The lack of firmware upgrades has been very disappoing. After six+ months of waiting, I gave up and bought a MikroTik Routerboard for $100 (which blew this out of the water) and retired my RV180W this week. The RV180 had great potential, but it's clearly forgotten by Cisco.
... View more
I'm on the stock firmware (1.0.0.30) since I haven't heard of any others. Please call in to the support center at 1-866-606-1866 if you don't have the current release. This is pretty painful. I made the call 30 minute ago, now waiting for a call back after they check the database to see if this is a known issue and whether they can escalate this ticket to get the firmware ...
... View more
Nope -- there are no non-hackish workarounds yet. This is a pretty big issue, pondering returning the RV180W over it. So far, there are lots of little & annoying bugs. Traceroute, for example, returns a spoofed packet for the first hop that breaks some apps. (Try to traceroute to any endpoint outside your LAN and note the first packet)
... View more
Correct, but that's not the issue. The issue is that clients have to negotiate their own MTUs. I'll post a more detailed summary later. This is a well known problem with enabling jumbo frames on networks.
... View more
Simon Slater wrote: the review on smallnetbuilder showed it supported upto 9000 frames. http://www.smallnetbuilder.com/security/security-reviews/31746-cisco-rv180-vpn-router-reviewed?start=2 That's only between LAN devices -- not to the router itself. If the router itself doesn't support jumbo frames, it breaks end-to-end connectivity to other endpoints (outside of the WAN) using jumbo frames internally.
... View more
I've enabled jumbo frames in Networking -> LAN (Local Network) -> Jumbo Frames on an RV180W running the base firmware (1.0.0.30). The switch seems to pass jumbo frames just fine (like ... almost every switch these days), but the router itself silently drops jumbo frames. Is this a known bug? This makes enabling jumbo frames on clients impossible, since it will break some external connectivity. (I.E. when two endpoints are on networks with jumbo frames, they will then negotiate a high MTU over the WAN, but the router will silently drop large frames and they won't get an ICMP Fragmentation Needed, etc. because the router simply drops large frames).
... View more
I recently purchased an RV180W to upgrade (vlan features, etc.) from a Cisco/Linksys E4200. However, the wireless on the RV180W (even with identical settings channels, etc.) seems to be very flaky (consistent >1% packet lost, intermittent disconnections, etc.). I've compared it to a few other pieces of hardware (an Asus RT-N16 and old WRT56G), and they all work fine, but the RV180W has constant issues. Has anyone else seen this problem? Any suggestions on debugging (I've played with beacon intervals, etc.).
... View more
I'm trying to set up an RV180 router as a replacement for some non-Cisco gear, but I can't seem to get NAT loopback to work. That is: - The client has an external IP, say X.X.X.X, and uses NAT for bunch of 192.168.1.0/24 internal addresses - An internal server (say 192.168.1.123) hosts an important business app on :443 SSL - The router tunnels any external connections to X.X.X.X:443 to the internal server 192.168.1.123:443 This works perfectly for external users (e.g. visiting X.X.X.X:443 works fine) but internally accessing the WAN IP (X.X.X.X:443) does not work, and instead loads the router login page. This is particularly problematic, since our users access this via a CNAME that points to the WAN IP. - Is this a known bug & are there any workarounds on the router? - Is there an easier or more private way to report bugs than forum posts? - Is there any beta firmware that might fix this issue?
... View more
I have both a WAP321 and WAP121 -- they are both quite stable and don't seem to have any problems. That said, I'm thinking of returning the WAP321. It's ~$100 more than the WAP121, and has very few additional features for the cost. You're paying for: - 5 ghz (but *not* simultaneous, so not super useful) - Captive Portal (provided by lots of other devices, e.g. RV180) - GigE instead of FE connectivity - 8 vlans/MSSIDs instead of 4 - 32 connected clients, 20 active (vs. 16 connected, 10 active) Seems a little strange to not provide simultaneous dual band, IMHO.
... View more
Same story for the WAP321. I figure they're still so new that they haven't pushed any new firmware yet, but it'd be nice to at least see a firmware page put up.
... View more
I'm considering upgrading a small business to the newly released RV180 or RV180W. Does the RV180 series support 6rd (IPv6 rapid deployment?). I see 6rd documented in the other small business routers (e.g. RV110), but I can't find it in the RV180 documentation.
... View more