On 2011-10-21 15:41, OpenWrt User List wrote: >> Frankly, the ath9k has been a nightmare. I wouldn't recommend the Buffalo >> WZR-HP-G300NH because of it. It's never been stable, and never been as fast >> (in terms of throughput) as the lowly WRT-54-GL. > > Please be careful with such generalizations, one anecdote doesn't make a > trend. I use ath9k in production and it is fast and stable for me while > the lowly WRT54GL simply used to drop out from time to time. Based on my > personal experience I don't run around yelling how nightmarish the > broadcom driver is.
I agree, and I don't intend to make an overly broad generalisation. I said it was a nightmare (for me), and that *I* wouldn't recommend it. However, I shouldn't have targeted the ath9k driver. I should have specified the combination of chipset, hardware, and driver. So I will make this exact statement: the Atheros AR9132 chipset, in the Buffalo WZR-HP-G300NH, is neither stable nor has a data rate exceeding 28 mbit using 802.11b/g, in any official OpenWRT backfire build. Using 10.03.1-rc5, I am unable to achieve rates better than 6.5 mbit. What hardware do you have in production use? > http://downloads.openwrt.org/snapshots/trunk/ ? Ah! I see I've misread the datestamps. Thank you. I'll test RC5 and the trunk snapshots this weekend and report back. Thank you for the help. Regards, Tyler -- "... jingoism, racism, fear, religious fundamentalism: these are the ways of appealing to people if you’re trying to organize a mass base of support for policies that are really intended to crush them." -- Noam Chomsky, in "Understanding Power" _______________________________________________ openwrt-users mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openwrt.org/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-users
