Hacker News Clone new | comments | show | ask | jobs | submit | github repologin
OpenWrt Community question: What do you want to see in OpenWrt? (forum.openwrt.org)
23 points by voxadam 2 hours ago | hide | past | web | 12 comments | favorite





I'd like to see more collaboration between OpenWRT and SBC makers like Banana Pi. While I love FriendlyELEC and GLi.Net for creating fantastic OpenWRT hardware, I abhor the fact that I they use OpenWRT forks. As an OpenWRT user, I really want to just upload my config files and hit the ground running. Not interested in fooling around with the user interfaces of these 3rd party spinoffs.

I'd also like to see the Wiki examples supported by complete configurations. A lot of the routing examples don't show enough of what's actually required to make them work. Perhaps create complete configurations that can be applied to a virtualized OpenWRT instance?


BananaPi dont make anything from what I see. SinoIP is one manufacturer but who will make up the boards Desktop Overlays????

Leave it to poor saps on a Wiki to do it for them...

Raxda has tried to support some but they use a shitty old u-boot tree like many of these joke boards.

Hello. Please upsteam your work and get rid of the 2017 Uboot tree. Geez


Streamline configuring common things.

Just recenty I wanted to quickly create guest wifi on AP. After following a long guide from the official wiki, it didn't work. I probably missed something and could make it work, if I would invest some more time. But instead, I just enabled a hotspot on my phone.

Both AP and router are on OpenWRT.


Honestly, guest WiFi should be a one-click adventure, not a weeks-long trawl through dozens of outdated wiki pages and forum posts from years ago.

Pretty much anything other than the most very basic configuration is unduly difficult.

While it's certainly nice to have every conceivable setting availble to you, only a fraction of a percent of people even know what they're all for or how to apply them.

What OpenWRT needs most of all is for anyone to be able to walk up and find the button that does what they want. Even for technically advanced users and career programmers, OpenWRT is obtuse and confusing. You have to spend hours researching how to do anything even slightly more complex than attaching an AP to a LAN bridge.


API for central management of APs. And a server instance to do this.

Absolutely.

That's one thing that ubiquiti and the like do very well.

Combine that with the openwrt wiki/databases and you can support a LOT of different hardware with different capabilities relatively easily.


First thing I want to see is the ability to configure beyond the basic default settings.

Things that should not require configuring are Basic Common Criteria, WHONIX settings,

Configurable everything.

For now, I am cobbling something akin beyond Debian APT configuration:

https://github.com/egberts/easy-admin

Warning: Bash programming.


I remember configuring my openwrt router wasn't fun. I'd say there's room for improvement with the UX, but it's possible it's already been improved and I don't know about it. I haven't bothered updating to the latest available versions simply because I remember the initial setup being so time consuming. I'm afraid I'll lose something with an update and have to go through the trouble again. It's my own conundrum.

I used to be a openwrt contributor. It was never anything fancy.

Automatic firmware updates would be my vote if i could vote.

I wish they had add "next gen firewall" to the list. Go compete with palo, fortinet, or sonicwall. Be able to have threatfeeds blocking. Having those extra features would be huge.


Yes, a built-in updater would absolutely be my vote. The OpenWRT device knows exactly which firmware build it needs, so having it download the update directly is much faster and less error prone than having me do it.

I'd still prefer to manually click to initiate the update on my schedule, but the process could be more streamlined.


What?

No nftables?


Do new routers still "need" aftermarket firmware?

That's a very subjective question. What do you want your router to do, and can it do that out of the box?

I am surprised (hardware tokens based) luci 2fa is not on the list, I would think it is table stakes at this point.

Why would you want 2fa on your router? You really should never expose the management interface to WAN, it should be locked down to only your local network.

If you for some reason absolutely need to manage it remotely, that's why we have VPNs and SSH keys.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: