Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Ixus74]

Hi,

I, ve just got my DIR-655 (FW 1.11) and I have one big issue with it, it can't have static routes to the LAN interface. So I have upgraded to FW 1.20, but it has the same limitation.

I've got a VPN (PPTP) gateway on my LAN that serves a specific subnet. Since the DIR-655 is my main router (default gateway), I want it to route traffic for this subnet to the VPN gateway. How can this be done without static routing to the LAN interface?

By the way it really should be fixed in a new firmware, because it's an essential networking feature.

TIA , Ixus.

[Lycan]

That unit no longer supports Lan to Lan routes.
The DGL-4500 is the only unit we have that does that.

[Ixus74]

That's rubbish, allmost all other routers from allmost all other vendors support that feature. Why are these things called routers?

Is it possible to reintroduce this feature, because for me a router is worthless if can't route properly.

[Lycan]

The creation of static LAN routes is reserved for the DGL-4500.
I'm attempting to add it to the DIR-855 but there are no plans to add this feature to the DIR-655.

[BrianTO]

Lycan,

I have to agree with Ixus74 - the ability to add a static route to the LAN interface of the router (pointing inward to a LAN VPN server for example) is not, and should not be a "reserved" feature for any router that D-Link produces.  Apparently this ability was removed from the more recent firmware versions for the DIR series - if the word on the web is any indication.

I also agree that every other company that produces routers supports this feature (Linksys, Netgear).  I recently purchased the DIR-625 model.  If I can't find a firmware version that actually does this - I'm going to return it for a refund.  Might be worth considering adding this "reserved" feature to even the baseline models - can't be that hard if everyone else is doing it.

[EddieZ]

Lycan, I guess the question "why remove it" might need some elaboration from the PM people. Reserving the feature for the other model only seems only logical if it is a way of promoting other (more expensive) products for these tasks (although I must agree it is a basic task for a router, even a HOME router). If so just let them (D-Link) say so. Unless they've anticipated that this would cause a lot of commotion and will not admit to this. In that hypothetical situation they should question their strategy...In the long run these hidden tactics never work. But that's only a assumption based on a hypothetical situation ofcourse.

[Lycan]

1) I agree.
2) There's nothing that can be done about it.

[EddieZ]

1) I agree.
2) There's nothing that can be done about it.

1. Thanks
2. Well, product management could demonstrate some perestroika
(Under 25? -> Link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perestroika)

[Lycan]

Unlikely, however, since the 655 is aging and now the senior of our N line I'm sure moving forward this will be a standardized feature. So there's that.............yea.

[EddieZ]

Unlikely, however, since the 655 is aging and now the senior of our N line I'm sure moving forward this will be a standardized feature. So there's that.............yea.

About time a better firmware would be availabe, wouldn't you say? Before it becomes EOL (if I read closely...).

[Lycan]

again,
1) I agree.
2) Not much I can do about that. There is something in the works, whether it allows Lan to Lan routes, I don't know. (but i strongly doubt it).

[dlinkmw30]

Really disappointing...

And I thought firmware upgrades were suppose to add functionality... Silly Me

[codecannon]

So what guaruntee from dlink is there that they will just not take a routing feature away from a router in the future in order to move new product?  i.e. If I buy the DGL-4500, whats to say you just wait until the new product line for it comes out and fix remaining bugs but remove basic functionality?  I liked the 655, but as for brand loyalty, this has convinced me I need to find another vendor.

[Rad Spencer]

Lycan mentions the feature is becoming a "standard" in the Upper Crust of D-Link's home class devices.

My guess is it was done to emphasize the line between the "classes" of the home class products.
The 655 was the bad boy on the block for a long time running, some (inc. myself) consider it to be  a superior product because if it's long track record of reliability and feature sets. I know they've had extensive issues with some of the higher end products, but I've used the DIR-825 and that is a solid unit.
The 655 (rev A1/2) were blessed with the very stable IP5060-Nat and a high end business class switch CPU by Vitesse. When these parts were no longer available they switched to a higher end NAT from Ubicom and a Realtek switch with matched performance. This has caused them some trouble with the Kernel for the IPos on the higher end DGL/DIR models. It appears to be resolved or close to it anyway.

That being said, I can only assume D-Link is trying to create better products, but when something like the 655 keeps people from trying them because of it's extended features, high-end performance and price point what allure do the other products have.

[Lycan]

Couldn't have said it better myself. But I DIDN'T.