Previous Thread
I applaud the efforts of Netgear to offer an open source product and sincerely appreciate their willingness to cooperate with the open source community. Anything done to reduce or eliminate the "reverse engineering" needed for other products is major assistance. These actions are legally necessary, given the licensing requirements of the Linux kernel, but a pro-active approach such as Netgear's shows more than a grudging acknowledgment of the billion-dollar development leveraging provided by using Linux as a product foundation.
While I do wish that all source code were immediately available to everyone, packaging a binary-only kernel driver is permitted, even if not encouraged by the open source community. Linus allows it, so others should be as tolerant. Had the driver been replaced by a stub and a FUSE style user-space application, that application could have been released as a purely binary-only application with no hope ever of source code access. Proprietary applications are fine. Its kernel source code we need to see.
So I encourage the community to assist Netgear, pointing out where they have
run afoul of our expectations but always assuming their compliance, not
confrontation. Everyone has limited resources and nothing springs from the
mind of Zeus fully grown.
MyOpenRouter community members,
We recently launched our 802.11n open source platform, the WNR3500L. Many of the feature requirements of the powerful 802.11n open source platform came from this online community and forum members as we learned and fine tuned the WNR3500L. Many of you contributed heavily to the DD-WRT, OpenWRT and Tomato builds and patches and have already started custom building applications on WNR3500L via the Development Partner program.
As you have seen in recent posts on several Linux websites, we have been criticized by the Open source community in terms of the default NETGEAR firmware running on WNR3500L not being open enough and for marketing it as a "open source" router. I want to clarify NETGEAR’s position on WNR3500L to the Opensource community. Given your relation and association with NETGEAR's open source efforts for over a year, you are the best judge of NETGEAR’s efforts on the WNR3500L.
From what we learned, most of you have flashed open source firmware like OpenWRT and DD-WRT and have built applications on it instead of using the standard NETGEAR firmware. Similarly, we envision the WNR3500L as a powerful open platform on which our customers can easily flash available open source firmware and develop applications on it. In other words, NETGEAR has attempted to make it simple for users of the WNR3500L router to flash the router’s open platform to DD-WRT, Open-WRT, Tomato, or other open source firmware for custom development. For example, on the MyOpenRouter community, we have provided open source guides, guides for flashing the firmware, and many other resources. Many of you have asked for further details of the hardware and a block diagram of the platform, and we are working on providing that as well. We believe the openness of the platform, the various features including gigabit ports, 802.11n, USB, a powerful CPU and plenty of RAM and flash memory and the associated freedom of choice given to the customer is fundamentally different from competing, opensource or non-open-source routers.
Concern has been raised on the presence of binary modules in the pre-loaded NETGEAR firmware. The factory-loaded firmware by NETGEAR on the WNR3500L router is there for those customers who simply want to use the router "as-is" with the features provided by the NETGEAR firmware. It is no different from the millions of other NETGEAR Linux routers we sell in the market. We do offer the GPL code on our websites for all customers to download, review, and even to modify it: something many of our development partners have already done. With respect to the default firmware, we have used our best efforts to comply with and believe we have complied with the applicable GPL requirements. Nevertheless, we understand that the open source community generally takes exception when factory loaded firmware written in Linux that is placed on routers or other hardware includes binary only kernels. As it has been rightly pointed out, this has been a continuing saga between any company and the open source community. As for use of Linux kernel 2.6 on WNR3500L drivers, we are already working on it. Please stay tuned for more updates in the next few months.
We always work diligently to review our GPL compliancy. As a consequence, we comply with the GPL requirements, and we strive to hold our partners and suppliers to the same standard. In that regard, we think NETGEAR's goals and position are aligned to the Opensource community.
We look forward to your comments and even sharing your opinions and comments on the websites that have raised concerns on WNR3500L (search “WNR3500L” “Not opensource”). We want the MyOpenRouter community as well as other online communities and forums to judge WNR3500L on the features, capabilities and the openness of the platform along with the flexibility it offers to use any open source software on it and develop applications on; versus debating on to what extent the default firmware on the WNR3500L is GPL compliant.
Best regards
Som Pal Choudhury
Senior Product Line Manager, Advanced Wireless
NETGEAR Inc.
Off: 408-890-3033
cell: 408-910-2936
Email: som.choudhury@netgear.com
View unverified member's comment - posted by Rodd Ahrenstorff
I have ordered my WNR3500L already but I feel ashamed that I've missed that it isn't truely open. I hope we'll see some source code when sales drop and Broadcom has advanced a few chipset generations.
Linux 2.6.22 has brought us a new WiFi subsystem and there has been a time when suddenly lots of NICs appeared to be seriously vulnerable. I don't feel comfortable with hardware the community can't maintain on its own. Security through obscurity won't help.
I own a lot of hardware that works with free drivers. Most devices even don't need a firmware. A free firmware doesn't hurt of course.
I've once returned an iRiver iFP890 mp3 player because it didn't have an usb mass storage compatible firmware. E. g. I won't buy hardware that needs apps like iTunes to work.
My cellphone uses regular bluetooth profiles, acts as a generic 3g modem and as usb mass storage. My 3G mini pcie modem works with the hso driver, I have a CSR based bluetooth dongle, RT73 based WiFi dongle that works perfectly with wpa_suppicant, a cyberjack pinpad, a pwc webcam with an included mic (usb sound), a twinhan based DVB-T card.
My 2nd WGR614L is still to be replaced. Replacement will be a truly open one of course. I admit that this might take a while until other routers with 8 mb flash, N WiFi and gigabit switch arrive.
No matter how long it takes I'll return to this thread and will post my decision here. Just in case someone is in doubt about that.
As for use of Linux kernel 2.6 on WNR3500L drivers, we are already working on it. Please stay tuned for more updates in the next few months.
"already"? That is really ridiculous.
The latest stable Linux kernel version is already 2.6.31.4. Version 2.6.0 was released in december 2003. That was more than half a decade ago.
ASUS RT-N16 is the competition, netgear can't afford to make compromises on software.
I am prepared to wait for updated firmware from Netgear. Eventually I want to use Fonera2 software on it. http://www.fon.com . Meanwhile the advantages of this kit over the competition is clear. Just in terms of speed and power it leaves the Linksys equivalent well behind.
Could anyone tell where it already retails? I see that some of you have already ordered it. Presumably it will retail here in the UK simultaneously with the US.
As for use of Linux kernel 2.6 on WNR3500L drivers, we are already working on it. Please stay tuned for more updates in the next few months.
What does this mean? -Is Netgear getting Broadcom to open-source their driver or are they working with linuxwireless.org on getting the open-source b43 driver to work with this product??
I wish they could be a little more ... open on this subject as well. I suppose my question right now is ... How much trust can I put to these vague statements? Is it a technically sound solution that they are pursuing, or just some kind of crippling awkward hack just to have 2.6.x on the router?
I am itching to buy one of these routers, but this never-ending broadcom open-source problem made me swear to never buy another broadcom-based WiFi router again.. Have to have a bit more information than this to go back on that.
How is Netgear helping out the open source community (or communities)?
On the MyOpenRouter download page for OpenWRT some missing features are described:
- WPA and WPA2 are not working.
- SAMBA support is not present.
- NAS can be accessed only through command line using utilities such as ftp and No GUI support to access NAS is available till now.
How exactly are Netgear working to solve these issues? Are patches to OpenWRT being prepared as I write this, or is Netgear just using OpenWRT as a selling point? I suspect the latter, but if Netgear can prove me wrong I would be very happy to see this.
So far it looks like Netgear is just using "open source" as a slogan to lure in customers from the geek and bitheads communities, without actually being open source.
Oh yeah, and then we have the Broadcom issue. Work out a deal with Broadcom and release the freakin' docs for their wireless hardware and the several years long discussion on Broadcom in open environments will be over! Seriously, how hard can it be?
hakan said: How is Netgear helping out the open source community (or communities)? On the MyOpenRouter download page for OpenWRT some missing features are described:How exactly are Netgear working to solve these issues? Are patches to OpenWRT being prepared as I write this, or is Netgear just using OpenWRT as a selling point? I suspect the latter, but if Netgear can prove me wrong I would be very happy to see this. So far it looks like Netgear is just using "open source" as a slogan to lure in customers from the geek and bitheads communities, without actually being open source. Oh yeah, and then we have the Broadcom issue. Work out a deal with Broadcom and release the freakin' docs for their wireless hardware and the several years long discussion on Broadcom in open environments will be over! Seriously, how hard can it be?
- WPA and WPA2 are not working.
- SAMBA support is not present.
- NAS can be accessed only through command line using utilities such as ftp and No GUI support to access NAS is available till now.
The problem isn't Netgear, but Broadcom.
Broadcom makes the wireless cards for Netgear's N routers (as well as a lot of others, including Cisco/Linksys) and their refusal to unleash their source code is legendary. Consider the router that the WNR3500L (and the earlier WNR3500-100NAS, which the L directly replaces in Netgear's lineup) will likely replace - Linksys's long-in-the-tooth WRT54G series. (I'm not just talking about the original G, but their one-hundred-percent clones and copies, including the WRT54GS and variants thereof; basically every Linksys G router up to, but not including, the VXWorks-based G routers, such as the the WRT54G2; if i want IPv6 in the GS *and* wireless support, I have to not only use a custom third-party firmware, as Linksys' own firmware doesn't support IPv6, most third-party firmware requires you to choose between working wireless and IPv6 support, as the 2.6 kernel *still* lacks reliable support for Broadcom wireless radios, even for the moldie-oldie GS V.2! Broadcom doesn't even sell those particular wireless radios any more; yet it still keeps their driver code away.) Netgear is going a loit further with the documentation (especially third-party documentation) than Cisco (either pre-acquisition OR post-acquisition); in fact, the WNR3500L is the current bargain champ when it comes to having both IPv6 *and* solid wireless (and that's even G, let alone draft-N or ratified-N); Cisco's *only* router that can play in that space with the same feature set as the 3500L (WRT610N) is twice the 3500L's price, and is supported by far less third-party firmware). While I understand the consternation, Netgear can only go as far as their suppliers will allow (which is still further than Cisco has gone, and they would doubtless have a lot more juice over Broadcom than Netgear would).
Andreas Kuckartz said:As for use of Linux kernel 2.6 on WNR3500L drivers, we are already working on it. Please stay tuned for more updates in the next few months."already"? That is really ridiculous. The latest stable Linux kernel version is already 2.6.31.4. Version 2.6.0 was released in december 2003. That was more than half a decade ago.
It's a question of support, as it has ALWAYS been when it comes to Linux (on anything, not just routers).
For example, the 2.6 kernels don't support wireless reliably *at all* on the WRT54G and clones thereof. That's a straight kernel driver issue, which (naturally) can be laid at Broadcom's door. (Never mind that Broadcom doesn't sell the wireless radios used in those routers any more, and, in fact, hasn't since the end of Bush the Younger's first term; the only drivers for those radios are 2.4-specific and monolithic at that.)
Why does Broadcom get away with it? Simple, really; nobody has managed to even stay EVEN with Broadcom when it comes to reliability AND cost, let alone beat them. (Look at Broadcom's competition; has any of them managed to supply the same components with the same reliability at the same price point?) If you're a router manufacturer and you want a reliable wireless router that is reasonably affordable, you go with Broadcom chips. Broadcom in wireless has the position that Creative has in sound cards, and for the same reason - value for the money.
(I mentioned Creative, another company that has long steered clear of open-source, for a reason - they released source code *and documentation* for the X-Fi DSP only after Microsoft made hardware acceleration in Windows irrelevant by changing how Windows handled audio calls. Suddenly, onboard audio for PCs didn't suck any more; meanwhile, the only real sales that Creative could count on going forward were in the open-source community. The router manufacturing companies are a combination of semi-open-source and completely-closed-source; the one thing the top tier all have in common is Broadcom chips. So, what router chip company is going to declare business on Broadcom?)
Certainly an interesting product, but I shan't upgrade my AP yet until I can run with free drivers on the Linux side - to be a killer upgrade in all respects and not leave a nagging feeling about superfluous limitations. Hopefully b43 will provide that at some point; I can see myself rushing to buy then.
While one can live with RE'd stuff, one _would_ prefer a product with a more co-operative chip provider as well, but Netgear themselves seem to mostly get it even if they (presumably for cost/time-to-market/functionality/etc reasons) went with prop-Broadcom.
The main problem in all is what Broadcom Corportaion is big world player in Wi-Fi chipset manafucture which have to deal with much patents to provide us with those Hi-Tech tehnologies shits. So, if they decide to provide some manafucture (ASUS, MSI, NetGear, GigaByte, ABIT etc.) with real source code, maybe, they broke some patents rules. In the ending we get that The World must be controlled. Like all our entertaiment stuff on hard drive, what we in ending don't have time to watch etc. People start thinking out of box. Better switch of your PC and go exercise or do something else. Help anothers. Happy day.
http://www.itpeople.lv/blog/2009/12/06/freifunk-coool-firmwares - All about Freifunk-Coool firmwares for ASUS WL-500g Premium v1 and ASUS RT-N16 (Sorry in Latvian language. Use Google translate)
Maybe the open source community would be more forgiving if they knew [i]why[/i] they have to put up with binary blobs.
Does this have anything to do with the FCC requiring that Radio transmitting equipment be tamper-resistant? Such a requirement sort of rules out Open source software implemented radios.
When I asked that about cell phones (on /.) the response was: simply move the radio function into a different chip. The radio presents itself to the Open source half as a generic GSM modem supporting standard modem commands. Would it be possible to have a binary blob presenting a nice, tweakable interface to the open-source components?
One ironic reason I an interested in hackable routers is that I want to use them in bridge mode to avoid driver issues: ethernet drivers just work for the most part. For some reason wireless bridges cost 3 and 4 figures even though routers that have a more complicated software stack cost 2-3 figures.
"Does this have anything to do with the FCC requiring that Radio transmitting equipment be tamper-resistant? Such a requirement sort of rules out Open source software implemented radios."
No, it has to do with total disregard and respect to the linux kernel developers. You can easily hide stuff by introducing ACPI tables and modify networking parameters through ACPI. Or any other bytecode stuff that is platform independent. That way, most part of the driver can be BSD or GPL except for the hardware manipulation code that's just a binary bytecode blob while the code for interpreting the bytecode blob is open.
The fact is that they don't want any part of their driver code public probably because another company might use it, or they want to keep complete control over the companies that buy their chipsets (which actually sounds most likely).
ardje said: "Does this have anything to do with the FCC requiring that Radio transmitting equipment be tamper-resistant? Such a requirement sort of rules out Open source software implemented radios." No, it has to do with total disregard and respect to the linux kernel developers. You can easily hide stuff by introducing ACPI tables and modify networking parameters through ACPI. Or any other bytecode stuff that is platform independent. That way, most part of the driver can be BSD or GPL except for the hardware manipulation code that's just a binary bytecode blob while the code for interpreting the bytecode blob is open. The fact is that they don't want any part of their driver code public probably because another company might use it, or they want to keep complete control over the companies that buy their chipsets (which actually sounds most likely).
Seems then, that, if they didn't do that... then they would eventually reach a point where their company would have no function and therefore cease to exist.
If we should reach a point where all they're doing is making a Wireless(insert Letter) router with a USB port, 8 megs of Flash, and 64 Megs of RAM... anybody could do that. And everybody has already done that.
At that point it would all come down to simply what the router looks like and whose router is the cheapest.
I've never been a fan of the lower-end, or even mid-level, Netgear or D-Link routers... but I think the WNR3500L proved that they could finally do it.
I think Netgear advertising it as an "Open Source" or "Open" router is a bit much (I don't think even Linksys does that). It might be better to say it's "Linux Compatible"... and it would certainly be more accurate.
Still I don't consider it a damnable sin. The marketing is just not quite entirely honest.
Add Your Reply
Sponsored Links
Copyright © 2010
Capable Networks LLC.. All Rights Reserved.
RSS |
Privacy Policy |
Advertise With Us |
Terms of Use |
About Us |
Contact Us |
Site Map
Our Capable Community Network:
DVR playground |
Explore3DTV |
MediaSmart Home |
MotoDash |
My DigitalEntertainer |
My Open Router |
Pogoplugged |
Robo Community |
Sansa Community |
TechLore |
TiVo Community |
TouchSmartDevZone
MyOpenRouter.com is not affiliated with NETGEAR®. NETGEAR is a registered trademark of NETGEAR, Inc. in the United States and/or other countries. Other brand names mentioned herein are for identification purposes only and may be trademarks of their respective holder(s). © 2008 NETGEAR, Inc. All rights reserved.
