Print

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

[Axel49]

Just curious here, can the logs be disabled on the DAP fully?

I don't think so, but as the DAP-1360 doesn't persist about one week without cycling the power (it can keep 200 log records) it would be a good idea to have such a tool. If problem occur, one can turn on  the logging again for diagnostic purposes.

I was running the old DWL-G710 until the end of last year. It did not maintained logs at all, I used it as a repeater to extend range, but in the past distorsions became worser and the DWL-G710 doesn't support 802.11n. I tried to replace them with DAP-1360 as repeaters but ran into problerm - I didn't knew that the problem was a (probably) Samsung SMART TV (the SWL problem) nearby and finally I decided to replace the repeaters with wired connections instead and use the DAP-1360 as AP instead for wireless support. At this point I detected the "DDoS/DoS" attacks from the SWL and could limit the effects by blocking this aggressive equipment. Now the SWL problem is gone, probably the owner detected the behavior and effects and has turned off the WiFi function on his equipment.

I wanted the DAP-1360 to send me logs automatically via e-mail, but ran into the present difficulties to locate the "Log Settigs" menu and when testing if email works at all via the Watchdog i got the DDAP-1360 to begin a stalling behavior.

Now reset has been done, simple setup and no Watchdog enabled has been done, automatic cycling the power every 24h around 03:00 in the night has been installed and surge protector as well. Now I have started it all, let's see how it runs overnight. Hopefully as planned. Auto cycling power at 03:00 in the night for switch and 3 DAP-1360 AP:s but not router (A small TP-Link router for internal LAN usage only. I run Watchguard at the Internet connection (terribly expensive however, a small model, 4 years old with 2 years still remaining on the current license).  Maybe I'll replace the Watchguard in 2016, the throughput is low (70 Mbps although the vendor says 80 Mbps) but currently sufficient for the most things.

The DAP-1360 problems do not matter so much, it is for internal usage only and I got 802.11n at 300 Mbps.... No problem, simple to set up and manage, but alerts and reporting features could be better. However, who should read it regularly? But some type of alerting shuld have been appreciated.

[Axel49]

Axel49, well I can only attribute all the errors problems to BAD coding, problems with the web interface, and the old software, busybox and so on. There are so many updates since the versions d-link uses it is crazy.

From what I understand busybox is a scaled down linux, so yes it should be able to use the cpu to it's limits, but as with any operating system, once it hangs it hangs, and you are stuck. All I can say, at least by doing a power cycle every 24h, the DAP-1360 is working fine.

If I remember correct, you need a JTAG to use the unit as a sort of computer, then you will have access to everything, busybox, the commands and so on. If you check the open source code you will see what it is. You could update everything on your own, drivers, busybox and so on, but you need to compile it once done. That is way beyond me, as I do not have any programing skills or limited "know how" of linux.

Someone has posted some information, here you can see what I mean, and what you get when the unit boots up.

https://forum.openwrt.org/viewtopic.php?id=46334

And if you scroll down, you will recognize some parts of the information from the log during a startup of the unit, the do not show you everything in the log, you need to access it with that special custom made cable.

I do not know if someone at the WRT forums have released a custom firmware for the unit, I think they had problems with not having the option to support all the different cpus, and all units they support have custom pre-compiled images. There are a lot of things to do in order to get a customized firmware to work.

Many thanks, DennisOlof1!

I've been programming for several equipments since 1969, but never on the Linux and to start programming for the DAP-1360 would imply that I would have my own FW version and release to maintain even when it is founded on the original OpenSource code.

It would be time-consuming, and as I said, I am not experienced with Linux nor the hardware specific services being offered. Of course, I can conclude that you have considered this area somewhat and know more in detail than I  what this concerns.
But I don't have any Linux machine although I know about the existence of such things as OpenBSD, FreeBSD, RedHat, Sun Solaris and others. But this is a mini Linux version as far as I understand and it would have its specific limitations as well as specific hardware interface features for the DAP-1360.

It is preferable to have a FW version adopted and acknowledged (recognised) from the vendor to save work. I also noticed that the FW would be dependent of the Hardware Version, too, thus, this is not a general issue  which can be adopted everywhere.

A centralised support and maintenance regarding the DAP-1360 would be highly appreciated by many reasons. Otherwise it would be a maze where nobody knows the main road anymore.

One thing would be essential from a security aspect - that login from a WiFi connection to the DAP-1360 could be blocked.
It is almost impossible to get full security at an open WiFi port, the best way would be to block all access to internal DAP-1360 tools from the wireless net - no login interface this way.

[DennisOlof1]

Axel49, agree.

I guess thats why mikrotik and ubiquite came about, d-link and netgear simply did not "cut it" when it came to systems with higher demands. Anyway, on my DAP-1360 the v3.02 firmware had major issues, and when it crashed, the unit (busybox) did not crash in it self, it was just some firmware loading or something with the WLAN part of the unit. Anyway, it turned out that it happened to often, could be a hour, or two days, but every time the unit became unusable. Having a watchdog on it did not help as it is just a basic type of watchdog, and when reviewing the logs it was clear that it was a major bug that just needed to be fixed, and D-link did so.

The v3.04 of the firmware probably has some bugs too, but the unit is now working as good as could be expected, and that is all you can ask, really. As it is meant for home use, and the products are cheap.
I had not problems on the v3.04 firmware running my two dap-1360 as "point to point" bridge for more than 30days. Downloading data, surfing the web, the works. It had no problem handling that at all, compared to the previous firmware.

Anyway, I am using the units as public access for anonymous people in a smaller residential area, sure the speeds are not that good but on average most users do get 8Mbit and that is good enough for surfing, mailing and so on. But this is also why i power cycle the units every 24h, just to be sure of error free operation, and it has not failed so far. The firewall does not need rebooting, a zywall 100 USG, I have been running similar at home, and even though they do not have that much performance, and has some bugs, it works and is stable as a rock. It does get power cycled a few times, but that is due to power outage in the area.

The only reason for me moving to ubiquiti (not mikrotik) is they are much more easy to administrate and I need more output power on the WiFi signal, the standard 15mW (15 dBm) (milli watts) on most WLAN equipment is not enough, as I have to compensate for some cable loss and I need more reach. But I only found this out by trial and error. And there are not that many companies out there that have stuff that do not follow regulations. At least with ubiquiti I can get like 25dBm or something, this will be more than enough for better reach but mostly better coverage. Some might still have to use APs as wireless client with a external 8dbi antenna, but that is not important.

[Axel49]

I belive that I have noticed a remarkable thing, I have three DAP-1360.

Two of them are delivered early in the beginning of 2014, around the Newyear. They were originally delivered with FW 3.02, I have upgraded them with FW 3.04 as provided from the D-Link swedish homepage,

But the last one was delivered in the middle of March 2014 and with FW 3.04 (as stated).

Now I am testing them, one by one. First, I tested the last delivered one, surprisingly, it was still somewhat unstable and some error reportings appeared.

To find out what the problem cause could be I exchanged it with one of the two elder DAP-1360 to locate something which could help me to select the "least unstable" one. Surprisingly, the behavior changed. The logs differ and I haven't got any "unstable" indication yet. Of fourse, there are details to check out more carefully, for example to check out the Watchdog functionality (now disabled due to "stalling" behavior when the ping IP address was nonexistent - I intended to checkout the alert signal via email, but could not get anything mailed. The DAP-1360 failed completely to send me an alert.

I also want to automatise the log management, to get the log excerpt sent daily via email is a good thing.

But this requries access to the "Log Settings" function where among other things te receiving email address should be defined. This is described in help function and in handbook, but the "Log Settings" function doesn't seem to be implemented at all.

About the possible FW difference observed.... It looks like that the FW 3.04 has got additional corrections without having its version number changed. So the FW 3.04 I downloaded should rather have been denoted for example 3.041 than keeping the 3.04 version assignment. Such deviations are hard to manage to the customer as well as to the support team - the reported problem situation to analyse cannot be ensured to be correctly recreated on the support side to manage complaints correctly.

I will soon make a try to override the FW 3.04 in my DAP-1360, delivered in March 2014 to see if the difference observed really will persist. But I cannot get back, even with "factory reset" as the FW upgrade obviously  will remain. I have tried with the others, upgraded with FW 3.04, but "factory reset" did not went back to the original FW 3.02 as I expected for a full reinstall from original state.

Comments on this? These statements aren't fully verified yet. But I prefer some comments before continuing as these details seems to be irreversigle - I cannot get back the original situation.