| 31 May 2025 |
 emily | I understand that usually they don't want you to do this because you can mess up the PON for other people or whatever? | 23:12:14 |
| emily | here everything up to and including the ONT box is technically property of the network operator. | 23:12:29 |
 magic_rb | In reply to @emilazy:matrix.org
I understand that usually they don't want you to do this because you can mess up the PON for other people or whatever? If you plug in a incorrect pon you can fry the other side ive been told | 23:17:01 |
| emily | K900: should we be using the device tree overlays for the RTC and WiFi? | 23:43:08 |
| 1 Jun 2025 |
 Electro | Has anyone had any luck with getting WoL to work on RK3588? I have an orange pi 5 plus. I tried enabling it with ethtool -s interface wol g, suspending (systemctl suspend) and then trying to wake it up from my other machine on the same network (wol -p 9 c0:74:2b:fc:2e:31). I have already unblocked UDP port 9 on the machine. | 00:23:49 |
| Electro | * Has anyone had any luck with getting wake-on-lan to work on RK3588? I have an orange pi 5 plus. I tried enabling it with ethtool -s interface wol g, suspending (systemctl suspend) and then trying to wake it up from my other machine on the same network (wol -p 9 c0:74:2b:fc:2e:31). I have already unblocked UDP port 9 on the machine. | 00:39:50 |
 K900 | RTC if you have a battery, wifi no | 06:02:35 |
 ElvishJerricco | K900: why is the wifi one not needed | 06:47:24 |
| K900 | Because all the MAC address stuff is downstream openwrt and doesn't actually work | 06:47:59 |
| K900 | And the regulator it's trying to set is the physical switch | 06:48:12 |
| K900 | Which is a physical switch and not a regulator | 06:48:20 |
| K900 | OK so update on my SFP shenanigans | 10:03:33 |
| 23 Sep 2025 |
|  @rick:matrix.ciphernetics.nl left the room. | 07:36:50 |
| 1 Jun 2025 |
| K900 | Turns out the modem thingy and the Mediatek MAC violate the 2500base-x spec in mutually incompatible ways | 10:04:02 |
| K900 | But it can run 1000base-x | 10:04:08 |
| K900 | Which is fine really because my uplink is 1G anyway | 10:04:16 |
| K900 | But yeah RTL9601x - avoid if you want over 1G | 10:04:41 |
| K900 | But also since people were concerned, it is in fact running just fine at 1000base-x | 10:04:54 |
| K900 | So the whole "only does 10G" thing is most definitely inaccurate | 10:05:03 |
| emily | well yeah I got my 1GBASE-T SFP+ to work at 1G once I installed the PHY driver | 11:25:58 |
| emily | but uhhh | 11:25:59 |
| emily | it's actually 2500BASE-X I'm most interested in :P | 11:26:08 |
| emily | so hearing the 2500BASE-X is busted is not that reassuring (though I'd already seen murmurings of that on the forum) | 11:26:25 |
| emily | it seems like it can work if you force it though | 11:26:34 |
| emily | (also wait the thing can take an RTC battery?) | 11:27:15 |
| magic_rb | Yes | 11:33:23 |
| magic_rb | https://aliexpress.com/item/1005008105706573.html no ides if this is supported right? Think its the same as this one, https://www.ruijie.com/en-global/products/switches/accessories/xg-sfp-lr-sm1310 the pictures say sm1310 | 11:37:14 |
| K900 | In reply to @emilazy:matrix.org
so hearing the 2500BASE-X is busted is not that reassuring (though I'd already seen murmurings of that on the forum) The problem with 2500BASE-X is that it's not real | 11:42:40 |
| K900 | There's like | 11:42:43 |
| K900 | Five different vendor specific implementations of it | 11:42:59 |
