tplink TL-WR1043ND access point is now ready (was Re: svn commit: r227926 - head/sys/mips/conf)

[Adrian Chadd]

On 26 November 2011 07:01, Stefan Bethke <stb at lassitu.de> wrote:

> Got it up and running, this is very nice. A couple comments and questions:
>
> I managed to write the firmware image from OpenWrt's sys upgrade, so the format seems to be sane.  I *think* the TP-Link web interface should accept this image as well, but I haven't tested that.

Yup, if you use -s on the script (build_tplink) then it should do that. :)

> People wanting to try this: as this moment, you do need the serial console, since the image will not allow you to log in over the network and become root (AFAICT).  If the cofnig that goes into the image is improved, I'm confident you can run this without console access.

Patches are gratefully accepted for a default configuration. Actually,
I thought I had one. :)

# Create a bridge, flip on an IPv4 static address
netif_bridge0_type="bridge"
netif_bridge0_addrtype="static"
netif_bridge0_descr="default"
netif_bridge0_name="bridge0"
# These are bridge members w/ STP enabled
netif_bridge0_members_stp="arge0"
# These are bridge members w/ STP disabled
netif_bridge0_members=""
netif_bridge0_ipv4_address="192.168.1.20"
netif_bridge0_ipv4_netmask="255.255.255.0"

.. and no root/user password. Just telnet in as 'user' first, then su to root.

So try that?

> Wifi speed seems to be decent, from an old MacBook I have lying around, I managed about 38 MB/s to and from my server using ssh and dd.

The -HEAD lock and invariant debugging is enabled by default in the
kernel config. You should get higher throughput if those are disabled.

> Is there a read-write filesystem for the flash, or are we limited to an archive in the cfg flash partition?

No r/w flash filesystem yet. :) Sorry! Someone else needs to do this,
I've got my hands full!

> Is the root MFS copied to RAM, or is it read on demand?

It's read on demand - it's actually stored on flash as a uzip
partition, so it's decompressed on the fly.

> I see that you went to some lengths creating your own config framework.  Why did you choose to not use the standard?

This is just my development stuff, it's not designed to be a public
openwrt-style project. It thus is to enable me to do my hackery. :)

> I haven't looked at nanobsd in ages, and I did see in the last status report that there is another attempt at creating an OpenWrt-like setup.  I'm currently running about six or seven OpenWrt routers (mostly at the extended family), and I'm interested in eventually replacing OpenWrt with FreeBSD.  Any guesses where a trimmed-down but fully functional (incl. ports) distribution might emerge?

Hah. Someone will have to make ports cross-compile. Again, I'd love it
if someone stepped up to doing that. :)

I'm doing as much as I can to "dangle the carrot" so to speak.
Hopefully this will attract some more interest in freebsd-embedded as
well as the openwrt-style project called "zrouter".

zrouter.org is really meant to be the openwrt-style project. My stuff
is purely to get (my) development happening. Alex and the others at
zrouter.org can then pick up the work and package it. ;)

> Thanks for all your work, if you ever happen to come over to Hamburg, I'll have a beer waiting :-)

You're welcome!



Adrian