broadcom for their consumer WiFi product families. Those chips are still designed around what's best for the big brands that are the primary customers: Netgear, Linksys, TP-Link, etc. Adding SATA controllers to a WiFi router SoC does not benefit Netgear, et al., nor does splitting out all the radios to separate chips that could be installed onto M.2 cards (miniPCI and miniPCIe being long obsolete and bandwidth-starved). Asking for eSATA is laughably unrealistic. A focus on the kind of modular, expandable and upgradable hardware platforms that actually currently exist (namely, PCs) is what leads to the distractions you're complaining about: "video acceleration, mesa, X, wayland, Doom, etc."
1vuio0pswjnm7 2y ago
Votes Yes: 24 No: 0 Missing: 18

205 points by todsacerdoti 2y ago

> * 10G SFP > * 5G copper > * 4 port 2.5G copper > * 1-2 port 1G copper Should've gone for at least two 10G ports and dropped the extra two 1G ports...

Namidairo 2y ago
From what I can tell of the block diagram, dropping the 2x 1gbit ports would not yield you a 2nd 10G SFP, as those would be running off the integrated switch as opposed to one of two USXGMII interfaces. You would have to drop the other ports instead, and then you would just have 2x 10G SFP and a gigabit switch. Which is exactly how the BPi R4 is configured.

ksec 2y ago

> "Two" will (hopefully) be in the 250$ region What does that mean ?

teruakohatu 2y ago
I read that as “It will cost around $250.”
Cyphase 2y ago
That "Two" will hopefully retail for around 250 dollars. The full sentence: > "Two" will (hopefully) be in the 250$ region with yet again a portion of that being donated to the project.
petesergeant 2y ago
OpenWRT "One" and "Two" are physical routers designed specifically to run OpenWRT. This is describing "Open WRT Two", a physical piece of hardware, that will have a price-tag, rather than some new software release of OpenWRT.
- RestartKernel 2y ago
  This should be at the top, since it's not clear at all from the RFC.
  - squarefoot 2y ago
    Possibly the result of little or no announcements elsewhere. I learned about the OpenWRT One existence only after searching what OpenWRT Two is 10 minutes ago.
  - ksec 2y ago
    Yes. I was thinking it will only work or it works on $250 dollar routers but I know for sure that is not the case. And I didn't even know OpenWRT made hardware routers. I search and looked at that router.... I wish someone from Eero or Ubnt hardware team would lend them a hand.

teruakohatu 2y ago

I wonder why they are including a 5G port. There does not seem to be a lot of gear that uses it. An additional 1/2.5G or 10G SFP would make more sense.

jauntywundrkind 2y ago
There's 30$ usb-c adapters out now. Where-as 10Gbe is usually $130+. Yes there are very few switches with 5Gbe. But I'd be open to that changing!
- simoncion 2y ago
  > There's 30$ usb-c adapters out now. Where-as 10Gbe is usually $130+. Sure, but if you include another SFP+ port, you can run that at 1, 2.5, 5, or 10gbit. Another SFP+ port gives you a BUNCH of options (including the "copper, fiber, or twinax?" option). A 5Gbit copper port locks you in to just that one configuration. As for the expense of SFP+ modules, go check out the 10Gtek company. The optical ones are very inexpensive [0], and I've had eight of their optical SFP+ modules in my home networking hardware for many, many years with no problems whatsoever. I expect the copper ones to be just as reliable. [0] And their copper ones are on the low side of average price
  - m000 2y ago
    Options for who? 5GBASE-T can run on Cat5e/Cat6 cabling which people probably already have. This makes the router a viable product, which can improve your home network performance with minimal investment, just by swapping out your old router. OTOH, the dual SFP+ configuration is more on the exotic side. It may make sense on some professional setting (or some outlier home network configurations - like yours), but I guess this is not the intended market.
    - simoncion 2y ago
      > Options for who? The operator of the device. Who were you thinking of? > 5GBASE-T can run on Cat5e/Cat6 cabling which people probably already have. There are SFP and SFP+ modules that will do 1, 2.5, 5, and 10GBASE-T just fine. If the operator wants to run 1GBASE-T, they can. If the operator wants to run 10GBASE-[SL]R, they can do that, too. Options. > The dual SFP+ configuration is more on the exotic side. 1) Used to be that having a gigabit Ethernet port was on the exotic side, too. (If we go far enough back, 10mbit was hella fancy.) Times change. 2) Here are two SFP+ ports for ~140 USD. [0] Here are four for 150USD. [1] Times change, man. [0] <https://mikrotik.com/product/css318_16g_2s_in https://mikrotik.com/product/css318_16g_2s_in> [1] <https://mikrotik.com/product/crs305_1g_4s_in https://mikrotik.com/product/crs305_1g_4s_in>

Cyphase 2y ago

Previously: OpenWRT One Released: First Router Designed Specifically for OpenWrt - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42285689 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42285689 - Dec 2024 (144 comments)

Springtime 2y ago
It's weird reading the claim as there have been plenty of routers designed for OpenWRT in years prior. Some even quasi-bespoke. A selling point of the product is they release their source code but afaik this just means OpenWRT per se (and I suppose the bootloader) as various chips have closed source firmware anyway (much like other products that try to be as open source as possible).

usui 2y ago

Is there a reasonable scenario where enough people vote "no" here? It seems unlikely, so a nuanced discussion where pros and cons are considered seems more productive. Seems like a yes/no vote makes more sense if there is actual contention or disagreement among internal factions. If you vote no, you'll basically be seen as the stickler person without a good reason. 18 people are missing (abstained?), so could that be interpreted as an ambiguous "no"?

reaperman 2y ago
In a slightly different reality, most members might reasonably vote no if it was deemed too costly for the organization's budget, or if the champion of the project was seen as unreliable, or if there were genuine concerns with the chosen contractor. Some of these could change after a short bit -- a sudden funding source appears, a different leader of the project steps up, or they address concerns with the contractor bid.
Havoc 2y ago
Probably acts more like a project lead election

Cyphase 2y ago

Awesome, I hope this work continues. I got to put my hands on a One a few weeks ago at SCaLE 22x[0], where the Software Freedom Conservancy was the "Network Sponsor"[1] and the WiFi was being provided by a bunch of Ones. [0] https://www.socallinuxexpo.org/scale/22x https://www.socallinuxexpo.org/scale/22x [1] https://www.socallinuxexpo.org/scale/22x/sponsor/software-freedom-conservancy https://www.socallinuxexpo.org/scale/22x/sponsor/software-fr...

the-grump 2y ago

Heck yeah. GL.iNet is awesome, and these specs will make this the one router to rule them all for consumer applications. It’s a wonderful time to be into free software and free hardware. Thank you folks!

_cenw 2y ago
I have one of their travel routers (Beryl), and they beat a U7 Pro (the one with horrible still unfixed firmware) in consistency and throughput with one device connected to 5 GHz. While I sit next to the UniFi AP and the Beryl sits behind a concrete wall. And it's not a small difference either. I run it in AP mode for game streaming now because the UniFi keeps dying, even when I'm the only device on 6 GHz. The polish I'm missing on supposed premium products.

neilv 2y ago

GL.iNet is a popular brand, though I can't find a Wikipedia page for it. https://www.gl-inet.com/about-us/ https://www.gl-inet.com/about-us/ says: > GL Tech (HK) Ltd: #601, 5W, Hong Kong Science Park, N.T. Hong Kong > GL Intelligence, Inc.: 10400 Eaton Place, Suite 215, Fairfax, VA 22030 I'm a little curious about this. One of the reasons that some people run OpenWrt is for improved security. In the general security space, a Shenzen company isn't the most usual choice of vendor for Western countries. Also, the company having the US subsidiary/office/unit based in Virginia, and with "intelligence" in the name, hits a somewhat odd note.

teleforce 2y ago
The existing OpenWrt One is running a version of Banana Pi, also a product by a Chinese company [1],[2],[3]. From their website, "Banana Pi open source hardware community is an open source hardware project led by Guangdong Bipai Technology, and supported by Taiwan Hon Hai Technology (Foxconn)." [1] Banana Pi OpenWrt One: https://www.aliexpress.com/item/1005007795779282.html https://www.aliexpress.com/item/1005007795779282.html [2] Banana Pi website: https://www.banana-pi.org/web/index.php https://www.banana-pi.org/web/index.php [3] Banana Pi: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Banana_Pi https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Banana_Pi
TechDebtDevin 2y ago
GL Intelligence is just their 'American Agency', or their legal representation in the United States since they are a foreign company. Probably an American consultant firm they fund. This is required. You can't use your Hong Kong lawyers here. https://fcc.report/FCC-ID/2AFIW-XE300C4G/7058909.pdf https://fcc.report/FCC-ID/2AFIW-XE300C4G/7058909.pdf
donnachangstein 2y ago
Is it really any different than every person who insists on running pfSense for security reasons then immediately suggesting some Chinese shitbox PC off AliExpress as the ideal platform to run it on? Also, since when has having a Wikipedia page proven a company legitimate? You know most companies author their own pages anyway, that's kind of how Wikipedia works.

pzo 2y ago

What I would want to have some company to make one device that would at the same time be: 1) router 2) smart tv (airplay, chromecast, miracast) 3) smart speaker 4) smart home gateway (matter) 5) wireless charging pad 6) private cloud (nextcloud) 7) private backup (removable nvm) 8) private vpn / dns / pihole / adguard 9) mini server Everything in a nice package and preconfigure and ideally modular (upgradable ssd, wifi). UmbrelOS [0] is interesting but its quite expensive and its only for home server (no router, no smart speaker, smart tv, wireless charging pad). Apple TV has a great hardware and cheap but so limited for 3rd party. Wish they made it modular that you could attach magnetic speaker, wireless charging pad and had some usb for attaching 4g modem. [0] https://umbrel.com/ https://umbrel.com/

teleforce 2y ago
Please check Synology products, a Taiwanese company. They have affordable products and solutions that provide all your listed requirements and then some more [1],[2]. Not sure if they have one device or several devices integrate together to perform the functions you've listed, more likely the latter. [1] Synology Products A - Z: Applications: https://www.synology.com/en-global/products-a-z https://www.synology.com/en-global/products-a-z [2] Synology: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Synology https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Synology
walterbell 2y ago
Used Lenovo Tiny PCs with VMs, iGPU and 4-port NICs get close.
- 3np 2y ago
  Got any specific recommendation for 4-port NIC?
  - walterbell 2y ago
    Depends on your preference for hypervisor/host, network performance, SR-IOV partitioning, need/avoidance of AMT vPro remote mgnt (e.g. Intel vs. Broadcom), OEM NIC firmware. I've used low-profile Dell quad-port NICs in the past.

petesergeant 2y ago

> OpenWRT "One" and "Two" are physical routers designed specifically to run OpenWRT. This is describing "Open WRT Two", a physical piece of hardware, that will have a price-tag, rather than some new software release of OpenWRT.

thescriptkiddie 2y ago

i heard reports that the openwrt one cpu was not fast enough to run cake sqm at line speed. i wonder if the two will be able to.

microtonal 2y ago
I don't know about the One. But some of the MediaTek CPUs apparently have hardware fq-codel support, or so I was told. I had a Gl.iNet with a MediaTek SoC (Flint 2) and it had great bufferbloat scores.
- u8080 2y ago
  AFAIK, vanilla openwrt does not support that (HQoS is seems what you are referring to - only supported in official Mediatek SDK)
Havoc 2y ago
To be fair that’s true for majority of routers that aren’t top end. Cake is pretty resource hungry

xvilka 2y ago

I am looking forward for "qualcommax: ipq60xx: add GL.iNet GL-AX1800/AXT1800 support"[1] to be included in the release. [1] https://github.com/openwrt/openwrt/pull/14950 https://github.com/openwrt/openwrt/pull/14950

misiek08 2y ago

250 sounds like Banana R4 already won. Seeing different no-name boards such specs should be way less or we should have 2 10G fiber, 4-5 10G copper and some great specs in terms of computing... Did I miss anything?

tguvot 2y ago
I saw a post a couple of days ago that due to some component selection r4 radios weaker than previous model

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]

nfriedly 2y ago

This is awesome! I've been using OpenWRT for more than a decade, and I think it's great that they're designing their own hardware now. I'm on a GL.iNet MT-6000 right now, and it's a great router. The stock firmware is based on openwrt, and they make it very easy to upgrade to an official openwrt release. I bought it before the OpenWRT One became available, but I probably would have gone with it anyways because it has two 2.5gb ports whereas the OpenWRT One only has a single 2.5gb port. I'm on 1gb internet right now, so that would be fine for the moment, my ISP has already been advertising 2gb service coming soon, and I'd like to upgrade once it's available. It looks like the MT7988 chip they chose for the OpenWRT Two supports either two 10gb ports or one 10gb and a bunch of other ports, so I think they made the right call. It should be capable of handling up to 5gb internet service, so it'd be a better fit for someone like me. I imagine it'll also be one of the first and likely best OpenWRT devices to support Wi-Fi 7.

PaulKeeble 2y ago
There is experimental support for the Asus BT8 which is a be14000 device, there are snapshot builds for it but issues going back to the Asus firmware. Also banana pi R4 development board and it's got a be14000 WiFi card. These are all the devices I know that have support but many of the mt7988s should get added in time.

evanjrowley 2y ago

GL.iNet's hardware has been great, but it's always annoyed me their products are designed with OpenWRT as an unsupported "advanced function" where updates lag behind the main project. If OpenWRT Two breaks this pattern, then I am very intrigued.

M95D 2y ago

OpenWrt went crazy in the last few years. OpenWrt (the OS) is a mess: - bugs are ignored, - bug fixes ignored, - improvements to core OpenWrt are ignored (although package PRs are still accepted somehow), - almost no new documentation, - no reply for documentation clarifications on the forum, - significant parts of OpenWrt are not accessible for PRs or bug reports: fstools, procd, ubus, etc. - no improvements to critical routing features, such as hardware acceleration, - routers abandoned left and right (kernel no longer fits in the factory partition) and absolutely no support for older kernels, But now they have video acceleration, mesa, X, wayland, Doom, etc. With OpenWrt Two, I bet they're going to make the same mistakes as OpenWrt One: not enough memory and not upgradable, wifi not replaceable, no usable expansion slots (mini-PCI, M.2) and, of course, no (e)SATA. Another e-waste product that will be obsolete even before it's available to buy. I wish they got back to routing.

wtallis 2y ago
> With OpenWrt Two, I bet they're going to make the same mistakes as OpenWrt One: not enough memory and not upgradable, wifi not replaceable, no usable expansion slots (mini-PCI, M.2) and, of course, no (e)SATA. Another e-waste product that will be obsolete even before it's available to buy. Those are only mistakes if you ignore the realities of what hardware is available. A highly-integrated SoC designed specifically for wireless router usage is a more cost-effective platform than a generic x86 PC. Basing OpenWRT One and Two on such hardware means work to improve support for those systems is more likely to benefit OpenWRT support for mainstream consumer networking equipment that also uses purpose-built SoCs. OpenWRT is not yet in a position to influence the hardware design decisions made by companies like Mediatek, Qualcomm, Broadcom for their consumer WiFi product families. Those chips are still designed around what's best for the big brands that are the primary customers: Netgear, Linksys, TP-Link, etc. Adding SATA controllers to a WiFi router SoC does not benefit Netgear, et al., nor does splitting out all the radios to separate chips that could be installed onto M.2 cards (miniPCI and miniPCIe being long obsolete and bandwidth-starved). Asking for eSATA is laughably unrealistic. A focus on the kind of modular, expandable and upgradable hardware platforms that actually currently exist (namely, PCs) is what leads to the distractions you're complaining about: "video acceleration, mesa, X, wayland, Doom, etc."

1vuio0pswjnm7 2y ago

Votes Yes: 24 No: 0 Missing: 18