D-Link Forums
The Graveyard - Products No Longer Supported => Routers / COVR => DIR-655 => Topic started by: ShawnTRD on January 26, 2009, 03:44:54 PM
-
I see these on D-Links FTP site. Anyone trying them?
ftp://ftp.dlink.com/Gateway/dir655/Firmware/
File:dir655_firmware_121b11_beta02.zip 1434 KB 1/26/2009 10:17:00 PM
-
yeah I posted it under other thread....
-
http://forums.dlink.com/index.php?topic=3969.msg22296#msg22296
-
Lycan, just for clarification, is this 1.21 or 1.22? the forum post states 1.22B11 beta 2, and the ftp file is named 1.21B11 beta 2.
-
It's the wanna-be 1.22, but for now called 1.21 beta
-
someone load it and tell me what it says in the routers UI.
-
It says 1.21.
I think the DNS issue has been resolved. Ran the NSlookup thingie and it works fast.
Edit: Lost my settings, took some longer to load after upload then earlier firmwares (77 sec). Easy restore config from 1.21 production.
-
I've just loaded it. It says 1.21, and in the chklst.txt page it says 1.21b11Beta02.
EDIT: it also kept my settings.
-
So it sounds like this might be a winner...
-
Yep, no side effects so far.
Now I can go to sleep... ;D
-
Having basically ''punted'' on any hopes for a stable/reliable 1.22 firmware upgrade and downgraded back to 1.21 ''with'' SecureSpot, I presume this means that in order to take advantage of this particular beta I'll have to give up on the whole idea of even trying SecureSpot since my 30-day trial period is already underway?
In general I'm fine with this since I have only one PC/Windows machine on my entire network of Macs. Considering there seems to be no serious effort underway to make provisions to offer the more ''useful'' elements (antivirus etc.) of SecureSpot for the Apple community, SecureSpot is really a dead issue anyway and no more than a temporary curiosity.
Back to OpenDNS...
-
Having basically ''punted'' on any hopes for a stable/reliable 1.22 firmware upgrade and downgraded back to 1.21 ''with'' SecureSpot, I presume this means that in order to take advantage of this particular beta I'll have to give up on the whole idea of even trying SecureSpot since my 30-day trial period is already underway?
In general I'm fine with this since I have only one PC/Windows machine on my entire network of Macs. Considering there seems to be no serious effort underway to make provisions to offer the more ''useful'' elements (antivirus etc.) of SecureSpot for the Apple community, SecureSpot is really a dead issue anyway and no more than a temporary curiosity.
Back to OpenDNS...
You're a bit impatient, my dear friend.
You do not need to try the beta, just wait for the final version. It'll be out in a few days or so. They don't call it 'beta' for nothing.
-
You're a bit impatient, my dear friend.
You do not need to try the beta, just wait for the final version. It'll be out in a few days or so. They don't call it 'beta' for nothing.
Are you a source for official news? If so, do you know if the final version will provide for any Mac oriented usefulness for attaching a hard drive to the USB port, for example?
I agree with you on the beta thing, however, part of the seeming impatience on my part, and perhaps others, is that generally speaking, many of us who followed the rave reviews to the 655--especially from the Mac world--may have become a bit disillusioned.
Be patient with us ''Mac people.'' We're not ''Stepford people.'' We're just used to things working...
Yeah, okay, so MobileMe was a fiasco... ;D
However, is it too much to ask that a bicycle seat come standard with a new bicycle? :o
-
Nope, if I was I would have had one of those nice Dlink badges :)
Haven't got a clue as to the availability of a Mac version. You might want to inquire after a small device from Taiwan that I've seen: Some kind of Ethernet-to-USB hub. Makes it possible to connect USB drives through the ethernet port of the router. No more info though...
Respect!
-
Here's the deal. Taiwan claims that they've solved the DNS relay issue. Odd part is I was getting reports that the 1.22B02 code fixed it as well. Either way they made an executive decision to pull the code and ensure it's stability. It will be reposted asap, as for this 1.21 beta, I don't know what thats about and if I can repost the 1.22b02 as a beta I will.
-
Is the "DNS Relay Issue" what keeps Wake on Lan from working correctly? Regardless, will WOL work in 1.22 or do we still need to go back to 1.11?
Thanks?
-
No the WOL function does not work out of the box in 1.21 (it does in 1.11) because of the limitation on the network address WOL works on. So no connnection with DNS Relay. The WOL workaround can be found in other threads.
-
Here's the deal. Taiwan claims that they've solved the DNS relay issue. Odd part is I was getting reports that the 1.22B02 code fixed it as well. Either way they made an executive decision to pull the code and ensure it's stability. It will be reposted asap, as for this 1.21 beta, I don't know what thats about and if I can repost the 1.22b02 as a beta I will.
Well I hope something gets done I've been holding back until now! I am running into issues with 1.11 with Wireless N WPA2 AES dropping connections or just turns it off completely. I have backup Access Points to use if case that happens then I have to fall back to Turbo G MIMO. I notice that DIR-655 it won't go into 802.11n it only goes into 802.11gn. Speed burst at 300M then 150M then 120M. Router shows 108M on the devices connected. But than that drops to 40M.
-
Well I hope something gets done I've been holding back until now! I am running into issues with 1.11 with Wireless N WPA2 AES dropping connections or just turns it off completely. I have backup Access Points to use if case that happens then I have to fall back to Turbo G MIMO. I notice that DIR-655 it won't go into 802.11n it only goes into 802.11gn. Speed burst at 300M then 150M then 120M. Router shows 108M on the devices connected. But than that drops to 40M.
I've downloaded the beta... Wired connections for GIG/100 are fine.. Download BT now it's 3.40-3.085Mb/s that better than last year clock record. I don't want to upgrade but it the wireless is and issue and downloads will surfer.
-
DNS seems much faster. Running well so far.
-
Well I hope something gets done I've been holding back until now! I am running into issues with 1.11 with Wireless N WPA2 AES dropping connections or just turns it off completely. I have backup Access Points to use if case that happens then I have to fall back to Turbo G MIMO. I notice that DIR-655 it won't go into 802.11n it only goes into 802.11gn. Speed burst at 300M then 150M then 120M. Router shows 108M on the devices connected. But than that drops to 40M.
Yea, you're shooting yourself in the foot.
We've implemented a good neighbor policy that calls for the N ap to drop it's 40Mhz bonding to 20mhz if it picks up ANY 802.11G beacon, client or AP.
-
To counter any remarks about that Good Neighbour feature: it is required to implement. So as long as legacy G without the feature is still around (you), we will have to deal with it :-)
-
Yea, you're shooting yourself in the foot.
We've implemented a good neighbor policy that calls for the N ap to drop it's 40Mhz bonding to 20mhz if it picks up ANY 802.11G beacon, client or AP.
Well strange it didn't do that prior, but looks like a Netgear Wireless Router from one of my neighbor is showing 78% signal has been added to the mix left side of my house. So I guess now I need to get this good neighbor policy.
Thanks for the info..
-
Lycan
Can you please email the 1.22b02 to me at chascent@gmail.com PLEASE..........
Thanks
Charlie
-
Lycan
Can you please email the 1.22b02 to me at chascent@gmail.com PLEASE..........
Thanks
Charlie
Can't.
use this
http://forums.dlink.com/index.php?topic=3969.0
-
Will the securespot of this firmware be released soon?
-
Will the securespot of this firmware be released soon?
Of course, this is just a beta run. We will soon have a full release. (w/ SecureSpot and w/o)
-
Any idea when this will be days, weeks, months?
Hoping to use 1.22 but want to use securespot to block out all the ads...
-
At the risk of irritating someone at D-Link, there's really nothing I've seen useful in SecureSpot that can't be facilitated using OpenDNS, which is free, and one's own choice of an antivirus utility, free or not.
This goes especially for any Mac users out there. I've found absolutely nothing in SecureSpot of any benefit for that platform.
...and, if there ever is support for Mac, I'd sure appreciate another crack at a 30-day demo period. I was an idiot and started mine.
-
At the risk of irritating someone at D-Link, there's really nothing I've seen useful in SecureSpot that can't be facilitated using OpenDNS, which is free, and one's own choice of an antivirus utility, free or not.
This goes especially for any Mac users out there. I've found absolutely nothing in SecureSpot of any benefit for that platform.
...and, if there ever is support for Mac, I'd sure appreciate another crack at a 30-day demo period. I was an idiot and started mine.
I'm not Dlink, for the record.
Dlink is not claiming to have extra features besides OpenDNS/firewalls and Anti virus packages. Securespot is targeted at people who:
1. haven't got a clue what they're doing with PC's and networks
2. are not willing (or able) to understand why they need a firwall and antivirus program on their PC's at home (mom and dad, kids etc) and what the threats of malware are
So it's clear you're not the target audience for Securespot. But looking at the number of n00bs using PC's (the millions of infected PC's worldwide (zombie networks), the succesfull phishing scams and so on) Securespot can solve their problem for the entire home network. Yes, they can also ask the neighbour or local PC store to help them but most of the people will turn off the installed programs once they experience issues like unavailable websites or blocked LAN's
Please do not project your own expertise of OpenDNS, AV and firewalls upon the rest of the world. Reality is so much worse that you should look at the product from the average users' point of view, not from your own expert perspective. And yes, compared to the 'average user level' you're considered an expert.
-
EddieZ, I think the target audience for Securespot wouldn't even spend time researching and buying a high end router anyways. They would likely buy a low end router, or use the router sold by their ISP.
People buying a DIR-655 or similar router are likely power users who want the best possible performance for their home network (which again would likely consist of various kinds of computers, handhelds and other multimedia devices).
-
EddieZ, I think the target audience for Securespot wouldn't even spend time researching and buying a high end router anyways. They would likely buy a low end router, or use the router sold by their ISP.
People buying a DIR-655 or similar router are likely power users who want the best possible performance for their home network (which again would likely consist of various kinds of computers, handhelds and other multimedia devices).
Perhaps Dlink has some demographics on their clients, I don't know.
Not all products have Securespot. I will not be available on the 855 for example, because it is considered a true high end router. Looking at current prices and test results in all kinds of comparisons I wouldn't be surprised that this router is sold to a lot of basic users. Sales guys do not promote a very cheap model to ignorant customers. They optimize their selling potential with those clients ;D
So I disagree with your statement that it is considered a 'power users' ' router.
-
I'm not Dlink, for the record.
That's a load off. ;)
So it's clear you're not the target audience for Securespot. But looking at the number of n00bs using PC's (the millions of infected PC's worldwide (zombie networks), the succesfull phishing scams and so on) Securespot can solve their problem for the entire home network. Yes, they can also ask the neighbour or local PC store to help them but most of the people will turn off the installed programs once they experience issues like unavailable websites or blocked LAN's
As a Mac user, I'm definitely not the target audience--and perhaps never will be, it would seem.
Also, OpenDNS is not linked to any specific networking device, service provider, platform or hardware in general, and it has positive ''word of mouth'' working for it at all tiers, not just experts. SecureSpot is relatively obscure, and would seem to have a much narrower market of only those who find out about it most likely after having purchased a D-Link router.
Please do not project your own expertise of OpenDNS, AV and firewalls upon the rest of the world. Reality is so much worse that you should look at the product from the average users' point of view, not from your own expert perspective. And yes, compared to the 'average user level' you're considered an expert.
Appreciate the ''expert'' comment, but I'm far from it. I do know, however, of many companies, public libraries and universities who have implemented OpenDNS with great ease and success.
The core of my previous post was from a Macintosh point of view having to do with my opinion that ''in a perfect world'' D-Link routers seem to be much better than Apple branded devices and cost far less. My criticism is that SecureSpot never overtly lets Mac users know that it will only work for the PC/Windows platform, and makes Mac owners waste their 30-day trial period before, if ever, D-Link develops and/or releases a Mac-specific firmware/interface for SecureSpot.
My last bone of contention is that even for Windows users, OpenDNS is a much easier implementation to cover everything but online anti-virus protection. It is, in fact, much more accessible to the ''newbie'' who doesn't know diddly-squat about dangerous exposure on the WWW--and it is free. In this down economy, I feel it would be responsible, if not just plain ''nice'' to inform people about a better way to spend their money than on SecureSpot.
As for ''projecting'' -- I love those new Pico projectors! Was that what you were referring to? ;D
-
I agree with the fact that Mac users are left out, something that should be communicated much better.
OpenDNS is is many cases a good solution, although using it does have some side-effects that I don't like.
1. My IPv6 tunnels do not work (but these probably not used by basic users)
2. The blocking is very rigorous, even one of my own sites (which is purely dedicated to my lovely Somali cat) seemed to be a threat to other users numerous times.
3. It really does not block sites that are infected with malware or have active malware injectors. I checked and OpenDNS thought they were safe. Ended up with some nasty malware (which was removed by my AV suite)
So even though OpenDNS is free, you will have to take into account that the security level is not ultimate.
-
You forgetting the most important aspect of the BSecure Securespot Suite. The fact that the backend monitors the traffic in REAL TIME. Yes it causes network over head on your internet connection, but for people like my mom that needs not only parental controls, but reporting of attempts to violate said controls in real time it is a real boon.
The fact is the Securespot can actually be a pain (IMHO) to configure. Having to do it for my mother often has become something of a chore. Though now it is working and they seem to be happy with for the most part. Granted their understanding of it (or lack there of) takes away from it's true effectiveness it allow my step brother and sister to enjoy the benefits of the interwebs with a pretty effective safety harness as it were.
As for the Mac client, I can't honestly say what the hold up is with that. My guess it due to Mac's relatively low distribution compared to PC's running XP/Vista and the overall LACK of threats to the Mac platform itself D-Link doesn't see the profit in making the client. Again this is my personal opinion not that of D-Link.
Lastly, your observation of what a consumer will purchase for their networking needs is skewed. Drastically. The fact is these same consumers lack so much knowledge of networking as a whole and whats needed for them to get their specific job done that the march in to places like Frys and Best Buy and ask for assistance. This ALL MOST always yields the same result. The consumer is sold something that they A) know NOTHING ABOUT B) Have no idea about the differences between the product models C) Has the flashiest box with the most BUZZ words on it. (e.g. 802.11N, GIGabit, and WiFi Alliance as well as the biggest one Vista Certified.)
We were very stagegic about which products got Securespot and which ones will have it added later.
Also Eddie, you might be wrong about the 855, I forsee SS being added to EVERYTHING. ;)
-
...Yes it causes network over head on your internet connection...
''Overhead.'' I was wondering why my interaction speed with browsing the web was slowing down back when I had SS enabled. This seems to explain that. I felt like I was ''plowing snow'' not browsing. The more browsing I did seemed to slow things down (fill up the plow), but when I stopped for a bit (dumped the snow), it seemed to ''catch up'' so to speak...but then once again ''pile up snow in the plow'' as I browsed.
-
I concur, however for the people that need it, it's worth the performance degradation.
-
Any idea when this will be days, weeks, months?
Hoping to use 1.22 but want to use securespot to block out all the ads...
Anyone? ???
-
We're no given ETA's for code. However I know there's an alpha being tested now, the 1.21B11Beta I posted is the beta for the 1.22. I can only assume it's close.
-
We were very stagegic about which products got Securespot and which ones will have it added later.
Also Eddie, you might be wrong about the 855, I forsee SS being added to EVERYTHING. ;)
No problem, if you have the feature/code ready 'plug & play for BIOS insertion, why not ;) For those wanting to use it I think it's a great feature. One-stop-shopping.
-
Any idea when this will be days, weeks, months?
Hoping to use 1.22 but want to use securespot to block out all the ads...
Soon
"Soon" does not imply any particular date, time, decade, century, or millennia in the past, present, and certainly not the future. "Soon" shall make no contract or warranty between D-Link Systems and the end user. "Soon" will arrive some day, D-Link does guarantee that "soon" will be here before the end of time. Maybe. Do not make plans based on "soon" as D-Link will not be liable for any misuse, use, or even casual glancing at "soon."
-
Soon
"Soon" does not imply any particular date, time, decade, century, or millennia in the past, present, and certainly not the future. "Soon" shall make no contract or warranty between D-Link Systems and the end user. "Soon" will arrive some day, D-Link does guarantee that "soon" will be here before the end of time. Maybe. Do not make plans based on "soon" as D-Link will not be liable for any misuse, use, or even casual glancing at "soon."
You left out that 'soon' is much better than 'never'
-
You left out that 'soon' is much better than 'never'
Oh yeah, and that. but "better" is all relative to the user.
-
Oh yeah, and that. but "better" is all relative to the user.
i'm thinking about changing his member type to "Tech Lawyer" lol.
-
i'm thinking about changing his member type to "Tech Lawyer" lol.
I felt that it is very necessary to establish this clear distinction. Although, we do have ETAs, there is no point in disclosing them since the ETAs we're sung often change with little or no notice. You can imagine the domino effect forming.
-
Oh yeah, and that. but "better" is all relative to the user.
Is it? Whereas 'never' implies an clear and final statement, offering no choice to the 'user', 'soon' by definition offers the user a future choice and possibility to render a judgment based on comparison. Therefore 'better' is not relative to the user at this stage. Only in hindsight this qualification can be made.
Do I hear any objections? If so, please let me know ;)
-
I felt that it is very necessary to establish this clear distinction. Although, we do have ETAs, there is no point in disclosing them since the ETAs we're sung often change with little or no notice. You can imagine the domino effect forming.
Don't disclose them since they will only disappoint people not familiar with software development estimates.
-
Don't disclose them since they will only disappoint people not familiar with software development estimates.
I agree. Which brings me back to my earlier argument of "soon" :D
I'd continue to support my argument, but any further argument would just get you that much closer to insane member not to mention major thread derailment. ;)
-
I agree. Which brings me back to my earlier argument of "soon" :D
I'd continue to support my argument, but any further argument would just get you that much closer to insane member not to mention major thread derailment. ;)
LOL....
You mods labeled me, remember :)
-
OK now the Mods are posting here Mods a question:
Besides securespot and the USB share is there ANY advantage of 1.21 vs 1.11. I find 1.11 to be
faster and the signal strength to all wireless connections better. Mods please comment....
Charlie
-
OK now the Mods are posting here Mods a question:
Besides securespot and the USB share is there ANY advantage of 1.21 vs 1.11. I find 1.11 to be
faster and the signal strength to all wireless connections better. Mods please comment....
Charlie
There are quite a bit of technical changes that I cant quite disclose, the changes are generally beneficial or strategic.
If you find that SharePort and SecureSpot are both services that you do not require, not to mention increase your overall performance. You are by no means obligated to upgrade.
I believe it was stated earlier "If it isn't broke, don't fix it".
-
Wal
technically is it a true statement to say that the OS on 1.11 is faster (less code) then 1.21 or is 1.21 technically better. Only asking about SPEED and Signal strength??
Thanks
Charlie
-
Wal
technically is it a true statement to say that the OS on 1.11 is faster (less code) then 1.21 or is 1.21 technically better. Only asking about SPEED and Signal strength??
Thanks
Charlie
Our lab isn't quite the IDEAL home situation and it needs to be understood that our lab cant possibly replicate every possible user scenario. However, we do try and cover the "basics".
As far as speed, What is your benchmark of choice? actual line throughput? wireless throughput? QoS? WAN to LAN speed? etc.
-
Wal,
I have 6 mb down/1 mb up service from local Cable company,
my setup is ALL G:
1 wired in 100 mb
2 wireless within 15 feet of router
2 wireless upstairs
when I check signal strength with 1.11 vs 1.21 wireless connections:
Ver 1.11 - 3 connections 100% 1 connection 90%
Ver 1.21 - latest Beta 1 connection 100%, 1 connection 87%, 1 connection 80%, 1 connection at 60%
I tried twice with basically same results, I did NOT move any wireless connecting in, all I did was reset and re-flash to the firmwares above.
Using Time Warner speed tests, ver 1.11 consistently was faster by .5 mb on d/l and u/l is the same as 1.21.
Charlie
-
Wal,
I have 6 mb down/1 mb up service from local Cable company,
my setup is ALL G:
1 wired in 100 mb
2 wireless within 15 feet of router
2 wireless upstairs
when I check signal strength with 1.11 vs 1.21 wireless connections:
Ver 1.11 - 3 connections 100% 1 connection 90%
Ver 1.21 - latest Beta 1 connection 100%, 1 connection 87%, 1 connection 80%, 1 connection at 60%
I tried twice with basically same results, I did NOT move any wireless connecting in, all I did was reset and re-flash to the firmwares above.
Using Time Warner speed tests, ver 1.11 consistently was faster by .5 mb on d/l and u/l is the same as 1.21.
Charlie
Are you reloading configurations that were saved in 1.11? if so, try to manually reapply your desired configuration. I'll look into it...
-
Wal_,
You might wanna check if it's the method of measurement or the radio 'pattern' that has changed (or is influenced), causing the difference in signal %. I can verify the differences between 1.11 and 1.21/1.20, which are also noticeable on the client side. Also there seems to be a bit more variance in the 1.20/1.21 signal.
I'd be interested what has changed in the radio registers AND/OR antenna diversity.
-
Wal_,
You might wanna check if it's the method of measurement or the radio 'pattern' that has changed (or is influenced), causing the difference in signal %. I can verify the differences between 1.11 and 1.21/1.20, which are also noticeable on the client side. Also there seems to be a bit more variance in the 1.20/1.21 signal.
I'd be interested what has changed in the radio registers AND/OR antenna diversity.
I'll look into it...
-
Wal
ALL configurations are put in MANUALLY for both 1.11 and 1.21 beta.
Charlie
-
With me it's cost to 40mb down and 5mbps up for what I get, 1.11 having is having issues with wireless N. Speed is find for downloading but if you say there is increase in performance I'll give it a shot down.
As your correct ideal connections will vary about customers. Everyone setup is going to be completely different DLINK can only create environment that the router can operate in.
-
Hope they are going to release it soon, the new 1.2102 / 1.22 works fine now but want the securespot version :(
-
Cant a D-Link engineer just add the option for securespot back to firmware for ver 1211?
-
when the 1.22 is released it will have SecureSpot.
-
when the 1.22 is released it will have SecureSpot.
Will Wake On Lan work in 1.22, or will version 1.11 be the WOL capable version?
-
Hey Wal_
How about we get a stripped down version of firmware for the 655? Just basic security, port forwarding. Any chance of that?
-
thats the 1.21 beta i posted.
-
Hey Wal_
How about we get a stripped down version of firmware for the 655? Just basic security, port forwarding. Any chance of that?
What would be the advantage of a version like that? You can already turn off most of the features by default. Don't think there would be much of a speed gain. Or do you have some other assumptions on that?
-
Link?
thats the 1.21 beta i posted.
Hope that some of the other options that I don't need is what problems the 655.
What would be the advantage of a version like that? You can already turn off most of the features by default. Don't think there would be much of a speed gain. Or do you have some other assumptions on that?
-
http://forums.dlink.com/index.php?board=168.0
I think you can find it from there.