Jump to content


Photo

The first Release Candidate of the 9.0 image is online.


  • Please log in to reply
44 replies to this topic

#1 Frenske

  • Forum Moderator
    PLi® Core member
  • 27,436 posts

+396
Excellent

Posted 16 August 2023 - 15:18

Today the official Release Candidate of the 9.0 image went public. For those who never tested a Nightly Build before because being afraid then now is the opportunity to test this RC. Any comments / observations we look forward to receiving. And of course all positive comments are also nice to hear.


Mijn schotel is een T90 met 10 LNB's. Daarnaast voor de fun nog een draaibaar systeem met een Triax TD 78.

Dreamboxen heb ik niet meer echt actief. Verder heb ik ook nog een een VU+ duo2 met 500Gb harddisk + een VU+ Uno, Zero, Solo 4K, Ultimo 4K, Zero 4K, Uno 4Kse. + ook nog een Xtrend ET7x00. Daarnaast heb ik ook nog diverse andere modellen w.o. een Formuler F4, ET8500, ET7500, Mut@nt 2400HD, Xsarius Fusion HD se en verder nog wel het e.e.a. waarmee op verzoek vanalles wordt getest. Iemand moet het tenslotte doen. ;) :)
Los van de eerder genoemde modellen heb ik nog wel een rits aan testsamples als Mut@nt 2400HD, HD60, GB UE4K, GB Trio4K, Maxitec Multibox combo en Twin, Octagon sf8008, sf8008 mini en last but nog least enkele modellen van het Grieks Duitse Edision.

Voor centrale opslag van media gebruik ik een Qnap 219P 
met tweemaal 2 Tb harddisks + een Synology DS414 met 12 Tb Totale opslag.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Many answers to your question can be found in our wiki: Just one click away from this "solutioncentre".

Als ik alles al wist hoefde ik ook niets te vragen. If I had all the knowledge I had no questions at all.


Re: The first Release Candidate of the 9.0 image is online. #2 engin67

  • Senior Member
  • 37 posts

0
Neutral

Posted 16 August 2023 - 19:19

Thank you very much, the software we have been waiting for a long time has arrived. I think we will have to install this test software via usb memory.


SF8008 4 K

DM800 HD ,NEXT 18500 HD


Re: The first Release Candidate of the 9.0 image is online. #3 cobus

  • Senior Member
  • 4,754 posts

+69
Good

Posted 16 August 2023 - 19:34

why with the flashimage function in the menu works perfectly

Groetjes Cobus R

 

VU+ UNO 4K SE FBC DVB-C (8x) LCD4linux met Samsung SPF 75H

MUTANT HD66SE FBC DVB-C (3x)

MAXYTEC MULTIBOX COMBO

MUTANT HD60 DVB-S

 

 

Ziggo (digitaal) Kabel TV (FTV) op alle decoders met oa fallback tuner

 


Re: The first Release Candidate of the 9.0 image is online. #4 pybear38

  • Senior Member
  • 85 posts

+5
Neutral

Posted 16 August 2023 - 23:43

Hello,

 

Upgrade was easy and very good with the flashimage. After reboot, i have reinstall all my plugins and all is perfect. (pluto.tv, rakuten.tv, astra-sm and so on, all is OK).

 

This image will be soon the best of OpenPli... 

 

Thanks a lot to all the team.


TNT/Sat : VU+ Duo 4K SE - Home cinema : Onkyo TX NR686 | Air Gay Radio


Re: The first Release Candidate of the 9.0 image is online. #5 marto

  • Senior Member
  • 120 posts

+7
Neutral

Posted 17 August 2023 - 09:49

Thanks for the new image!

There is an issue with wifi driver in latest nightly and 9.0RC on Vu+ Ultimo 4K. As shown on screenshots, with PLi 8.3 the Bitrate connection is 866.5 Mb/s, but on 9.0RC is just 400 Mb/s. I've noticed this on latest nighties as well. The nightly builds from 3-4 months ago doesn't have this problem. 

 If somebody with same box can check and reconfirm that max speed now is limited to just 400 Mb/s, then might be necessary to switch back to previous driver if this is the issue...

Attached Files


VU+ Ultimo 4K; Clarke-Tech et9000


Re: The first Release Candidate of the 9.0 image is online. #6 WanWizard

  • PLi® Core member
  • 68,943 posts

+1,751
Excellent

Posted 17 August 2023 - 09:49

If you have ipk's that you install manually (as in: not from the plugins feed), copy them to the autobackup backup directory, and they will be reinstalled automatically.

 

And don't forget you need pyhton3 versions of those plugins.


Currently in use: VU+ Duo 4K (2xFBC S2), VU+ Solo 4K (1xFBC S2), uClan Usytm 4K Pro (S2+T2), Octagon SF8008 (S2+T2), Zgemma H9.2H (S2+T2)

Due to my bad health, I will not be very active at times and may be slow to respond. I will not read the forum or PM on a regular basis.

Many answers to your question can be found in our new and improved wiki.


Re: The first Release Candidate of the 9.0 image is online. #7 WanWizard

  • PLi® Core member
  • 68,943 posts

+1,751
Excellent

Posted 17 August 2023 - 10:18

Thanks for the new image!

There is an issue with wifi driver in latest nightly and 9.0RC on Vu+ Ultimo 4K. As shown on screenshots, with PLi 8.3 the Bitrate connection is 866.5 Mb/s, but on 9.0RC is just 400 Mb/s. I've noticed this on latest nighties as well. The nightly builds from 3-4 months ago doesn't have this problem. 

 If somebody with same box can check and reconfirm that max speed now is limited to just 400 Mb/s, then might be necessary to switch back to previous driver if this is the issue...

 

Kernel versions haven't changed (no vendor updates their linux kernel), therefore drivers haven't changed. It is possible, if your TP_LINK uses an out-of-tree driver, that there was a new version of that driver. But for that I need to know which driver is in use.

 

Have you tested the throughput?

 

What is shown there is whatever the commandline tools report, which is usually rubbish.

 

This is not unique to the box, Windows does exactly the same. The speed it displays bears no resemblance to the real world, if only because the driver has no idea what else is active (wifi is a shared medium and throttles to the speed of the slowest client).

 

I've checked two boxes:

root@vusolo4k:~# iwconfig wlan0
wlan0     IEEE 802.11bgn  ESSID:"OpenPLi"  
          Mode:Managed  Frequency:2.462 GHz  Access Point: 7A:45:58:33:DB:59   
          Bit Rate=130 Mb/s   Tx-Power=20 dBm   
          Retry short limit:7   RTS thr:off   Fragment thr:off
          Encryption key:off
          Power Management:off
          Link Quality=67/70  Signal level=-43 dBm  
          Rx invalid nwid:0  Rx invalid crypt:0  Rx invalid frag:0
          Tx excessive retries:2478  Invalid misc:1153   Missed beacon:0

root@sf8008:~# iwconfig wlan0
wlan0     IEEE 802.11bgn  ESSID:"OpenPLi"  Nickname:"<WIFI@REALTEK>"
          Mode:Managed  Frequency:2.412 GHz  Access Point: 7A:45:58:33:DC:41   
          Bit Rate:144.4 Mb/s   Sensitivity:0/0  
          Retry:off   RTS thr:off   Fragment thr:off
          Encryption key:****-****-****-****-****-****-****-****   Security mode:open
          Power Management:off
          Link Quality=84/100  Signal level=-49 dBm  Noise level=0 dBm
          Rx invalid nwid:0  Rx invalid crypt:0  Rx invalid frag:0
          Tx excessive retries:0  Invalid misc:0   Missed beacon:0

root@hd66se:~# iwconfig wlan0
wlan0     IEEE 802.11AC  ESSID:"OpenPLi"  Nickname:"<WIFI@REALTEK>"
          Mode:Managed  Frequency:5.2 GHz  Access Point: 7A:45:58:33:DC:42   
          Bit Rate:200 Mb/s   Sensitivity:0/0  
          Retry:off   RTS thr:off   Fragment thr:off
          Encryption key:****-****-****-****-****-****-****-****   Security mode:open
          Power Management:off
          Link Quality=85/100  Signal level=-35 dBm  Noise level=0 dBm
          Rx invalid nwid:0  Rx invalid crypt:0  Rx invalid frag:0
          Tx excessive retries:0  Invalid misc:0   Missed beacon:0

but in terms of throughput:

root@vusolo4k:~# iperf3 -c 172.19.12.31
Connecting to host 172.19.12.31, port 5201
[  5] local 172.19.12.52 port 37850 connected to 172.19.12.31 port 5201
[ ID] Interval           Transfer     Bitrate         Retr  Cwnd
[  5]   0.00-1.00   sec  8.76 MBytes  73.5 Mbits/sec    0    331 KBytes       
[  5]   1.00-2.00   sec  9.35 MBytes  78.5 Mbits/sec    0    515 KBytes       
[  5]   2.00-3.00   sec  8.38 MBytes  70.3 Mbits/sec    0    683 KBytes       
[  5]   3.00-4.00   sec  8.27 MBytes  69.4 Mbits/sec    0    905 KBytes       
[  5]   4.00-5.00   sec  9.25 MBytes  77.6 Mbits/sec    0   1.00 MBytes       
[  5]   5.00-6.00   sec  8.83 MBytes  74.1 Mbits/sec    0   1.05 MBytes       
[  5]   6.00-7.00   sec  8.58 MBytes  72.0 Mbits/sec    0   1.08 MBytes       
[  5]   7.00-8.00   sec  8.71 MBytes  73.1 Mbits/sec    0   1.12 MBytes       
[  5]   8.00-9.00   sec  8.46 MBytes  71.0 Mbits/sec    0   1.12 MBytes       
[  5]   9.00-10.00  sec  9.06 MBytes  76.0 Mbits/sec    0   1.14 MBytes       
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
[ ID] Interval           Transfer     Bitrate         Retr
[  5]   0.00-10.00  sec  87.7 MBytes  73.5 Mbits/sec    0             sender
[  5]   0.00-10.02  sec  87.4 MBytes  73.1 Mbits/sec                  receiver

root@sf8008:~# iperf3 -c 172.19.12.31
Connecting to host 172.19.12.31, port 5201
[  5] local 172.19.12.60 port 41114 connected to 172.19.12.31 port 5201
[ ID] Interval           Transfer     Bitrate         Retr  Cwnd
[  5]   0.00-1.00   sec  14.0 MBytes   117 Mbits/sec    0    392 KBytes       
[  5]   1.00-2.00   sec  12.5 MBytes   105 Mbits/sec    0    413 KBytes       
[  5]   2.00-3.00   sec  11.2 MBytes  94.4 Mbits/sec    0    434 KBytes       
[  5]   3.00-4.00   sec  10.0 MBytes  83.9 Mbits/sec    0    434 KBytes       
[  5]   4.00-5.00   sec  11.2 MBytes  94.4 Mbits/sec    0    460 KBytes       
[  5]   5.00-6.00   sec  11.2 MBytes  94.4 Mbits/sec    0    484 KBytes       
[  5]   6.00-7.00   sec  10.0 MBytes  83.9 Mbits/sec    0    484 KBytes       
[  5]   7.00-8.00   sec  11.2 MBytes  94.4 Mbits/sec    0    578 KBytes       
[  5]   8.00-9.00   sec  12.5 MBytes   105 Mbits/sec    0    578 KBytes       
[  5]   9.00-10.00  sec  11.2 MBytes  94.4 Mbits/sec    0    578 KBytes       
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
[ ID] Interval           Transfer     Bitrate         Retr
[  5]   0.00-10.00  sec   115 MBytes  96.6 Mbits/sec    0             sender
[  5]   0.00-10.03  sec   112 MBytes  94.0 Mbits/sec                  receiver

root@hd66se:~# iperf3 -c 172.19.12.31
Connecting to host 172.19.12.31, port 5201
[  5] local 172.19.12.65 port 34010 connected to 172.19.12.31 port 5201
[ ID] Interval           Transfer     Bitrate         Retr  Cwnd
[  5]   0.00-1.00   sec  13.6 MBytes   114 Mbits/sec    0    413 KBytes       
[  5]   1.00-2.00   sec  16.2 MBytes   136 Mbits/sec    0    549 KBytes       
[  5]   2.00-3.00   sec  16.2 MBytes   136 Mbits/sec    0    611 KBytes       
[  5]   3.00-4.00   sec  16.2 MBytes   136 Mbits/sec    0    682 KBytes       
[  5]   4.00-5.00   sec  16.2 MBytes   136 Mbits/sec    0    725 KBytes       
[  5]   5.00-6.00   sec  16.2 MBytes   136 Mbits/sec    0    802 KBytes       
[  5]   6.00-7.00   sec  16.2 MBytes   136 Mbits/sec    0    802 KBytes       
[  5]   7.00-8.00   sec  16.2 MBytes   136 Mbits/sec    0    885 KBytes       
[  5]   8.00-9.00   sec  16.2 MBytes   136 Mbits/sec    0    885 KBytes       
[  5]   9.00-10.00  sec  16.2 MBytes   136 Mbits/sec    0    885 KBytes       
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
[ ID] Interval           Transfer     Bitrate         Retr
[  5]   0.00-10.00  sec   160 MBytes   134 Mbits/sec    0             sender
[  5]   0.00-10.03  sec   157 MBytes   131 Mbits/sec                  receiver

both tested to my NAS.
 

my Solo has 2.4Ghz connection, the Mutant a 5Ghz connection. I only use 40Mhz bands on 5Ghz, which limits the maximum throughput a bit.

 

As a test I moved everything off the AP the Solo was connected to, that changed the reported bitrate figure, but didn't significantly change the throughput.


Currently in use: VU+ Duo 4K (2xFBC S2), VU+ Solo 4K (1xFBC S2), uClan Usytm 4K Pro (S2+T2), Octagon SF8008 (S2+T2), Zgemma H9.2H (S2+T2)

Due to my bad health, I will not be very active at times and may be slow to respond. I will not read the forum or PM on a regular basis.

Many answers to your question can be found in our new and improved wiki.


Re: The first Release Candidate of the 9.0 image is online. #8 Stan

  • Senior Member
  • 346 posts

0
Neutral

Posted 17 August 2023 - 10:40

This morning I tried to use the "Media Player" plugin, which comes with RC9.0, but it crashes at start.

 

Enigma2 crashlog:

Traceback (most recent call last):
  File "/usr/lib/enigma2/python/StartEnigma.py", line 223, in processDelay
    callback(*retval)
  File "/usr/lib/enigma2/python/Plugins/Extensions/MediaScanner/plugin.py", line 19, in execute
  File "/usr/lib/enigma2/python/Components/Scanner.py", line 78, in open
  File "/usr/lib/enigma2/python/Plugins/Extensions/MediaPlayer/plugin.py", line 1195, in filescan_open
  File "/usr/lib/enigma2/python/StartEnigma.py", line 312, in open
    dlg = self.current_dialog = self.instantiateDialog(screen, *arguments, **kwargs)
  File "/usr/lib/enigma2/python/StartEnigma.py", line 255, in instantiateDialog
    return self.doInstantiateDialog(screen, arguments, kwargs, self.desktop)
  File "/usr/lib/enigma2/python/StartEnigma.py", line 272, in doInstantiateDialog
    dlg = screen(self, *arguments, **kwargs)
  File "/usr/lib/enigma2/python/Plugins/Extensions/MediaPlayer/plugin.py", line 249, in __init__
  File "/usr/lib/enigma2/python/Components/Playlist.py", line 54, in open
  File "/usr/lib/python3.9/codecs.py", line 322, in decode
UnicodeDecodeError: 'utf-8' codec can't decode byte 0xfc in position 122: invalid start byte
[ePyObject] (CallObject(<bound method Session.processDelay of <__main__.Session object at 0x716ed688>>,()) failed)


Re: The first Release Candidate of the 9.0 image is online. #9 WanWizard

  • PLi® Core member
  • 68,943 posts

+1,751
Excellent

Posted 17 August 2023 - 15:54

Something in the playlist that isnt UTF-8 ?


Currently in use: VU+ Duo 4K (2xFBC S2), VU+ Solo 4K (1xFBC S2), uClan Usytm 4K Pro (S2+T2), Octagon SF8008 (S2+T2), Zgemma H9.2H (S2+T2)

Due to my bad health, I will not be very active at times and may be slow to respond. I will not read the forum or PM on a regular basis.

Many answers to your question can be found in our new and improved wiki.


Re: The first Release Candidate of the 9.0 image is online. #10 Stan

  • Senior Member
  • 346 posts

0
Neutral

Posted 17 August 2023 - 16:57

Thanks for pointing me in the right direction. The playlist (etc/enigma2/playlist.e2pls) was indeed not in UTF-8 format.

I have deleted it now. Problem solved :)

 

BTW. The playlist which created the problem was in the backup I used.


Edited by Stan, 17 August 2023 - 17:02.


Re: The first Release Candidate of the 9.0 image is online. #11 ruijmnunes

  • Member
  • 6 posts

0
Neutral

Posted 17 August 2023 - 18:09

Hi

 

I use openatv image and i want try OpenPLI image, but when i flash with usb,the box dont boot. Only see the logo image....

 

Any help?

 

Thanks 



Re: The first Release Candidate of the 9.0 image is online. #12 littlesat

  • PLi® Core member
  • 56,550 posts

+693
Excellent

Posted 17 August 2023 - 18:52

Why didn’t flash with online flash… as far I know you should be able to select openpli…. Likely the usb stick is not seen by the box. Try an older usb stick?

WaveFrontier 28.2E | 23.5E | 19.2E | 16E | 13E | 10/9E | 7E | 5E | 1W | 4/5W | 15W


Re: The first Release Candidate of the 9.0 image is online. #13 WanWizard

  • PLi® Core member
  • 68,943 posts

+1,751
Excellent

Posted 17 August 2023 - 19:01

BTW. The playlist which created the problem was in the backup I used.

 

In python 2, everything is a string of bytes. In Python3, bytes and str are two different types, so if you need to convert, you need to specify a source charset.


Currently in use: VU+ Duo 4K (2xFBC S2), VU+ Solo 4K (1xFBC S2), uClan Usytm 4K Pro (S2+T2), Octagon SF8008 (S2+T2), Zgemma H9.2H (S2+T2)

Due to my bad health, I will not be very active at times and may be slow to respond. I will not read the forum or PM on a regular basis.

Many answers to your question can be found in our new and improved wiki.


Re: The first Release Candidate of the 9.0 image is online. #14 WanWizard

  • PLi® Core member
  • 68,943 posts

+1,751
Excellent

Posted 17 August 2023 - 19:02

I use openatv image and i want try OpenPLI image, but when i flash with usb,the box dont boot. Only see the logo image....

 

Which box?


Currently in use: VU+ Duo 4K (2xFBC S2), VU+ Solo 4K (1xFBC S2), uClan Usytm 4K Pro (S2+T2), Octagon SF8008 (S2+T2), Zgemma H9.2H (S2+T2)

Due to my bad health, I will not be very active at times and may be slow to respond. I will not read the forum or PM on a regular basis.

Many answers to your question can be found in our new and improved wiki.


Re: The first Release Candidate of the 9.0 image is online. #15 marto

  • Senior Member
  • 120 posts

+7
Neutral

Posted 17 August 2023 - 21:20

 

Thanks for the new image!

There is an issue with wifi driver in latest nightly and 9.0RC on Vu+ Ultimo 4K. As shown on screenshots, with PLi 8.3 the Bitrate connection is 866.5 Mb/s, but on 9.0RC is just 400 Mb/s. I've noticed this on latest nighties as well. The nightly builds from 3-4 months ago doesn't have this problem. 

 If somebody with same box can check and reconfirm that max speed now is limited to just 400 Mb/s, then might be necessary to switch back to previous driver if this is the issue...

 

Kernel versions haven't changed (no vendor updates their linux kernel), therefore drivers haven't changed. It is possible, if your TP_LINK uses an out-of-tree driver, that there was a new version of that driver. But for that I need to know which driver is in use.

 

Have you tested the throughput?

 

What is shown there is whatever the commandline tools report, which is usually rubbish.

 

This is not unique to the box, Windows does exactly the same. The speed it displays bears no resemblance to the real world, if only because the driver has no idea what else is active (wifi is a shared medium and throttles to the speed of the slowest client).

 

I've checked two boxes:

root@vusolo4k:~# iwconfig wlan0
wlan0     IEEE 802.11bgn  ESSID:"OpenPLi"  
          Mode:Managed  Frequency:2.462 GHz  Access Point: 7A:45:58:33:DB:59   
          Bit Rate=130 Mb/s   Tx-Power=20 dBm   
          Retry short limit:7   RTS thr:off   Fragment thr:off
          Encryption key:off
          Power Management:off
          Link Quality=67/70  Signal level=-43 dBm  
          Rx invalid nwid:0  Rx invalid crypt:0  Rx invalid frag:0
          Tx excessive retries:2478  Invalid misc:1153   Missed beacon:0

root@sf8008:~# iwconfig wlan0
wlan0     IEEE 802.11bgn  ESSID:"OpenPLi"  Nickname:"<WIFI@REALTEK>"
          Mode:Managed  Frequency:2.412 GHz  Access Point: 7A:45:58:33:DC:41   
          Bit Rate:144.4 Mb/s   Sensitivity:0/0  
          Retry:off   RTS thr:off   Fragment thr:off
          Encryption key:****-****-****-****-****-****-****-****   Security mode:open
          Power Management:off
          Link Quality=84/100  Signal level=-49 dBm  Noise level=0 dBm
          Rx invalid nwid:0  Rx invalid crypt:0  Rx invalid frag:0
          Tx excessive retries:0  Invalid misc:0   Missed beacon:0

root@hd66se:~# iwconfig wlan0
wlan0     IEEE 802.11AC  ESSID:"OpenPLi"  Nickname:"<WIFI@REALTEK>"
          Mode:Managed  Frequency:5.2 GHz  Access Point: 7A:45:58:33:DC:42   
          Bit Rate:200 Mb/s   Sensitivity:0/0  
          Retry:off   RTS thr:off   Fragment thr:off
          Encryption key:****-****-****-****-****-****-****-****   Security mode:open
          Power Management:off
          Link Quality=85/100  Signal level=-35 dBm  Noise level=0 dBm
          Rx invalid nwid:0  Rx invalid crypt:0  Rx invalid frag:0
          Tx excessive retries:0  Invalid misc:0   Missed beacon:0

but in terms of throughput:

root@vusolo4k:~# iperf3 -c 172.19.12.31
Connecting to host 172.19.12.31, port 5201
[  5] local 172.19.12.52 port 37850 connected to 172.19.12.31 port 5201
[ ID] Interval           Transfer     Bitrate         Retr  Cwnd
[  5]   0.00-1.00   sec  8.76 MBytes  73.5 Mbits/sec    0    331 KBytes       
[  5]   1.00-2.00   sec  9.35 MBytes  78.5 Mbits/sec    0    515 KBytes       
[  5]   2.00-3.00   sec  8.38 MBytes  70.3 Mbits/sec    0    683 KBytes       
[  5]   3.00-4.00   sec  8.27 MBytes  69.4 Mbits/sec    0    905 KBytes       
[  5]   4.00-5.00   sec  9.25 MBytes  77.6 Mbits/sec    0   1.00 MBytes       
[  5]   5.00-6.00   sec  8.83 MBytes  74.1 Mbits/sec    0   1.05 MBytes       
[  5]   6.00-7.00   sec  8.58 MBytes  72.0 Mbits/sec    0   1.08 MBytes       
[  5]   7.00-8.00   sec  8.71 MBytes  73.1 Mbits/sec    0   1.12 MBytes       
[  5]   8.00-9.00   sec  8.46 MBytes  71.0 Mbits/sec    0   1.12 MBytes       
[  5]   9.00-10.00  sec  9.06 MBytes  76.0 Mbits/sec    0   1.14 MBytes       
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
[ ID] Interval           Transfer     Bitrate         Retr
[  5]   0.00-10.00  sec  87.7 MBytes  73.5 Mbits/sec    0             sender
[  5]   0.00-10.02  sec  87.4 MBytes  73.1 Mbits/sec                  receiver

root@sf8008:~# iperf3 -c 172.19.12.31
Connecting to host 172.19.12.31, port 5201
[  5] local 172.19.12.60 port 41114 connected to 172.19.12.31 port 5201
[ ID] Interval           Transfer     Bitrate         Retr  Cwnd
[  5]   0.00-1.00   sec  14.0 MBytes   117 Mbits/sec    0    392 KBytes       
[  5]   1.00-2.00   sec  12.5 MBytes   105 Mbits/sec    0    413 KBytes       
[  5]   2.00-3.00   sec  11.2 MBytes  94.4 Mbits/sec    0    434 KBytes       
[  5]   3.00-4.00   sec  10.0 MBytes  83.9 Mbits/sec    0    434 KBytes       
[  5]   4.00-5.00   sec  11.2 MBytes  94.4 Mbits/sec    0    460 KBytes       
[  5]   5.00-6.00   sec  11.2 MBytes  94.4 Mbits/sec    0    484 KBytes       
[  5]   6.00-7.00   sec  10.0 MBytes  83.9 Mbits/sec    0    484 KBytes       
[  5]   7.00-8.00   sec  11.2 MBytes  94.4 Mbits/sec    0    578 KBytes       
[  5]   8.00-9.00   sec  12.5 MBytes   105 Mbits/sec    0    578 KBytes       
[  5]   9.00-10.00  sec  11.2 MBytes  94.4 Mbits/sec    0    578 KBytes       
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
[ ID] Interval           Transfer     Bitrate         Retr
[  5]   0.00-10.00  sec   115 MBytes  96.6 Mbits/sec    0             sender
[  5]   0.00-10.03  sec   112 MBytes  94.0 Mbits/sec                  receiver

root@hd66se:~# iperf3 -c 172.19.12.31
Connecting to host 172.19.12.31, port 5201
[  5] local 172.19.12.65 port 34010 connected to 172.19.12.31 port 5201
[ ID] Interval           Transfer     Bitrate         Retr  Cwnd
[  5]   0.00-1.00   sec  13.6 MBytes   114 Mbits/sec    0    413 KBytes       
[  5]   1.00-2.00   sec  16.2 MBytes   136 Mbits/sec    0    549 KBytes       
[  5]   2.00-3.00   sec  16.2 MBytes   136 Mbits/sec    0    611 KBytes       
[  5]   3.00-4.00   sec  16.2 MBytes   136 Mbits/sec    0    682 KBytes       
[  5]   4.00-5.00   sec  16.2 MBytes   136 Mbits/sec    0    725 KBytes       
[  5]   5.00-6.00   sec  16.2 MBytes   136 Mbits/sec    0    802 KBytes       
[  5]   6.00-7.00   sec  16.2 MBytes   136 Mbits/sec    0    802 KBytes       
[  5]   7.00-8.00   sec  16.2 MBytes   136 Mbits/sec    0    885 KBytes       
[  5]   8.00-9.00   sec  16.2 MBytes   136 Mbits/sec    0    885 KBytes       
[  5]   9.00-10.00  sec  16.2 MBytes   136 Mbits/sec    0    885 KBytes       
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
[ ID] Interval           Transfer     Bitrate         Retr
[  5]   0.00-10.00  sec   160 MBytes   134 Mbits/sec    0             sender
[  5]   0.00-10.03  sec   157 MBytes   131 Mbits/sec                  receiver

both tested to my NAS.
 

my Solo has 2.4Ghz connection, the Mutant a 5Ghz connection. I only use 40Mhz bands on 5Ghz, which limits the maximum throughput a bit.

 

As a test I moved everything off the AP the Solo was connected to, that changed the reported bitrate figure, but didn't significantly change the throughput.

 

Here is my iwconfig output:

root@vuultimo4k:~# iwconfig wlan3                                      
wlan3     IEEE 802.11  ESSID:"TP-LINK_5G"                              
          Mode:Managed  Channel:38  Access Point: E8:48:B8:DD:4E:9E    
          Bit Rate=400 Mb/s   Tx-Power:32 dBm                          
          Retry min limit:7   RTS thr:off   Fragment thr:off           
          Power Management:off                                         
          Link Quality=5/5  Signal level=-44 dBm  Noise level=-92 dBm  
          Rx invalid nwid:0  Rx invalid crypt:0  Rx invalid frag:0     
          Tx excessive retries:13  Invalid misc:0   Missed beacon:0    
                                                                       
I use 160MHz band on 5GHz. Not sure how to check the throughput, as iperf3 -c with any IP address is giving some error: unable to send control message.
The router webinterface is showing the same speed of 400Mb/s.
Just flashed again the develop image from 11th of April, and the bitrate was back to 866.5Mb/s, so definitely something was changed during the last 3-4 months. When i did online actualization of that image and became up-to date(2023-08-17), the bitrate changed again to 400Mb/s.
Perhaps this is only Ultimo 4K issue, but it will be good if someone else test with different receiver by switching from latest RC/develop and 8.3 or older develop from April.

Attached Files


VU+ Ultimo 4K; Clarke-Tech et9000


Re: The first Release Candidate of the 9.0 image is online. #16 WanWizard

  • PLi® Core member
  • 68,943 posts

+1,751
Excellent

Posted 17 August 2023 - 21:30

iperf3 -c should work fine on the box, as you can see from my post.

 

Any more info about that error message? Usually it comes with a description of the error that causes it?,

 

I can't comment any further, I need to know the exact driver used for the chipset TPLINK is using. Probably some realtek thing, they are known for their cheap crap...


Currently in use: VU+ Duo 4K (2xFBC S2), VU+ Solo 4K (1xFBC S2), uClan Usytm 4K Pro (S2+T2), Octagon SF8008 (S2+T2), Zgemma H9.2H (S2+T2)

Due to my bad health, I will not be very active at times and may be slow to respond. I will not read the forum or PM on a regular basis.

Many answers to your question can be found in our new and improved wiki.


Re: The first Release Candidate of the 9.0 image is online. #17 AllMassive

  • Member
  • 23 posts

0
Neutral

Posted 17 August 2023 - 22:30

maybe a silly question:

when being on the develop-image during the way to 8.3, will updating lead to the 9.x or will it stay on 8.3?



Re: The first Release Candidate of the 9.0 image is online. #18 Aliraza63

  • PLi® Tester
  • 250 posts

+23
Neutral

Posted 18 August 2023 - 06:07

It will stay on 8.3 .

Rc9. is py3 .Where as 8.3 is py2 


 DM-900 ,DM-520, Vu+Duo2


Re: The first Release Candidate of the 9.0 image is online. #19 Rudi1

  • Senior Member
  • 162 posts

+1
Neutral

Posted 18 August 2023 - 07:21

great news that the RC version is out, but I have one question. I tried to install some ipk plugins via software management, but with all of them this window appears and it doesn't disappear

https://ibb.co/Gvzjt0K


Edited by Rudi1, 18 August 2023 - 07:21.

VU+Zero

Osmio4K


Re: The first Release Candidate of the 9.0 image is online. #20 marto

  • Senior Member
  • 120 posts

+7
Neutral

Posted 18 August 2023 - 08:07

iperf3 -c should work fine on the box, as you can see from my post.

 

Any more info about that error message? Usually it comes with a description of the error that causes it?,

 

I can't comment any further, I need to know the exact driver used for the chipset TPLINK is using. Probably some realtek thing, they are known for their cheap crap...

root@vuultimo4k:~# iperf3 -c 142.251.33.68                          
iperf3: error - unable to send control message: Bad file descriptor 
root@vuultimo4k:~#                                                  
 
I've got always the same error as above. Tried to reinstall iperf3, but with no avail. Maybe something else is missing? The router is Archer AX73 with Broadcom BCM6750 1.5Ghz Triple-Core CPU.                                                           

VU+ Ultimo 4K; Clarke-Tech et9000



1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users