Technology

60062 readers

3214 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.

Our Rules

Follow the lemmy.world rules.
Only tech related content.
Be excellent to each another!
Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
Politics threads may be removed.
No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

512

First Router Designed Specifically For OpenWrt Released (sfconservancy.org)

submitted 3 weeks ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

77 comments fedilink hide all child comments

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.bestiver.se/post/123708

Comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 17 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

It doesn't make sense to me to future proof wifi but not wired for $5 more, but maybe it makes sense to people in rural places

[–] [email protected] 11 points 3 weeks ago

Let's be realistic. How many devices support a mainline version of OpenWRT and have more than one 2.5 Gbe port?

This thing is primarily a wifi router and access point. The available Ethernet ports, which are limited to what the chipset supports, are going to be more than sufficient for the majority of users.

If your main concern is wired throughput to the Internet, you are not the target audience for OpenWrt. The literal point of the OpenWrt project was to be an open source firmware for the WRT54G wireless router. The project has of course grown since then, but that is still its primary intended use case.

You are much more likely to find what you need in pfSense/OPNsense/etc, and on more powerful hardware. I would be way more concerned with the fact that it only has 1 GB RAM.

But if you still want to take that stance, there is nothing stopping you from reconfiguring the 2.5 Gbe port as a VLAN trunk and hanging it off a managed switch. Put your uplink in one VLAN and your LAN in another. That is going to be more than sufficient to saturate the 1 Gbps fiber connection that most people have (or at least asymmetrically saturate the 2 Gbps connection that some people have).

Or if you don't like that, just do the routing on the switch. If your primary concern is wired throughput, you'll probably already be doing that anyway. Then just use this thing as an AP, in which case the one port is sufficient.