nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Looking for 200.10.10.5.229 Feedback

daniel_m

Hello community!

So is anyone here running 200.10.10.5.229 at home with great success? I'm considering upgrading for the latest security fixes and to be on the "latest and greatest," but I am a bit worried about bringing too much "ruckus" to my home network in the form of incompatibilities due to too much IoT and other legacy wireless devices.

So, anyone here with a varied home network have "200.10.10.5.229" Just Work with no issues or have seen it improve things?

Cheers.

Find more posts tagged with

Accepted answers

All comments

unknown

It only came out yesterday, but as I was upgrading for frag attack anyway (which was the patch immediately before this update), I decided to go to 200.10.

I haven't seen any issues but it's only been ~16 hrs for me.

george_wang_cdz

Just upgraded my R610 (single AP) to 200.10.10.5.229, the procedure is smooth.

After it finished updating, my first impression is my Google Pixel 4 XL phone with Android 12 beta 1 that used to has issue to connect to WPA2/WPA3 mixed authentication, it now quickly get connected without re-enter passphrase every time.

I upgraded my small installation at home (2 R650s, ca. 40 clients), no issues. I believe to see less "poor" connections.

Actually, I am afraid I have to correct myself: Both iPad Pro's I have cannot connect to R650s at 200.10.10.5.229. I reverted to an earlier version and it works again. All other devices in the house worked fine. There seems to be an issue here, both iPad have 802.11ax (these are the only ax devices I have).

daniel_m

Thanks for the update. Are you using WPA3 anywhere?

unknown

Interesting -- the iPads here are ac, but the iPhones are both ac and ax.... the iPhones have no problems here. This is using a pure WPA3 SSID.

The AP was configured WPA2/WPA3-Mixed. My daughters iPhone worked, but it is 2 years old, so no ax.

veno77

Hello, it was promised the setting to limit the 2.4ghz to 802.11n only will be back with 200.10 firmware but I could not find it in the web interface. Any ideas?

Thanks,

Veno

louis

Dynamic VLAN assignment by the dynamic PSK used to authenticate has been disabled in 200.10. There is no explanation anywhere I can find, but it wasn't a well documented feature in the first place. I had just finished rolling out a deployment of 8 R850s using this feature heavily, it was working so well, but now it is completely broken. Not sure what else to do but to downgrade to 200.9 and evaluate other vendors. Such a disappointment...

unknown

So far only had an issue at one of the sites that uses a wireless mesh using R750s.

This site was setup after a ton of wireless surveys and trial and errors to place the APs far enough from the root AP to have a solid mesh connection but at same time also maximize coverage per AP. All APs connect directly to the root AP for the most part. Everything has been solid on 200.9 and never had any mesh dropouts since going live with the setup.

On 200.10 however with exactly the same setup and no physical changes, I can not get the wireless mesh APs to connect to the root AP. Mesh APs will try for a few minutes then start broadcasting the Recover.me-XXXXX ssid and then reboot after 15-20 minutes to try again and repeat the cycle. Either the mesh signal is now not strong enough possibly due to the addition of 2.4GHz or some mesh logic regarding the strength allowed to connect has been changed.

Randomly after a few hours the mesh would connect and the connection from the devices on the mesh APs would be stable but the mesh APs would randomly disconnect and not connect again for hours.

I only had the weekend to do this and didn't want to start moving the APs so I reverted back to 200.9 and everything just worked as before without issues.

I did not have time to test out mesh on 2.4 GHz either.

This is a very specific use case but heads up to anyone who is using wireless mesh thinking of upgrading to 200.10

veno77

Lastly I see frequently AP disconnects at home on 200.10 due to "Heartbeat Loss". This was quite stable on 200.9. I have R550 + 2 x R320 in my home network.

daniel_m

I'm the OP and decided to upgrade; I shouldn't have. Like @veno77, my network breaks once a week with a heartbeat loss. In looking at this further, it appears it might be PoE related. Port 2 is the R710.

In the past I had issues with the R710 and manually configured the PoE Operating Mode for 802.3at to allow the R710 to have full power. After the first heartbeat loss with 200.10, I removed this manual configuration, but the issue persists. The R610 has the default configuration and does not appear to have an issue.

Logs from the controller:

Jun 15 14:47:45 Ruckus-Unleashed syslog: eventd_to_syslog():AP[R710@58:b6:33:3b:18:30] joins with uptime [307] s and last disconnected reason [Heartbeat Loss] 
Jun 15 14:48:02 R710 syslog: eventd_to_syslog():AP[R610@30:87:d9:03:8a:c0] joins with uptime [86] s and last disconnected reason [AP Restart : application reboot] 
Jun 15 14:48:04 R710 stamgr: stamgr_update_reboot_info():AP[30:87:d9:03:8a:c0] reboot detail:/usr/sbin/election  election: The unleashed network have another master and the priority is less than it, reboot.  
Jun 15 14:48:04 R710 syslog: eventd_to_syslog():AP[R610@30:87:d9:03:8a:c0] warm boot successfully,last reboot reason [application reboot].

Logs from my switch:

I 06/15/21 14:42:24 00077 ports: port 2 is now off-line
W 06/15/21 14:42:24 00562 ports: port 2 PD Over Current indication.
I 06/15/21 14:42:24 00565 ports: port 2 PD Removed.
W 06/15/21 14:42:26 00562 ports: port 2 PD Over Current indication.
I 06/15/21 14:42:28 00560 ports: port 2 PD Detected.
I 06/15/21 14:42:28 00561 ports: port 2 Applying Power to PD.
I 06/15/21 14:42:30 00076 ports: port 2 is now on-line
I 06/15/21 14:43:19 00077 ports: port 2 is now off-line
I 06/15/21 14:43:22 00076 ports: port 2 is now on-line
I 06/15/21 14:44:15 05824 ports: Port 3: PD stopped responding to LLDP PoE TLVs from PSE. Previous LLDP negotiated power values will be retained.
I 06/15/21 14:46:27 00077 ports: port 3 is now off-line
I 06/15/21 14:46:31 00076 ports: port 3 is now on-line
I 06/15/21 14:46:31 05824 ports: Port 3: PD stopped responding to LLDP PoE TLVs from PSE. Previous LLDP negotiated power values will be retained.
I 06/15/21 14:47:11 00077 ports: port 3 is now off-line
I 06/15/21 14:47:14 00076 ports: port 3 is now on-line

More info from the switch; it appears the R710 is not negotiating LLDP:

Available: 195 W Used: 26 W Remaining: 169 W

PoE Pwr Pwr Pre-std Alloc Alloc PSE Pwr PD Pwr PoE Port PLC PLC
Port Enab Priority Detect Cfg Actual Rsrvd Draw Status Cls Type
------ ---- -------- ------- ----- ------ ------- ------- ----------- --- ----
1 No low off usage usage 0.0 W 0.0 W Disabled 0 -
2 Yes low off usage usage 5.6 W 5.3 W Delivering 4 2
3 Yes low off usage lldp 5.8 W 5.6 W Delivering 4 2

I had no issue here with 200.9.