DD-WRekT
Images are sometimes not shown due to bandwidth/network limitations. Refreshing the page usually helps.
You are currently reading a thread in /g/ - Technology
You are currently reading a thread in /g/ - Technology
wait you mean to tell me DDWRT's firmware settings cant do something a 10yo DLINK can?
>have to fuck around with iptables just to block actual IP ranges
>meanwhile my DLINK with far less CPU and RAM is able to do this easily and clearly shouldnt require as much computation as a iptable rule set would
http://support.dlink.com/emulators/dgl4100/17/Advanced_Inbound_Filter.html
What point are you really making? That something old and less advanced uses less CPU cycles for one specific task?
>>52177819
my point is a firmware that's supposed to be more advanced and far more features doesnt even have something literally every proprietary router firmware has
the only thing DDWRT has that comes similar to this is blocking PORT ranges or just single domains
>>52177775
>Not fucking around with iptables
What level of pleb are you?
>>52177897
Hey, just because I'm not a huge nerd like you
>>52177861
If you want to range ban shit you do that per service, not at your router.
>>52178330
>service
the pre-set services are bullshit, if you're talking about the firewall section where you can outright block all access, or just filter
there's no option for blocking TCP or UDP its just a bunch of different things, i tried using the HTTP option but that didnt seem to work
>>52178367
It blocks all of that by default, you have to specifically forward ports to your server with the services running.
I'm saying that its far easier to manage this per service on your actual server, not at your router.
>>52178414
are you talking about this section?
which one of the settings counts as general traffic?
and im not running a server i have a device within my LAN that i want to block IP's for
there is an option to do it for the entire router all together, but that isnt what i need
>>52178463
Ah, I thought you were trying to use some kind of access restriction on services, not prevent a client from accessing ranges of IPs.
You need to use iptables for that shit.
>>52178501
well fucking around with it the other day, once i added any allow rules it just fucking opened the entire gates, rather than respecting the deny rule and only allowing ones within the range allowed
>>52177775
>dd-wrt
>not openwrt
>>52178588
>barely has any support on devices
>>52177775
>he fell for the jeWRT
>>52178628
is this bait? dd-wrt doesn't even support the wrt1900ac
it's outdated and has no features
>>52178715
i havent checked in a while but it doesnt have a version for the RT-56AC that i have
it was all a bunch of routers nobody heard of
>>52177775
Jesus christ OP just use openwrt or one of the tomato mods. ddwrt is outdated as all fuck and proprietary shitware. Also if you're too incompetent to even write iptable rules by yourself maybe you should avoid installing alternate firmwares?
>>52178538
Thats because the way iptables rules resolve you can have one that denies but if its allowed by a later rule that deny rule is ignored.
>>52179715
yeah but the allow rules are for specific ranges tho
which makes no sense
now unless im supposed to put the deny rule inbetween each?
Master race.
