Hacker News Clone new | comments | show | ask | jobs | submit | github repologin
OpenWRT One Released: First Router Designed Specifically for OpenWrt (sfconservancy.org)
77 points by m463 2 hours ago | hide | past | web | 27 comments | favorite





If you want a more polished product, GL.iNet's Flint 2 is almost identical, has more ports, and runs stock OpenWrt just fine:

https://openwrt.org/toh/gl.inet/gl-mt6000


Be careful of GL.iNet's products - some of them say they run OpenWRT, but they don't run stock OpenWRT and instead offer a version of OpenWRT supplied by the CPU manufacturer, with binary drivers and no source code.

..in these geopolitical times....

Both have Mediatek IC's so I don't see your point.

What do you mean?

Seems kinda weird, why one GigE and one 2.5GbE? Maybe they will make a one plus with double the ram and 2x2.5Gbe?

Most likely an IO limitation of the MediaTek MT7981B SoC used—it looks like it only has one lane of PCIe Gen 2, a USB 3.0 port, and one built-in 1 Gbps Ethernet controller (among a few other common low-speed interfaces)[1]. Typically these chips have bandwidth constraints, and it seems this one is meant for small routers, not the typical multi-2.5G or 10G setups some homelabbers would prefer.

[1] https://mirror2.openwrt.org/docs/MT7981B_Wi-Fi6_Platform_Dat...


As an aside: Why can't DSL modems be a single USB dongle?

Those of us with DSL connections must suffer either an extremely limited selection of DSL modem/routers that can run Linux/OpenWRT, or have to suffer running a Linux/OpenWRT router behind a DSL modem (that often has proprietary and out of date firmware).


I'm just about to cancel my DSL, but when you run the modem in bridge mode, and run PPPoE on your actual NAT gateway if needed (which is sadly often the case), the modem firmware doesn't matter very much.

I put together some stuff so I could transfer PPPoE sessions to a backup system and then I could reboot the NAT boxes for upgrates with minimal downtime. Sometimes, it even worked ;)


There are fiber PON/ONU/UT/$JARGON in shape of an SFP module, though most customers don't appreciate such offering and therefore it'll be an upsell.

As for why not USB specifically, probably because such a device is inherently much faster and responsive in upload to the Internet than downloads, and therefore it makes less sense.


I tried for years to do similar when I lived in Australia. Though with a PCI/PCI-E card

ZyXEL if I remember correctly did make an ADSL2+ at the time PCI-E card. Literally just a DSL modem wired to a Realtek 8139 NIC. You could slap it in a Linux (or BSD, or Windows) PC and just use PPPoE to connect to the internet

Naturally it was impossible to order the damn thing and I never got to realize my dream of an "all-in-one" DSL Linux router.

After moving to DOCSIS (Cable) internet I ran into the same confusing problem. "Thankfully" with Fiber everything is just ethernet (more or less) now. But it was an infuriating time in the 2010's


Very cool, but wish it was at least 2x2.5GbE.

I think it's unfortunate given the audience I imagine will make up most of its purchases. For example, the NBN in Australia just announced earlier this year it's first 2 Gbps residential plans (previously 1 Gbps being the maximum) planned for availability some time next year[1].

[1] https://www.nbnco.com.au/corporate-information/media-centre/...


Nice. I'll definitely consider using it. I love that it's got a battery powered RTC.

Sad that it’s wifi6 and not wifi6E. Can’t wait for wider adoption

Worse still, Wi-Fi *7* devices are already out. Qualcomm's QCN9274's running on the "ath12k" chipset [1] have been a tempting DIY option. Though that module requires an external 3 amps at 5 Volt (15 watts!) to be soldered to it to operate

[1] https://www.524wifi.com/index.php/network-modules-adapters/w...


Am I the only one who doesn’t even want their router to have wifi?

I’d rather use wifi APs connected via PoE to a switch which is connected to the router.

I feel like router and wifi should be separate so that I can expand and upgrade the wifi independently of the router.


> I feel like router and wifi should be separate so that I can expand and upgrade the wifi independently of the router.

This _is_ the objectively better way. It's not practical for a whole host of scenarios, though.


That's my preference as well. Keep the router simple, don't put a transmitter near the sensitive bits to cause interference with the CPU, ethernet, or USB bits. I want my AP to be dumb and do nothing besides connect ethernet to wifi clients. That way when you need more coverage you add APs, newer WIFI upgrade only the APs, etc.

This device looks like a candidate for a wifi AP; if I'm reading correctly, it accepts PoE over the 2.5G port, and OpenWRT makes for a decent AP.

Same here. I’m stuck with the service provider’s (“free”) fibre router.

I’ve turned its wifi off, and connected my own setup via the LAN port.


Complex (who I believe does most of Qualcomm's reference designs) has some newer models out, if you are willing to go down market some.

Only 2x2 and lower power output, but they are powered off mini-pcie (and I think there are some m.2 models as well). https://compex.com.sg/shop/wifi-module/wle7002e25d-wifi7-11b...

Not required, but you can solder a Multi Link Operation wire between multiple cards (within a single system), to enable them to work in concert together (basically as a 4x4 or whatnot). In case you still really miss soldering extra shit onto your cards!!

Sponsored write-up, and longer/jargon-y-er than it needs to be, but still enjoyed this post: https://www.cnx-software.com/2024/11/07/compex-systems-wi-fi...


lol, I'm still on 802.11n !

Seems almost ideal if you don’t use it as an ethernet switch. A third radio for wireless mesh trunking is the only thing I see missing from my OpenWRT setup.

There is an M.2 slot, though only PCIe 2.0 x1. Possibly still good enough for reasonable bandwidth.

Would other SoC suppliers ( Qualcomm, Broadcom) embrace it?



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

Search: