Search results

I see.. I will review the code in more detail. Agreed, it should work as they're on that 1.9 fw as well.

I got several of the SL-SWTGW218AS , nothing open on port 8088/tcp.

@stas2k Does this scraper work with sodola switches?

Don't assign a gateway ip and add firewall rule to block switch's ip from any internet access. I don't see any options to change management vlan. I don't recall if it listens on all defined vlans for its ip address?

Where can one find these?

Thanks for the link. I tested this on my sodola. Changed it to dhcp, saved, then rebooted. No issues. Also power cycled, same no issues, stayed dhcp.

Where is that from? Link?

Picked up another sodola 8+1 managed switch. Noticed this one came with a 1A wall brick vs 2A on the ones from last year. Others noticing similar with the other brands too?

^^Yes, it has, but this is an official source now; or as official as it can get.

Not sure if this was posted here before. Came across this link recently, sodola now has their firmware available online. https://www.sodola-network.com/pages/firmware-updated-for-sodola-managed-switch

Maybe by changing the ip that breaks the save function?

That's nuts.. I did my changes in firefox (118.x).

Maybe factory reset and start over? Are you trying to remove vlan from from all ports?

@Mr Smile, I don't know where your post went, regarding vlan 1 removal. On v1.9 I can remove it from a port. I don't however see an option for assigning a management vlan. So probably using vlan1 for management.

^^I think all of these fw's are exactly the same. Look at post 135 for the sodola one. It probably pulls certain identifiers from nvram such as the model #. Something the firmware doesn't touch.

Received the fw for sodola switch. Same md5 as in post #128. File: sodola_RF_V1.9_SL-SWTGW218AS_0104.bin CRC-32: b59ac72d MD5: 559fbd81a07ed7ce954a710c7fb2a249 SHA-1: b2e137f2c29075b842e2b8dbd9b017eccd5db960 SHA-256: 2609eb5f3108fb5cd6916d764d9b15a89cc70e69a8ca97d14f025306efdaceec

They never include change logs. @ribeiro_lucio did you notice anything different after install?

Looks good, at least as far as raw network performance. You should also test with -R on the client as the above is sending from the client to the server.

On the server side - you can also add the -D parameter for each server instance to run it as daemon rather than interactive. iperf3 -B 192.168.3.10 -s iperf3 -B 192.168.3.11 -s On the client side iperf3 -B 192.168.3.7 -c 192.168.3.10 <other options> iperf3 -B 192.168.3.8 -c 192.168.3.11...

What error message? Verify your ip addresses. From the above, the client ip is 192.168.3.10 (ip you want to bind instance to), and server is 192.168.3.11? Also verify you're using a version of iperf3 that actually supports -B. Execute iperf3 by itself to see available options.