From: "Linus Lüssing" <linus.luessing@c0d3.blue>
To: The list for a Better Approach To Mobile Ad-hoc Networking
<b.a.t.m.a.n@lists.open-mesh.org>
Subject: Re: [B.A.T.M.A.N.] [PATCH] batman-adv: introduce "noflood" broadcast flood prevention option
Date: Tue, 30 Apr 2019 18:01:21 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190430160121.GC5267@otheros> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <cb27fa9e-c7d2-db51-6f47-c717612b82af@darmstadt.freifunk.net>
On Sun, Apr 28, 2019 at 09:04:19PM +0200, Martin Weinelt wrote:
> We have been using the early noflood and DHCP snooping patches from
> Linus since roughly 2018/04. They were based on sockmarking packets that
> should be handled by noflood. This resulted in quite some amount of
> ebtables rules on our gateways, that marked addresses within DHCP ranges
> for noflood, since they were very likely already snooped. The result can
> be seen in graphs I provided to Linus back then, that are now visible at
> https://www.open-mesh.org/projects/batman-adv/wiki/DAT_DHCP_Snooping#Result.
Though to be fair, I'm expecting similar results with the DAT DHCP
snooping + pending DAT cache/DHT split patches. At least the
Total->unanswered->ok->last-reply->0...30min. and
Total->answered->"via DAT BCAST" in the link should go
away then (90.09% of all broadcast flooded ARP Replies in this link).
So while that was the main use-case for me before the discussions
we had last year on how to improve DAT, it's now more a minor one
for me. Though it would still be nice to have / work towards a zero-broadcast
mesh as RFC7772 for instance explains that frequent broadcasts
have a quite significant impact on battery power for small, mobile
devices. And the noflood option would be a quick and easy option
for us for now to achieve this for ARP and other packet types.
[0]: https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7772
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-04-30 16:01 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-04-26 17:12 [B.A.T.M.A.N.] [PATCH] batman-adv: introduce "noflood" broadcast flood prevention option Linus Lüssing
2019-04-26 21:56 ` Marek Lindner
2019-04-27 2:38 ` Linus Lüssing
2019-04-27 2:53 ` Linus Lüssing
2019-04-28 17:04 ` Sven Eckelmann
2019-04-28 19:04 ` Martin Weinelt
2019-04-30 16:01 ` Linus Lüssing [this message]
2019-04-30 16:07 ` Linus Lüssing
2019-05-02 6:40 ` Sven Eckelmann
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20190430160121.GC5267@otheros \
--to=linus.luessing@c0d3.blue \
--cc=b.a.t.m.a.n@lists.open-mesh.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.