Differences between tomato and DD-WRT?

[blackangst1]

Ive got a new E3000 I need to flash to use as a bridge, and Ive always used DD-WRT on previous routers. However, tomato seems to have a nice following too. So those who have used both, can you tell me what some of the differences are?

 

[Van G]

When you say bridge, do you mean you're using the E3000 as WAP or are using it as the router?

If WAP, I would say no benefit in flashing either f/w since you're only using it for wireless?

I'm setting up a WRT54GL v1.1 as the router and E3000 as WAP. As it stands now I'm going to install Tomato on WRDT54Gl and leave E3000 stock.

 

[JackMDS]

If a special feature is Not needed and the Wireless aspect is important, it is better to leave the E3000 as is with stock firmware. The Wirelss action is better under the the stock firmware.

Otherwise flashing with Tomato is easier but DD-WRT is more flexible and features rich.

Same for the whole E-xxxx group and Buffalo dual Radio AGN line.

 

[Van G]

I'll give the E-xxxx thread a read.

My only special need for the E3000 as WAP would be to allow guest access to use internet only. The solution that shipped with the E3000 is either garbage, or I'm missing something!

 

[Van G]

Do I have this right?: If E3000 is the WAP and WRT54GL is Router (Tomato or DD-WRT installed), the guest wifi access (all wifi access) will be configured on the WRT54GL?

 

[blackangst1]

If a special feature is Not needed and the Wireless aspect is important, it is better to leave the E3000 as is with stock firmware. The Wirelss action is better under the the stock firmware.

Otherwise flashing with Tomato is easier but DD-WRT is more flexible and features rich.

Same for the whole E-xxxx group and Buffalo dual Radio AGN line.

Hmm. Does the stock E3000 allow how I have it set up now? Ive got the 5ghz radio set up as a bridge to upstairs, and the 2.4ghz radio set up as an AP.

 

[JackMDS]

If the source is 2.4 the 5GHz aspect of the Bridge is useless.

Make much more sense to use the better Router E3000 is the source and the WRT-54G as the Bridge.

As a result if you also have on the Network a AGN Wireless you will enjoy on it better bandwidth.

 

[Van G]

JackMDS, you lost me on this one. E3000 is a better router than WRT54?

I was planning on putting WRT54 (radio turned off) in between my cable modem and home LAN and then using E3000 for WAP only.

 

[blackangst1]

If the source is 2.4 the 5GHz aspect of the Bridge is useless.

Make much more sense to use the better Router E3000 is the source and the WRT-54G as the Bridge.

As a result if you also have on the Network a AGN Wireless you will enjoy on it better bandwidth.

Someone else mentioned the WRT-54G not me My source is an E4200 so the 5ghz radio IS relevant