WD PR4100 USB network support

Any chance support for USB network adaptors will be added soon, so higher speeds can be achieved, such as 2.5G or even 5G?
I’m not expecting every adaptor to be supported, but at least one or a few chipsets would be great, since currently the highest transfer speed achievable is 1G.

Hi @gertsen

Have you checked our knowledge base articles?
(Support for Western Digital Hard Drives | Western Digital)

Try this one.

Have you opened a Support Case?
If not, contact Western Digital Technical Support for assistance.
[Contact Us | Western Digital]

You seem to misunderstand that this is about using an external hard drive, that is NOT the case.

I am asking about using an external NETWORK ADAPTOR to achieve higher network transfer speeds, faster than 1000 Mbit/s.

The chances of WD enabling USB network adapter support are probably less than zero, so you shouldn’t get your hopes up.

I have the ability to do it by loading the required kernel modules via a custom app, but creating and testing apps takes a lot of time and it tends to be a thankless endeavor.

Besides, the PR4100 uses acient technology and the demand for additional functionality is minimal, so the juice simply isn’t worth the squeeze. Been there, done that.

I highly doubt that BusyBox v1.30.1 (A/K/A: OS5) has support a network dongle on the PR4100’s USB3 Type-A ports
But, even if it did, the Admin GUI (currently) shows no support for a 3rd network interface. But, who knows, maybe a new hidden NIC would show up if it was detected.
Otherwise, if the OS does see the 3rd NIC, you’d have to do your own configuration of it through the command line.
And I’ve made changes to some of the config files (DNS and NTP), and they get overwritten by the original files on reboot. If you did get the 3rd NIC running, it may not survive a reboot.

I configured my switches to use channel bonding 802.3ad (Mode 4 channel bonding) for active/active and set the PR4100 to that mode on its two 1GbE ports. That’s not a great work around, but it gives a slight boost in throughput for multi-threaded transfers (like robocopy or rsync) but don’t help single threaded operations.

But now you’ve piqued my interest.
Amazon has a UGREEN USB Type-A to Ethernet Adapter 2.5Gb ($23).
I was going to buy some of these anyway, so it might be easy to check to see if anything changes for the better on the PR4100.

Busybox has absolutely nothing to do with hardware support, which is typically provided by the Linux kernel and internal/external modules.

There are simple methods to solve that little problem. Search the forums, maybe you’ll get lucky and find them.

It won’t work.

Heck. . . we can’t even get WD to provide “copy folder” into their web app.
You think you are going to get a patch to install faster network connectivity?

The devices barely hibernate properly. . . and most don’t even have a proper off button. . .and you expect support for USB upgrade cards?

buahahaha.

As Cerberus said. . .this hardware is old tech. It’s (relatively) cheap, and is what it is.

Please keep a civil tone.
I do not want this to be a WD-bashing thread.

Simply stating facts isn’t bashing WD. Besides, it would be a waste of time, as they’ve already fallen on their face so many times that it’s comical at this point.

These devices are simply old technology and they’re riddled with flaws. While it can be interesting to try and extend or enhance the functionality of old technology, everything has it’s limits.

Like I said previously, sometimes the juice simply isn’t worth the squeeze.

Fair enough.

However, at this point I see the following

  1. The WD NAS product line has not been refreshed in a very long time.
  2. The WD NAS O/S is receiving minimal updates, and several essential features that were missed in the original release of this O/S version. . . .have not even been acknowledged as missing (features like copy in the mobile app)

I have GAS (Gear Acquisition Syndrome). I have three WD NAS units, and two WD Passport Wireless devices (which are conceptually a portable NAS). I also have two NAS boxes from a competing brand. I buy SSD external drives like candy. (data hoarding is my hobby)

For the basic functionality of “Install NAS drive on your network to act as a file server”; these units are fine and work well. If you want a full fledged Server Workstation that supports dozens of users, operates well across the internet, can be a VPN server, and can handle tasks like being a media server that can transcode on the fly. . . .well. . . . there are options that cost more that are better suited to these tasks.

So expecting these units to be upgraded, or supporting an external upgrade to support higher network speeds is beyond my expectation for these boxes. Don’t get me wrong. . . I really like these devices. I am not bashing beyond stating an opinion from a user group (sample size: me) that has used these boxes for a few years.

And wow. . .WD has had some real product blunders smr drive debacle along the way. And wow. . .the WD NAS lineup sure could use a product line refresh for both software and hardware.