Click thumbnail to enlarge

Golden Gate
1/15/2005
6 comments

Off-site links open in a new window

Current
2007 Archives
   August
   June
   March
2006 Archives
   December
   November
   May
   April
   March
   February
   January
2005 Archives
   December
   November
   October
   September
   August
   July
   June
   May
   April
   March
   February
   January
2004 Archives
2003 Archives
2002 Archives
2001 Archives

Gallery
Download
Comments
Links

About Jerry
Amazon Wish List

MeFi-Projects

Seattle Pancakes

© 2001-2012 Jerry Kindall

Search this site
Search the Web

 

Wednesday 06/01/05

Linksys has an interesting-looking new router, the RT042, which has a novel QoS ("Quality of Service") feature that lets you define priorities for specific machines on your network or for specific ports. Hmm, I thought: I could give my Vonage box first priority to keep my calls from breaking up (an occasional nuisance), then I could give the Web/mail server second priority so that if I'm downloading something big on the Mac it won't keep anyone from getting to my Web site. Best of all, it's under $100, which is pretty darn reasonable for something with QoS. I'll buy one!

Well, I got it today, and it's total and utter crap. It requires that the machines on your local network be assigned addresses dynamically (i.e. with DHCP). Otherwise, not only do the QoS features not work, you can't access the Internet at all. That's right, the router doesn't work with static IPs! (Oddly enough, you can port-forward incoming connections to static IPs. Which would be great if I wanted to receive e-mail but never send it.) There's not even a way to force particular devices to be assigned specific IP addresses via DHCP, as with Netgear routers; that would be kind of a pain, but it'd be acceptable. Basically the RT042 is completely useless for anyone whose home network is of any complexity whatever -- in other words, for exactly the kinds of nerds who would buy it to begin with.

I sent their support desk a scathing e-mail telling them in great detail just how lame the product and the company are; we'll see what they say. (Full text of letter in the comment thread.)

Update: Someone in the comment thread discovered how to use static IPs with the router. You have to use their (Windows-only) setup software to do it, though; it can't be done through the Web interface. Still lame.

Important: This page still gets a lot of hits because of its Google pagerank. Please keep in mind that my review is more than a year old at this point and Linksys may well have improved their product. (In fact I hope to God they have, if they haven't they're even more of a disaster.) Still, you may be interested in reading my more recent experience with Linksys products.

Re: Linksys RT042 is crap There are 59 messages in this thread, displayed in the order they were posted. Jerry Kindall 6/1/2005 10:07:10 PM Pacific This is the e-mail I sent: Re: Not a question. I'm just completely incensed. [Incident: 050601-012774] I just bought an RT042. Paid extra to have it delivered overnight, in fact. I assumed it would work like the routers I've had in the past, with the addition of the QoS features which I found very interesting. I have Vonage and it breaks up sometimes when there's heavy Internet traffic, and it's not at all convenient to run all my network traffic through the ATA to ameliorate this situation. So I was looking forward to seeing how the QOS worked. I never in a million years would have guessed that this router won't even let you have access to the Internet if your machine uses a static IP address. After struggling with getting access for a close to an hour, I finally switched my machine to DHCP and, of course, was able to go right out onto the Internet. While it was up, I Googled a bit and found this page, which confirms the unbelievable: http://www.linksysinfo.org/modules.php?name=Forums&file=viewtopic&t=5576 My jaw literally fell open when I read this. A router than doesn't route static IPs? WTF? On a Netgear router you can "force" the DHCP server to assign particular IP addresses to specific MACs. On a cheapie Buffalo Airstation I was playing with last week, you can manually enter client names and IP addresses so that the device "knows" about static IPs (the Buffalo requires this for port forwarding to static IPs, which it does by name -- kinda weird). Linksys-a-division-of-Cisco, you know, the networking experts, the dot-in-dot-com, eschews both of these solutions, either of which would have made me happy, in favor of not allowing static IPs to access the Internet at all! The RT042 will happily route inbound traffic to a static IP address, of course, which isn't very useful considering that machine will have no Internet access otherwise. To add insult to injury, there is no support on your site for the device! It's not even listed on the drop-down menus in the Knowledgebase, and a search for RT042 or RT-042 finds nothing. In fact I've had to choose RV042 on this comment form; it's not really even close to the same product, obviously, but at least the model number is similar. I have used Linksys products in the past and been generally satisfied with them. Recently I have been using mostly Netgear stuff, but when I saw the specs on the RT042, I was perfectly willing to try the product. I am astonished and disgusted by the truly breathtaking incompetence demonstrated by the RT042. "No, it can't be," I said to myself. I spent a good half hour going through every screen in the Web admin looking for the function that would let me assign a fixed DHCP address based on a MAC or else define a client name for a static IP address. But it just wasn't there! Even now, after an emergency trip out to CompUSA to buy a Netgear router (without QoS and with a wireless feature I don't need, sigh), I find it hard to believe that in 2005, a major networking company could release a so-called "router" that can't do something so simple and basic as NAT routing from static IP addresses! I will of course be sending this doorstop back for a refund and avoiding Linksys products in the future. All told we're talking $25 for shipping (here overnight, and back by ground), plus an hour and a half of my time. If you can't get a basic feature like this right, who knows what else you might screw up? I need to be able to rely on networking products that are made by companies that understand networking. I thought that included you guys, but wow, did you ever prove me wrong! Congratulations, I have never seen a company blow it like you did with this product -- I can't believe Cisco put their logo right on it. Jerry Kindall, Seattle Keith 6/2/2005 9:56:28 AM Pacific Ouch. I feel like I'm getting psychic blowback from reading that letter. You're quite right, of course. A router that can't handle static ip is not a router at all. Jerry Kindall 6/2/2005 10:28:19 AM Pacific Yeah, the thing that amazes me is that a division of Cisco would release something like that! No wonder CSCO shares have been struggling to hit $20 lately... Jerry Kindall 6/4/2005 8:09:36 AM Pacific Here's their response: Dear Jerry, Thank you for contacting Linksys Customer Support. I would like to apologize for the inconvenience that this has caused you. But we would like to thank you for your time in sending us this valuable feedback. Rest assured that this effort will not be unnoticed. We will do our best to serve you better. I will forward this to the proper department so that they may consider this suggestion in the next firmware/driver release and future updates. C------ M------ Linksys – A Division of Cisco Systems, Inc. Product Support Specialist 1-800-326-7114 support@linksys.com Jamie Anderson 6/6/2005 3:15:34 AM Pacific Linksys does need to take more care on the quality of their product, but RT042 really isn't that pathetic. My experience with the RT042 really wasn't as bad, not as bad as how you have described. After reading your thread, I tried setting my PCs with static IP in my network, and found that other then the master PC, all other client PCs can be set as static IP and be allowed to access the internet. I guess the reason Linksys restrict static IP, is coz it allow master PC to have total control over the network. I've used the step by step setup wizard provided in the setup CD to setup my RT042, I'll have to say, RT042's setup are not like any previous router I've purchased before, but once getting used to it, it's actually kinda handy, maybe it's coz I am not a power user, but most of the functions (eg QoS) seems to work when I setup via the utility. Jerry Kindall 6/6/2005 10:24:24 AM Pacific What? How did you get THAT to work? "The master PC"? How does it tell which machine is the "master"? (Do you mean the DMZ?) Jamie Anderson 6/6/2005 5:54:51 PM Pacific Linksys does need to take more care on the quality of their product, but RT042 really isn't that pathetic. My experience with the RT042 really wasn't as bad, not as bad as how you have described. After reading your thread, I tried setting my PCs with static IP in my network, and found that other then the master PC, all other client PCs can be set as static IP and be allowed to access the internet. I guess the reason Linksys restrict static IP, is coz it allow master PC to have total control over the network. I've used the step by step setup wizard provided in the setup CD to setup my RT042, I¡¦ll have to say, RT042's setup are not like any previous router I¡¦ve purchased before, but once getting used to it, it's actually kinda handy, maybe it¡¦s coz I am not a power user, but most of the functions (eg QoS) seems to work when I setup via the utility. David G. 6/7/2005 10:13:49 AM Pacific Jamie, you are confused. Jerry is ABSOLUTELY right when he described the problem, and THERE SHOULD NOT BE ANY MASTER! What is a "master" in the routing world anyway?!!! Bottom line: the firmware is crap, the router not good, power users do not use the stupid wizards and go straight to the web interface to setup everything the way they like. You used the wizard and you used DHCP, so I would describe you as a non power user, and in this case I'd advise you to return that router and buy a cheap d-link for $20, since all the functionalities of this router are supposedly aimed at power users (I don't think John Doe knows what's QoS anyway...). If you setup an efficient network at home, without DHCP, and maybe several levels of routing (I have several routers at home), it's simple: you are screwed. Jerry Kindall 6/16/2005 1:05:32 AM Pacific The D-Link DGL-4300 looks like a possible replacement. They have a model without the wireless, the DGL-4100; I'll probably try one out. Update: They have a $30 rebate on the 4300, making it cheaper than the 4100 at most stores. Ordered it from Buy.com today. The RT042 is on its way back. What a weird world we live in when D-Link makes better hardware than Linksys/Cisco. Juan Fermin 6/17/2005 8:21:21 PM Pacific I have both the D-Link & the Linksys. I like the way the D-link lets you assign Priorority over not only IP addresses, but also by a port range, via their "Gamer's Fuel" setup area. I have an office with 4 Packet 8 Phones and originally bought the Linksys for that, but I was unable to get the QOS to work with the phones since the IP address on them kept changing. I had lost the box and reciept so I couldn't return the Linksys, but from what I understand they've already made some major changes on the Firmware. I'm going to set it up this weekend to see if I can get it to work and if I can, then I'll go back to that, since the way it's setup now, I have to manually switch to my DSL line if my Cable Line goes down. (which has already happened once) I like the way the Lynksys allows you to have the Failover, that would really help me out. Jerry Kindall 6/23/2005 9:20:18 PM Pacific Yeah, the failover feature looks nice for a small business. If only they can get the router to work. Maybe someday... Jerry Kindall 6/24/2005 1:48:58 PM Pacific Gratifyingly, if you Google for "Linksys RT042", this page is the first non-Linksys page you get. Neil Williams 6/29/2005 10:56:29 PM Pacific Jamie's right about the Master computer thing, check out this link from the Linksys KnowledgeBase Jerry Kindall 6/29/2005 11:04:58 PM Pacific Wow. That's just weird -- it's not in the Web interface at all. It never occurred to me that you had to use their Windows client app for what should be a basic setup task. I have a Windows box here, but it's not very convenient to use it for that sort of thing (it's my Web server and it needs a static IP address, so I can't easily set it up for DHCP). I know they don't support Macs officially but all their other products can be configured with a browser and I've never had a problem setting them up from a Mac. This seems a pretty big step backward to me. Good God, I feel old. I've been outsmarted by a router. Some of the things I've read about the router's performance made me not very sorry to have sent it back, in any case. Rich S 7/3/2005 12:37:29 PM Pacific Same story for me... I tried the "master pc" and the utility... Still no luck... There is an obscure note that from the utility you can "delete" a device so it won't show up anymore (I guess like your mother in law's pc)... The problem, I'm still just guessing, is that once you delete the box, it can't be un-deleted... Or, the darn thing just don't work... Already spent about 8 hours (what a geek), trying to make it work... no luck... Chris Borden 7/12/2005 5:21:32 PM Pacific wow, glad I found this first! When I first stumbled across the RT042, I thought "wow, that'd be perfect! No more dropped packets in-game when my roommate's surfin' the web!"... But with the performance issues mentioned... I think I'll pass. Too bad the RV042 doesn't have QoS... The WRTP54G does, though... but I'll bet it's plagued by the same issues. Chris Borden 7/12/2005 5:41:34 PM Pacific PS: too bad the Netgear FVX538 is so much more expensive... based on the same chipset, although with several more advanced features (gigabit uplink, etc..) http://www.netgear.com/products/details/FVX538.php Leon Garchitorena 7/21/2005 1:01:41 AM Pacific Pardon my ignorance, but what are the issues if QoS can only be used with dynamic IP's and not with static IP's? What are the pros & cons? I plan on getting the RT042 next week, and now I'm rethinking. A friend of mine told me that the BEFSR41 v4 has QoS, so I think I'll get that instead since all I want is the QoS anyway. I'd like the ability to control the bandwidth allocation of the PC's connected to my router. Rich S 7/21/2005 8:59:53 AM Pacific Update - I did get my rt042 working... Note - with static ip, if you are connecting other hubs/routers to it, make sure that your other routers accept "pings", otherwise the rt042 won't see them... My download speed went from 5000Kbps to 3000Kbps with the rt042... Oddly, my upload speed wasn't impacted at all... So, I bought it mainly for upload speed management (I have 3 voip phones). They are working nice (can talk on all at the same time and surf the web)... So, in summary, I did get it working with static (and/or dynamic ips), download is slow, its a pain to setup, but it does do what I need it to do... RDD 7/27/2005 8:13:03 PM Pacific You might be interested in this info about the RT042: Hi, my name is Karol Joseph V(19288). How may I help you? Richard: Hello I just received my RT042 QOS router and I am having a problem with it Karol Joseph V(19288): What is the problem you are experiencing with your Linksys product? Richard: I am receiveing a "User Account Overflow" popup when I try to activate a computers static IP Karol Joseph V(19288): Static IP on the router's setup page or on the computer? Richard: I am in the "Utility" as I have just added another PC to my network with a static IP and I wish to give it access to the inet Richard: It shows up but when I click on the connection icon to change it from "Disconnected" to "Connected" I get the error Richard: I have the latest firmware Karol Joseph V(19288): Are these the steps that you have taken? Karol Joseph V(19288): http://linksys.custhelp.com/cgi-bin/linksys.cfg/php/enduser/std_adp.php (unholy URL truncated) Richard: I have done that Richard: I have 5 machines total Richard: this is number 5 Richard: the others work Karol Joseph V(19288): Please give me a few moments. I am currently doing some research and will return shortly. I apologize in advance for the delay. Richard: but when I turned this one on and then went to the "MAster" pc to run the utility and "Connect" it by clicking on the red line as described Richard: it pops up a little window saying "User Account Overflow!" Karol Joseph V(19288): Please give me a few moments. I am currently doing some research and will return shortly. I apologize in advance for the delay. Richard: Thanks! Karol Joseph V(19288): No problem. Karol Joseph V(19288): Thank you for waiting. The other computers are also set to static IP right? Richard: yes Richard: except the "Master" Richard: which I understood has to be DHCP to run the "Utility" Karol Joseph V(19288): The router can actually accomodate a maximum of 6. Are all the computers QoS set to high? Richard: dont know Richard: what about DHCP Richard: whats the limit on that Karol Joseph V(19288): 6 DHCP including static. Karol Joseph V(19288): Have you configured the QoS settings in the router? Richard: also how do I get to the DHCP settings to change the range etc if I wanted Richard: yes somewhat Richard: should I reset them back to defaults Karol Joseph V(19288): Yes sir then try to add your 5th computer again. Richard: hang on Karol Joseph V(19288): Ok sir. Richard: still there? Richard: Are you saying six (6) computers only or six static IP addresses Richard: Because I have about 8 machines total Richard: and I was using a Linksys BEFSR81 with no problems Karol Joseph V(19288): Yes sir 6 IP addresses (DHCP and static). Richard: thats absurd Richard: this is NAT Richard: I should be able to put as manay machines as I want Richard: as long as I have the bandwidth Richard: I mean I have VOIP phone thats one machine Richard: two laptops his and hers Richard: 3 kids machines Richard: and my personal desktop Richard: not too mention my network laser printer Karol Joseph V(19288): 6 is the maximum the router can handle. Richard: and my wireless access point (also linksys) Karol Joseph V(19288): For that model. Richard: guess I will be refunding this one Richard: that is absurd Richard: my BEFSR81 had an 8 port switch and could handle as many machines as I could put behind it and cost 1/2 as much Richard: where dose it state this in the specs on the unit Karol Joseph V(19288): The BEFSR81 is different from the RT042. Since the RT042 has QoS the number of clients that it can handle is limited. Richard: again where does it state this in the specs...had I read this anywhere I would never have ordered it Karol Joseph V(19288): Currently Linksys is working on that one. It was not included in the data sheet. I apologize for the inconvenience. Richard: I am assuming I can send it back to Amazon for a full refund. Karol Joseph V(19288): You may check if their warranty allows refunds. Richard: If not then Linksys is liable Richard: as the serious limitations of the router were omitted from the specs Richard: I need a cust case number and a phone number to call a supervisor/manager please Karol Joseph V(19288): You may send it back to us but we only do product exchanges/replacements but not refunds. Karol Joseph V(19288): An incident number will be sent to your email after this session is closed. Richard: I need a contact phone number as well please Karol Joseph V(19288): To reach our Technical Support department, please call 1-800-326-7114 and an agent will happily assist you over the phone. Richard: disconnected Karol Joseph V(19288): disconnected Ryan 10/14/2005 10:38:51 AM Pacific If you are a geek, just get an old PC (really old is fine, I've done it with a P75) and a couple network cards, load linux on the thing, run iptables masquerade and do QoS that way. Heck, you can purchase network firewall appliance PCs (basically VIA EPIAs with 4 onboard NICs) for under $200 and use one of those. If someone starts selling locked down, rebranded linux routers they would make a mint. Especially because you can replicate most of the features of a $5000 cisco with a $200 PC and linux... Michael C 11/9/2005 12:21:40 AM Pacific Just to let you know Jerry your site stopped my getting the Linksys so you've definately cost them at least one sale. I got the DLink gaming router despite not having played a single game in 5 years. Although it's not really a gaming router it's just marketed that way afaik. Once I worked out the QoS was actually called GAMEFUEL (how tacky is that? :-) I got it working nicely. Voip now seems to be working quite well, you definately need QoS to run it. jeff 12/21/2005 7:37:06 PM Pacific I enjoy a challenge, and purchased this 'router' recently. After getting confounded for a few minutes, I had it operational...but....got on with Linksys chat support and asked for that v1.3.7 beta release. Well u can now add a static ip device from the web interface, but the throughput performance is lacking. Somewhat helped with my Sipura VoIP voice quality. And I also have more than 6 ip's, some static, some dynamic. Printer, Wireless AP, laptops, desktop etc. Overall....so so for someone with 4 or less devices and VoIP appliance Michael G 12/27/2005 2:28:58 PM Pacific Thank goodness I found this site before I actually purchased the RT042. Curious if anyone has tried the SMC with similar specs. The model is SMCBR24Q and the screenshots in the user manual look strikingly similar to the Linksys RT042. I am seriously considering buying this little guy and was wondering if anyone has tried it in lieu of the Linksys product. Ray 12/27/2005 9:21:59 PM Pacific Thanks to Jerry for hosting this page. I almost sold a RT042 to a customer. Boy and I glad I read this first. From the posts here it looks like the static IP issue can be resolved, but it isn't easy. As for RDD's problem with too many PCs, that can be fixed by connecting his BEFSR81 to the RT042 so 8 PCs will look like one to the RT042. The local IP range MUST be changed on of the routers. They can't both use 192.168.1.x. Changing one to 192.168.2.x should be sufficient to make it work. I understand the need to have a limit in the RT042 of something less than 256 IP addresses, but 6 is ridiculous. As for the problem of the maximum speed is 512k; this is absurd. I have a 7 megabit DSL line. If no other users are downloading anything I expect to get my full 7 meg, not 512k. A Qos router should have an unlimited top end with an option to share the band width when others need it. The RT042 needs to be completely redesigned or replaced. It is worthless for anyone with a fast Internet connection. SOBE 1/3/2006 8:23:46 PM Pacific Great information guys, thanks for sharing. I am back to the drawing board, what called my attention most about the RT042 was the fact that one can use two ISPs for failover, and added bandwidth. The QoS is nice too, but based on all the reading I have done here, I have to admit that the RT042 is out of the question. Symantec sells a similar product which allows for 2 ISPs, but it costs much more than the RT042. I just subscribed to Cable ISP, I currently have DSL and the service has been sort of crappy. I am on Fiber, yet the highest speeds I am offered is 1.5 down and 384K up. People in my city with 40 year old phone lines are currently running at 6MB down and 768K up, my entire neighborhood is on FIBER, yet I am limited with a much slower service, I rarely get the full 1.5 down and 384k up. So I decided to buy the 6MB down and 768K up Cable Internet service, and will use it as a secondary Gateway for my home LAN, I use Vonage and it has been crappy over my DSL line. I am hoping that using the secondary ISP (6MB) for Vonage will do the trick. Matt 1/8/2006 9:16:33 AM Pacific Completely shocked! That is the only way I can describe my reaction to this. You guys have prevented another sale to linksys thank you very much for the information presented on this web site. I was debating on going for the rt0 because I have worked with the rv0 series in the past and been happy with them, but they are geared towards different markets. myne 1/12/2006 5:47:40 PM Pacific Heh I was about to recommmend this to my boss - assuming since it's a cisco that it'd work fine with atleast 25 users. Screw that for a joke. Marvin 1/17/2006 7:11:17 PM Pacific Glad I Googled the RT042 before I actually sold one. Your site was the first Google pulled up, but after reviewing many other sites, I'm thinking of pullnig the thing from mine. Linksys does sell other models that do QoS and provide multi-ISP connectivity. http://products.fiortechnologies.com/index.php?main_page=index&cPath=3_33_34 I've had great experience with the RV-0XX's (RV-042, RV-082 and RV-016. All support muli-ISP connections for fail-over or load-balancing. The RV-016 will allow up to 7 ISP connections.All 3 models support vaious numbers of VPN connections. The RV-082 and RV-016 supports physical port based "psudo" QoSing. I say "psudo" 'cause I come from a Cisco back-ground where routers support true QoS policies and queing. But it works great if you plug your SIP phone or ATA into a port and mark it as High and your PC's as normal. Just can't set-up fancy policies like you can on a regualr Cisco router. (But hey, a Cisco 2800 goes for a few thousand bucks) The RV-0XX's are a lot more pricier than the RT-042. The RV-042 runs ~ $180.00 with the RV-016 comming in at ~ $445.00. Joe Negron 1/20/2006 12:07:00 PM Pacific I didn't have such luck... I picked one up for one of my customers (retail) as a quick fix... little did I know... STATIC IPs work -BUT- you need to assign them an address => 100. The routher sees the static address but I don't know if this will cause other issues down the road - i.e. if and when it attempts to assign that address from the pool. It appears that you cannot configure the DHCP settings on this router - AT ALL. You can't even turn it off! This product is a P.O.S. Mike Mullins 1/26/2006 5:48:09 PM Pacific Sorry guys, but the RV042 that I baught is working just fine. It looks like a brilliant product. It may be that the earliest firmware was not good. I am still not finished setting up but it looks like its failover mode is very good. Dan Chisholm 1/31/2006 7:11:39 PM Pacific I wish I had found this site before ordering Linksys products. It would have saved me hours of pain and the cost of returning the pieces of crap. The first thing I always do with a new router is turn off it's DHCP service. I should have sent the RT042 back as soon as I found that DHCP could not be turned off but, the router features (QOS, scheduling, etc.) sounded so cool that I decided to continue on and turn of DHCP on my server. I put the router in place and, WTF happened to my network? I read the entire manual, and it is not really said directly but it seems that static IP addresses are not supported. How can this be? So I go to the Linksys site and check the support for the RT042 and find that there is an article that describes how to setup the RT042 to work with static IP addresses using a utility program. The web interface can not be used. I think this must be just a temporary work around until the firmware is fixed. As the article instructs, I setup the "Master" dynamically configured IP address and then setup some devices that need static IP addresses. Finally, I start converting computers to use DHCP. All total there are about ten computers in the house. After a couple computers are setup to use dynamic IP addresses I have a computer that says it can not find the DHCP server. So I try another computer and it also says it can not find the DHCP server. Fine, I convert the computer back to a static address and check the "Master" computer and find that when I "click on the red line" as described in the support article I get the error "User Account Over flow". Crap! So I google for "RT042 User Account Over flow" and I find this site. There is very definitely a limit to the number or combination of static/dyaname IP addresses but at this point I don't give a damn about figuring out this kluge that Linksys has put together. I am sending this piece of crap back. Richard, thanks for posting this info. You may want to change the title to "Linksys is crap". When I ordered the RT042, I also ordered a Linksys PSUS4 printer server. The PSUS4 is also crap. They say it supports most printers but they can not tell you which printers it supports and which it does not support. I ASSumED that HP printers would be supported but no, I have two HP printers and neither worked with the Linksys printer server and after searching the web I found that there are a lot of people out there that have had the same experience. It is too bad; Linksys used to be a good brand. A day and half wasted on two Linksys products. To add insult to injury, I have to pay shipping and %15 restocking fee. Astoria, NY 3/1/2006 12:38:00 PM Pacific Thanks for the site. Prevented me from purchasing one of these. Don't waste your time with the WRT54G or GS either, those have been totally nerfed by Linksys in the last few months. I'm returning a GS right now, total junk. Saskatoon, SK, Canada 3/4/2006 5:53:41 AM Pacific Thanks for the site. Prevented me from purchasing one of these Jim 3/23/2006 4:27:54 PM Pacific Thanks You saved me a lot of headaches. sasha 3/27/2006 11:28:00 AM Pacific and once again.... thanks for keeping me away from this product:) Michael 3/30/2006 12:14:07 PM Pacific Thanks. Will stay away from this router. Larry 4/12/2006 9:53:00 PM Pacific Wow, never seen this bad a review in a long time. Thank you for helping me decide NOT to buy this one. Hassan 4/15/2006 3:27:01 PM Pacific New firmware to possibly resolve these issues Hassan 4/15/2006 3:27:28 PM Pacific http://http://www.linksysinfo.co.uk/files/rt042_v1 Jake Blondell 4/16/2006 5:54:39 PM Pacific My download speed went from 2.5Mb to 1.4Mb with ONE DEVICE and it was config'd to receive max bandwidth (worse when I had multiple devices). This is GARBAGE! However, the static IPs were easily managed with a bit of common sense. If you don't care about losing 40% or more of your bandwidth(YIKES), and you want to limit usage by your kids at certain times of day, this will suffice - as long as you have a basic knowledge of networking. However, I will be returning mine because I think that losing a chunk of your bandwidth for such a trivial feature should be embarrasing for linksys. I have fired people for suggesting to release sub-par products like this. Juan Carlos Mejia 4/30/2006 11:19:34 PM Pacific Thanks God I found this forum! I was about to place my order, But now, never in a lifetime. Does anyone has any suggestion about a router with these 2 features (QoS & 2 internet connections)? And Thank Jerry! TheZeDD 5/1/2006 9:07:45 PM Pacific Your saga with the 42 was an interesting plight and one not far from what I have been dealing with. I had been doing some research on a few items when this page popped up. What is Cisco doing these days. Linksys has (had?) always been one of the top SOHO choices. Amazing... I only hope this doesn't show a path to the future of either Linksys or Cisco. Thanx for the info and reading! - Z Gregory 5/8/2006 6:15:55 PM Pacific Can somebody who had experience with RV-042 tell us if it shares the same problems with RT-042? Especially if it fully supports static IPs and the bandwidth is OK with 7Mbit DSL connections? Thanks david 6/4/2006 3:11:16 PM Pacific I am looking for a router with dual wan for Roger cable 6m bit and bell wireless internet 3m bit, I want to use this router for voip and host a server in house, what is a reasonable router to do this job. inbound outbound load balance QoS auto failover etc how important are they and is linksys rv042 good enough or not. Thanks. Viktor 7/11/2006 10:21:14 PM Pacific Thanks god I googled this before buyng this crap. I would not believe its possible. Its bizarre. Mike Newd 8/2/2006 2:23:23 PM Pacific If you want to get a commercial-quality unit that's also incredibly easy to use take a look at the Kentrox 2300 ( http://www.kentrox.com/products/Q2300/ ). Will be more than a made-in-China consumer quality product, but will be a lot less than anything else comparable. Jerry Kindall 10/18/2006 12:34:42 PM Pacific Note that the above message recommending a Kentrox product was posted from IP address 192.228.32.6, which is pdxfwx.kentrox.com and was likely thus posted by an employee of Kentrox. I know nothing of the product or the company other than this, though I wouldn't buy a product from a company that has its employees posting shill comments on blogs under obvious pseudonyms. Albert Gamayen 11/19/2006 11:33:42 PM Pacific I have a lot of problems with the junk called Linksys RV042, after calling tech support for about 4 days and spending my time about 7 hours with linksys tech support they were not able to resolve my problems with the piece of junk that i bought for $235.00 dollars. This VPN router won't work at all with VPN, if someone else is triying to buy this crap make sure is your enemy ajjajaja. On VPN I see remote computers, but remote computers can't see my network!!!! even thou I provided them access to the router they didn't fix nothing nor resolve anything, after so many hours of wasting my time, I realize that LINKSYS is now days living of a good reputation they had in the past. SHAME OF LINKSYS (JUNKSYS) Greg Forrest 1/28/2007 9:15:46 AM Pacific Thanks for the great info. I cannot tell you how many other blogs indicate complete discust with Linksys products in general. One other common comment I see - "always update the firmward first on all Linksys products". I have sever D-Link and Netgear prodicts and have never updated firmware or needed a "Master" (WTF??). They have been running for four years non-stop. Greg Glenn Dobbelaere 2/11/2007 5:24:45 AM Pacific Here at home we have been using Linksys for years on end now, and the damn thing still runs fine, never had any problem with their product...but this review...wow...mindblowing. When I started reading I thought this was about some small problem, for example just with the QoS...but no Static IP, and that Master PC stuff...no thanks! I don't exactly have a spare pc laying around to set up as master and to let it run day and night! I was actually looking to buy a new router, because ours is getting quite old now...the RV042 looked interesting: Good features, small and ISP failover... but after reading this there is no way in a 1000 years I'm buying it, new firmware or not! Jerry, thanks for this review! Jerry Kindall 2/11/2007 7:30:01 AM Pacific Just a note: the RT042 and RV042 are entirely different products. christian mc east 5/30/2007 12:47:07 AM Pacific i had a wonderful experience with linksys! i salute them with my whole experience! always patronize linksys products.. Runamok 6/14/2007 12:51:56 AM Pacific Interesting thread. Occasionally, router upgrades can just complicate things. It\'s true. New options increase functionality and offer less compatibility. I\'ve had only good experiences with a linksys product, until this... Please read the 7/14/2005 customer review, and Please read the now helpful 6/12/2007 customer review. http://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductReview.aspx?Item=N82E16833124154&SortField=0&SummaryType=ALL&Pagesize=10&Page=1 v6, v7, v8, v9 Neutered-WRT54G routers? RV016, what\'s next? The RV016 sits in a box. There were some things left to try, like switching to different subnets. Website Design 9/2/2007 12:37:48 PM Pacific I'm thinking of getting one of these routers. If 10 people are using the network, will the internet be shared to each of them? (ie will they all get the same bandwidth)? Kit 1/1/2008 11:34:50 PM Pacific So does anyone have any other problem with the RV042 besides the VPN? QoS, Dual-Wan, Bandwidth, Static IP, all the normal router stuff work like a charm? I'm looking for a dual WAN router to buy at this time; any suggestions?. Thanks in advance. Chris B 10/17/2008 4:50:07 AM Pacific I also would like dual WAN (dual homed, 2 ISPs for load balancing and failover) plus good QoS for VoIP. I generally liked Linksys products, and still like very much the Linksys WRT54GL AFTER flashing it with Open Source DD-WRT v24 (and hear Tomato firmware also good). There's good QoS for $70.00 US. But no dual WAN ! :-) As for the RT042 that I was looking at due to dual WAN, Fter reding this, what total trash! 6 IP limit? No statics without PC setup wizard? What were they thinking?? As a CSCO stockholder, I am rally embarassed that they let that out the door. So, come on guys, $100 ball park, dual WAN and QoS, what do you like, including if needed 3rd party firmware? Chris B 10/17/2008 4:57:00 AM Pacific Also, the QoS on the Linksys BEFSR41 v.4 doesn't work. If the "upstream bandwidth" is set other than zero, all other traffic stops. Buggy. With at Auto, I can't see any QoS effect. So QoS is on the feature list of BEFSR41 newer version v.4 firmware, but is not usable. DD-WRT QoS works. David R 4/23/2009 3:16:02 PM Pacific Maybe, you can try what I used to fix my linksys wrt54gs wireless router. After having several problems keeping my router connected to my lan, I tried the old "throw it against the wall" technique. After applying that technique twice (and resoldering a bit) my linksys router works fine!!!!!???? I contacted their support and found it to by very un-friendly. I wish I could apply the above mention repair technique to their support also. I like my newly repaired router, but Linksys has several problems accross the board to fix!!!!!!!!!!!! This is only one of MANY problems, Linksys has, that can be found by Googling the device. It is currently 2/3/2012 8:51:03 PM Pacific. Name: (required)  E-mail: (optional)  URL: (optional)  Enter your comments below. Leave a blank line between paragraphs. You may use <B>, <I>, and <A> HTML tags for formatting and linking, but you need not use HTML for line and paragraph breaks. Your e-mail address will not be displayed publicly. Remember me       aspcomments2 by Jerry Kindall based on aspcomments by sneaker