RV320 firmware 1.3.2.02 Bug List

[cbjwthwm]

I've found a few easily repeatable bugs for Cisco to address in the RV320's next firmware release:

Bandwidth management:

- creating rate control rules for WAN1 restricts the performance to excessively low levels; eg: setting upstream & downstream rules (cfg'd for all traffic, all IP's in the range of the subnet) for 3072 / 32768 (3Mb up, 32Mb down) results in speed caps in speedtest.net about 10% lower for upstream rates and > 1/3 lower than specified (only ~20Mb) on downstream.

PPTP throughput

- running LAN Speed Test (http://www.totusoft.com/lanspeed1) copies through a PPTP tunnel caps around 3-4Mb, and any attempts to specify increased rates on the protocol etc have no effect.  The same test using old, unsupported routers such as the RV180 series test at full rate on a connection with a 15Mb upload rate

[cbjwthwm]

PPTP Server (and possibly on other types of VPN connections)

- DHCP does not pass DNS & domain suffix info to client connections; this functionality worked correctly on a RV180W previously used with an identical DHCP & PPTP server configuration

[Glenn Martin]

Looking into this and will respond as soon as I can.

[cbjwthwm]

Excellent thank you, another user with the RV340 on the latest firmware (attempting to upgrade a site from a RV320) apparently has measured a similar PPTP performance restriction despite the 100Mb throughput rating with the newer model as well:

https://supportforums.cisco.com/discussion/13336231/issues-rv340-vpn

[cbjwthwm]

In the end, what the user in the RV340 thread found after more extensive testing was that throughput was ok on a synchronous connection, but the more common async connections had very limited throughput.  All of my environments for these routers are on async connections.

[greg.zoll]

I do not know why they would run the tests when Smallnetbuilder .com has already done the heavy work for us.

These units are not meant to be for the Enterprise.  They do lack in being able to handle today’s speeds that have changed to faster rates that they are not designed for the WAN to LAN.

I am to where I have been looking at replacing mine because of how much it has changed in needing better firewall security.

[cbjwthwm]

The Smallnetbuilder review is from 3.5 years ago, on the second oldest firmware release.  The results we're seeing in the real world with current firmware for its PPTP performance are far below the numbers in the review's synthetic tests, so things have gone awry somewhere along the way.

I am not using these routers in Enterprise environments, just regular SMB networks and its rated performance specs are fine for modern connections if they produced their rated specs or even the level of previous lower end models like the RV180.

Cisco's answer to your hopes for higher throughput and an expanded security feature set in this category is the RV340, but it looks to have substantial bugs in basic functionality of its VPN features at present.

[x88dually]

I have a RV325 running over 2 yrs now. DHCP will NOT assign any new ip's.

[greg.zoll]

Are you talking about VPN or just your LAN that is not getting IP's handed out.

[x88dually]

LAN. expanded range from 3 to 15 for AP's and other devices, but nothing gets assigned an ip.

This thing is useless.

[cbjwthwm]

I've also isolated and documented a testing procedure to confirm a bug on RV130 "allow" access rules in this thread, which should be forwarded to engineering:

https://supportforums.cisco.com/discussion/13342651/new-rv130w-port-forwarding-not-working-help

The same access rule configured as a block works fine.

[greg.zoll]

Glen I have been running the latest firmware on my RV-320 since it came out this past December.  I have mine set for DMZ plus through my ATT U-Verse NVG589 gateway and have not experienced any slowdowns. 

Now with the fact that the RV32x unit have a slower CPU than the newer units coming out, along with at as robust, there are going to be some things that a person may do.

[cbjwthwm]

If you're suggesting the RV320 isn't competitive vs the competition's latest offerings, Cisco's RV340 series would be the new product line released to compete with newer gen routers.

It seems to have a fair amount of basic functionality bugs presently (eg: CHAP authentication on PPTP), but the throughput specs and wider VPN support definitely look like a promising step forward.