* [B.A.T.M.A.N.] network down timeout
@ 2010-01-14 13:40 ecfu
2010-01-14 20:03 ` Andrew Lunn
0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: ecfu @ 2010-01-14 13:40 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: batman users
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 285 bytes --]
Is there a configuration setting for batman-adv to timeout on a connection?
i.e. if I lose a node in my network, I noticed it took a long time for that
node to leave the originators list. What is this based on or in other words
when does batman-adv declare the lost originator gone?
[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 318 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [B.A.T.M.A.N.] network down timeout
2010-01-14 13:40 [B.A.T.M.A.N.] network down timeout ecfu
@ 2010-01-14 20:03 ` Andrew Lunn
2010-01-15 2:32 ` ecfu
0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Andrew Lunn @ 2010-01-14 20:03 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: The list for a Better Approach To Mobile Ad-hoc Networking
On Thu, Jan 14, 2010 at 08:40:25AM -0500, ecfu wrote:
> Is there a configuration setting for batman-adv to timeout on a connection?
> i.e. if I lose a node in my network, I noticed it took a long time for that
> node to leave the originators list. What is this based on or in other words
> when does batman-adv declare the lost originator gone?
An originator is purged when it has not been heard from in
#define PURGE_TIMEOUT 200000 /* purge originators after time in ms if no
* valid packet comes in.
is 200s = 3.3 minutes.
Andrew
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread* Re: [B.A.T.M.A.N.] network down timeout
2010-01-14 20:03 ` Andrew Lunn
@ 2010-01-15 2:32 ` ecfu
2010-01-15 2:39 ` Marek Lindner
0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: ecfu @ 2010-01-15 2:32 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: The list for a Better Approach To Mobile Ad-hoc Networking
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 979 bytes --]
Is there something special about this number?
If I need a faster response say 1 minute or even 30 seconds, is that a bad
idea?
On Thu, Jan 14, 2010 at 3:03 PM, Andrew Lunn <andrew@lunn.ch> wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 14, 2010 at 08:40:25AM -0500, ecfu wrote:
> > Is there a configuration setting for batman-adv to timeout on a
> connection?
> > i.e. if I lose a node in my network, I noticed it took a long time for
> that
> > node to leave the originators list. What is this based on or in other
> words
> > when does batman-adv declare the lost originator gone?
>
> An originator is purged when it has not been heard from in
>
> #define PURGE_TIMEOUT 200000 /* purge originators after time in ms if
> no
> * valid packet comes in.
>
> is 200s = 3.3 minutes.
>
> Andrew
> _______________________________________________
> B.A.T.M.A.N mailing list
> B.A.T.M.A.N@lists.open-mesh.org
> https://lists.open-mesh.org/mm/listinfo/b.a.t.m.a.n
>
[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1498 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [B.A.T.M.A.N.] network down timeout
2010-01-15 2:32 ` ecfu
@ 2010-01-15 2:39 ` Marek Lindner
2010-01-15 14:34 ` ecfu
0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Marek Lindner @ 2010-01-15 2:39 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: The list for a Better Approach To Mobile Ad-hoc Networking
On Friday 15 January 2010 10:32:46 ecfu wrote:
> Is there something special about this number?
>
> If I need a faster response say 1 minute or even 30 seconds, is that a bad
> idea?
I'd be interested to understand why you think a smaller number would be
beneficial.
Regards,
Marek
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [B.A.T.M.A.N.] network down timeout
2010-01-15 2:39 ` Marek Lindner
@ 2010-01-15 14:34 ` ecfu
2010-01-15 15:57 ` Andrew Lunn
0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: ecfu @ 2010-01-15 14:34 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: The list for a Better Approach To Mobile Ad-hoc Networking
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 683 bytes --]
Because I am dealing with rapidly changing networks, like to the point where
applications could be complete in less than 3 minutes
On Thu, Jan 14, 2010 at 9:39 PM, Marek Lindner <lindner_marek@yahoo.de>wrote:
> On Friday 15 January 2010 10:32:46 ecfu wrote:
> > Is there something special about this number?
> >
> > If I need a faster response say 1 minute or even 30 seconds, is that a
> bad
> > idea?
>
> I'd be interested to understand why you think a smaller number would be
> beneficial.
>
> Regards,
> Marek
> _______________________________________________
> B.A.T.M.A.N mailing list
> B.A.T.M.A.N@lists.open-mesh.org
> https://lists.open-mesh.org/mm/listinfo/b.a.t.m.a.n
>
[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1209 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [B.A.T.M.A.N.] network down timeout
2010-01-15 14:34 ` ecfu
@ 2010-01-15 15:57 ` Andrew Lunn
0 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Andrew Lunn @ 2010-01-15 15:57 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: The list for a Better Approach To Mobile Ad-hoc Networking
On Fri, Jan 15, 2010 at 09:34:08AM -0500, ecfu wrote:
> Because I am dealing with rapidly changing networks, like to the point where
> applications could be complete in less than 3 minutes
This still does not explain why the entry is a problem.
Please could you explain in a bit more detail what you think the
problem is?
Thanks
Andrew
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2010-01-15 15:57 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2010-01-14 13:40 [B.A.T.M.A.N.] network down timeout ecfu
2010-01-14 20:03 ` Andrew Lunn
2010-01-15 2:32 ` ecfu
2010-01-15 2:39 ` Marek Lindner
2010-01-15 14:34 ` ecfu
2010-01-15 15:57 ` Andrew Lunn
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox