@Coach-D 

Well, I hope he can clear it up because I'm having very poor luck with the official support mechanisms.

They don't even acknowledge my questions.  Instead they offer "solutions" which don't make any sense.

First they responded to my original concern by saying that the function isn't supported anymore.  Bad news, but true, as it turns out.

That's when things started going south.

They suggested the downgrade, which failed with Invalid File Type.  I asked, basically, what's up with that?

Then they said to use an ethernet cable.  I responded by saying my laptops have no ethernet port.

(I was able to borrow one that did, but obviously, that did not help.)

So in response to that they suggested I execute a lengthy and complex procedure so random and insane it looked like it came out of a Cracker Jack box.

I told them, basically, that I didn't think the solution to this should be to try something that is more likely to brick the router than solve the print server problem.

So they came back and said then that the next step would be for me to download a third party program for the sole purpose of letting one of their senior engineers take full control of my system.  They didn't even say what he or she would try to do.  They don't seem to be sensitive to the reality that a lot of criminal scams begin this way.  I don't think tp-link is trying to scam me, but they have to realize most customers (at least in the US) would be very disinclined to agree to this, no matter how wholesome the reason.

In response I said, basically, no thank you, and asked if they could just answer the questions and ask me for more info if they need it to debug this.

That's where it stands at the moment.

We're in the back stretch and I think the Community is leading the Support team at the moment by about a length and a half.......

@Coach-D 

I think you are being a 'little tough' on the Support folks. They are not American, but Chinese. At least that has been my experiences with them seems to point out. Having worked in Support I know how it usually done. It isn't until you get to the more experienced people that sometimes real progress can be made.

In my case, I understand the need to be hands on on the problem. I personally do that using TeamViewer with friends that need help. It allows me to take control of their computer. Yes, they have to trust me, but they can also shut me down if they think I'm doing something wrong. Yes, recent scams have worked the same way. The difference, you should KNOW who is on the other end. Some people will search the web for a support phone number, find it and call, and those 99% of the time is not an offficial vendor support organization. Some are 3rd party, that may be reputable but also require payment. Some are scam artists, more likely to want to get paid for unneeded programs than fix your problem. However, a contact with TP-Link via email listed on the official site or in your router manual's support email address is probably, and I say probably because sometimes sites do get hacked, OK.

I've had 2 instances of router problems that required 3rd level debugging. Using TeamViewer, but it was done on China Time. Very early in the US East coast morning, which was a pain, but had to be done. I could not simultaneously talk to them, they said they had no phone capability, but we used NOTEPAD to converse back and forth. Having Support and debug experience I knew how to use the tools they did (WireShark) and understood TCP/IP packages and requests. So what I saw going on on my screen didn't phase me at all, but could for someone that didn't understand it could cause concern. It also required a special build for me of the firmware. Did solve the problem though or at least discover what it was.

What would they do for you if you allowed them to connect? They'd try to run the F/W downgrade so they could see what happened. They might have a DEBUG version of the f/w as well they could use? They'd probably use TeamViewer and WireShark as well. To me, your problem appears to be easily duplicated, and as I've said in other replies, Googling the problem gets a lot of hits, and some are even going from 3rd party f/w back to TP-Link f/w. One thing though, if they can't make it work, it will take some time to get it fixed once they determine the problem. Unless Tony can get them looking further into the problem, it still might require a connection to you to see what is going on? They (support) might not even have your router model to work on and try to see if there is a problem, hence the need to connect to you. They didn't have one in my case.

By the way, this 'support' model is used by other vendors too. These are multi-national companies. Support can also be done by a sub-contracted company. Many seem to be Asian based. Product is even usually built in Asia, and many models are different for different counties even, some due to the country wireless laws or power voltages. Even models bought in and for the US can be different depending on when or where made. I'm not talking version numbers either, but the power supply can vary other parts. When the version number changes, it is usually due to the INTERNAL COMPONENT changes though.

Still, you are going to be 'between a rock and a hard place'. I dumped my Netgear working router due to the need to stay at a prior f/w version to keep a feature I used. Knowing full well that possibly at some point I'd need to update or face a security problem possibly. I'm stilll amazed at why TP-Link hasn't updated my router in well over a year? Netgear seemed to do it every few months, and the README always had in it 'security update'. Hard to beleive Netgear had such poor f/w that it needed to update the f/w that often (and there is NO guarantee they actually did have a security fix in it) but TP-Link doesn't need to?

Me, I'd be looking for another router with the feature I require. However, Print Servers in general, across all vendor's are a thing of the past. When they first were implemented there were very few wireless printers, today, almost all are.

You do know there are other ways to 'solve' this problem?

• Get a wireless printer. Yes, can be expensive, but also it would probably be an upgrade as well in terms of printing.
• Get a USB Printer Server, like one of these at Amazon (https://www.amazon.com/IOGEAR-1-Port-Print-Server-GPSU21/dp/B000FW60FW/ref=sr_1_3?_encoding=UTF8&c=ts&dchild=1&keywords=Computer+Networking+Print+Servers&qid=1618316528&s=pc&sr=1-3&ts_id=13983761). They generally work well. I used one many many printers ago. Costs about $40 or more, cheaper than a printer or new router.They allow the USB cable to be plugged into it, then the output would be an Ethernet port or a Wireless device. Most are USB 2.0, which is fine for printing.

Good thing about Amazon, doesn't work, usually can return it for free.

@Coach-D 

Sometimes TP Link will warn you about some firmware that is not backward compatible. I suspect that may be the case here but they did not warn the user.

That third party program they want to install, will allow the tech to go in and disable that function or install the older firmware. I also would have reservations about that procedure.

Sounds like you got higher up than most do in TP Link support.

I would see if TP Link support would do one of the following:

• Replace your current router with a new or refurbished one with the old firmware and you sent them your current one back to them.
• Replace your router with a different model with the correct features.
• If you have a temporary router you can use, send your router to them, they install the old version of the firmware, and return it to you.
• A partial or full credit toward another TP Link router.

@IrvSp ,

I am very familiar with everything you've said, and I agree with most of it.

It may well be that they could fix the issue if they had control of my system, but we're nowhere near that point.

I have experience in the support industry myself, 25+ years actually, but the product I worked with was a large enterprise s/w product, not a small consumer h/w product.  My team (about a tenth of the entire support organization for the product) had three people in the US and 5 Chinese nationals located in Beijing, and my concerns now have nothing to do with who the support people are or where they are located.

When I say something doesn't work, they could ask me what did I do and what was the result.  Then they could ask me for documentation of the problem or a description of what I saw.  Then they could look into it and try to explain what is happening.  Then they could ask more questions and later have me try something else.

But instead they are shotgunning "solutions" all over the place without giving much attention to whatever it is I am asking about.  Support is support, and I do not feel like I am getting adequate support.  The people I've interacted with seem sincere and their English language skills are excellent.  But they are not following an approach that is helpful.  It is also possible--perhaps likely--that their training is minimal and their access to the senior engineers is limited.  I think that is a problem with almost any consumer product support organization these days.

On top of this is the fact that I am sure my problem is not unique.  They must already have a very good handle on what I am experiencing, but for some reason no one seems to act like that's the case.  If I felt my problem was somehow very obscure, I might feel differently about how this has been going.

I joked before that I am getting better support from the "community" than from the proper support mechanism.  That should NEVER be the case, except maybe for the most naive user error situations.

Don't get me wrong.  I know that the support is free.  I mean, it is part of the cost of the product; I don't pay extra.  And the fact that I can open a ticket or send an email and get any reply at all is a big plus.  So much of the consumer support I see for the US population is so poor that just getting a reply to anything already elevates you to a high tier of satisfaction as far as I'm concerned.

But my expectations are just a little bit higher than that.

And this problem CANNOT be that mysterious to people on the inside.

@Coach-D 

I too worked in a support organization, PC based OS. I was NOT a CSR, but they do have limited tools and capabilities. They didn't have access to the s/w either. The tools they had were basically 'scripts' and a PMR database they could look up. 'Look up' is the key here. It depended on the skill of the PSR and the person reporting the problem. That is why you could get some 'suggestions' that you either had tried, or what you called 'shotgunning'.

After that, they could create a new PMR. That would route to the next level. They might try reproducing it. Problem is h/w and s/w at that point. No one has 'every possible' combination. In this case, they might not have the same router even? Don't forget, some routers have more than one version for countries, and f/w for it, not to mention h/w versions.

Always best to allow direct connect as this would make it easier to duplicate.

However, to me, this is quite simple:

1. Secure an Archer A7 V5 (US).
2. Install the latest F/W on it.
3. Get the prior F/W version.
4. Try to install it.

Simple, either it would work or it wouldn't.

Coach-D wrote

 

And this problem CANNOT be that mysterious to people on the inside.

Define 'people'

Actually, Google this, "archer a7 v5 install old firmware version" and see how reports of that you find? NONE on the first page, other than people with DDWRT installed that want to go back to STOCK TP-LINK F/W. Nothing on the first 3 pages either?

One could try the Instaii using TFTP, but this is generally for bricked routers. Like on this link, https://www.computerbytes.co.nz/blog/unbricking-a-tp-link-router/ but I really would try that without @Tony or someone from support telling you to give it a try. Could wind up with a bricked router.

@ArcherC8 , and others in the community who have assisted here:

After many iterations with tp-link customer support (most of them unnecessary, as it turns out), I finally received an update from them which brings this much further along.

I won't paste their exact words, but I will share my most recent update back to them in response.

From reading it, it will be pretty clear what they said to me.

------------

...

It finally appears that we are getting to the true answer to all of this, so thank you.

Based on what you've told me now, the issue seems quite simple:

1. tp-link has decided to remove USB print server support for the Archer A7 router.

2. the removal of this support was implemented silently via a normal firmware upgrade.  Once users do the update, the functionality disappears.

3. the router has the additional characteristic of disallowing any firmware update to a prior level.  Only "forward" upgrades are permitted.

4. therefore, users have no way to know that the function is being removed until after it happens, at which time there is no way to get it back.

5. users who contact tp-link support and pursue the issue sufficiently will be offered the opportunity to have tp-link engineers perform a custom ad hoc update of the router's firmware to re-enable the print server function, but users must be willing to relinquish control of their systems to allow this to happen.

This would have been an acceptable answer for you to have provided at the beginning.  It took me several iterations to get to this point, and it is now clear that some of the prior suggestions provided were unnecessary, and could not possibly have solved this problem.

Another unfortunate aspect to all of this, if you want to call it unfortunate, is that I really like this router in all other ways.  It is fast, it has been reliable, and it has suited my needs well since I purchased it.

The USB print server function was also a very nice feature to have, but I never wanted to jeopardize the standard functioning of the router for it.

I do not wish to pursue the "downgrading" of the firmware any further, now that you've properly explained the situation.  Even if it could be done successfully, I do not feel it is the right thing to avoid recommended updates that may fix or prevent other important problems as a long term solution to this problem.

I think my options at this point are limited.  I do not wish to replace the router because I like it and a replacement would be expensive.  I do not wish to replace my printer because I like it also and a comparable replacement with wireless capability would be very expensive.

A third option is to buy a new device--a wireless USB print server, that can be added to my current setup and essentially restore the function that was lost.

These devices are less costly than the other options.  It might be the only way for me.

So may I please ask you this question now:

tp-link makes and sells these devices too, as part of its overall product lineup.

Because of the inconvenience brought about by the unexpected removal of a function that I believed was included with the product I already purchased, could tp-link send to me, at no cost, one of its compatible USB print server devices, so that I could use it with my existing router and printer, both of which I like and would prefer to continue to use?

If yes, I will be happy to provide my complete shipping address.

Thank you for all your assistance,

...

------------

OK, let's see what they say.  But as a technical matter, I think this is the end of the line.  Either they honor my request, which would be great, or they don't, in which case I will likely just do it myself.

Stay tuned.....

Coach-D wrote

OK, let's see what they say.  But as a technical matter, I think this is the end of the line.  Either they honor my request, which would be great, or they don't, in which case I will likely just do it myself.

 

Stay tuned.....

@Coach-D 

Well, from my 'eyes', I can't see them doing this, especially with that published here?

The 'cost' could be doing this for everyone who bought the router.

What 'we' need to understand is the 'why'? Knowing that might more sense of this?

I can think of many reasons, but I will give my old router maker the credit where credit is due, they DID announce in the forum that the next f/w version would not include Time Machine and DLNA Server. If you used those functions DO NOT UPGRADE.

OK, so TPL didn't do that, not that even if they did, most are unlikely to see that.

So in my old vendor for my router, they had to remove the functions due to needed F/W space to INCLUDE a revenue stream Security suite.

Other reasons could exist though. Such as the code was going to be broken by required f/w changes like securiy fixes. That or the f/w grew due to fixes required and something had to go. Yes, USB Print Servers in a router are going to be hard to find now a days... due to the proliferation of wireless printers, which probably are a vast majority of those sold.

Me, I'd not be holding my breath on this. Either buy the USB print server, get a wireless printer, or change routers. However, changing routers might not mean you'll not hit this problem in the future either with a different router or vendor.

It might also be possible that a 3rd party f/w might still have the Print Server in it? Check the DDWRT forums I guess to find out. Using the DDWRT f/w will probably void the warranty though.

IrvSp wrote

I can't see them doing this...The 'cost' could be doing this for everyone who bought the router.

 

What 'we' need to understand is the 'why'? Knowing that might more sense of this?

 

I can think of many reasons....

@IrvSp, 

It never hurts to ask, but of course I'm not holding my breath.

As for the reasons for removing the function, though I find it objectionable, I don't think it's particularly mysterious.

I'm sure it's because of some combination of the reasons you've laid out.  They all make sense to me.

Plus, the important factor in their decision-making that THEY BELIEVE that the function is seldom-used and therefore the overall impact to customers will be low.

I think this is a bad miscalculation, and I'm sorry to hear your news that other manufacturers are doing the same.

Yes, it's probably true that a very large majority of printers sold today have built-in wireless capability.

But this is certainly NOT true for printers that are IN USE today.

I think it would be appropriate for tp-link (or any vendor) to not include this capability in any new routers that they sell.

But to take it away from existing purchased equipment?  And to assume that everyone's existing printers don't need it?  That's misguided, and it offends me.

I would hate to think that any worthwhile company is that glib and shortsighted.

I imagine, though we'll never know for sure, that what really happened is that one of your existing explanations was so severe that they had NO CHOICE but to jettison the function to avoid a major security exposure that couldn't be fixed without doing so, or some other reason that made this decision the ONLY one possible, and they simply had no other choice but to choose among a set of really bad options.

This may be the fault of some designer very early on, years before the things were even made, but that's an entirely different discussion.......

@Coach-D 

While we are basically in agreement, I'll comment more.

I had a perfectly functioning NG R8000. I used the DLNA Server function so I could rip purchased DVD's, put them on the USB drive, and then have my Smart TV's, iPad's, and phones be able to play them. All legal as far as I know and it makes it a lot easier to watch on some devices.

OK, now NG warned they were removing that function (and others). Why? To ADD a Security Suite, a $79 a year revenue stream if you wanted it. Clear that it needed RAM space to do that. I had a CHOICE, much like you 'might' have, to stay on the OLD F/W forever.

Not much of a choice to me, since NG seems to update the F/W many times per year, and always states 'security fixes'.

Now one can wonder WHY so many Security Problems? CVE (https://www.cvedetails.com/) can be searched by vendor even. Using 2019 as a reference, TP-Link had a total of 14 events, and Netgear had 6. You can click on the types and the description would sometimes show the router model.

Netgear (check the forum for 'fun') seems to break existing function when releasing new f/w though, and I suspect that is the reason for more frequent f/w releases than security (which might be listed even if there are none)?

So, taking into account the need to use RAM, assuming that new fixes didn't use it all that that was free in the last release, WHY would any vendor remove a funtion/feature?

I can not think of a valid reason to just do it. Assuming NO NEW feature were to be added, then the possible reasons to me would still have to be:

• New code for fixes will break the feature
• This assumes the vendor DOES NOT have the source code for the feature, just a binary file
• There is a license fee due for the feature, and assuming less to no use of the feature, the license was NOT re-newed
• Lastly, knowledge of the code is no longer available in the company
• A new version of the h/w is coming soon. One set of source code is used with 'if' statements per version. Not a good reason to drop the feature though, but it could make support easier vs. complicating code for all versions to account for changes.

I assume to both of us, none of the above is a valid excuse.

Sooo, what could be the real reason, especially with no prior warning this would be happening (even TP-Link moderator's here didn't seem to know)?

I can only think of 'because it had to be done', and that means something had to be removed for some reason. It was NOT planned, and that leads me to believe the fixes needed more RAM space than the router had, so something had to go.

Interestingly, NetGear R8000 router had a 'hidden' GUI page that showed you RAM usage I recall? Maybe is we a normal page, I forgot? Nothing like that on my Archer A20 though.

@Coach-D 

Since you worked support, sometimes a bit of misinformation can head you down the wrong path. In your original post you stated, "I do NOT suspect a hardware problem because the failure to print on the two computers did not happen at the same time, but rather within a few days of each other." That made me think it was not the router as both computers would have had the issue at the same time. Later it was determined it was the router.

Also since you worked support you know the highest-level support person does not usually answer the initial call and when new firmware or release is rolled out, support does not always get all the details. So why expect something different.

I am guessing we will never know the reason for the feature to be removed.

At least we know what the cause of your issue is and we do not like it. As I and others have stated before, we do not like features removed especially without prior notice or warning.

We can hope that TP Link will be more forthcoming in the future in the firmware notes. They dropped the ball on this one.